Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
2000 Anarchists go on Rampage in SF
Two Thousand Anarchists go on Rampage in San Francisco
Thousands of protestors marched, danced and sprinted through the streets of San Francisco today,shouting slogans against war, racism and capitalism. The protestors were part of a breakaway march from the larger permitted rally organized by A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism) which brought out approximately 200,000 demonstrators.
After the permitted march got to its destination, about two thousand demonstrators broke off and proceded on a militant and well-planned march through the streets of the city. Throughout the march, they targetted a number of symbols of the current capitalist war. They stopped at the building that holds the San Francisco Chronicle, a major newspaper, notorious for its right-wing slant. Masked speakers on a megaphone pointed out how the coverage from this newpaper, and from the capitalist media in general serve to bolster the US war effort at the same time as other masked protestors conveyed this message by graffittiing the building with "weapon of mass destruction," among other messages. Next, the building that houses the British consulate was grafittied, with protestors stressing the international nature of the struggle against war and capitalism, and calling for similar actions by the people of britain against the capitalists there. Protestors are well aware that Tony Blair is, as one person at the event put it, "Bush's Poodle." Protestors punctuated their message by smashing a number of windows. One spray-painted slogan read "UK out of Iraq! Burn the State!"
The breakaway march wound its way through the city, using a number of sophisticated tactics to out-manoeuver the police. At times they stopped quickly and reversed direction. At others, they stopped, shouted a countdown from 10 and then the entire demonstration ran for a block. As they moved along, more and more newspaper boxes were knocked into the street, and through the windows of a Starbucks and a Victoria's Secret. The energy built up as protestors chanted "What do we want? CLASS WAR! When do we want it? NOW!" and "What do we want? PEACE! How we gonna get it? REVOLUTION!"
The high point of the demonstration was in attacks on the building that houses the Federal government's Immigration and Naturalization Service. Numerous windows were broken and a cement pylon and a newspaper box were thrown through the INS building's glass front doors. As the call for the breakaway march, put out by a group called Anti-War Action stated, "The thousands of Arab and South Asian desaparecidos in the US since September 11th recall the US-supported fascist regimes of Latin America."
Apparently angry at being consistently outfoxed, police became more aggressive. An undercover officer grabbed one demonstrator, a number of police on motorcycles rode directly into the crowd and a group of mounted police in riot gear began to chase the protestors. The demonstration walked quickly through the streets for some minutes, leaving garbage cans in the streets to slow the pursuing police, and ended by going down into a BART station (Bay Area Rapid Transit). As protestors dispersed on San Francisco's busy Market Street, a number of police in riot gear rushed down into the BART station, and are reported to have arrested two protestors.
After September 11 of last year, media, critics and politicians gloated about what they saw as the death
of radical street protests in the United States. The more conservative elements of the anti-globalization
movement were frightened by a possible confrontation or worse, saw it as a time to stick together and offer
"critical support" to the United States government. At the same time the radicals were targetted with
stronger and more aggressive policing, and international financial institutions such as the World Trade Organization held their meetings in countries with repressive regimes that do not allow protest. But the radicals in the anti-globalization movement were never just protesting "globalization", they were opposed to capitalist globalization. This analysis has transferred easily into anti-war organizing.
The callout for today's breakaway march read "This is not a war between the people of the US and the people of the world. It is capitalism--a war on the poor. Investors in US oil companies will get a new pipeline through Afghanistan and increased access to the Iraq’s oil reserves (second only to Saudi Arabia). The weapons manufacturers will get new contracts and the US politicians will have an excuse to increase their power. Meanwhile, the poor and working people of America will definitely not be better off. We continue to live in a world of unemployment and minimum wage jobs, of racism and harassment, of surveillance and prisons, of impossible rents and evictions--a world not built for us, but on top of us."
Maybe smug critics and politicians were wrong. We are witnessing a rebirth of the radical street demonstrations in the US. As one black-clad and masked protestor said today, "The anti-globalization movement is dead, but the anti-capitalist movement is alive and well."
Today's protest are only a small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
After the permitted march got to its destination, about two thousand demonstrators broke off and proceded on a militant and well-planned march through the streets of the city. Throughout the march, they targetted a number of symbols of the current capitalist war. They stopped at the building that holds the San Francisco Chronicle, a major newspaper, notorious for its right-wing slant. Masked speakers on a megaphone pointed out how the coverage from this newpaper, and from the capitalist media in general serve to bolster the US war effort at the same time as other masked protestors conveyed this message by graffittiing the building with "weapon of mass destruction," among other messages. Next, the building that houses the British consulate was grafittied, with protestors stressing the international nature of the struggle against war and capitalism, and calling for similar actions by the people of britain against the capitalists there. Protestors are well aware that Tony Blair is, as one person at the event put it, "Bush's Poodle." Protestors punctuated their message by smashing a number of windows. One spray-painted slogan read "UK out of Iraq! Burn the State!"
The breakaway march wound its way through the city, using a number of sophisticated tactics to out-manoeuver the police. At times they stopped quickly and reversed direction. At others, they stopped, shouted a countdown from 10 and then the entire demonstration ran for a block. As they moved along, more and more newspaper boxes were knocked into the street, and through the windows of a Starbucks and a Victoria's Secret. The energy built up as protestors chanted "What do we want? CLASS WAR! When do we want it? NOW!" and "What do we want? PEACE! How we gonna get it? REVOLUTION!"
The high point of the demonstration was in attacks on the building that houses the Federal government's Immigration and Naturalization Service. Numerous windows were broken and a cement pylon and a newspaper box were thrown through the INS building's glass front doors. As the call for the breakaway march, put out by a group called Anti-War Action stated, "The thousands of Arab and South Asian desaparecidos in the US since September 11th recall the US-supported fascist regimes of Latin America."
Apparently angry at being consistently outfoxed, police became more aggressive. An undercover officer grabbed one demonstrator, a number of police on motorcycles rode directly into the crowd and a group of mounted police in riot gear began to chase the protestors. The demonstration walked quickly through the streets for some minutes, leaving garbage cans in the streets to slow the pursuing police, and ended by going down into a BART station (Bay Area Rapid Transit). As protestors dispersed on San Francisco's busy Market Street, a number of police in riot gear rushed down into the BART station, and are reported to have arrested two protestors.
After September 11 of last year, media, critics and politicians gloated about what they saw as the death
of radical street protests in the United States. The more conservative elements of the anti-globalization
movement were frightened by a possible confrontation or worse, saw it as a time to stick together and offer
"critical support" to the United States government. At the same time the radicals were targetted with
stronger and more aggressive policing, and international financial institutions such as the World Trade Organization held their meetings in countries with repressive regimes that do not allow protest. But the radicals in the anti-globalization movement were never just protesting "globalization", they were opposed to capitalist globalization. This analysis has transferred easily into anti-war organizing.
The callout for today's breakaway march read "This is not a war between the people of the US and the people of the world. It is capitalism--a war on the poor. Investors in US oil companies will get a new pipeline through Afghanistan and increased access to the Iraq’s oil reserves (second only to Saudi Arabia). The weapons manufacturers will get new contracts and the US politicians will have an excuse to increase their power. Meanwhile, the poor and working people of America will definitely not be better off. We continue to live in a world of unemployment and minimum wage jobs, of racism and harassment, of surveillance and prisons, of impossible rents and evictions--a world not built for us, but on top of us."
Maybe smug critics and politicians were wrong. We are witnessing a rebirth of the radical street demonstrations in the US. As one black-clad and masked protestor said today, "The anti-globalization movement is dead, but the anti-capitalist movement is alive and well."
Today's protest are only a small taste of things to come if the war on Iraq happens.
For more information:
http://www.linefeed.org/~cactus
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
For more information:
http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/01/156210...
The website, (linefeed.org/~cactus) concerning the ‘capitalist war machine’ was a very attractive and professionally designed site. It takes a lot of skill to put a site like that together, a lot of time and money. The writing was clear and concise, obviously the product of a fine education (probably more than a few pricey college classes) – and the color scheme was well-coordinated – muted with a slight edge. That took talent - and time, and money.
When you talk about ‘we the working poor’, what on earth do you mean by that?? This well-written article, that website are obviously the product of an expensive education.
You are not the working poor. The working poor are back there at Starbucks sweeping up the glass, scrubbing off the grafitti, cleaning up the mess you made. Is this how you plan to help them? By giving them more glass, more messes to clean up? Is that your educated, elitist ideal of REVOLUTION?
Do the working poor want your revolution? Have you ever bothered to ask them?
When you talk about ‘we the working poor’, what on earth do you mean by that?? This well-written article, that website are obviously the product of an expensive education.
You are not the working poor. The working poor are back there at Starbucks sweeping up the glass, scrubbing off the grafitti, cleaning up the mess you made. Is this how you plan to help them? By giving them more glass, more messes to clean up? Is that your educated, elitist ideal of REVOLUTION?
Do the working poor want your revolution? Have you ever bothered to ask them?
It doesn't take a pricy education to learn how to write well--and writing well doesn't ensure a high wage.
Your critique is weak, Mary. It's basically a string of non-sequitors posing as an argument. But I don't infer from that fact that you're "uneducated" and poor. Quite the opposite. You sound like your garden-variety college liberal.
Your critique is weak, Mary. It's basically a string of non-sequitors posing as an argument. But I don't infer from that fact that you're "uneducated" and poor. Quite the opposite. You sound like your garden-variety college liberal.
Man, the trhill of breaking glass! Now that's a big step in the RIGHT direction: towards alienation, towards discrediting and destroying the labor of thousands of people working to bring everybody on board.
Real 'class' act.
Real 'class' act.
"Anarchism is catching on among young activists"
at http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/104887_anarchy18ww.shtml
at http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/104887_anarchy18ww.shtml
Aaron - What a wit. If my critique is weak, then prove it. Are you saying that this article, and this website were assembled by the working poor?
If it isn’t, then where do they get off with this ‘we the working poor’ bit? Who do they think they’re fooling?
Yes, I am a garden variety, college educated moderate – and I don't pretend that I'm speaking for the working poor.
This 'revolution' by the educated elites doesn't speak for them either.
If it isn’t, then where do they get off with this ‘we the working poor’ bit? Who do they think they’re fooling?
Yes, I am a garden variety, college educated moderate – and I don't pretend that I'm speaking for the working poor.
This 'revolution' by the educated elites doesn't speak for them either.
Dear Mary,
you ask about the working poor and whether or not giving them glass to sweep up is a good thing. Well, Mary, as long as they are living under Capitalism that's what they're going to be doing: cleaning up other people's messes. That's what the deal is: poor means that you work.
Now, there are other levels of work as well: work taken on by smug, "college educated", "moderates". Those "moderates" (who are actually defenders of an extreme Capitalism and Representative un-Democracy) sell their more skilled labor at a higher price than the people that play "Music of the Coffeelands" to the moderates as they slurp their burnt, cheap slave-labor-produced coffee. But those "college educated" moderates are also proletarian workers. They do not own the means of the production, so while they might feel superior (in a nice, liberal way) to the people at Starbucks they share more with them than they realize.
As far as the effect of some broken windows at Starbucks? I can tell you from personal experience that it means an extra-shift for someone. That may or may not be a problem, but it's no different from the other problems of working for a fucking horrible company. If it wasn't for that reason then it could be for some other one. Personally I'd rather that it was for a good reason, like anti-Capitalism.
And, by the way, you smug bitch I both go to college and work at Starbucks, so shove that up your college-educated arse.
you ask about the working poor and whether or not giving them glass to sweep up is a good thing. Well, Mary, as long as they are living under Capitalism that's what they're going to be doing: cleaning up other people's messes. That's what the deal is: poor means that you work.
Now, there are other levels of work as well: work taken on by smug, "college educated", "moderates". Those "moderates" (who are actually defenders of an extreme Capitalism and Representative un-Democracy) sell their more skilled labor at a higher price than the people that play "Music of the Coffeelands" to the moderates as they slurp their burnt, cheap slave-labor-produced coffee. But those "college educated" moderates are also proletarian workers. They do not own the means of the production, so while they might feel superior (in a nice, liberal way) to the people at Starbucks they share more with them than they realize.
As far as the effect of some broken windows at Starbucks? I can tell you from personal experience that it means an extra-shift for someone. That may or may not be a problem, but it's no different from the other problems of working for a fucking horrible company. If it wasn't for that reason then it could be for some other one. Personally I'd rather that it was for a good reason, like anti-Capitalism.
And, by the way, you smug bitch I both go to college and work at Starbucks, so shove that up your college-educated arse.
Mary-
The problem with your arguement is that you assume "education" is necessary for people to be smart, intelligent, and capable of critical thinking.
Personally, my experience has been that "education" does exactly the opposite. It was only when I got engaged in anti-war organizing immediately after 9.11 last year that I began to think much more critically about the world. I started talking to more people around me, looking for different viewpoints, different analyses, different ideas for tactics and strategies for changing the world.
Then I started reading more. Instead of just reading the stuff my teachers fed to me, I was reading books that were recommended to me, or books that had really cool covers and even better stuff inside.
I started to actually be able to read the mainstream news, even watch fox news, and laugh at the lies they were spouting that becamse increasingly obvious.
Institutionalized education serves only those who have control over it. This has been the State primarily in this country, but with privitzation of education becoming mroe popular, some capitalists are gaining direct control over it too.
Learning things is a lot easier done when you're not in school. And the internet is accessible in public libraries, etc for free.
I have done some web design, but not enough to be great at it. I do know many people that have taught themselves to do great work, or have been taught by friends to do great work.
Great work doesn't require buckets of money. That's a capitalist arguement. Great knowledge and ability to think critically doesn't require State or Privately sponsored schools. That's a capitalist arguement.
At the basis of your arguement is the assumption that a working class person can't do good work - and that's fucking bullshit, if i do say so myself.
The problem with your arguement is that you assume "education" is necessary for people to be smart, intelligent, and capable of critical thinking.
Personally, my experience has been that "education" does exactly the opposite. It was only when I got engaged in anti-war organizing immediately after 9.11 last year that I began to think much more critically about the world. I started talking to more people around me, looking for different viewpoints, different analyses, different ideas for tactics and strategies for changing the world.
Then I started reading more. Instead of just reading the stuff my teachers fed to me, I was reading books that were recommended to me, or books that had really cool covers and even better stuff inside.
I started to actually be able to read the mainstream news, even watch fox news, and laugh at the lies they were spouting that becamse increasingly obvious.
Institutionalized education serves only those who have control over it. This has been the State primarily in this country, but with privitzation of education becoming mroe popular, some capitalists are gaining direct control over it too.
Learning things is a lot easier done when you're not in school. And the internet is accessible in public libraries, etc for free.
I have done some web design, but not enough to be great at it. I do know many people that have taught themselves to do great work, or have been taught by friends to do great work.
Great work doesn't require buckets of money. That's a capitalist arguement. Great knowledge and ability to think critically doesn't require State or Privately sponsored schools. That's a capitalist arguement.
At the basis of your arguement is the assumption that a working class person can't do good work - and that's fucking bullshit, if i do say so myself.
Yesterday's massive march was, in itself, a good step.
There were a lot of people there who've never been to a demo before. That' s good. But i think we need to discern between newbies, because they're not all the same. Many say that we should appeal to, and not alienate, people like moderate mary--"middle class" people who're basically okay with how the system works and believe that bad stuff can be effectively combatted by playing by the rules. I'm not for alienating moderates unnecessarily, but I am far more opposed to alienating poor and working class people who know from experience that this system's injustices don't begin and end with this incipient war. People like moderate mary think that breaking windows alienates the working class. But, apparently, she doesn't think that they (we) are alienated by a movement that treats war as if it occurs in a vacuum and peace as simply as a state of mind. Speaking from experience, I'd say she's dead wrong.
If we have to alienate moderate mary, and people like her, to bring in large numbers of working class and poor people into the movement, I say so be it.
There were a lot of people there who've never been to a demo before. That' s good. But i think we need to discern between newbies, because they're not all the same. Many say that we should appeal to, and not alienate, people like moderate mary--"middle class" people who're basically okay with how the system works and believe that bad stuff can be effectively combatted by playing by the rules. I'm not for alienating moderates unnecessarily, but I am far more opposed to alienating poor and working class people who know from experience that this system's injustices don't begin and end with this incipient war. People like moderate mary think that breaking windows alienates the working class. But, apparently, she doesn't think that they (we) are alienated by a movement that treats war as if it occurs in a vacuum and peace as simply as a state of mind. Speaking from experience, I'd say she's dead wrong.
