사이드바 영역으로 건너뛰기

Missile-Dick Chicks & Identity Satire

At the Women’s Film Festival, I watched a film about the “missile-dick chicks,” an anarchist street theater activist group in New York city. The missile-dick chicks are a small group of friends who make “missile-dicks” out of paper mache (or something like that), strap them on, dress up in costumes and perform acts of street theater, making funny and satirical exhibitions of patriotism, nationalism, militarism and right-wing politics. During the filming, Bush was “president” so the missile-dick chicks imitated Texas accents and thereby pretended they were from Texas during street theater performances.


During the time of filming, the missile-dick chicks decided to travel the US and perform street theater in more conservative regions of the country. The film was about their travels and experiences during the project.

Now that Barack Obama has been elected “president,” the missile-dick chicks said they will not discontinue their street theater activities, but need to create and proceed with something new. As anarchists, they are not satisfied with party politics or elections, no matter what the result is. I wonder how the missile-dick chicks plan to continue satirical street theater performances in the future, especially considering how they mocked the cultural identity of Bush from Texas. How will they do identity mockeries or will they do identity mockeries with Obama? This leads to another question: what does cultural identity have to do with authoritarian politics? Wherever we find a nation-state, we find authoritarian politics, whether or not political and economic power is centralized in the hands of private or state powers (“state” is only supposed to be public, but state power is indeed private power...although it is generally accepted that nation-states are expected to serve “public” interests and needs while “private” powers are expected to serve only themselves). There are probably many “white” Texans who practice anti-authoritarian or anarchist politics and culture. I’m critical of the attempt to satirize regional identity alongside the authoritarian right-wing politics of Bush. It reminds me of how left-wing people in Korea are currently making mockeries of the authoritarian right-wing “president” Lee Myung Bak by satirizing his identity as a “mouse” in the Chinese horoscope. I’m also a mouse, so how am I supposed to receive this satire? Wouldn’t it possibly lead me in the direction of becoming offended or maybe even identifying myself with a commonality between the fascist myung bak and me? Using these identity mockeries can be a danger to solidarity, outreach and mutual aid politics that are fundamental to any movement carrying just a hint of anti-authoritarian or anarchist culture and organizing practices. Anarchists need to reach out, make connections and network with a diverse array of various groups in any of the continually multiplying movements that we engage in. Anarchists and anti-authoritarians can’t afford to exclude or include (an exclusion hidden within a specified inclusion?) particular identities. Not that anarchists just “can’t afford” to alienate people from a movement along the lines of identity, but that such exclusive practices are contrary to anti-authoritarian or anarchist approaches to politics, lifestyle, culture and relationships. If we are to work towards developing equitable, compatible social relationships that aren’t ridden with social privileges and power inequalities, then nobody should ever be excluded and that means nobody should ever feel inclined to exclude themselves for some particular reason. This doesn’t mean that we should compromise with everything, but that cultural diversity should be accepted and regional or linguistic differences should not be used as a standard for exclusion whatsoever. Networks and movements like Indymedia or Food Not Bombs have branched out all around the world with many autonomous nodes in many countries and cities comprising an international network, and that’s probably because neither Indymedia or Food Not Bombs preached identity politics. I could write about this issue for a long time but I don’t want to overdo it, so I’ll go on to the next subject.

Street theater, arts and “playful activism” have become relatively popular, but I wonder how effective such tactics are in restructuring power relations and making real changes in our everyday lives. Arts and aesthetics of resistance, activism of play, subversive entertainment, etc. have historically had the tendency to assimilate to the point of becoming dominated by the very oppressions and inequities they seek to resist. For example, hip hop and punk rock are considered to be great examples of anarchist culture, but both of these subcultures have become commercialized music/fashion genres within the market capitalist record/culture industry. How can “playful” subversion sustain it’s creativity and genuine resistance without becoming normalized and swallowed up into authoritarian social systems?

진보블로그 공감 버튼트위터로 리트윗하기페이스북에 공유하기딜리셔스에 북마크