Tag Archives: guy debord

The Most Gangster Vandalism I’ve Ever Seen


Yesterday was Remembrance Day and I attended the campus ceremony here. I was wearing civvy clothes with my regimental headdress and Op Athena decorations, but there were a lot of active and former members in attendance wearing full dress uniform. I spoke with one of the guys, and he is putting together an on-campus group for student-vets. I think this is a great idea and I look forward to having coffee with these boys and building up the group into something special. In somewhat related news, a few girls told me how handsome I looked which is always nice to hear, and all in all it was a great success as far as days dedicated to remembering the fallen go.

But not everywhere. It seems that sometime overnight the cenotaph in Toronto got vandalized:

The text, YE BROKE FAITH WITH US, is obviously a reference to Colonel John McCrae’s World War One poem, In Flander’s Fields, although the source I read was reluctant to definitively make that connection…fuckin’ MSM!!

Some further context: This past weekend Don Cherry was fired from Sportsnet for obliquely suggesting that immigrants were not sufficiently grateful to the Canadian soldiers who (ostensibly) have made this country such a desirable place to live. Are these two events connected? I don’t know but there seems to be a common theme.

First, let me get the superficial out of the way; This is fucking badass. Ye broke faith with us sounds like the kind of biblical warning a supervillain would issue before beginning a campaign of terror. I got a slight chill when I saw it and it reminded me of the vandalized statue of Superman from the Batman v Superman teaser from a few years ago.

To a lesser extent I was reminded of Raoul Silva’s cryptic warming to M before blowing up MI6 in Skyfall:

I can’t help it -I love gangster shit, and there’s nothing more gangster than a cryptic warning. As much as I’m against desecration, I am (net) more in favour of artistic expression/detournement.

Also, I’m not convinced that this is disrespect for veterans. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a veteran who did this on behalf of disgruntled veterans as a criticism of the Trudeau government cutting benefits for veterans. Or perhaps it was a veteran who was troubled by what he perceived as excessive kowtowing to ‘immigrant norms’ or the way (again), the Trudeau government paid off Omar Khadr.  Add to the mix the Don Cherry controversy as a catalyst, and I could see a lot of moto soldier-types getting up like this.

Again, I’m not vouching for or co-signing the motivations or even the actions in an absolute sense. I’m simply speculating that this strikes me as an act on behalf of veterans by a veteran. And, as it was non-violent and subversive to a monument which is ostensibly for veterans in a climate where veterans feel they are being left out to dry, it strikes me as pretty badass and even poetic.

There is of course the possibility that it is a black op: Jussie Smollett for example, tried to defame the right by pretending he got attacked by them, and it’s possible that there are provocateurs who wish to turn public support away from white men by acting like a disgruntled veteran and doing something a disgruntled veteran would do. This strikes me as excessively complex though and perhaps ineffective, because if anything it would garner initial sympathy for veterans and that might not abate even if it were pinned on a veteran patsy. No, I don’t think this is a black op -too many competing sympathies.

Whomever did this, meant it.


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Spectacle: Breivik’s Sanity

***As of when I posted this article, Anders had been deemed sane.***

My Friends,
   The latest media debacle to catch my eye is the trial of Anders Behring Breivik, the Norwegian O.G. who shot/blew up 77 people, including children, because he hates Islam.

Looks like my friend, Nick

The debacular (sic.) aspect in this instance is that the prosecution is trying to argue that Anders was sane when he committed those actions and remains sane today, while his defence claims he was insane.  Now I will preface this by saying I understand that the prosecution would like him deemed sane so they can push for jail-time/harsher sentences, but really, how do you argue that a man who massacred several people is sane?
   You don’t.  That motherfucker is crazy.  I mean have we really set the bar for crazy so high that mass murder isn’t an instant qualification?  Is crazy an exclusive club now?  The way I see it, if you wanna call him crazy but also label him the Norwegian equivalent of a Dangerous Offender so he can be locked up indefinitely/executed,* do that.  But please, whatever you do, don’t insult the families of the victims and their memories by trying to prove this man was sane when he went on a killing spree.

On the other hand….

   Now I have been wrong before, and now that I think about it perhaps the prosecution is on to something.  Nobody does anything without seeing potential gain in it, And perhaps after examining Anders’ testimony and statements they saw that he was acting as one who was/is of sound mind and body and simply trying to achieve a goal.  Anders himself is a proponent of this view:

   “Breivik himself has insisited he is mentally stable and demanded that the
   attacks be judged as a political act rather than the work of a deranged man.”