If we have to alienate moderate mary, and people like her, to bring in large numbers of working class and poor people into the movement, I say so be it.
using a peace march, with thousands of protesters rallying against one thing -- the war -- to go on a destructive rampage. it makes it a lot more difficult for the protests to be taken seriously, to get the task they're meant to address through, with this kind of thing going on. it's not so much that i'm against what they're doing, but it's a really really bad place for it. if they organized their own, seperate time to tackle this sort of thing, hey, whatever. but instead it makes it harder for the voices of the people who oppose the war to be heard, as they get put into the same category as those smashing and tagging... and it makes it less likely that people will continue going to war protests because they don't want to be categorized with these groups.
it's much more effective to tackle one objective at a time. when protesting war, don't bring other dogmas into it; join together your voice with the voices of those around you in complete solidarity. otherwise with too many different voices, our shouts become an unintelligible garble.
it's much more effective to tackle one objective at a time. when protesting war, don't bring other dogmas into it; join together your voice with the voices of those around you in complete solidarity. otherwise with too many different voices, our shouts become an unintelligible garble.
“you smug bitch’ ‘fucking bullshit’ – well, what kind of responses can you expect from window breakers and window-breaker-wannabes?
In fact, the educated elites who have responded here already know that ‘revolution’ begins with the disgruntled upper and middle classes looking to gain political power, trying to convince working people that all this destruction will be, in the long run, good for them.
It never has been and it never will be.
Actually, the nice website and the good writing were not how I guessed that this is an educated and elite group
I mean – pretending that knocking over garbage cans and smashing windows is a bold and brave political statement – and then pretending to be the working poor?
Only the educated elite would be dumb enough to believe any of that.
Go ahead with your class war – we all know whose side you’re on.
In fact, the educated elites who have responded here already know that ‘revolution’ begins with the disgruntled upper and middle classes looking to gain political power, trying to convince working people that all this destruction will be, in the long run, good for them.
It never has been and it never will be.
Actually, the nice website and the good writing were not how I guessed that this is an educated and elite group
I mean – pretending that knocking over garbage cans and smashing windows is a bold and brave political statement – and then pretending to be the working poor?
Only the educated elite would be dumb enough to believe any of that.
Go ahead with your class war – we all know whose side you’re on.
>In fact, the educated elites who have responded >here ...
>already know that ‘revolution’ begins with the >disgruntled upper and middle classes looking to >gain political power, trying to convince working >people that all this destruction will be, in the long run, >good for them.
>It never has been and it never will be.
This agruement is false. The us government while still opressive is better than the nazi's. Poor people helped the us fight a war (violence and god forbid even a little property distruction), the war ended make life a little better for poor people. Thus poor people allied themselves with a ruling class group (the us government) in the hopes of making things better and it did. This is not to say that we should ever forget that the nicer rulers are still rulers, but if we can win a little better conditions we should do it.
>I mean – pretending that knocking over garbage cans >and smashing windows is a bold and brave political >statement – and then pretending to be the working >poor?
I agree, at the next march are you wiling to go farther.
I'm not poor but I'm rich either, I not claiming to represent anyone but myself, and when I use the word we I am using it to refer to people that want the best posible world for everyone. I learned webdesign in
highschool, one of the best virus writers in the world never owned a computer.
infoshop.org is owned and run by a man with no job, he can barely feed himself.
Don't stereotype
>already know that ‘revolution’ begins with the >disgruntled upper and middle classes looking to >gain political power, trying to convince working >people that all this destruction will be, in the long run, >good for them.
>It never has been and it never will be.
This agruement is false. The us government while still opressive is better than the nazi's. Poor people helped the us fight a war (violence and god forbid even a little property distruction), the war ended make life a little better for poor people. Thus poor people allied themselves with a ruling class group (the us government) in the hopes of making things better and it did. This is not to say that we should ever forget that the nicer rulers are still rulers, but if we can win a little better conditions we should do it.
>I mean – pretending that knocking over garbage cans >and smashing windows is a bold and brave political >statement – and then pretending to be the working >poor?
I agree, at the next march are you wiling to go farther.
I'm not poor but I'm rich either, I not claiming to represent anyone but myself, and when I use the word we I am using it to refer to people that want the best posible world for everyone. I learned webdesign in
highschool, one of the best virus writers in the world never owned a computer.
infoshop.org is owned and run by a man with no job, he can barely feed himself.
Don't stereotype
Mary-
You've got some valid criticism. I guess my question is, what are you doing? How are you acting up? Faced your own complicity any time lately? How are you resisting? Got any suggestions?
It's easy to criticize, and fun. It's harder, and less fun, to try and work for change. If you're down, and working for change, so be it. But if you're not, then you're just another floccipaucinihilipilifacatory stooge, and frankly, we've got enough of those.
and fyi, i'm working clas, under the poverty line, and think this website is a good and a grand thing.
You've got some valid criticism. I guess my question is, what are you doing? How are you acting up? Faced your own complicity any time lately? How are you resisting? Got any suggestions?
It's easy to criticize, and fun. It's harder, and less fun, to try and work for change. If you're down, and working for change, so be it. But if you're not, then you're just another floccipaucinihilipilifacatory stooge, and frankly, we've got enough of those.
and fyi, i'm working clas, under the poverty line, and think this website is a good and a grand thing.
Don't think that black bloc "tactics" alienate working class people? Think again. Plenty of working class people think the black bloc are childish and counter-productive. After-all, what does a regular, blue jean, nike wearing person have in common with some kids who dress up in black and cover their faces? You may think that you are acting and representing on behalf of the masses. But black bloc tactics are a weight on the movement. And spare me the usual rhetoric about how cops are the real enemies, etc. etc. I agree and I'll defend the black bloc from the Right. But the issue is about building a movement that involves political discussion and debate about how to move forward (tactics, nature of the state) and not just showing up to a demonstration and doing "whatever the fuck feels good."
I think that the post referred to the working class and the poor, not to the working poor. The poor are (in north america anyway) a part of the working class. The working class are the people who have to sell their labor to survive. Everyone from the people who work at starbucks to the unemployed to doctors and college professors are working class in this sense.
The person above doesn't understand. It would be totally wrong, or 'vanguardist', for a group to take over a march that other people had organized along a certain set of guidelines, and to break all their principles (say, by doing property destruction). Various communist groups have done this in the past - most famously the 10 person Revolutionary Communist Party sectarian chapter which holds that it is their job to spur the working class into violent revolution - they're famous for taking over marches.
The people doing the breakaway march tend to hold as one of their foundational principles that there is free association of people, which implies that you should not force yourself on others.
Thus, the breakaway marches *always* occur at different times and places than regular marches. They do all the work of disassociating themselves from the others. They walked more than a mile away to do their separate activity, and even most of the media covering this didn't even hear about it during yesterday's news cycle - Channel 2 had nothing about it on the 11 o'clock news.
I liked how the Chronicle felt it had to spend 1/4 to 1/3 of its article space giving equal time to the two dozen counterprotesters.
I met someone there who was talking about how she never had a formal year of schooling after 4th grade, and also wasn't homeschooled, but was self schooled as her family lived on the road in the south, and she ran away over here as a teen. She attends city college training to be an ambulance medic, and they're raising their tuition more than double soon.
The people doing the breakaway march tend to hold as one of their foundational principles that there is free association of people, which implies that you should not force yourself on others.
Thus, the breakaway marches *always* occur at different times and places than regular marches. They do all the work of disassociating themselves from the others. They walked more than a mile away to do their separate activity, and even most of the media covering this didn't even hear about it during yesterday's news cycle - Channel 2 had nothing about it on the 11 o'clock news.
I liked how the Chronicle felt it had to spend 1/4 to 1/3 of its article space giving equal time to the two dozen counterprotesters.
I met someone there who was talking about how she never had a formal year of schooling after 4th grade, and also wasn't homeschooled, but was self schooled as her family lived on the road in the south, and she ran away over here as a teen. She attends city college training to be an ambulance medic, and they're raising their tuition more than double soon.
I’m just another one of the educated middle class - that's how I know how clueless we can be.
As far as changing things goes, the old fashioned methods, getting strength in numbers, writing many letters to congressmen, having large yet peaceful demonstrations, writing letters to the editor – these seem to be the most effective ways of changing things.
I write a lot of letters. The last demonstration I went to was at the Saudi embassy, to allow American/Saudi women to return to this country without the permission of their male relatives (women in that country have fewer rights than cats do here). It wasn’t very successful, but smashing windows wouldn’t have helped. Destroying property is not only wrong, it turns potentially sympathetic people against a cause.
While I don’t agree with everything on this site, it’s an interesting & democratic forum. That’s what’s good about free speech – you know where people stand..
As far as changing things goes, the old fashioned methods, getting strength in numbers, writing many letters to congressmen, having large yet peaceful demonstrations, writing letters to the editor – these seem to be the most effective ways of changing things.
I write a lot of letters. The last demonstration I went to was at the Saudi embassy, to allow American/Saudi women to return to this country without the permission of their male relatives (women in that country have fewer rights than cats do here). It wasn’t very successful, but smashing windows wouldn’t have helped. Destroying property is not only wrong, it turns potentially sympathetic people against a cause.
While I don’t agree with everything on this site, it’s an interesting & democratic forum. That’s what’s good about free speech – you know where people stand..
To my Anarchist sisters and brothers, I applaud your energy, your committment, and your strength in the fight for peace and justice. I do not however, condone any acts of violence or vandalism done in the name of our cause.
While I understand (and share) your anger and frustration at corporate control of our society, window smashing and tagging of corporate property alienates our moderate brothers and sisters from joining our fight.
All mindsets are needed for this lengthy battle to rid our culture of corporate vermin. Only through mass mobilzation can we win against the monolithic "MAN". Violence is THEIR way not ours. When you do violence (even for noble causes) you're doing exactly what they hope for. It gives them fuel to discredit and discount everything we're working for.
I hope that you will channel your immense energys and anger into construction not destruction from now on.
Peace!
While I understand (and share) your anger and frustration at corporate control of our society, window smashing and tagging of corporate property alienates our moderate brothers and sisters from joining our fight.
All mindsets are needed for this lengthy battle to rid our culture of corporate vermin. Only through mass mobilzation can we win against the monolithic "MAN". Violence is THEIR way not ours. When you do violence (even for noble causes) you're doing exactly what they hope for. It gives them fuel to discredit and discount everything we're working for.
I hope that you will channel your immense energys and anger into construction not destruction from now on.
Peace!
I would like to ask the beark away marchers " what did they acoomplish by their actions?"
Their actions will not serve the anti war movement, which is the most important movement in US now.
I want to ask them to think twice about the outcome and effect of their actions on anti war movement. We want more people on the street not less. We don't want to scar away any one. Think about how can we bring 1 million peopel to anti war protest next time. One million people on the street will be much more scarry for goverment than few broken windows. Please think twice.
Their actions will not serve the anti war movement, which is the most important movement in US now.
I want to ask them to think twice about the outcome and effect of their actions on anti war movement. We want more people on the street not less. We don't want to scar away any one. Think about how can we bring 1 million peopel to anti war protest next time. One million people on the street will be much more scarry for goverment than few broken windows. Please think twice.
The American people can clearly see the symbolism in the targeting of symbols of oppression (such as the INS), just as they recall the Boston Tea Party.
"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..." -
Criticize the oppressors, not those who stand up for the oppressed.
"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..." -
Criticize the oppressors, not those who stand up for the oppressed.
So, we all had a big picnic in San Francisco. What did it achieve? Did the war stop? Oh. How big do the marches have to get before the war stops? When have marches ever stopped war before? When have marches that don't have the threat of violence and revolution behind them ever achieved anything (hint to people thinking Gandhi: read what the Brits were worried about at the time. It was the imminent threat of violent revolution that made them leave and the withdrawal of goods and services).
Now, I can see that smashing the INS offices etc is symbolic as well (and I like it), but let's face it, neither symbolic action does anything on its own besides maybe showing people that there's a significant number of others that feel like them.
Here's a more concrete suggestion: General Strike.
Mary doesn't have to smash a Starbucks window. Anarchists get to do a direct action. Labour unions get to use their machinery effectively. Pacifists don't have to hurt anyone. And, and, and it would not be a mere symbol. It would be an actual choking of the machinery that allows war, it would hit the war profiteers in the pocket.
We get to stop the war and re-divert those billions of dollars back into OUR health care system and OUR schools and OUR lives.
Now, I can see that smashing the INS offices etc is symbolic as well (and I like it), but let's face it, neither symbolic action does anything on its own besides maybe showing people that there's a significant number of others that feel like them.
Here's a more concrete suggestion: General Strike.
Mary doesn't have to smash a Starbucks window. Anarchists get to do a direct action. Labour unions get to use their machinery effectively. Pacifists don't have to hurt anyone. And, and, and it would not be a mere symbol. It would be an actual choking of the machinery that allows war, it would hit the war profiteers in the pocket.
We get to stop the war and re-divert those billions of dollars back into OUR health care system and OUR schools and OUR lives.
It's already happening in the UK: rail operators are refusing to move cargo trains of ammunition for a war on Iraq. A week-long general strike beginning the day the war starts would be an excellent goal to push for.
Most of the people I know felt very good by these actions, although regular people at the church were upset by it. But so what? They loved talking about the biased coverage of the counter demonstrators and how the angry teenagers were doing the wrong thing - what else would the average American have to get excited about (besides numbers) after these protests? Everyone is doing what is meaningful to them. Just let them be.
I had a long discussion with a friend about how the media coverage of the damage was - yes, excessive relative to the march - but could easily have followed the same path as before where the Chron showed the single flag getting burned on the cover instead of the 30,000 we had against bombing Afganistan. And why can they no longer cover these demos that way? Because they've tested the waters and found that it's no longer reasonable, given the numbers on the anti-war side, for them to report things as rediculously as they have.
So it's a huge victory, and smashing corporate symbols is just icing on the cake - the media won't be albe to do sh-t with it now. Too many people know what's going on for them to do their fuc---- lies anymore.
I had a long discussion with a friend about how the media coverage of the damage was - yes, excessive relative to the march - but could easily have followed the same path as before where the Chron showed the single flag getting burned on the cover instead of the 30,000 we had against bombing Afganistan. And why can they no longer cover these demos that way? Because they've tested the waters and found that it's no longer reasonable, given the numbers on the anti-war side, for them to report things as rediculously as they have.
So it's a huge victory, and smashing corporate symbols is just icing on the cake - the media won't be albe to do sh-t with it now. Too many people know what's going on for them to do their fuc---- lies anymore.
Plenty of the black bloc are working class people.
a million people will not stop this war, neither will breaking some windows. In almost all cases power only gives up some privage or power, to maintain the rest. If you want to stop the war, you just need to create curcumstances in which the ruling classes, either loses power or stops the war. This can be done peacefully or violently. With property destruction, or without. The question is which is the most effective (for creating a better world), this is not to say the means justify the ends, but to say that are means should be inaccordence with our end. "tatical issues are moral issue"
Those starbuck were built on ground and grass and tree's and maybe old builds that were destroyed. Creation of everything involved changing what is and change is always a destructive process. Turn swords to plows, involves destroying the swords. And turning starbucks or nukeclear weapons to something more loving and usefull involves destroying them.
I can not speak for the poor or the working class, no one can speaking for someone else. I can say what I've seen with my eyes. In boston mayday march a few years back the march past construction sites, the workers in the stopped work, put their hardhats over their hearts and lined the streets. It was a shame that they couldn't join the march, but they had families to feed.
The working class is just a bunch of people under somewhat common circumstances.
Those starbuck were built on ground and grass and tree's and maybe old builds that were destroyed. Creation of everything involved changing what is and change is always a destructive process. Turn swords to plows, involves destroying the swords. And turning starbucks or nukeclear weapons to something more loving and usefull involves destroying them.
I can not speak for the poor or the working class, no one can speaking for someone else. I can say what I've seen with my eyes. In boston mayday march a few years back the march past construction sites, the workers in the stopped work, put their hardhats over their hearts and lined the streets. It was a shame that they couldn't join the march, but they had families to feed.
The working class is just a bunch of people under somewhat common circumstances.
what about alienating both poor and middle class people who are moderate? Your support of such childish action as smashing windows makes me wonder how much experience you really have. What does that achieve? Starfucks probably just uses it as an insurance write off. Seems pointless to argue about who's poorer than thou and more working class. Really what is the point of that? To resist something as large and long seeded as capitalism or war you need a lot of voices and sometimes you do have to use some of the current rules and standards of the system. Smashing things comes off as a little kid whining in the streets about how much he doesn't like his little situation. boohoo grow up and use your mind, not your dick. It's going to take a lot more than a couple brats smashing things to start a revolution if that's what you're so dead set on.
Most of the people I know felt very good by these actions, although regular people at the church were upset by it. But so what? They loved talking about the biased coverage of the counter demonstrators and how the angry teenagers were doing the wrong thing - what else would the average American have to get excited about (besides numbers) after these protests? Everyone is doing what is meaningful to them. Just let them be.
