Aus: Tipex – Magazin für Literatur und Kultur, Nr. 7, 1987. Mit herzlichem Dank an Jutta Cassau!
—
Tipex Mitte 80er
- Post author By admin
- Post date February 22, 2026
- Categories In explicitly German
- No Comments on Tipex Mitte 80er
Author: admin
New Perspectives: Rethinking Society
At https://tierrechtsethik.de/, we understand that the intersection of punk principles and animal rights ethics opens a perspective that goes beyond mere critique. It asks not only how society is, but how society could be reimagined. Open social designs, as aspired to in punk, gain a radically expanded orientation through the socio-animal practice of animal rights: responsibility extends not only to human communities, but to the entire more-than-human world.
Hegemonial anthropocentric structures reveal themselves here in their full philosophical impoverishment and ethical catastrophe. The consistent practice of animal rights is therefore not merely a moral appeal, but an experimental social practice: it disrupts established hierarchies, leveling mechanisms, and symbolic logics by making visible the relational claims of all living beings.
In this sense, “animal-rights punk” marks a radical step toward a society that does not merely claim openness, responsibility, and justice, but practices them structurally. It is a perspective that realigns social relationships, power dynamics, and the creation of meaning – a genuine orientation for a society capable of rethinking itself.
Wir bei https://tierrechtsethik.de/ meinen > Neue Perspektiven: Gesellschaft neu denken
Die Verbindung von Punk-Prinzipien und Tierrechtsethik eröffnet eine Perspektive, die über bloße Kritik hinausgeht: Sie fragt nicht nur, wie Gesellschaft ist, sondern wie Gesellschaft neu gedacht werden könnte. Offene soziale Entwürfe, wie sie in Punk angestrebt wurden, erhalten durch die tiersoziale Praxis von Tierrechten eine radikal erweiterte Zielführung: Die Verantwortung erstreckt sich nicht allein auf die menschliche Gemeinschaft, sondern auf die gesamte Mitwelt.
Hegemonial-anthropozentrische Strukturen zeigen sich hier in ihrer vollen philosophischen Armut und ethischen Katastrophe. Die konsequente Praxis von Tierrechten ist deshalb nicht bloß moralischer Appell, sondern experimentelle soziale Praxis: Sie bricht mit etablierten Hierarchien, Nivellierungen und Symbollogiken, indem sie die relationalen Ansprüche aller Lebewesen sichtbar macht.
In diesem Sinne markiert Tierrechtspunk einen radikalen Schritt in Richtung einer Gesellschaft, die Offenheit, Verantwortung und Gerechtigkeit nicht nur behauptet, sondern tatsächlich strukturell praktiziert. Es ist eine Perspektive, die soziale Beziehungen, Machtlogiken und Sinnstiftung neu ausrichtet – eine echte Zielführung für eine Gesellschaft, die sich selbst neu denkt.
—
The Limit of politicalness in mainstreamed punk always had been reached
Punk should be its own cliché. If something goes beyond that, in terms of … yes, on what points actually? Let’s say in terms of the claim of “political questioning of the systemic” and the like … then it’s something new.
Punk was the thing that tried to swallow all these things out of a revolutionary claim, and which also confined all these things within a framework that today has clearly become visible as promoting stagnation.
Punk will no longer promote many things that need to be promoted. It is therefore nonsensical – as important as punk may have been at a certain time, apart from the shortcomings in the time and in the movement itself, which people may now try to play down; and as important as approaches that were and can be included in it are – to present this movement as the ultimate and thus to push the still pressing issues of our time into the background, in front of the facades of a superficial gestural revolt. As a rule, the representatives of the movement themselves have not managed to do more than this.
As already mentioned, there are approaches in the movement that each had different explosive qualities at the time, but the evolution of punk effectively ends at all the branches that are more than just branches in terms of content – as can be seen particularly in the case of animal rights punk – if the message(s) were ever meant seriously at all.
Demanding animal rights without consequence or “with consequence after arbitrariness” is perhaps punk for most punk-informed people today, but it is just the limit that could be reached in terms of explosive force in the matter, nothing more.
—
The preservation of punk as an idea raises the question of a.) what are the agreements about the idea and what are the ideas that are being subordinated to those agreements and b.) what is the point of halting a process in order to uphold an idea, vague enough to mutate > into a cliché and a way of cloaking consernative basics like a whole array of obvious normalized -isms, and vague enough that the idea tells itself to be an apex in revolutionariness, in spite of all of today’s problems that won’t get adressed out of the self-delusion of that having been enough of an human effort to revolt.
Punk
doesn’t account for today’s hardcore
contentwise
And hardcore and hardcore
are all lose ends
and can only be sensibly sorted
by content and politicalness or lack of THAT.
Socially uncritical punk, like […]
Can’t be tied to political hardcore,
Hence punk means a crossroads too.
It’s one of these past/present reactions,
like we observe them these days too with many being frustrated about this unstoppable flexibility of history in that sense.
Eventually dispersing frictions
In many youth cultures in the 1980ies the more ‘typically contemporary european’ you were … the more integrating entitlement you received from your peers. If you weren’t you were either “out of the game” or you simply submitted to the “social game”.
The idea and the proclaimed interactive goals weren’t necessarily so – yet the social dynamics were driven by a narrow consciousness of what was felt to be the proper ‘Zeitgeist’.
It was good to stay out of this and watch feminist, animal rights and other political aspects, like a complementary color matching – a self-prescribed background of ‘categoric outsiderism’, neighboring other gestics of outcastsism.
The bunch of people alienated by the strong, ‘mutual-back-slapping group-solidarity’ didn’t even know if there were more of them – that existed in a half-witted promising frame which was but a cultural illusion.
The possibilities in political, social and ecosocial themes brought forth an array of possibilities for open friction.
Many did not use these options and probably underestimated those aspects.
In the context of our project we keep messing around with against speciesism in art we posted this video: Antispekunst 1.
The question is why so few Animal Rights activists discuss and thematize they way in which speciesism displays itself in artworks and why isn’t asked why some artists want to make such arts and why this type of arts even gains a lot of acclaim, fame and positive attention?
Why do other activists blur out questions evolving around speciesism when they appear in contemporary arts? It’s a bit like religion, as a huge cultural factor, is equally being routinely ignored as a source of speciesist thought.
The foundations of that what people consider to be human cure cultural expressions are kept under guard: “human society can’t be that bad in it’s great achivements such as: art, religion, technical progress.”
Why – if it’s not people simply being affrimative of society – do activists fail to see the level of speciesism experiend by nonhuman animals in cultural core institutions and expessions that are deemed to have a great cultural value?
For where does this inability und unwillingness take its impulses I wonder???
Unfortunately we had to give up on our old layout for the punk section. The Javascript caused a bunch of problems and to make things easier time-saving-wise we switched to wordpress and a standrard nice wordpress theme – as you can see. Anway, we are reloading the content now … .