Certainly a diagnosis of sane, though it would carry a harsher penalty, would render the man a tad more credible.  If deemed insane we could dismiss him as an aberration,** ignore his cause and go about our lives.  However, if we deem him sane we should examine his motives and try to understand him: it is a serious cause indeed that would drive a sane man to massacre people.  We probably won’t do this.  Instead, Norwegian society will want to have the best of both worlds: punish him as a sane man but dismiss him as a crazy one.  This is a mistake in my opinion.  Certainly most people would be reluctant to give Anders a forum to spread his views in light of his crime, as it presumably sends the message “if you commit atrocities you get to have a voice.”  There is merit to this view and I don’t think bad behaviour should be rewarded, but it occurs to me that Anders probably felt voiceless long before he committed his crime.  People like him (“terrorist” is what they are calling him) are screaming to be heard and when no one listens they might start to feel like they have to make a big noise to get people’s attention.  Or 77 big noises.
Stay Thirsty,
-Andre Guantanamo

*I’m not sure what Norway’s laws are on capital punishment, and I’m too lazy to google them.  Please don’t take my casual allusion to the death penalty as a cavalier attitude toward life.  I will explain myself in good time, but that will be another entry.

**I don’t believe crazy people should be wholly dismissed either, but that also is another entry.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Down for Whatever

My Friends,
   Jim Carrey made a film a few years back called “Yes Man,” wherein his character made a point of saying “yes” to everything (except presumably, committing felonies).  This opened him up to a plethora of new experiences as well as true love.  While the film did have its funny moments I think its true appeal was that it served to illustrate just how much we deprive ourselves of with negativity, or saying “no.”  Who hasn’t stubbornly refused a flyer or voucher handed out by someone on the street, or declined an invitation to try something like skydiving, or even deleted an email for discount Cialis without reading it?
  It would be preachy and cliche to spout banalities such as “at the end of your life you will regret the things you didn’t do more than the ones you did,” but I can not help but think of all the human potential that is squandered for lack of utilization.  By simply trying something you would not ordinarily be inclined to try you may surprise yourself by finding a new proficiency or passion.  Ironically, in our efficient and purposeful existence, where we steer clear of any obstruction hindering movement from point A to point B, I would hazard a guess that wasted human potential is the most abundant resource on the planet.
   What to do about this predicament?  Well, I am reminded of the words of Guy Debord in his 1958 treatise, “Theory of the Derive,” where he proposes that individuals,

   “during a certain period drop their relations, their work and leisure activities, and all their other usual motives for movement and action, and let themselves be drawn by the attractions of the terrain and the encounters they find there.”

The segment in bold is important because I feel it encapsulates the essence of the problem of wasted human potential: we are accustomed to the usual.  In such a state as we live in, it is exceedingly difficult for responsible adults to do things on a whim without incurring the ire or, at the very least, the derision of others depending on you to keep doing what you have been doing thus far.  Saying “yes” to any new experience or opportunity that comes along is anathema to structure and security.  Don’t get me wrong, people will laud you for being bold and embracing life but only up until the point where your free-spiritedness conflicts with their ordered existence.
   For example, my family is generally supportive of my endeavours adventures, but I can see in the not-too-distant future one of my siblings having children.  At that point, their support for my devil-may-care existence will be tempered with their earnest and understandable desire to see their offspring get ahead in this world.  I will cease to be the adventurous brother and become the bum uncle who will serve as a cautionary tale to the offspring for why they should do their homework, eat their vegetables or use prophylactics: “IF YOU DON’T USE A GOOD SPERMICIDAL LUBRICANT YOU’RE GOING TO END UP A BUM JUST LIKE YOUR UNCLE.”  But I digress.
   Still, at the risk of advising you on a course of action which could result in a downward life spiral and self-ruin, we should not let the expectations of others and the omni-present threat of becoming a cautionary tale ground our inklings to the point where we view them simply as distractions.  It is in those inklings and urges, so often put on a backburner due to prohibitive cost (time or money), fatigue and/or children, where our true passions reside.  Now don’t go selling your house, wife & kids to chase your pipe dream of becoming a millionaire seducer of women/space marine; if you fall short of the mark it will sour you on new experiences.  If you really want to rectify the situation in a manageable way, the next time someone invites you to something, man up and say “yes.”
Stay Thirsty
-Andre Guantanamo


Filed under Uncategorized