I had a long discussion with a friend about how the media coverage of the damage was - yes, excessive relative to the march - but could easily have followed the same path as before where the Chron showed the single flag getting burned on the cover instead of the 30,000 we had against bombing Afganistan. And why can they no longer cover these demos that way? Because they've tested the waters and found that it's no longer reasonable, given the numbers on the anti-war side, for them to report things as rediculously as they have.
So it's a huge victory, and smashing corporate symbols is just icing on the cake - the media won't be albe to do sh-t with it now. Too many people know what's going on for them to do their fuc---- lies anymore.
I had a long discussion with a friend about how the media coverage of the damage was - yes, excessive relative to the march - but could easily have followed the same path as before where the Chron showed the single flag getting burned on the cover instead of the 30,000 we had against bombing Afganistan. And why can they no longer cover these demos that way? Because they've tested the waters and found that it's no longer reasonable, given the numbers on the anti-war side, for them to report things as rediculously as they have.
So it's a huge victory, and smashing corporate symbols is just icing on the cake - the media won't be albe to do sh-t with it now. Too many people know what's going on for them to do their fuc---- lies anymore.
When I went home and was looking for coverage, CNN covered the int'l marches, and the San Francisco one got 10-15 seconds of description. They said "there were 10s of thousands of people in San Francisco, including a group of women who bared all for peace". So, just like some other sources, the only group they mentioned was the one naked person. I didn't even see any naked people. So, despite all the peaceful, witty sign making efforts, plus great expenses people went to for traveling to San Francisco, a couple journalists reduced it the message down to "a few marginal hippie relics went on a peace march" regardless of the true size and energy of that crowd. The local TV station showed a hippie dangling off a don't walk sign while his hippie friends drummed nearby.
CNN must've had to scour the place for naked people - I didn't see any either, except one woman without a shirt.
But showing the naked people is different than showing the hole in the INS window.
But showing the naked people is different than showing the hole in the INS window.
It's not working. If it was, this war wouldn't be happening at all, let alone escalating.
I just looked at the 5pm Sunday news. The march appeared on the 11pm news yesterday, with no mention of the INS destruction, but perhaps they hadn't had time to gather the news yet yesterday. There was almost no mention of the march on channels 2, 5, 7, 11, and channel 4 KRON had decent coverage of the main march. So, the INS is apparently not something that they consider so valuable. Seattle was very concerned over their Niketown and Starbucks, but San Francisco apparently didn't consider this as notable as the music awards in Los Angeles going on today - because they're already onto the next news cycle and the people who wasted their time peacefully marching yesterday are just like hobbyists who could have taken their walk on ocean beach instead. They did show some people trying to scale a fence in DC getting arrested though. They also showed Muhamar Qaddafi allying with US against Iraq
Why wait "until the war starts" for a General Strike. There are millions of people that feel that the current build-up should stop NOW!
I'd rather stop the war BEFORE it happens. The best way to do that is to shut off supplies by a General Strike.
As you point out people are doing this sort of thing in the UK and have done it in Italy.
Think what a HUGE effect it would have here.
Forget all the bickering about smashing windows.
A General Strike would be EFFECTIVE at STOPPING THE WAR which is what we all say we want.
Lets do it.
I'd rather stop the war BEFORE it happens. The best way to do that is to shut off supplies by a General Strike.
As you point out people are doing this sort of thing in the UK and have done it in Italy.
Think what a HUGE effect it would have here.
Forget all the bickering about smashing windows.
A General Strike would be EFFECTIVE at STOPPING THE WAR which is what we all say we want.
Lets do it.
I went on the breakaway until 5th and Market and exited then because I was with my daughter and sensed that shit might get sorta chaotic.
I'm actually not a huge fan of the black bloc. About two weeks ago, on the "Bring The War Home" thread, I voiced my differences with it. In short, I think the black bloc is vulnerable to police infiltration, is sorta cartoonish, and serves to marginalize militant oppositionists. The black bloc is a tactic, but unfortunately some seem intent on elevating it to an absolute principle.
All that said, I don't think that militancy per se turns off working class and poor people. It goes without saying that it's fallacious to generalize about such a huge group of humans, but my experience is that working class people tend to respect successful militant actions (with the emphasis on success) far more than your typical, time-consuming exercises in moral handwringing that are near and dear to the hearts of our erstwhile "moderates".
To Mary: I apologize for being so harsh. I hope you continue to remain active in the struggle. However, I do still find your characterization of people like me as "elites" asinine. If you could see my family's small bank account, you'd know why.
I'm actually not a huge fan of the black bloc. About two weeks ago, on the "Bring The War Home" thread, I voiced my differences with it. In short, I think the black bloc is vulnerable to police infiltration, is sorta cartoonish, and serves to marginalize militant oppositionists. The black bloc is a tactic, but unfortunately some seem intent on elevating it to an absolute principle.
All that said, I don't think that militancy per se turns off working class and poor people. It goes without saying that it's fallacious to generalize about such a huge group of humans, but my experience is that working class people tend to respect successful militant actions (with the emphasis on success) far more than your typical, time-consuming exercises in moral handwringing that are near and dear to the hearts of our erstwhile "moderates".
To Mary: I apologize for being so harsh. I hope you continue to remain active in the struggle. However, I do still find your characterization of people like me as "elites" asinine. If you could see my family's small bank account, you'd know why.
hey everyone!
1. what did this property destruction accomplish?
well, for one, a whole lot of fuckng discussion. whether or not you think its a valuable tactic, at least people are making arguements and having discussion and interacting with each other on some level. wouldn't it be boring if we went back home afterwards and just commented "great work everyone." if everyone agreed, our minds would just waste away.... so at least its giving something us something to think about, and the discussion has generated interesting thoughts. people are taking a simple thing like property destruction as the starting point and the debate has become political, theoretical and practical.
another thing - i'm sure that any immigrant that has had to go to register in the past few weeks, or will have to go in the next few weeks will be mighty pleased to hear about the INS windows being smashed in. a friend of mine was detained for a month this past fall. he spent a month in jail just for being an arab, and luckily enough public pressure got him out. but he told us there were dozens of other detainees in there that didn't have anyone to help them from the outside. just think - some of those "missing person" flyers on the street might actually be disappeared by this government. well, i told my friend what had happened and he was jumping up and down and yelling to his girlfriend in the other room. he sure as hell wasn't alienated. he may not be in a position to throw the brick himself as the threat of deportation hangs over his head, but bringing a little joy and sense of solidarity to people who have many less rights than we citizens do in this country could go a long way.
2. the media
there's been a lot of discussion about what the mainstream media decided to cover and decided not to cover. hell, the chronicle had a decent piece about the breakaway march but mysteriously failed to mention that their own building had been tagged with "weapons of mass distraction." how ironic is that?
the media will never be on our side. the media is owned by the same fuckers that are profiting from this war and the daily war on the poor. so, let's not tailor our movement to these fuckers, because that's just selling out from the beginning.
some people may say, "but joe sixpack in smallville is getting his information from fox news, so ..." fuck that. that's what indymedia is all about. we need to take control ourselves of spreading information. and i mean indymedia in the broadest possible sense. indymedia is this website, indymedia is the graffiti on the walls. indymedia is the conversation you have after you hook up with someone you meet tomorrow night after drinking way too many beers. indymedia is talking to strangers, ... and talking to friends, ... and becoming friends with strangers.
once again: tailoring our movement to the mainstream media is - and never will be - the answer.
3. general strike
one guy posted the idea of a general strike up above. if you haven't read it yet, scroll up and read it after you're done with this comment.
a general strike is a great idea. there is no best idea, but a general strike would sure as hell make this war impossible.
but lets not delude ourselves into thinking it would be a 'non-violent' direct action. it would only be non-violent if you wanted to condemn the strike to failure from the beginning. it could start out as non-violent, and if we're extremely well organized and effective, maybe it could be non-violent to the end. but that would mean getting the whole police force and the whole national guard, and the whole army to strike. if the country came to a stand still, a whole lot of bosses would be losing a lot of money ... capitalists and politicians would surely see it as a serious threat to their control of everything. and they would do everything they could to stop it, if it were to go beyond a symbolic one-day action. and anyone who's going to be so pathologically non-violent that they wouldn't defend themselves and their friends against what the government at that point is just that - pathological.
4. lets get this party started
ok, its time to stop this war. how we gonna do it?
any idea that anyone has should be acted upon. take initiative. if for the first time in your life, take an idea and do everything you can to make it happen. talk to your friends, talk to you co-workers, talk to your family. pull something off and see what happens.
what were the effects of what you did? look at it from every possible angle. if you did something that you think will help in the long run, tell everyone about it. post it on indymedia, tell your friends, send it out on your mailing lists; the anti-war one, the knitters club one, etc. if other folks like it, maybe they'll do it too. maybe they'll do it better. listen to what other folks are doing. try new stuff.
solidarity is good. lets get each other's backs. criticism of tactics is good, but we're all in this together, so don't let our disagreements divide us. if you think such and such is not the best plan, come up with a better one, do it, tell folks about it, and tell them why you think its more effective that what you were trying to out-do.
no one knows the right solution. the right thing today may be the wrong thing tomorrow. this movement will be effective if it is built on diversity, creativity, and solidarity.
let's get this party started!!
1. what did this property destruction accomplish?
well, for one, a whole lot of fuckng discussion. whether or not you think its a valuable tactic, at least people are making arguements and having discussion and interacting with each other on some level. wouldn't it be boring if we went back home afterwards and just commented "great work everyone." if everyone agreed, our minds would just waste away.... so at least its giving something us something to think about, and the discussion has generated interesting thoughts. people are taking a simple thing like property destruction as the starting point and the debate has become political, theoretical and practical.
another thing - i'm sure that any immigrant that has had to go to register in the past few weeks, or will have to go in the next few weeks will be mighty pleased to hear about the INS windows being smashed in. a friend of mine was detained for a month this past fall. he spent a month in jail just for being an arab, and luckily enough public pressure got him out. but he told us there were dozens of other detainees in there that didn't have anyone to help them from the outside. just think - some of those "missing person" flyers on the street might actually be disappeared by this government. well, i told my friend what had happened and he was jumping up and down and yelling to his girlfriend in the other room. he sure as hell wasn't alienated. he may not be in a position to throw the brick himself as the threat of deportation hangs over his head, but bringing a little joy and sense of solidarity to people who have many less rights than we citizens do in this country could go a long way.
2. the media
there's been a lot of discussion about what the mainstream media decided to cover and decided not to cover. hell, the chronicle had a decent piece about the breakaway march but mysteriously failed to mention that their own building had been tagged with "weapons of mass distraction." how ironic is that?
the media will never be on our side. the media is owned by the same fuckers that are profiting from this war and the daily war on the poor. so, let's not tailor our movement to these fuckers, because that's just selling out from the beginning.
some people may say, "but joe sixpack in smallville is getting his information from fox news, so ..." fuck that. that's what indymedia is all about. we need to take control ourselves of spreading information. and i mean indymedia in the broadest possible sense. indymedia is this website, indymedia is the graffiti on the walls. indymedia is the conversation you have after you hook up with someone you meet tomorrow night after drinking way too many beers. indymedia is talking to strangers, ... and talking to friends, ... and becoming friends with strangers.
once again: tailoring our movement to the mainstream media is - and never will be - the answer.
3. general strike
one guy posted the idea of a general strike up above. if you haven't read it yet, scroll up and read it after you're done with this comment.
a general strike is a great idea. there is no best idea, but a general strike would sure as hell make this war impossible.
but lets not delude ourselves into thinking it would be a 'non-violent' direct action. it would only be non-violent if you wanted to condemn the strike to failure from the beginning. it could start out as non-violent, and if we're extremely well organized and effective, maybe it could be non-violent to the end. but that would mean getting the whole police force and the whole national guard, and the whole army to strike. if the country came to a stand still, a whole lot of bosses would be losing a lot of money ... capitalists and politicians would surely see it as a serious threat to their control of everything. and they would do everything they could to stop it, if it were to go beyond a symbolic one-day action. and anyone who's going to be so pathologically non-violent that they wouldn't defend themselves and their friends against what the government at that point is just that - pathological.
4. lets get this party started
ok, its time to stop this war. how we gonna do it?
any idea that anyone has should be acted upon. take initiative. if for the first time in your life, take an idea and do everything you can to make it happen. talk to your friends, talk to you co-workers, talk to your family. pull something off and see what happens.
what were the effects of what you did? look at it from every possible angle. if you did something that you think will help in the long run, tell everyone about it. post it on indymedia, tell your friends, send it out on your mailing lists; the anti-war one, the knitters club one, etc. if other folks like it, maybe they'll do it too. maybe they'll do it better. listen to what other folks are doing. try new stuff.
solidarity is good. lets get each other's backs. criticism of tactics is good, but we're all in this together, so don't let our disagreements divide us. if you think such and such is not the best plan, come up with a better one, do it, tell folks about it, and tell them why you think its more effective that what you were trying to out-do.
no one knows the right solution. the right thing today may be the wrong thing tomorrow. this movement will be effective if it is built on diversity, creativity, and solidarity.
let's get this party started!!
Calling a general strike would be an effective way to show how out of touch you are. You throw around all this rhetoric about what you want for the working class. The fact of the matter is that you have nothing that the working classes want. They want honest day pay for an honest day’s work. They what to be safe in their homes, and they want someday to send their kids to a university so they can go father in life than they did. These hard working every day people. Know that in living in the U.S.A. offers them the best opportunity to achieve that goal and a strike takes money out of their pocket. And as for your Anarchist/ Communist/ Socialist dreams you would be lucky if 0.5% of Americans agrees with you
THANK YOU ANARCHISTS!!!
WE HAD A PLEASANT DAY!!
INVITE US BACK TO SF ANYTIME!!!!!
HOW ABOUT, OH, FEB 15TH?
SEE YOU IN A MONTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WE HAD A PLEASANT DAY!!
INVITE US BACK TO SF ANYTIME!!!!!
HOW ABOUT, OH, FEB 15TH?
SEE YOU IN A MONTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Living in L.A. I couldn't go to S.F. this past weekend because of funds but I did attend the L.A. march that happened on the 11th. I just wanted to thank everyone who was in S.F. on Saturday and tell you that I stand with you against this war on humanity.
As far the violence that occurred, all I can say that in L.A. it was very peaceful and because of it I think it resulted in a lot of new marchers to drive up to S.F. and invite their friends along. I believe violence leads to violence, and so did Martin Luther King Jr. I believe the only true way to change the world we live in is by changing our behavior entirely. To the people who threw rocks at INS and ran I think what you did was a very cowardly thing to do. If really wanted their attention you should have stayed there and let them arrest you. So when the media comes you tell them exactly what you did and why you did it. If you really want to grab the elites’ attention next time INS does a round up chain yourself to the front door and say you will not move until the roundup stops. You don't wear a mask when you do it and have your ID ready to show anybody who wants to see it. A true revolutionary does not hide behind a mask when they don’t have to. The only people who do have to hide their identity are political refugees who have death warrants on them because of their political views, not young white kids from the suburbs who thrill on the idea of destruction. A true revolutionary faces evil in the face and tells it the he or she is not afraid. This is the example of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Mumia Abul-Jamal, Gandhi, Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Stew Albert and the list goes on. Cowards wear masks and run. A true leader stays and shows his face. That is how a true revolutionary acts. Are you ready to do that?
As far the violence that occurred, all I can say that in L.A. it was very peaceful and because of it I think it resulted in a lot of new marchers to drive up to S.F. and invite their friends along. I believe violence leads to violence, and so did Martin Luther King Jr. I believe the only true way to change the world we live in is by changing our behavior entirely. To the people who threw rocks at INS and ran I think what you did was a very cowardly thing to do. If really wanted their attention you should have stayed there and let them arrest you. So when the media comes you tell them exactly what you did and why you did it. If you really want to grab the elites’ attention next time INS does a round up chain yourself to the front door and say you will not move until the roundup stops. You don't wear a mask when you do it and have your ID ready to show anybody who wants to see it. A true revolutionary does not hide behind a mask when they don’t have to. The only people who do have to hide their identity are political refugees who have death warrants on them because of their political views, not young white kids from the suburbs who thrill on the idea of destruction. A true revolutionary faces evil in the face and tells it the he or she is not afraid. This is the example of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Mumia Abul-Jamal, Gandhi, Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Stew Albert and the list goes on. Cowards wear masks and run. A true leader stays and shows his face. That is how a true revolutionary acts. Are you ready to do that?
>>I had a long discussion with a friend about how the media coverage of the damage was - yes, excessive relative to the march - but could easily have followed the same path as before where the Chron showed the single flag getting burned on the cover instead of the 30,000 we had against bombing Afganistan. And why can they no longer cover these demos that way? Because they've tested the waters and found that it's no longer reasonable, given the numbers on the anti-war side, for them to report things as rediculously as they have. So it's a huge victory, and smashing corporate symbols is just icing on the cake - the media won't be albe to do sh-t with it now. Too many people know what's going on for them to do their fuc---- lies anymore.
