The Chic Style For Summer: Anarchist Apparel

Fashion as a form of news media? Or an example of how a youth movement is disarmed? Trend Hunter highlights the weaving of Occupy and rioter imagery into designer clothing this summer:

The Commune de Paris Spring/Summer 2012 collection presents intriguing scenes to capture the attention of youths at which the brand is aimed. Implied violence and rebellious spirit are clearly depicted in these images, which are used to create an anarchist’s apparel.

A masked figure in a t-shirt is caught in a striking pose in which he is about to throw a glass bottle with a fuse in it. Two masked men waiting for some smoke and debris to clear the air… Beautiful lighting, dynamic compositions and stylish, wearable clothing. Commune de Paris tries to remind the viewers of this series that there can be beauty in anarchy too.

22 Comments on "The Chic Style For Summer: Anarchist Apparel"

  1. Liam_McGonagle | Jun 26, 2012 at 1:15 pm |

    I think they underplay the sales appeal of the GPS tracking features.

    Violent anti-consumerist protests are chaotic affairs, even at the best of times, and it’s always handy to be able to plug into a phone app to track down a missing balaclava or bullet-proof-vest after extricating oneself from a messy police scrum.  Certainly for high-end stuff like this, anyhow.

  2. Festernaecus | Jun 26, 2012 at 1:29 pm |

    you’re supposed to light the molotov cocktail before you throw it

    • Liam_McGonagle | Jun 26, 2012 at 1:32 pm |

      That’s odd–my first instict would have been to light the fuse.  I guess I naively figured the fumes issuing from the resulting impact had been charged with the duty of lighting the actual cocktail.

      • Calypso_1 | Jun 26, 2012 at 1:53 pm |

        not if it’s 2nd gen chem ignition [which as pictured it is not]

        • Yeah, the Finns figured out the hard way why you might want chemical ignition…

          • Liam_McGonagle | Jun 26, 2012 at 2:36 pm |

            I’m guessing your referring to a famous incident which should be common public knowledge, but I’m totally unaware of it.
            Without a prevailing sense of the overt literalness of tragectory typical to these conversations, and based on my own experience with hopelessly drunken Finns, I’d have guessed that the stupid b*st*rds tried to drink ’em.
            However, I’m betting you’re actually referring to some infiltrator or plain incompetent bozo igniting a cache, with disasterous consequences.

          • I was referring to the Finnish Winter War.

            The Finns didn’t have a whole lot that could stop the Russian Armor Columns except terrain and Molotov Cocktails.

            Because it was Winter (and in Finland), much of the fighting was done at night and it was a dead giveaway(pun intended) to the Russians that trouble was headed their way when they saw someone lighting up a Molotov wick and running towards their tank.

            Machinegun bursts in that general direction were pretty effective in suppressing the Molotov throwers.

            So, the Finns came up with a chemical ignitor which allowed the attacker a better chance to make it to the target unseen and unshot. 

          • Liam_McGonagle | Jun 26, 2012 at 2:59 pm |

            Thanks for the recap. 

            I am a bit surprised that a molotov cocktail could have much impact on soviet armour, though.  But then again, 10 year-old kids in Belfast showed what a simple rock could do against a Saracen.

          • If it gets into the engine compartment, its curtains for the tank. Thats a mobility kill at least, and a tank that can’t movie is just an armored coffin.

            God forbid some jackass has a hatch open and the molotov gets into the crew area.

          • Calypso_1 | Jun 26, 2012 at 6:32 pm |

            the old tanks also had rubber track guide wheels that could be melted.

          • Rubber guide wheels? Oh, the horror. Those things must have lasted minutes in the dirt.

          • Calypso_1 | Jun 27, 2012 at 12:56 am |

            Maybe my terminology is off.

          • Somewhat, but I was tank crew and I knew what you meant. We use rubber nowadays, but tech has come a long way.

          • Calypso_1 | Jun 26, 2012 at 3:58 pm |

            A Scotsman can drink a Finn under the table – and oh what a rowdy good time of it that is (and what a hangover)!  Vittu Saatana!

    •  There appears to be a flame at the tip of that rag…just not a terribly big one.

  3. Revolt into style…

  4. Adam Cantrell | Jun 26, 2012 at 2:58 pm |

    hermes selling it right back to ya

  5. mysophobe | Jun 26, 2012 at 4:25 pm |

    I hope this trend catches fire.

  6. Does this make my Guy Fawkes wear passé?

  7. Anarchy as a fashion statement is instrumental in the upheaval of the disgusting mess that is modern default cultural programing. If it won’t be broadcast on television or in main stream news sources, we must use our bodies to show the strength of the anarchist ideal, to enlighten the masses and shift the direction of the planet. 

    • On the contrary. We must be anonymous as possible. The Revolution will happen, and it is up to us to determine when.

  8. Bruteloop | Jun 27, 2012 at 2:54 am |

    Dear old Auntie Vivienne was doing it way back in 1977 with the ‘Anarchy’ shirts. Noticing the had a whole bunch of old Wemblex striped, pin collar shirts lying about, the ones the Mods used to revere, she painted rough broad stripes on them with dye and then stenciled the slogan “Only Anarchists Are Pretty” across the front, sewed a silk  Karl Marx patch on the chest and an inverted Luftwaffe fob on the collar. Cloth rectangles hand painted in bleach and bearing situationist slogans were sewn across the shoulder and down on side on the front.
    So the shirt is sending out mixed signals and bears a worrying resemblance to concentration camp uniforms.
    Variations were Mao or Stalin on the patch (you could find them in Chinatown in London at the time) and, of course, colours and slogans.
    Only a handful were made and are now worth thousands. Or in museums.

    Whatever – they were certainly a tad more radical than the above.

Comments are closed.