------------
Next up, after saying they won't be able to do sh-t with it anymore, bov continues to complain about how the corporate media is still fooling everyone with their fuc---- lies. Stay tuned.
------------
Next up, after saying they won't be able to do sh-t with it anymore, bov continues to complain about how the corporate media is still fooling everyone with their fuc---- lies. Stay tuned.
:: Some Thoughts
:: by a thinker (and a do-er) • Monday January 20, 2003 at 01:34 AM
:: hey everyone!
::1. what did this property destruction accomplish?
:: well, for one, a whole lot of fuckng discussion. whether or not you think its a valuable tactic, at least people are making arguements and having discussion and interacting with each other on some level.
I thought you were all marching for Peace on moral principle. I guess I was wrong.
:: no one knows the right solution. the right thing today may be the wrong thing tomorrow. this movement will be effective if it is built on diversity, creativity, and solidarity.
Anything goes? In the real world there are ethical principles of right and wrong. In the totalitarian world of ANSWER/WWP there are only the concepts of power and tactics to achieve it.
I guess we now know the real purpose of Saturday's "Peace" demonstrations.
:: by a thinker (and a do-er) • Monday January 20, 2003 at 01:34 AM
:: hey everyone!
::1. what did this property destruction accomplish?
:: well, for one, a whole lot of fuckng discussion. whether or not you think its a valuable tactic, at least people are making arguements and having discussion and interacting with each other on some level.
I thought you were all marching for Peace on moral principle. I guess I was wrong.
:: no one knows the right solution. the right thing today may be the wrong thing tomorrow. this movement will be effective if it is built on diversity, creativity, and solidarity.
Anything goes? In the real world there are ethical principles of right and wrong. In the totalitarian world of ANSWER/WWP there are only the concepts of power and tactics to achieve it.
I guess we now know the real purpose of Saturday's "Peace" demonstrations.
"A true leader stays and shows his face. That is how a true revolutionary acts. Are you ready to do that"
That is brave but totally stupid.
A real troop learns that fighting another day is more important than anything else.
That is brave but totally stupid.
A real troop learns that fighting another day is more important than anything else.
I agree with you on your perspective of the black bloc. Judging from you other post, I thought you were espousing their views. I, also, think they are childish, easily infiltrated by cops and carry their tactics too much as principle. And I agree with you that workers and other regular people are capable of militancy too. After-all, that's how unions were built in this country, through industry wide strikes, sit-ins and mobilization. The real issue is rebuilding that militant tradition in society. The black bloc attempts to do that through the act of a "deed" as opposed to doing the hard work of building as broad a movement as possible and working with others in trying to figure out the way forward. Course, their unwillingness to do that stems from other things like disdain for democratic decision making, centralization, etc.
Sellout, collaborationist labor brokers, unions are the velvet glove on the iron fist of corporate rule.
Down with unions. Up with the rank and file.
Down with unions. Up with the rank and file.
Bravery is stupid. That is exactly what they told Martin Luther King Jr., but do you think he is stupid now? Stupid is using the word ‘peace’ to create ‘destruction’ (which is exactly what Bush is doing). If you want to do something productive and live another day to tell about it why don’t you go to the ghettos of America, which you claim you represent, and teach 3 kids how to read and write. And when you are done being afraid of what might happen to you when confronting the evils of this government then maybe you can follow Martin example and use your own existence in this world to make a difference and stop not add to the violence.
Hey y'all.
If we want to talk resistance and gumming up the works...how about this...
A strike, while good in principle, does go against helping the working class who can't afford a 7 day or longer strike. We're talking children not being fed, people losing apartment, and the whole shebang.
But..most people can take a day off here or there....
These big huge protests are great..but they do get a carnival attitude to them. It's Saturday. We can go get dressed up and hang with the protesters. Woohoo!
I'm not attempting to dimish what happened this Saturday..I was there, and it was amazing..but...
What would happen if the major cities of America had 50,000 people in their business districts at 9am on a Wed. morning. Gumming up transit...doing sit-ins in Starbucks (to educate not damage), diverting traffic, and generally causing a peaceful shock to the system?
100,000 people on a Saturday is nice. 50,000 people in the Embarcadero on a Wed. making sure mass transit and the corporate machine slows down for a day...that will get some coverage. Just my $.02
If we want to talk resistance and gumming up the works...how about this...
A strike, while good in principle, does go against helping the working class who can't afford a 7 day or longer strike. We're talking children not being fed, people losing apartment, and the whole shebang.
But..most people can take a day off here or there....
These big huge protests are great..but they do get a carnival attitude to them. It's Saturday. We can go get dressed up and hang with the protesters. Woohoo!
I'm not attempting to dimish what happened this Saturday..I was there, and it was amazing..but...
What would happen if the major cities of America had 50,000 people in their business districts at 9am on a Wed. morning. Gumming up transit...doing sit-ins in Starbucks (to educate not damage), diverting traffic, and generally causing a peaceful shock to the system?
100,000 people on a Saturday is nice. 50,000 people in the Embarcadero on a Wed. making sure mass transit and the corporate machine slows down for a day...that will get some coverage. Just my $.02
The protests in SF and DC did nothing but reinforce the antiwar movement's reputation as the spoiled brats of our national scene. Terrific message: newspapers are corporate shills, Bush is Hitler, cops are pigs, etc. And every syllable of this mass whine-in protected by the umbrella of the freest, most open political and economic system in human history. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.
Here's an idea: read something. A book, a newspaper, anything outside your anarchist/communist/lunatic fringe sphere. Read "Ghost Soldiers," a remarkable book about Japanese atrocities during World War 2 (and a rescue mission that practically defies reason). Read "Saddam's Bombmaker," about a top Iraqi physicist, for some chilling details about life inside Iraq's nuclear program. Read the testimony of survivors of North Korea's death camps. I'm not saying any of it is a justification for war. But - hello - it does offer some perspective.
Is our own system perfect? Of course not. America makes mistakes, tons of 'em. But American free enterprise built those streets you walk on, those clothes you wear, that school you go to (or went to), the way of life you take for granted - while communist systems either collapsed of their own weight, were liberated by their own people, or continue to enslave/torture/oppress millions of their own citizens.
Want proof? Okay. Look at the places where America lost. Where its policies failed, or its troops were defeated. Vietnam. Cuba. North Korea. Eastern Europe. China. Can you seriously argue that life ANYWHERE in these countries is better than it is here, or in any other free democracy on earth?
Really hate America? Capitalism? Bush? Whatever?
Move. Go someplace you think is better. Go to one of the countries listed above. Have the courage of your convictions. Really. We won't stop you. That's why they call it a free country.
I have the feeling you won't. Because deep down, you want us - normal Americans - to keep taking care of you, tolerating your tantrums, and cleaning up after your messes. Because that's what adults do for their children.
But don't for a minute consider yourself "revolutionaries." Revolution means change. You can't change society, because you're not offering a better alternative.
Compared to the people who've caused REAL change in human history - who put their lives on the line in Afghanistan, Kosovo, the former Soviet Union, Europe and Asia during WW II - who died so strangers all over the world could live in, yes, freedom - you'll always be a bunch of chickenshit, loudmouth hypocrites.
Meanwhile, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Kim Il Jong and dozens like them around the world are counting on your support. Knowing you, I'm sure you won't disappoint them.
Here's an idea: read something. A book, a newspaper, anything outside your anarchist/communist/lunatic fringe sphere. Read "Ghost Soldiers," a remarkable book about Japanese atrocities during World War 2 (and a rescue mission that practically defies reason). Read "Saddam's Bombmaker," about a top Iraqi physicist, for some chilling details about life inside Iraq's nuclear program. Read the testimony of survivors of North Korea's death camps. I'm not saying any of it is a justification for war. But - hello - it does offer some perspective.
Is our own system perfect? Of course not. America makes mistakes, tons of 'em. But American free enterprise built those streets you walk on, those clothes you wear, that school you go to (or went to), the way of life you take for granted - while communist systems either collapsed of their own weight, were liberated by their own people, or continue to enslave/torture/oppress millions of their own citizens.
Want proof? Okay. Look at the places where America lost. Where its policies failed, or its troops were defeated. Vietnam. Cuba. North Korea. Eastern Europe. China. Can you seriously argue that life ANYWHERE in these countries is better than it is here, or in any other free democracy on earth?
Really hate America? Capitalism? Bush? Whatever?
Move. Go someplace you think is better. Go to one of the countries listed above. Have the courage of your convictions. Really. We won't stop you. That's why they call it a free country.
I have the feeling you won't. Because deep down, you want us - normal Americans - to keep taking care of you, tolerating your tantrums, and cleaning up after your messes. Because that's what adults do for their children.
But don't for a minute consider yourself "revolutionaries." Revolution means change. You can't change society, because you're not offering a better alternative.
Compared to the people who've caused REAL change in human history - who put their lives on the line in Afghanistan, Kosovo, the former Soviet Union, Europe and Asia during WW II - who died so strangers all over the world could live in, yes, freedom - you'll always be a bunch of chickenshit, loudmouth hypocrites.
Meanwhile, Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Kim Il Jong and dozens like them around the world are counting on your support. Knowing you, I'm sure you won't disappoint them.
Wow you did a great job acting like children on a tantrum while erroding the credibility of the peace rally.
Do you hope to get anybody to listen to your ideas and solutions when you destroy shit? What's the point? Do you think you would make good leaders? I'd rather not have my shit destroyed, thank you very much.
So you're basically pro war, right? Revolution?
Damn you people are idiots. No wonder the Left isn't taked seriously. We keep shooting each other in the foot.
And what do you suggest we replace capitalism with? Anarchy? You won't find people willing to do that and any system you replace will have the same human flaws. With corruption, any economic or political system will flounder. If people get their shit together, any economic system can thrive.
Do you hope to get anybody to listen to your ideas and solutions when you destroy shit? What's the point? Do you think you would make good leaders? I'd rather not have my shit destroyed, thank you very much.
So you're basically pro war, right? Revolution?
Damn you people are idiots. No wonder the Left isn't taked seriously. We keep shooting each other in the foot.
And what do you suggest we replace capitalism with? Anarchy? You won't find people willing to do that and any system you replace will have the same human flaws. With corruption, any economic or political system will flounder. If people get their shit together, any economic system can thrive.
Dear Darwin Awards Candidates,
Take a step back and look at what you hope to achieve this way? You're kinda like terrorists. You may not be killing anyone, (though it may not be beyond you,) but you're just destroying without building anything to replace it, without it working toward any kind of goal that is clear. Unless you focus on the SOLUTION and not the PROBLEM, whatever you destroy will probably just be replaced by something just as bad. Think BUILDING SOLUTIONS, not DESTROYING.
It's really really lame of you to take an act of civil disobedience, the peace rally, an action that we can all attribute to Gandhi and Martin Luthor King Jr, and then went the opposite direction with it. You screwed the 200,000 people who have a point to get across.
Think before you act.
You will not see me at the emergency rally for the people who were arrested. They will have to deal with the consequences of their own actions.
Take a step back and look at what you hope to achieve this way? You're kinda like terrorists. You may not be killing anyone, (though it may not be beyond you,) but you're just destroying without building anything to replace it, without it working toward any kind of goal that is clear. Unless you focus on the SOLUTION and not the PROBLEM, whatever you destroy will probably just be replaced by something just as bad. Think BUILDING SOLUTIONS, not DESTROYING.
It's really really lame of you to take an act of civil disobedience, the peace rally, an action that we can all attribute to Gandhi and Martin Luthor King Jr, and then went the opposite direction with it. You screwed the 200,000 people who have a point to get across.
Think before you act.
You will not see me at the emergency rally for the people who were arrested. They will have to deal with the consequences of their own actions.
COINTELPRO refers to a decades-long FBI program of dividing groups and movements by infiltrating and subverting them through legal and illegal means. In short, it's about the government suppressing free speech. Groups that carried out actions against legitimate government targets of oppression are now under fire for alleged "violence." Undiscussed is the huge difference between violence aimed at people and actions targeting property. War, deportation, incarceration without charges, police brutality, torture, militarism, and the denial of basic human rights are all forms of violence against people. The American people can clearly see the symbolism in the targeting of symbols of oppression (such as the INS), just as they recall the Boston Tea Party. Furthermore, this was clearly a breakaway group that did not hide behind protesters who chose civil obedience over civil disobedience.
San Francisco suffers from the same advertising blight as the rest of the U.S. Public space has been co-opted by corporate speech, in the form of "naming rights" and other advertising schemes, that have scarred the places the public frequents. Flyers are quickly removed from public places, chalk messages washed off sidewalks, independent news racks are outlawed: all for the benefit of the same corporate monopolies that back the war machine. Antiwar messages tagged on the towers of these corporate oppressors offer a glimmer of poetic justice. Political graffitti is simply free speech reclaimed.
Most educated protesters understand this difference, though a few may be sucked in by the COINTELPRO label of "violent peace protesters." If Mr. Hallinan and the SFPD truly were upholding the constitution, they would be downtown dismantling the INS themselves. Don't be suckered by those who would value property before human life: that is what drives the call to war in the first place.
San Francisco suffers from the same advertising blight as the rest of the U.S. Public space has been co-opted by corporate speech, in the form of "naming rights" and other advertising schemes, that have scarred the places the public frequents. Flyers are quickly removed from public places, chalk messages washed off sidewalks, independent news racks are outlawed: all for the benefit of the same corporate monopolies that back the war machine. Antiwar messages tagged on the towers of these corporate oppressors offer a glimmer of poetic justice. Political graffitti is simply free speech reclaimed.
Most educated protesters understand this difference, though a few may be sucked in by the COINTELPRO label of "violent peace protesters." If Mr. Hallinan and the SFPD truly were upholding the constitution, they would be downtown dismantling the INS themselves. Don't be suckered by those who would value property before human life: that is what drives the call to war in the first place.
For more information:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLIT...
Pity those who value property over life and human rights.
What WOULD Ghandi Do? Gahndi would have protested peacefully, like the recent protests in Bhopal, then most likely arrested and sued anyway:
http://nyc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=42815
If 200,000 people had gathered without even a piece of trash, they still would be demonized for creating a traffic jam.
Ghandi, in present day, would be marginalized, framed, and arrested by paid COINTELPRO fascists. readers who have followed the details of the arrests will note that the two people arrested were standing on the sidewalk, clearly NOT taking part in any direct action against symbols of oppression. As usual in SF, the cowardly cops grab easy targets for arrest and scapegoats, while letting determined freedom fighters get away.
http://nyc.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=42815
If 200,000 people had gathered without even a piece of trash, they still would be demonized for creating a traffic jam.
Ghandi, in present day, would be marginalized, framed, and arrested by paid COINTELPRO fascists. readers who have followed the details of the arrests will note that the two people arrested were standing on the sidewalk, clearly NOT taking part in any direct action against symbols of oppression. As usual in SF, the cowardly cops grab easy targets for arrest and scapegoats, while letting determined freedom fighters get away.
For more information:
http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLIT...
it's a DAMN shame that OUR ancestors and our current servicemen risked their lives and or died for pieces of shit like you!
"Is our own system perfect? Of course not. America makes mistakes, tons of 'em. But American free enterprise built those streets you walk on, those clothes you wear, that school you go to (or went to), the way of life you take for granted - while communist systems either collapsed of their own weight, were liberated by their own people, or continue to enslave/torture/oppress millions of their own citizens.
Want proof? Okay. Look at the places where America lost. Where its policies failed, or its troops were defeated. Vietnam. Cuba. North Korea. Eastern Europe. China. Can you seriously argue that life ANYWHERE in these countries is better than it is here, or in any other free democracy on earth?
Your American Empire has NOTHING to do with Freedom, least of promoting freedom in any of those countries you list where America got its ass kicked.
Your America is about exploiting, and dominating those countries in order to sustain your obscene way of life. Period.
American Apologists like you will always ignore this fundamental issue and spew pathetic and predictable propaganda demonizing your victims and glorifying how great your Evil Empire is--all in order to justify America's genocidial wars.
What you refuse to face is the fact that everything America has, every penny, every dime, every dollar is based upon the continued exploitation and subjugation of the planet. That is why your Evil America wages the wars it does around the world--and why you America Pigs are so rightfully hated and increasingly despised on this planet.
The sooner that the Two-hundred old Frankenstein monster called "America" is ended and destroyed the better off the rest of the human race will be.
Want proof? Okay. Look at the places where America lost. Where its policies failed, or its troops were defeated. Vietnam. Cuba. North Korea. Eastern Europe. China. Can you seriously argue that life ANYWHERE in these countries is better than it is here, or in any other free democracy on earth?
Your American Empire has NOTHING to do with Freedom, least of promoting freedom in any of those countries you list where America got its ass kicked.
Your America is about exploiting, and dominating those countries in order to sustain your obscene way of life. Period.
American Apologists like you will always ignore this fundamental issue and spew pathetic and predictable propaganda demonizing your victims and glorifying how great your Evil Empire is--all in order to justify America's genocidial wars.
What you refuse to face is the fact that everything America has, every penny, every dime, every dollar is based upon the continued exploitation and subjugation of the planet. That is why your Evil America wages the wars it does around the world--and why you America Pigs are so rightfully hated and increasingly despised on this planet.
The sooner that the Two-hundred old Frankenstein monster called "America" is ended and destroyed the better off the rest of the human race will be.
"it's a DAMN shame that OUR ancestors and our current servicemen risked their lives and or died for pieces of shit like you!"
Actually, my ancestors who served did it to fight oppression, just as the 250,000 people who stood up in SF on J18 did, regardless of their tactics. They even fought for freedom of speech, even for those of unpopular points of view. What you stand for is anybody's guess.
Actually, my ancestors who served did it to fight oppression, just as the 250,000 people who stood up in SF on J18 did, regardless of their tactics. They even fought for freedom of speech, even for those of unpopular points of view. What you stand for is anybody's guess.
next time you all chat with the "Dear Leader", give him my best. ps Deer Leader was a pun lest you not get it!
The discourse about the breakaway ran the usual gamut, non violent types wondering why property damage as if property were an extension of your physical being as if Ghandi would have stood by while thousands died in Bhopahl. As if Ghandi were some idol to be worshipped. He did what he thought would work, sometimes he was right, sometimes not.
Liberals and people with political ambitions demanding that we stop doing things that might alienate that mysterious electorate out there that will one day rise up and vote in Ralph Nader or some leftist plitico who might actualy stand up to the military industrial complex, as if history hasn't already shown the futility of that as we see one betrayal after another. Clinton should have gotten the taste for liberal reform out of the most deluded democrat.
Wobblies and other labor dreamers talk about the general strike like this was 1934 not 2003. In europe people take mass transit and are highly socialized. Here union workers drive, shoot animals for fun and find the Super Bowl to be the national issue of unity. The working classes are too scared of loosing whats left of the tatered american dream to dare offer more than token appeals for job security.
So what is to be done, do we listen to the leninist drivel about our infantile tendencies, or do we continue in our absurd and romantic desires to break the barriers of insularity, indiference, alienation, blank indiference at scenes of desperation, fear and misery around the world caused largely by the greed perpetuated by a system that brutalizes us every day and makes acomplices of us in genocide, planeticide, and suicidal tendencies that have been rationalized into daily life.
I SAY NO! I SAY REVOLT! I SAY FIND ANY MEANS THAT FILLS YOUR HEART AND MIND WITH HOPE AND ENJOY EVERY MOMENT OF RESISTANCE! I SAY HAVE FAITH IN THE INNATE ABILITY OF HUMANITY TO OVERCOME THE POISON OF MODERN CIVILIZATION AND TO AWAKEN TO THE SIMPLICITY OF LIFE LIVED IN ITS IMEDIACY!
So if a few windows get broken, big deal, as someone said, they have insurance for such things. So a few politicos agendas are spoiled. What do we have to loose?
Liberals and people with political ambitions demanding that we stop doing things that might alienate that mysterious electorate out there that will one day rise up and vote in Ralph Nader or some leftist plitico who might actualy stand up to the military industrial complex, as if history hasn't already shown the futility of that as we see one betrayal after another. Clinton should have gotten the taste for liberal reform out of the most deluded democrat.
Wobblies and other labor dreamers talk about the general strike like this was 1934 not 2003. In europe people take mass transit and are highly socialized. Here union workers drive, shoot animals for fun and find the Super Bowl to be the national issue of unity. The working classes are too scared of loosing whats left of the tatered american dream to dare offer more than token appeals for job security.
So what is to be done, do we listen to the leninist drivel about our infantile tendencies, or do we continue in our absurd and romantic desires to break the barriers of insularity, indiference, alienation, blank indiference at scenes of desperation, fear and misery around the world caused largely by the greed perpetuated by a system that brutalizes us every day and makes acomplices of us in genocide, planeticide, and suicidal tendencies that have been rationalized into daily life.
I SAY NO! I SAY REVOLT! I SAY FIND ANY MEANS THAT FILLS YOUR HEART AND MIND WITH HOPE AND ENJOY EVERY MOMENT OF RESISTANCE! I SAY HAVE FAITH IN THE INNATE ABILITY OF HUMANITY TO OVERCOME THE POISON OF MODERN CIVILIZATION AND TO AWAKEN TO THE SIMPLICITY OF LIFE LIVED IN ITS IMEDIACY!
So if a few windows get broken, big deal, as someone said, they have insurance for such things. So a few politicos agendas are spoiled. What do we have to loose?
To all those who say that the breakaway march is alienating the mainstream, or to those who are "sad to see this type of destruction in the peace movement."
Are you going to come to the next ANSWER march?
If not, you are only alienating yourselves.
Are you going to stay home next time there's a protest, tell you friends to stay home, and then come on indymedia and say, "see guys, you alienated us. we're staying home today to stop this war."
There is no logic in this. This is what an ideology like pacifism or any other is capable of. It makes people stop thinking critically.
Actions should always be judged by their EFFECT(S). Not on some moral principle.
If you truly believe that non-violence is the best TACTIC, then you should be organizing for an effective non-violent movement. Show the people doing property destruction that it can work. Tell your friends to come out next time in LARGER numbers. If they actually ARE alienated by a little broken glass and graffiti, why not take the responsibility YOURSELF to make them feel more comfortable. or are you uncapable of acting for yourselves and organizing yourselves?
Is that why you're dependent on a front group for the Stalinist WWP (ANSWER) to pay for the buses to get you into town or on the streets?
as long as you are sheep, you will always be playing follow the leader, and eating the shitty grass that the big rams leave behind.
think for yourselves and act for yourselves
Are you going to come to the next ANSWER march?
If not, you are only alienating yourselves.
Are you going to stay home next time there's a protest, tell you friends to stay home, and then come on indymedia and say, "see guys, you alienated us. we're staying home today to stop this war."
There is no logic in this. This is what an ideology like pacifism or any other is capable of. It makes people stop thinking critically.
Actions should always be judged by their EFFECT(S). Not on some moral principle.
If you truly believe that non-violence is the best TACTIC, then you should be organizing for an effective non-violent movement. Show the people doing property destruction that it can work. Tell your friends to come out next time in LARGER numbers. If they actually ARE alienated by a little broken glass and graffiti, why not take the responsibility YOURSELF to make them feel more comfortable. or are you uncapable of acting for yourselves and organizing yourselves?
Is that why you're dependent on a front group for the Stalinist WWP (ANSWER) to pay for the buses to get you into town or on the streets?
as long as you are sheep, you will always be playing follow the leader, and eating the shitty grass that the big rams leave behind.
think for yourselves and act for yourselves
Let's be clear about what Gandhi stood for:
1) Theft from the British Empire
2) Workplace takeovers (i.e. stealing property from the rich)
3) Authoritarian spirituality
Gandhi said: "If given the choice between cowardice and violence, I choose violence."
The dim-witted liberals of today pervert Gandhi's message. But remember that in his day, Gandhi shut the fucking British Empire down in India.
When the pacifists start doing what Gandhi did, they'll get the respect of people who want to make real social change.
But if you think coming out once every 10 years to a pre-planned parade constitutes making social change, you need to think again.
1) Theft from the British Empire
2) Workplace takeovers (i.e. stealing property from the rich)
3) Authoritarian spirituality
Gandhi said: "If given the choice between cowardice and violence, I choose violence."
The dim-witted liberals of today pervert Gandhi's message. But remember that in his day, Gandhi shut the fucking British Empire down in India.
When the pacifists start doing what Gandhi did, they'll get the respect of people who want to make real social change.
But if you think coming out once every 10 years to a pre-planned parade constitutes making social change, you need to think again.
Without their "voluntary servitude" the leader would be impotent. As Gandhi points out:
Even the most despotic government cannot stand except for the consent of the governed which consent is often forcibly procured by the despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear the despotic force, his power is gone (Gandhi, 1980, p.27)
In actual practice, the withdrawal of co-operation takes the form of civil disobedience, strikes, occupations, boycotts, and a general mass non-compliance with the wishes of the oppressor. [Gene Sharp (1973) has documented over 200 successful techniques of nonviolent resistance.] In the great Indian strike or hartel of 1930 against the Salt Laws, for example, virtually the entire subcontinent was shut down and British rule paralyzed (Bondurant, 1958).
Even the most despotic government cannot stand except for the consent of the governed which consent is often forcibly procured by the despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear the despotic force, his power is gone (Gandhi, 1980, p.27)
In actual practice, the withdrawal of co-operation takes the form of civil disobedience, strikes, occupations, boycotts, and a general mass non-compliance with the wishes of the oppressor. [Gene Sharp (1973) has documented over 200 successful techniques of nonviolent resistance.] In the great Indian strike or hartel of 1930 against the Salt Laws, for example, virtually the entire subcontinent was shut down and British rule paralyzed (Bondurant, 1958).
The Black Bloc of 1775 - A History Lesson
==============================================================================
"They tell me that we are weak, but shall we gather strength by irresolution? We are not weak. ....The battle is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. . . .
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
==========================================
From "Toward An American Revolution" by Jerry Fresia, South End Press
English merchant capitalists who arrived in America found that whatever wealth was to be had would come from the hard labor of mining, cutting down forests, planting and harvesting crops, and constructing buildings, roads, and bridges.
Investors, therefore, arranged to bring "new hands" to the "new world" to exploit its resources. A vast propaganda campaign was launched to lure the poor of Europe to America. Roughly half the immigrants to colonial America were indentured servants. At the time of the War of Independence, three out of four persons in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia were or had been indentured servants. Of the 250,000 indentured servants that had arrived by 1770, more than a 100,000 had been either kidnapped or released from their prison sentences. And by this time, roughly 20 percent of the colonial population was in slavery. Jefferson was clear about this when he said that "our ancestors who migrated here were laborers not lawyers."
In the hundred years or so prior to the War of Independence, the rich had gotten richer, and the poor, poorer. For example, in 1687 in Boston, the top 1 percent owned about 25 percent of the wealth. By 1770, the top 1 percent owned 44 percent of the wealth. During this same period, the percentage of adult males who were poor, "perhaps rented a room, or slept in the back of a tavern, owned no property, doubled from 14 percent of the adult males to 29 percent." It was during this time that the rich introduced property qualifications for voting in order to disenfranchise the poor and protect their privileges. In Pennsylvania in 1750, for example, white males had to have fifty pounds of "lawful money" or own fifty acres of land. This meant that only 8 percent of the rural population and 2 percent of the population of Philadelphia could vote. Similar situations existed in the other states. It is important to note the way in which voting qualification requirements can be used to curb political expression. Keep in mind also that voting has never been guaranteed in this country, or made a right ...
Common people were not taking this abuse sitting down. During the last quarter of the seventeenth century, militant confrontations brought down the established governments of Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina.
In Virginia, in a dispute over land distribution and Indian policy, white frontiersmen, together with slaves and servants forced the governor to flee the burning capital of Jamestown. England was forced to quickly dispatch 1,000 soldiers to Virginia to put down the armed insurrection.
By 1760, there had been eighteen rebellions aimed at overthrowing colonial governments, six black rebellions, and forty major riots protesting a variety of unfair conditions. In addition, women were beginning to speak and write about their inequality and would soon begin fighting the "irresponsibility of men" in family matters, and the denigration of the status of women in the public world.
To be sure, common people were involved in and supported the unfolding struggle for independence from Great Britain, even though Britain's colonial policies would, for them, only end in more severe or permanent forms of subordination. But as Philip Foner points out, for common people, independence meant freedom from the oppression of colonial aristocracy as well as freedom from British rule. As one slogan stated, "common people must be free from all "Foreign or Domestic Oligarchy." In other words, common people were thinking in terms well beyond "independence." They were thinking in terms of liberation.
We see then, that in the context of the struggle for independence, the specific aspirations of common people put them into conflict with the people we think of as the "Founding Fathers" or Framers. The Sons of Liberty, the Loyal Nine, and the Boston Committee of Correspondence and other such groups which the Framers organized were rooted in the "middling interests and well-to-do merchants" and upper classes. They have been wrongly described as renvolutionary.
The truth is that they took great measures to keep the peace and defuse revolutionary tendencies.
As mass resistance to British polices mounted, for example, they urged, "No Mobs or Tumults, let the Persons and Properties of your most inveterate Enemies be safe."
Sam Adams agreed. James Otis added, "No possible circumstances, though ever so oppressive, could be supposed sufficient to justify private tumults and disorders... "
The Boston Committee of Correspondence actually did its best to contain and control the militancy of activists involved in the Boston Tea Party.
Virtually ignored by most historians is the fact that much of the resistance directed toward Great Britain by common people was an extension of the resistance they felt toward what Dirk Hoerder has described as "high-handed officials and men of wealth whose arrogant conduct and use of economic power was resented."
Rioters often damaged coaches and other luxury items of the rich. The homes of the wealthy were sometimes broken into and destroyed.
The governor of Massachusetts said in 1765, " The Mob had set down no less than fifteen Houses...the houses of some of the most respectable persons in the Government. It was now become a War of Plunder, of general leveling and taking away the Distinction of Rich and poor."
In the countryside, there was similar class antagonism. In New Jersey and New York, tenant riots led to the carving of Vermont out of New York State.
And in North Carolina in 1771 there was the Regulator movement, an armed insurrection which according to Marvin L. Michael Kay was led by "class conscious white farmers...who attempted to democratize local government."
What was the general response to this revolutionary moment by the Framers? The response of Governor Morris, a key co-author of the Constitution, was not atypical: "The mob begins to think and to reason. . .I see and I see with fear and trembling, that if the disputes with Britain continue, we shall be under the domination of a riotous mob. It is to the interest of all men therefore, to seek reunion with the parent state."
==============================================================================
"They tell me that we are weak, but shall we gather strength by irresolution? We are not weak. ....The battle is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. . . .
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775
==========================================
From "Toward An American Revolution" by Jerry Fresia, South End Press
English merchant capitalists who arrived in America found that whatever wealth was to be had would come from the hard labor of mining, cutting down forests, planting and harvesting crops, and constructing buildings, roads, and bridges.
Investors, therefore, arranged to bring "new hands" to the "new world" to exploit its resources. A vast propaganda campaign was launched to lure the poor of Europe to America. Roughly half the immigrants to colonial America were indentured servants. At the time of the War of Independence, three out of four persons in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia were or had been indentured servants. Of the 250,000 indentured servants that had arrived by 1770, more than a 100,000 had been either kidnapped or released from their prison sentences. And by this time, roughly 20 percent of the colonial population was in slavery. Jefferson was clear about this when he said that "our ancestors who migrated here were laborers not lawyers."
In the hundred years or so prior to the War of Independence, the rich had gotten richer, and the poor, poorer. For example, in 1687 in Boston, the top 1 percent owned about 25 percent of the wealth. By 1770, the top 1 percent owned 44 percent of the wealth. During this same period, the percentage of adult males who were poor, "perhaps rented a room, or slept in the back of a tavern, owned no property, doubled from 14 percent of the adult males to 29 percent." It was during this time that the rich introduced property qualifications for voting in order to disenfranchise the poor and protect their privileges. In Pennsylvania in 1750, for example, white males had to have fifty pounds of "lawful money" or own fifty acres of land. This meant that only 8 percent of the rural population and 2 percent of the population of Philadelphia could vote. Similar situations existed in the other states. It is important to note the way in which voting qualification requirements can be used to curb political expression. Keep in mind also that voting has never been guaranteed in this country, or made a right ...
Common people were not taking this abuse sitting down. During the last quarter of the seventeenth century, militant confrontations brought down the established governments of Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina.
In Virginia, in a dispute over land distribution and Indian policy, white frontiersmen, together with slaves and servants forced the governor to flee the burning capital of Jamestown. England was forced to quickly dispatch 1,000 soldiers to Virginia to put down the armed insurrection.
By 1760, there had been eighteen rebellions aimed at overthrowing colonial governments, six black rebellions, and forty major riots protesting a variety of unfair conditions. In addition, women were beginning to speak and write about their inequality and would soon begin fighting the "irresponsibility of men" in family matters, and the denigration of the status of women in the public world.
To be sure, common people were involved in and supported the unfolding struggle for independence from Great Britain, even though Britain's colonial policies would, for them, only end in more severe or permanent forms of subordination. But as Philip Foner points out, for common people, independence meant freedom from the oppression of colonial aristocracy as well as freedom from British rule. As one slogan stated, "common people must be free from all "Foreign or Domestic Oligarchy." In other words, common people were thinking in terms well beyond "independence." They were thinking in terms of liberation.
We see then, that in the context of the struggle for independence, the specific aspirations of common people put them into conflict with the people we think of as the "Founding Fathers" or Framers. The Sons of Liberty, the Loyal Nine, and the Boston Committee of Correspondence and other such groups which the Framers organized were rooted in the "middling interests and well-to-do merchants" and upper classes. They have been wrongly described as renvolutionary.
The truth is that they took great measures to keep the peace and defuse revolutionary tendencies.
As mass resistance to British polices mounted, for example, they urged, "No Mobs or Tumults, let the Persons and Properties of your most inveterate Enemies be safe."
Sam Adams agreed. James Otis added, "No possible circumstances, though ever so oppressive, could be supposed sufficient to justify private tumults and disorders... "
The Boston Committee of Correspondence actually did its best to contain and control the militancy of activists involved in the Boston Tea Party.
Virtually ignored by most historians is the fact that much of the resistance directed toward Great Britain by common people was an extension of the resistance they felt toward what Dirk Hoerder has described as "high-handed officials and men of wealth whose arrogant conduct and use of economic power was resented."
Rioters often damaged coaches and other luxury items of the rich. The homes of the wealthy were sometimes broken into and destroyed.
The governor of Massachusetts said in 1765, " The Mob had set down no less than fifteen Houses...the houses of some of the most respectable persons in the Government. It was now become a War of Plunder, of general leveling and taking away the Distinction of Rich and poor."
In the countryside, there was similar class antagonism. In New Jersey and New York, tenant riots led to the carving of Vermont out of New York State.
And in North Carolina in 1771 there was the Regulator movement, an armed insurrection which according to Marvin L. Michael Kay was led by "class conscious white farmers...who attempted to democratize local government."
What was the general response to this revolutionary moment by the Framers? The response of Governor Morris, a key co-author of the Constitution, was not atypical: "The mob begins to think and to reason. . .I see and I see with fear and trembling, that if the disputes with Britain continue, we shall be under the domination of a riotous mob. It is to the interest of all men therefore, to seek reunion with the parent state."
please, please, please dont say "Gandhi shut down the british empire in India". Firstly, it is absurd to think that independance was achieved through gandhi alone........ remember, there were 400+ million people, all very pissed at the british. its a very complex issue, made into a simple one by saying "gandhi singlehandedly, peacefully, 'defeated' the british empire"..... remember, in the 1920s, violent riots had almost brought the same british empire to its knees, yet gandhi and pacifism delayed independance by 25 years
regarding anarchism and gandhi.... one of the most crucial thing to anarchism for me is the ability to be as human as humanly possible...... frankly..... pacifism does not make me more human. to not fight back when i am being assaulted, oppressed (physically or passively), i as a human being refuse to NOT fight back. i curb my most human emotions of being empowered by not physically resisting.
this may come off as extremely individualistic, but the issue of violence vs. non-violence is a personal one. deciding whether to be violent or not SOLELY on a political framework is absurd. some of it, if not all, has to come from within.
if u feel oppressed in ANY way, u are completely justified in fighting back - what u do, and how u do it, is a completely different matter.. u are completely, and overtly justified in the act of fighting back..... pacifism cannot be universal, for being a human being comes before being a pacifist.
regarding anarchism and gandhi.... one of the most crucial thing to anarchism for me is the ability to be as human as humanly possible...... frankly..... pacifism does not make me more human. to not fight back when i am being assaulted, oppressed (physically or passively), i as a human being refuse to NOT fight back. i curb my most human emotions of being empowered by not physically resisting.
this may come off as extremely individualistic, but the issue of violence vs. non-violence is a personal one. deciding whether to be violent or not SOLELY on a political framework is absurd. some of it, if not all, has to come from within.
if u feel oppressed in ANY way, u are completely justified in fighting back - what u do, and how u do it, is a completely different matter.. u are completely, and overtly justified in the act of fighting back..... pacifism cannot be universal, for being a human being comes before being a pacifist.
Honestly, when I heard about this rampage on Saturday night from a friend who happened to see it as she was walking back to BART from the ANSWER rally, I really was sad. I mean, the emotion of sadness actually swept over me for a few hours.
I thought to myself, "here we go, the day would have been almost perfect, but maybe its the end of the peace movement already." I mean, I was out there with many of my friends that day - we came as a group of almost 30 - and we were all out there because we are opposed to violence in all its forms, and we see war as being the utmost form of violence.
But I have to admit. I've been struggling the past few days, reading post after post on indymedia, and though I still feel I could NEVER do anything like this myself, I have to say, the arguments for these actions are well reasoned, intelligent, and simply must be considered.
I just thought the anarchists that have had so much attention since Seattle were a bunch of punks, with too much teenage angst out for a good time.
One of the tenants of my philosophy is that people should always struggle not to dehumanize others. I think it is what allows violence to be possible. But I was talking to a buddy at work yesterday about what happened, and he said, "hey graham, have you ever TRIED to look at it from the other side? I mean, don't you think you're dehumanizing THEM by not even trying to listen to their viewpoint? you're always talking about that right?"
This really got me thinking. My buddy's not even the political type at all. Usually I can tell that he just gets sick of listening to me every day when i come into work saying, "you won't believe what they're doing now!" (I just can't help myself sometimes) But he's right. He may have helped me make one of the biggest changes in my politics in my life.
I guess sometimes its good just to step back and reevaulate things. Sometimes its so easy to get swept up in your own thinking - especially when you're in the minority - that you don't have a chance to do this. Its just really hard. You get used to defending yourself against rightwingers all the time and that turns into getting used to defending yourself endlessly against anyone you're arguing with.
So after Wayne finished putting me in check, a few hours later, a few muslim guys came to the counter to order a couple of coffee. I took their order, and when I was filling up their cups I overheard a piece of their conversation. One of them was saying to the other "You wouldn't believe it!!! I swear, I was walking by there last night and the whole front of the building was trashed!! The windows were broken, there was spray paint on the walls, i can't remember exactly what it said...have you heard anything about this? Someone must've done it during that big march yesterday. Yusuf is gonna love it when he hears about this!"
anyway, that just topped it off. I mean, these guys were really excited about this. Hell, I went to a few of those protests down there the other week, but I never really thought of what it must be like to feel like you're at risk of being detained.
I don't think these actions alone will have any real affect of the INS process or on government policy, but I just can't write them off anymore.
I guess different people just have different ways of doing things. If we can stick together on this we'll be stronger.
PEACE :-)
I thought to myself, "here we go, the day would have been almost perfect, but maybe its the end of the peace movement already." I mean, I was out there with many of my friends that day - we came as a group of almost 30 - and we were all out there because we are opposed to violence in all its forms, and we see war as being the utmost form of violence.
But I have to admit. I've been struggling the past few days, reading post after post on indymedia, and though I still feel I could NEVER do anything like this myself, I have to say, the arguments for these actions are well reasoned, intelligent, and simply must be considered.
I just thought the anarchists that have had so much attention since Seattle were a bunch of punks, with too much teenage angst out for a good time.
One of the tenants of my philosophy is that people should always struggle not to dehumanize others. I think it is what allows violence to be possible. But I was talking to a buddy at work yesterday about what happened, and he said, "hey graham, have you ever TRIED to look at it from the other side? I mean, don't you think you're dehumanizing THEM by not even trying to listen to their viewpoint? you're always talking about that right?"
This really got me thinking. My buddy's not even the political type at all. Usually I can tell that he just gets sick of listening to me every day when i come into work saying, "you won't believe what they're doing now!" (I just can't help myself sometimes) But he's right. He may have helped me make one of the biggest changes in my politics in my life.
I guess sometimes its good just to step back and reevaulate things. Sometimes its so easy to get swept up in your own thinking - especially when you're in the minority - that you don't have a chance to do this. Its just really hard. You get used to defending yourself against rightwingers all the time and that turns into getting used to defending yourself endlessly against anyone you're arguing with.
So after Wayne finished putting me in check, a few hours later, a few muslim guys came to the counter to order a couple of coffee. I took their order, and when I was filling up their cups I overheard a piece of their conversation. One of them was saying to the other "You wouldn't believe it!!! I swear, I was walking by there last night and the whole front of the building was trashed!! The windows were broken, there was spray paint on the walls, i can't remember exactly what it said...have you heard anything about this? Someone must've done it during that big march yesterday. Yusuf is gonna love it when he hears about this!"
anyway, that just topped it off. I mean, these guys were really excited about this. Hell, I went to a few of those protests down there the other week, but I never really thought of what it must be like to feel like you're at risk of being detained.
I don't think these actions alone will have any real affect of the INS process or on government policy, but I just can't write them off anymore.
I guess different people just have different ways of doing things. If we can stick together on this we'll be stronger.
PEACE :-)
First, I've noticed recently that the media and the police have begun to differentiate between thousands of peaceful protesters and the small handfuls of anarchists out there. Granted, it took them quite a long while.. even with the the black bloc being so kind as to virtually wear uniforms to identify themselves.
A couple of articles I found in the mass media did have individual descriptions of anarchist protesters that were meant to be given as examples of what most protesters were like. Yet I read and saw many pieces that observed the "diversity" of the anti-war demonstrations, notably, the fact that more older and more "normal" looking people attended.
It is these "normal" people who I believe are key to securing support from if we are to stop this war. Yet to these people, many of the ways in which we (the progressive left) demonstrate seem as strange and offensive as the anarchists seem to us.
If we are going to secure a broad-based movement and change peoples' minds who might previously be FOR war, then we need to tone down the theatrics and the rhetoric a bit. If I am a typical person who is on the cusp of the issue.. not sure whether bombing is a good idea or not.. not liking Saddam but not trusting Bush either.. I probably don't want to hear that the US is the #1 terrorist nation.
Understand? I probably don't think president Bush is a terrorist, or his dad for that matter. I especially don't think he is comporable to Hitler. I don't know about what was wrong with the last Gulf War, I don't know about many hot left-wing issues.. Sandanistas, East Timor, or even how Saddam was armed by Ronald Reagan himself! The placards and posters raised at these meetings makes me uncomfortable and turns me away from the peace movement. I do understand statements like "No Blood For Oil", or "Let SUV drivers be drafted first", but hell.. I might drive an SUV...
Of course, taking away the rhetoric of anti-war left might take away all the teeth it has to fight Bush. (In reality) I think Bush is a terrorist, but I also believe there is a time and place to say that. You can still make strong statements, but you have to choose them wisely. Last weekend I saw too many Hitler-mustaches attached to Bush faces, to many references to US terrorism, and far to few "no blood for oil" signs. We need to get real here people, If we want support we can't expect every person to have read Zinn's "People's History". The dances, the puppets, the crazy signs.. they make us look stupid and out of touch. They reduce the coherancy of our message. Also, please for chrisake, keep that ridiculous band "Rage against the machine" away from protests, how freekin serious do we look with crowd-surfing!!
Protests shouldn't be fun, shouldn't be smiling, shouldn't be dancing until we have some small victory. Right now we are getting our asses kicked. Fat men with reporting gigs can go out, interview two or three idiotic kids on the street who claim the US is the next Nazi Germany and then because we all have huge Bush-Hitler signs, paint us all as fools. It's a miracle we got such decent coverage this time.
So next protest, choose your message wisely. It doesn't have to be weak or concensionist, it just has to make some amount of sense to your average Joe.
A couple of articles I found in the mass media did have individual descriptions of anarchist protesters that were meant to be given as examples of what most protesters were like. Yet I read and saw many pieces that observed the "diversity" of the anti-war demonstrations, notably, the fact that more older and more "normal" looking people attended.
It is these "normal" people who I believe are key to securing support from if we are to stop this war. Yet to these people, many of the ways in which we (the progressive left) demonstrate seem as strange and offensive as the anarchists seem to us.
If we are going to secure a broad-based movement and change peoples' minds who might previously be FOR war, then we need to tone down the theatrics and the rhetoric a bit. If I am a typical person who is on the cusp of the issue.. not sure whether bombing is a good idea or not.. not liking Saddam but not trusting Bush either.. I probably don't want to hear that the US is the #1 terrorist nation.
Understand? I probably don't think president Bush is a terrorist, or his dad for that matter. I especially don't think he is comporable to Hitler. I don't know about what was wrong with the last Gulf War, I don't know about many hot left-wing issues.. Sandanistas, East Timor, or even how Saddam was armed by Ronald Reagan himself! The placards and posters raised at these meetings makes me uncomfortable and turns me away from the peace movement. I do understand statements like "No Blood For Oil", or "Let SUV drivers be drafted first", but hell.. I might drive an SUV...
Of course, taking away the rhetoric of anti-war left might take away all the teeth it has to fight Bush. (In reality) I think Bush is a terrorist, but I also believe there is a time and place to say that. You can still make strong statements, but you have to choose them wisely. Last weekend I saw too many Hitler-mustaches attached to Bush faces, to many references to US terrorism, and far to few "no blood for oil" signs. We need to get real here people, If we want support we can't expect every person to have read Zinn's "People's History". The dances, the puppets, the crazy signs.. they make us look stupid and out of touch. They reduce the coherancy of our message. Also, please for chrisake, keep that ridiculous band "Rage against the machine" away from protests, how freekin serious do we look with crowd-surfing!!
Protests shouldn't be fun, shouldn't be smiling, shouldn't be dancing until we have some small victory. Right now we are getting our asses kicked. Fat men with reporting gigs can go out, interview two or three idiotic kids on the street who claim the US is the next Nazi Germany and then because we all have huge Bush-Hitler signs, paint us all as fools. It's a miracle we got such decent coverage this time.
So next protest, choose your message wisely. It doesn't have to be weak or concensionist, it just has to make some amount of sense to your average Joe.
"American Freedom is a Fascist Freedom
by American Nazis Burn in Hell. • Monday January 20, 2003 at 11:30 PM"
Do you live in America? Are you American? What are you, where are you?
Not one of your statements is supportable. I am absolutely stunned at your balderdash.
Tell me exactly how we are subjugating and exploiting the world. You can't be serious. You must not live on the same world I'm on, because America doesn't seem to be in charge of much of anything. We seem to be the world's whipping boy and favorite scapegoat.
"Mengistu has caused a famine in Ethiopia. Those damn Americans."
"Pol Pot has killed all of our educated engineers and scientists. dAmn those Americans. "
"Mao says we must only have one child. Damn those Americans."
"We're all too rich from the billions of gallons of oil we sell to America, giving us the highest per capita incoem in the world. Damn them."
After WWII, we sent billions to rebuild Europe-- then we left a few troops to defend from Stalin's aggression. Eastern Europe fell under his sway, and yet we didn't "colonize" or occupy the nation of Germany. We LEFT.
We give out more foreign aid than any country in the world. An ethnic group was almost exterminated, and to prevent that fro mhappening agian, Britain gave their "occupied land" to the population that was bringing trade and jobs in , and that land was attacked by 5 nations on the day of its birth. And ever since it has been on the defensive, for so long in fact that it now seems to be the aggressor. And the fact that the USA provides aid to this nation so that it is not annihilated by the five nations which have revealed many times thier intention to destroy it, seems to be the number one grievance that the world has: "You're too generous to them! What about us!???" Explain to me how giving one country more than another is exploitation or subjugation.
But the nations we don't give "as much" foreign aid sell us a resource that brings in billions of dollars, and so they shouldn't have a need for foreign aid.
Why is the suffering of other country's blamed on us? Why not blame themselves?
WE all started with hands and feet, tooth and nail. It is not the industrialized world's fault that some countries didn't follow suit.
And if we're so bad, why is the UN here ?
If we're so bad, why are we the number one immigration destination?
ANd for a final thought: imagien the wealth and power of the USA was in the hands of your favorite country. What makes you so confident that your nation wouldn't be much worse? Are you all saints?
The British empire, the Portuguese empire, the Spanish empire, the German empire... they were really empires. They took possession of places all over the world. Africa is somewhat recently emerged from French and English ironhand rule... which country in Africa declared independence from America?
Should all the Peace Corps and NGO volunteers go home, and stop building sanitation, hospitals, factories, etc... ad infinitum?
I KNOW WE'RE NOT PERFECT. BUT DAMN, WE'RE NOT NAZIS.
by American Nazis Burn in Hell. • Monday January 20, 2003 at 11:30 PM"
Do you live in America? Are you American? What are you, where are you?
Not one of your statements is supportable. I am absolutely stunned at your balderdash.
Tell me exactly how we are subjugating and exploiting the world. You can't be serious. You must not live on the same world I'm on, because America doesn't seem to be in charge of much of anything. We seem to be the world's whipping boy and favorite scapegoat.
"Mengistu has caused a famine in Ethiopia. Those damn Americans."
"Pol Pot has killed all of our educated engineers and scientists. dAmn those Americans. "
"Mao says we must only have one child. Damn those Americans."
"We're all too rich from the billions of gallons of oil we sell to America, giving us the highest per capita incoem in the world. Damn them."
After WWII, we sent billions to rebuild Europe-- then we left a few troops to defend from Stalin's aggression. Eastern Europe fell under his sway, and yet we didn't "colonize" or occupy the nation of Germany. We LEFT.
We give out more foreign aid than any country in the world. An ethnic group was almost exterminated, and to prevent that fro mhappening agian, Britain gave their "occupied land" to the population that was bringing trade and jobs in , and that land was attacked by 5 nations on the day of its birth. And ever since it has been on the defensive, for so long in fact that it now seems to be the aggressor. And the fact that the USA provides aid to this nation so that it is not annihilated by the five nations which have revealed many times thier intention to destroy it, seems to be the number one grievance that the world has: "You're too generous to them! What about us!???" Explain to me how giving one country more than another is exploitation or subjugation.
But the nations we don't give "as much" foreign aid sell us a resource that brings in billions of dollars, and so they shouldn't have a need for foreign aid.
Why is the suffering of other country's blamed on us? Why not blame themselves?
WE all started with hands and feet, tooth and nail. It is not the industrialized world's fault that some countries didn't follow suit.
And if we're so bad, why is the UN here ?
If we're so bad, why are we the number one immigration destination?
ANd for a final thought: imagien the wealth and power of the USA was in the hands of your favorite country. What makes you so confident that your nation wouldn't be much worse? Are you all saints?
The British empire, the Portuguese empire, the Spanish empire, the German empire... they were really empires. They took possession of places all over the world. Africa is somewhat recently emerged from French and English ironhand rule... which country in Africa declared independence from America?
Should all the Peace Corps and NGO volunteers go home, and stop building sanitation, hospitals, factories, etc... ad infinitum?
I KNOW WE'RE NOT PERFECT. BUT DAMN, WE'RE NOT NAZIS.
For more information:
http://townhall.com
I would like to thank Pacifist for his story and his honesty. *It's sometimes hard to consider why other people do things you wouldn't do, but i'm glad you are conidering it. I would also challegne eveyone on this list to consider what we can do actually stop the war... and do whatever you think that might be. Please! The Iraqi people, the Amrican grunts, the people of the will all thank you for it. chen they ask you what you did, don't say you couldn't because soem other people were breaking windows.
What are you saying here, that it's OK to possess stolen property as long as you bought it from a fence and didn't steal it yourself?
American Freedom is a Fascist Freedom
by American Nazis Burn in Hell. • Monday January 20, 2003 at 11:30 PM"
Do you live in America? Are you American? What are you, where are you?
Not one of your statements is supportable. I am absolutely stunned at your balderdash.
Tell me exactly how we are subjugating and exploiting the world. You can't be serious. You must not live on the same world I'm on, because America doesn't seem to be in charge of much of anything. We seem to be the world's whipping boy and favorite scapegoat.
"Mengistu has caused a famine in Ethiopia. Those damn Americans."
"Pol Pot has killed all of our educated engineers and scientists. damn those Americans. "
"Mao says we must only have one child. Damn those Americans."
"We're all too rich from the billions of gallons of oil we sell to America, giving us the highest per capita income in the world. Damn them."
After WWII, we sent billions to rebuild Europe-- then we left a few troops to defend from Stalin's aggression. Eastern Europe fell under his sway, and yet we didn't "colonize" or occupy the nation of Germany. We LEFT.
We give out more foreign aid than any country in the world. An ethnic group was almost exterminated, and to prevent that from happening again, Britain gave their "occupied land" to the population that was bringing trade and jobs in , and that land was attacked by 5 nations on the day of its birth. And ever since it has been on the defensive, for so long in fact that it now seems to be the aggressor. And the fact that the USA provides aid to this nation so that it is not annihilated by the five nations which have revealed many times their intention to destroy it, seems to be the number one grievance that the world has: "You're too generous to them! What about us!???" Explain to me how giving one country more than another is exploitation or subjugation.
But the nations we don't give "as much" foreign aid sell us a resource that brings in billions of dollars, and so they shouldn't have a need for foreign aid.
Why is the suffering of other country's blamed on us? Why not blame themselves?
WE all started with hands and feet, tooth and nail. It is not the industrialized world's fault that some countries didn't follow suit.
And if we're so bad, why is the UN here ?
If we're so bad, why are we the number one immigration destination?
And for a final thought: imagine the wealth and power of the USA was in the hands of your favorite country. What makes you so confident that your nation wouldn't be much worse? Are you all saints?
The British empire, the Portuguese empire, the Spanish empire, the German empire... they were really empires. They took possession of places all over the world. Africa is somewhat recently emerged from French and English ironhand rule... which country in Africa declared independence from America?
Should all the Peace Corps and NGO volunteers go home, and stop building sanitation, hospitals, factories, etc... ad infinitum?
I KNOW WE'RE NOT PERFECT. BUT DAMN, WE'RE NOT NAZIS.
by American Nazis Burn in Hell. • Monday January 20, 2003 at 11:30 PM"
Do you live in America? Are you American? What are you, where are you?
Not one of your statements is supportable. I am absolutely stunned at your balderdash.
Tell me exactly how we are subjugating and exploiting the world. You can't be serious. You must not live on the same world I'm on, because America doesn't seem to be in charge of much of anything. We seem to be the world's whipping boy and favorite scapegoat.
"Mengistu has caused a famine in Ethiopia. Those damn Americans."
"Pol Pot has killed all of our educated engineers and scientists. damn those Americans. "
"Mao says we must only have one child. Damn those Americans."
"We're all too rich from the billions of gallons of oil we sell to America, giving us the highest per capita income in the world. Damn them."
After WWII, we sent billions to rebuild Europe-- then we left a few troops to defend from Stalin's aggression. Eastern Europe fell under his sway, and yet we didn't "colonize" or occupy the nation of Germany. We LEFT.
We give out more foreign aid than any country in the world. An ethnic group was almost exterminated, and to prevent that from happening again, Britain gave their "occupied land" to the population that was bringing trade and jobs in , and that land was attacked by 5 nations on the day of its birth. And ever since it has been on the defensive, for so long in fact that it now seems to be the aggressor. And the fact that the USA provides aid to this nation so that it is not annihilated by the five nations which have revealed many times their intention to destroy it, seems to be the number one grievance that the world has: "You're too generous to them! What about us!???" Explain to me how giving one country more than another is exploitation or subjugation.
But the nations we don't give "as much" foreign aid sell us a resource that brings in billions of dollars, and so they shouldn't have a need for foreign aid.
Why is the suffering of other country's blamed on us? Why not blame themselves?
WE all started with hands and feet, tooth and nail. It is not the industrialized world's fault that some countries didn't follow suit.
And if we're so bad, why is the UN here ?
If we're so bad, why are we the number one immigration destination?
And for a final thought: imagine the wealth and power of the USA was in the hands of your favorite country. What makes you so confident that your nation wouldn't be much worse? Are you all saints?
The British empire, the Portuguese empire, the Spanish empire, the German empire... they were really empires. They took possession of places all over the world. Africa is somewhat recently emerged from French and English ironhand rule... which country in Africa declared independence from America?
Should all the Peace Corps and NGO volunteers go home, and stop building sanitation, hospitals, factories, etc... ad infinitum?
I KNOW WE'RE NOT PERFECT. BUT DAMN, WE'RE NOT NAZIS.
For more information:
http://townhall.com
I like the General Strike idea. It seems to have stirred a great deal of hysteria and attempts to divert the conversation among people with, shall we say "different agendas".
Here's why it's a good idea again:
1. It would be effective in actually stopping the war. The march about and listen to speakers demonstrations are a good first step. They encourage people to see that there's loads more people that don't want the war. But they are consistently under-reported and demonized in the media which does what the rulers want. A withdrawal of labor threatens profits of the corporations that are making billions in pork-barrel defence contracts. Thats our tax dollars being spent on murdering Iraqi children.
2. Although the Black bloc have every right to smash property (which is not violence because a window isn't a person) and it is a valuable symbol of resistance on its own its not going to raise the costs high enough to make the business people that run our country decide that it affect them financially. Also, its obvious that a lot of people who share common aims with the black bloc aren't comfortable with these actions at this time.
3. Unions are a valuable organization framework for labor. The structures are there, and while those structures may need to be reformed and reclaimed they are a valid expression of self-organization of the workers (note: workers means everyone that doesn't own and control the entity that they derive their living from. people may bullshit you about "middle class" and "white collar" and "blue collar" and "non-unionized labor" etc., but all these people get a "wage" from someone else. ). Unions have a lot of experience and resources to organize strikes. They have reserve funds for hardship cases so that members don't have to forego mortgage payments, credit card payments etc. An inflammatory and insulting comment above suggested that American workers were car-driving and hunting idiots. Car-driving, while not good, is the only transport option for many people. Hunting can be a useful supplement to one's wages and is an ancient and useful activity. This sort of attack on the American worker could only come from an isolated and malicious individual who wants there to be no chance of a strike.
4. General Strikes have been done before. They can be done again. They are being done in Europe and happened not too long ago in America.
Summary: if the Anti-War Movement is looking for a mass-based, peaceful, and efffective way forward a General Strike would be the way to go.
A One-Day General Strike would be far more attention-getting than a march that is under-reported. It will hit them in their pockets. It will be a valuable exercise in organizing for labor unions.
Here's why it's a good idea again:
1. It would be effective in actually stopping the war. The march about and listen to speakers demonstrations are a good first step. They encourage people to see that there's loads more people that don't want the war. But they are consistently under-reported and demonized in the media which does what the rulers want. A withdrawal of labor threatens profits of the corporations that are making billions in pork-barrel defence contracts. Thats our tax dollars being spent on murdering Iraqi children.
2. Although the Black bloc have every right to smash property (which is not violence because a window isn't a person) and it is a valuable symbol of resistance on its own its not going to raise the costs high enough to make the business people that run our country decide that it affect them financially. Also, its obvious that a lot of people who share common aims with the black bloc aren't comfortable with these actions at this time.
3. Unions are a valuable organization framework for labor. The structures are there, and while those structures may need to be reformed and reclaimed they are a valid expression of self-organization of the workers (note: workers means everyone that doesn't own and control the entity that they derive their living from. people may bullshit you about "middle class" and "white collar" and "blue collar" and "non-unionized labor" etc., but all these people get a "wage" from someone else. ). Unions have a lot of experience and resources to organize strikes. They have reserve funds for hardship cases so that members don't have to forego mortgage payments, credit card payments etc. An inflammatory and insulting comment above suggested that American workers were car-driving and hunting idiots. Car-driving, while not good, is the only transport option for many people. Hunting can be a useful supplement to one's wages and is an ancient and useful activity. This sort of attack on the American worker could only come from an isolated and malicious individual who wants there to be no chance of a strike.
4. General Strikes have been done before. They can be done again. They are being done in Europe and happened not too long ago in America.
Summary: if the Anti-War Movement is looking for a mass-based, peaceful, and efffective way forward a General Strike would be the way to go.
A One-Day General Strike would be far more attention-getting than a march that is under-reported. It will hit them in their pockets. It will be a valuable exercise in organizing for labor unions.
Not all of you, but some. What you all are is fascists. VBy definition, fascism is when business runs the government. That's what we have today in America, and in most of the world, too.
"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." -Mussolini
"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." -Mussolini
Hello, general strike people?
You are sounding nuttier and nuttier, no offense.
For the 50,000th time, we all understand why a general strike is, in theory, a good thing.
None of us understand how you expect to suddenly change terrible labor unions into general striking machines of resistance. Unless you have some blackmail or something on union leaders, it aint happening.
Start talking practically, get your heads out of the clouds.
You are sounding nuttier and nuttier, no offense.
For the 50,000th time, we all understand why a general strike is, in theory, a good thing.
None of us understand how you expect to suddenly change terrible labor unions into general striking machines of resistance. Unless you have some blackmail or something on union leaders, it aint happening.
Start talking practically, get your heads out of the clouds.
The problem with this idea that all of us just need to tweak the image a bit of the antiwar movement in order to get more 'normal' people out, or to change the speaker list or choose a different route or different behaviors to do while we walk is that the decision has already been made to go into Iraq.
George Bush and has cabinet already decided this. They already have sent the army, navy and marine troops over there. It doesn't matter whether they find significant amounts of WMD or not, and they are not interested in a democratic poll of the population - because they already decided. They know that the rest of the world opposes it, and that significant numbers here don't support it. US foreign policy doesn't operate on democratic principles. Can anyone show any way in which our already huge protest numbers have influenced the administration? I can't. I don't think that even if we all returned to a march next week with all our friends, doubling our numbers, with much wittier signs, that it would suddenly start to have an effect when no effect has been seen so far. In this context, what the anarchists do to embarrass the pacifists doesn't matter at all.
At first I thought the CIA or NSA had a location of some Weapons of mass destruction that they are waiting to reveal because they act so certain about this, but lately I'm thinking that they actually don't, but that they still doesn't matter.
George Bush and has cabinet already decided this. They already have sent the army, navy and marine troops over there. It doesn't matter whether they find significant amounts of WMD or not, and they are not interested in a democratic poll of the population - because they already decided. They know that the rest of the world opposes it, and that significant numbers here don't support it. US foreign policy doesn't operate on democratic principles. Can anyone show any way in which our already huge protest numbers have influenced the administration? I can't. I don't think that even if we all returned to a march next week with all our friends, doubling our numbers, with much wittier signs, that it would suddenly start to have an effect when no effect has been seen so far. In this context, what the anarchists do to embarrass the pacifists doesn't matter at all.
At first I thought the CIA or NSA had a location of some Weapons of mass destruction that they are waiting to reveal because they act so certain about this, but lately I'm thinking that they actually don't, but that they still doesn't matter.
8 Killed at S. Africa Gay Massage Parlor
By Associated Press
January 20, 2003, 9:19 AM EST
CAPE TOWN, South Africa -- An execution-style attack early Monday morning at a Cape Town house used as a gay massage parlor killed eight men and badly wounded two, police said.
Many of those killed had been tied up and shot at close range, Capt. Etienne Terblanche, a police spokesman said. Their throats were also slit.
Six men died at the scene and two more died later in the hospital. Two other wounded men, who also had been shot in the head, were in the hospital in very serious condition, Terblanche said.
"When we arrived, the injured were crawling around on the floor," Terblanche was quoted as telling the South African Press Association. There was "an incredible amount of blood about."
The rooms of the house, which had been rented out, had been turned into private massage rooms and were decorated with graphic pornographic images.
Leonard Ramatlakane, safety and security minister of the Western Cape province, said it looked like "organized crime was behind this." A police task force had been formed to investigate, he said.
Neighbors called police after hearing gunshots at the house about 4 a.m.
They also saw one of the injured men, with wounds on his head and neck, running out of the house to a nearby gas station, according to SAPA.
"We have been very concerned about threats issued by various fringe groups in society over recent months that indicated an intention to perpetrate acts of violence against lesbian and gay people," the organization's director, Evert Knoesen, said in a statement.
Neighbors said there had been an altercation at the house involving drug dealers, but police said they could not confirm that.
"At this stage we are investigating all possibilities," Terblanche said.
By Associated Press
January 20, 2003, 9:19 AM EST
CAPE TOWN, South Africa -- An execution-style attack early Monday morning at a Cape Town house used as a gay massage parlor killed eight men and badly wounded two, police said.
Many of those killed had been tied up and shot at close range, Capt. Etienne Terblanche, a police spokesman said. Their throats were also slit.
Six men died at the scene and two more died later in the hospital. Two other wounded men, who also had been shot in the head, were in the hospital in very serious condition, Terblanche said.
"When we arrived, the injured were crawling around on the floor," Terblanche was quoted as telling the South African Press Association. There was "an incredible amount of blood about."
The rooms of the house, which had been rented out, had been turned into private massage rooms and were decorated with graphic pornographic images.
Leonard Ramatlakane, safety and security minister of the Western Cape province, said it looked like "organized crime was behind this." A police task force had been formed to investigate, he said.
Neighbors called police after hearing gunshots at the house about 4 a.m.
They also saw one of the injured men, with wounds on his head and neck, running out of the house to a nearby gas station, according to SAPA.
"We have been very concerned about threats issued by various fringe groups in society over recent months that indicated an intention to perpetrate acts of violence against lesbian and gay people," the organization's director, Evert Knoesen, said in a statement.
Neighbors said there had been an altercation at the house involving drug dealers, but police said they could not confirm that.
"At this stage we are investigating all possibilities," Terblanche said.
I was part of the anti-capitalist march, my photo is in group 7, 5th photo, that's me with my sweetie and the 'Bush as World Dictator' poster.
I may look young, I am an anarchist Grandma, and my comment is to all of my younger anarchist activists allies.
Somewhere Between the English Embassy and the INS building, a group of young Black Bloc'ers were blocking the passage of a car with elders in it. Silver haired ladies in a fancy silver car. I looked at the older women, and in my heart knew that it was unjust to block their passage. I spoke to the group of people blocking the car, and raised the point that these ladies might be grandma's just like me, might have grandkids at home, just like me, and might have health needs to tend to, just like me, or loved ones needing them at home...Please, let's let them pass...
I got laughed at. I got a round of Fuck You's.
I mentioned that Our war is not with them, the elders in the nice car. I said that could be ME in there, and
I got laughed at again, cursed at, jeered.
The youths sneered and said "look at them, they don't care, they don't give a fuck about this war, look at how rich they are...fuck them, fuck you,etc, etc, etc."
HA!
The next moment the passenger and the other occupants came up with their Anti-War, Anti-Bush, fudk war posters, waved them behind closed windows and locked doors, and the fearsom and treatening Bloc backed-off and let them pass.
Our war is not with the elderly on our streets. Please do not be so presumptuous. Old silver haired ladies in a silver car are a silver lining to our struggle. Respect age, do not judge appearance, and remember we are stronger in numbers than in devisive hatred that is rooted in stigma and ignorance.
I may look young, I am an anarchist Grandma, and my comment is to all of my younger anarchist activists allies.
Somewhere Between the English Embassy and the INS building, a group of young Black Bloc'ers were blocking the passage of a car with elders in it. Silver haired ladies in a fancy silver car. I looked at the older women, and in my heart knew that it was unjust to block their passage. I spoke to the group of people blocking the car, and raised the point that these ladies might be grandma's just like me, might have grandkids at home, just like me, and might have health needs to tend to, just like me, or loved ones needing them at home...Please, let's let them pass...
I got laughed at. I got a round of Fuck You's.
I mentioned that Our war is not with them, the elders in the nice car. I said that could be ME in there, and
I got laughed at again, cursed at, jeered.
The youths sneered and said "look at them, they don't care, they don't give a fuck about this war, look at how rich they are...fuck them, fuck you,etc, etc, etc."
HA!
The next moment the passenger and the other occupants came up with their Anti-War, Anti-Bush, fudk war posters, waved them behind closed windows and locked doors, and the fearsom and treatening Bloc backed-off and let them pass.
Our war is not with the elderly on our streets. Please do not be so presumptuous. Old silver haired ladies in a silver car are a silver lining to our struggle. Respect age, do not judge appearance, and remember we are stronger in numbers than in devisive hatred that is rooted in stigma and ignorance.
to brainiacs, smashing stuff is a sign of some blah blah blah and using that theory, it turns people off.
all normal people and realpolitik people (like bush and company) understand that smashing stuff ups the ante a little bit, shows more conviction, and more raw unpredictability which would stretch the impact of the protest beyond the intentions of the politicians who are supposed to be running the anti-war dissent in this country. if you want to talk tactics, lets talk tactics!
all normal people and realpolitik people (like bush and company) understand that smashing stuff ups the ante a little bit, shows more conviction, and more raw unpredictability which would stretch the impact of the protest beyond the intentions of the politicians who are supposed to be running the anti-war dissent in this country. if you want to talk tactics, lets talk tactics!
I've worked shit jobs, I've worked in a factory, I've worked at Taco Bell, and when a window broke it wasn't coming out of my pocket. It was coming from up above. Good. That's where it ought to come from. If somebody's profiting from my labor <B>the fuck do I care</B> if they're making less profit because some people decided to have some fun? At least smashing a window might offer working people an alternative to the monotony of everyday life.
Is somebody going to work an extra shift? To clean up broken glass? I know there are plenty of working people who aren't getting paid enough. Anybody who has tried to make a living off minimum wage knows that a lot of corners need cutting and an extra shift can be a blessing in disguise. I've welcomed them from time to time.
And you don't need to have a college education to learn how to fucking read and write. Many former slaves did it, many people in any number of awful situations have learned how to read and write quite easily. Being able to read and write doesn't mean you're not working a shit job and you're not being exploited for profit. Making a flashy website isn't difficult either. People can do it pretty easily in their time off from working their shit job.
Of course smashing windows is still as useless as the march itself. Marches won't affect anything and neither will random property destruction. Does anybody seriously think that anybody in charge is threatened by a bunch of people waving signs and screaming stuff? No, it happens all the time in front of the MTV building in Time's Square.
If people are serious about ending the war, try organizing anarcho-syndicalist unions. One thing that would stop the war pretty effectively is a general strike.
Is somebody going to work an extra shift? To clean up broken glass? I know there are plenty of working people who aren't getting paid enough. Anybody who has tried to make a living off minimum wage knows that a lot of corners need cutting and an extra shift can be a blessing in disguise. I've welcomed them from time to time.
And you don't need to have a college education to learn how to fucking read and write. Many former slaves did it, many people in any number of awful situations have learned how to read and write quite easily. Being able to read and write doesn't mean you're not working a shit job and you're not being exploited for profit. Making a flashy website isn't difficult either. People can do it pretty easily in their time off from working their shit job.
Of course smashing windows is still as useless as the march itself. Marches won't affect anything and neither will random property destruction. Does anybody seriously think that anybody in charge is threatened by a bunch of people waving signs and screaming stuff? No, it happens all the time in front of the MTV building in Time's Square.
If people are serious about ending the war, try organizing anarcho-syndicalist unions. One thing that would stop the war pretty effectively is a general strike.
You general strike people are like a cult! Jesus Christ. We all love general strikes, but give me a break. There ain't gonna be no general strikes anytime soon in the US. And anarcho-syndicalist unions won't work anymore because capital (in the US anyway) doesn't need to centralize thousands of workers in the same mass-production plants to make a profit. In any case. We should just face the fact that there really isn't a practical strategy for stopping the war. We should participate in the anti-war movement because it provides an opening for radicalizing ideas and actions of a lot of people... but we ain't gonna stop this war... and we sure as hell ain't gonna have a general strike...
to co-ordinate a tax strike: use a uniform, single document - a form that every person uses. all take out the same percentage based on the idea that everyone who does so refuses to finance the war.
the tax strike should be co-ordinated with a student strike that day. The parents don't pay the total tax in order to curb military spending on war and the students protest war by not going to school.
concerted family disobedience that cuts the balls off war economy
the tax strike should be co-ordinated with a student strike that day. The parents don't pay the total tax in order to curb military spending on war and the students protest war by not going to school.
concerted family disobedience that cuts the balls off war economy
Violence and vandalism is not the way, the establishement will crack down hard. Peaceful protests and non violent actiosn are the way to allow more and more people to get involved.
You wrote:
>>you ask about the working poor and whether or not giving them glass to sweep up is a good thing. Well, Mary, as long as they are living under Capitalism that's what they're going to be doing: cleaning up other people's messes. That's what the deal is: poor means that you work. <<
So in what system do the poor not have to work ?? In the sweat shops of the PRC ?? In the factories of Viet Nam ??
Where is this paradise that allows people to enjoy the bounty without having to actually invest some sweat and time ?? Oh.the welfare systems ??
>>you ask about the working poor and whether or not giving them glass to sweep up is a good thing. Well, Mary, as long as they are living under Capitalism that's what they're going to be doing: cleaning up other people's messes. That's what the deal is: poor means that you work. <<
So in what system do the poor not have to work ?? In the sweat shops of the PRC ?? In the factories of Viet Nam ??
Where is this paradise that allows people to enjoy the bounty without having to actually invest some sweat and time ?? Oh.the welfare systems ??
So you want to be a street fightin' man?
The black bloc tactics are ineffective at this time. In order for street violence to have any effect it has to have a broad base of support. At present this is not the case. When street violence is perceived as an expression of large scale unrest, the empire will take notice, but they are really not going to be scared of a small group engaging in sporadic street fighting tactics.
Now if we could surround and blockade the INS or the Federal courts with a militant and very large crowd, that would have some signifigance. Even better would be to crack the detention centers and free the disappeared.
It's hard for me to take a few broken windows seriously. It seems like the "direct action" on Saturday took on the stigma of being labeled "violent" w/o really accomplishing anything important. Seems like an ineffective tactic to me.
A general strike only works when the masses of people are really hurting and are nolonger willing to take it lying down, It also requires a lot of organization. Try it now and it will be a total failure. Perhaps in a year if the bodies are coming home in bags and the economy is screaming, there might be a chance of success. Then I will join you.
I am a veteran of many civil disobedience actions and strikes. So I am not opposed to Saturdays action on principle but because it was counterproductive.
As for the moaning and wailing by people who think you should always stay around to get arrested, let me remind you we are living in a police/prison state. To subject oneself to victimization by that state simply to be "honorable and pure" strikes me as masochistic and counterproductive at this time.
And to the anti-union poster: don't forget that the labor movement is in the peace camp. The people are reclaiming the labor movement and it is an important ally for so many reasons. To call unions the velvet glove on the iron fist does no good whatsoever. What other segment of US society has the financial and logistic assets necessary to successfully fight corporate America. The anti-corporate, anti-military industrial movement will not succeed w/o union support. Ya, there are still reactionary unions out there, but they are old guard and are fading.
As for the posters who think the US is the freest and the best, read some history. You are just plain ignorant. Also, the US may not be Nazi yet but we are moving rapidly in that direction. There are a lot of closet fascists in the Bush administration.
The black bloc tactics are ineffective at this time. In order for street violence to have any effect it has to have a broad base of support. At present this is not the case. When street violence is perceived as an expression of large scale unrest, the empire will take notice, but they are really not going to be scared of a small group engaging in sporadic street fighting tactics.
Now if we could surround and blockade the INS or the Federal courts with a militant and very large crowd, that would have some signifigance. Even better would be to crack the detention centers and free the disappeared.
It's hard for me to take a few broken windows seriously. It seems like the "direct action" on Saturday took on the stigma of being labeled "violent" w/o really accomplishing anything important. Seems like an ineffective tactic to me.
A general strike only works when the masses of people are really hurting and are nolonger willing to take it lying down, It also requires a lot of organization. Try it now and it will be a total failure. Perhaps in a year if the bodies are coming home in bags and the economy is screaming, there might be a chance of success. Then I will join you.
I am a veteran of many civil disobedience actions and strikes. So I am not opposed to Saturdays action on principle but because it was counterproductive.
As for the moaning and wailing by people who think you should always stay around to get arrested, let me remind you we are living in a police/prison state. To subject oneself to victimization by that state simply to be "honorable and pure" strikes me as masochistic and counterproductive at this time.
And to the anti-union poster: don't forget that the labor movement is in the peace camp. The people are reclaiming the labor movement and it is an important ally for so many reasons. To call unions the velvet glove on the iron fist does no good whatsoever. What other segment of US society has the financial and logistic assets necessary to successfully fight corporate America. The anti-corporate, anti-military industrial movement will not succeed w/o union support. Ya, there are still reactionary unions out there, but they are old guard and are fading.
As for the posters who think the US is the freest and the best, read some history. You are just plain ignorant. Also, the US may not be Nazi yet but we are moving rapidly in that direction. There are a lot of closet fascists in the Bush administration.
This war seems set up right?
W.'s father was the head of the CIA.
The CIA has been know to do outragously bad things to people.
Was the 9-11 fisco set up to rally a nation to go to war for oil?
Was it a CIA orchestrated plan to fly remote controlled airplanes into a nearly empty building?
Why was a building that normally housed 50=80 THOUSAND people, virtually empty on a "normal Tuesday morning?
Why was there never any footage of a plane hitting the Pentagon?
They do have remote control plane technology.
Are we all being fooled?
eg
W.'s father was the head of the CIA.
The CIA has been know to do outragously bad things to people.
Was the 9-11 fisco set up to rally a nation to go to war for oil?
Was it a CIA orchestrated plan to fly remote controlled airplanes into a nearly empty building?
Why was a building that normally housed 50=80 THOUSAND people, virtually empty on a "normal Tuesday morning?
Why was there never any footage of a plane hitting the Pentagon?
They do have remote control plane technology.
Are we all being fooled?
eg
For more information:
http://www.rotten.com
1. The buildings weren/t "virtually empty" 50,00 people were able to escape. Did you bother to ask anyone who survived? If you did you would know that there were plenty of people in the buildings (Jews too!) Also if you knew anything about New York, you would know that most people don't start until 9am here. The first plane crashed into it before then.
2. Remote control? That's bullshit. Do you remember all of the cell phone calls from passengers saying that the plane was hijacked? I guess since they were there and you weren't, that would make you WRONG.
Facts, facts, facts dude. So now it's your turn to lite up the bong and spew another bullshit lie.
Brent
2. Remote control? That's bullshit. Do you remember all of the cell phone calls from passengers saying that the plane was hijacked? I guess since they were there and you weren't, that would make you WRONG.
Facts, facts, facts dude. So now it's your turn to lite up the bong and spew another bullshit lie.
Brent
1. The buildings weren/t "virtually empty" 50,00 people were able to escape. Did you bother to ask anyone who survived? If you did you would know that there were plenty of people in the buildings (Jews too!) Also if you knew anything about New York, you would know that most people don't start until 9am here. The first plane crashed into it before then.
2. Remote control? That's bullshit. Do you remember all of the cell phone calls from passengers saying that the plane was hijacked? I guess since they were there and you weren't, that would make you WRONG.
Facts, facts, facts dude. So now it's your turn to lite up the bong and spew another bullshit lie.
Brent
2. Remote control? That's bullshit. Do you remember all of the cell phone calls from passengers saying that the plane was hijacked? I guess since they were there and you weren't, that would make you WRONG.
Facts, facts, facts dude. So now it's your turn to lite up the bong and spew another bullshit lie.
Brent
Yes, I agree with the older woman about what was happening with people's rage. We really all of us must understand how a life of oppression can twist upon itself with mass psychology and projected anger. What does rage at a motorist do? Rage at older people? Rage that breaks a little window to be cleaned up by another worker? That's about as effective as a fly challenging an elephant, and much more dangerous to the innocent, poor, and working class people who are REALLY the ones to feel the state's heavy hand more strongly as a result.
Yes, I understand that FOR SOME it would be much harder to pick up a real working class job with a real wage-slaving boss, and give postive support and encouragement to your comrades to organize. Put up with the same pressure. Put up with the same lies. Put up with the same indignities and insults. Even Marx could only handle that for a short time, and then went back to writing. Yes, unfortunately for SOME 'radical' activists, to actually work at the shit jobs other people don't have the luxury to leave will never happen. For anarchists to get any kind of credibility on the left, MANY more, and not just the exeptions, need to fill the ranks of the service jobs and become brothers and sisters with those struggling to surmount many frustrations, human needs, and contradictory desires in this oppressive classist, racist, misogynist system.
WAKE UP AND GET REAL<< NO NEED TO MAKE YOUR FRIEND YOUR ENEMY << GET OFF THE RHETORIC AND GET TO WORK, ORGANIZING WITH REAL PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR NEEDS, NOT YOURS. Then the State will REALLY get a run for their money!!!!!!
Smile for the revolution, it's our turn!
Yes, I understand that FOR SOME it would be much harder to pick up a real working class job with a real wage-slaving boss, and give postive support and encouragement to your comrades to organize. Put up with the same pressure. Put up with the same lies. Put up with the same indignities and insults. Even Marx could only handle that for a short time, and then went back to writing. Yes, unfortunately for SOME 'radical' activists, to actually work at the shit jobs other people don't have the luxury to leave will never happen. For anarchists to get any kind of credibility on the left, MANY more, and not just the exeptions, need to fill the ranks of the service jobs and become brothers and sisters with those struggling to surmount many frustrations, human needs, and contradictory desires in this oppressive classist, racist, misogynist system.
WAKE UP AND GET REAL<< NO NEED TO MAKE YOUR FRIEND YOUR ENEMY << GET OFF THE RHETORIC AND GET TO WORK, ORGANIZING WITH REAL PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR NEEDS, NOT YOURS. Then the State will REALLY get a run for their money!!!!!!
Smile for the revolution, it's our turn!
> America makes mistakes, tons of 'em.
That's a problem, considering them all mistakes and not deliberate policy decisions.
> But American free enterprise built
> those streets you walk on,
Built by the state actually.
> those clothes you wear,
The conditions of that production being a major issue.
> that school you go to (or went to),
Primary and secondary education are run by the state. Some colleges are run by the state, others are private but usually non-profit, and in any case receive lots of funds from the state.
> the way of life you take for granted
"Free" enterprise did that? Well, the Bill of Rights and citizens' defense of it counts for a large part of what I consider important about "the way of life".
> Look at the places where America lost. Where its
> policies failed, or its troops were defeated.
> Vietnam. Cuba. North Korea. Eastern Europe. China.
> Can you seriously argue that life ANYWHERE in these
> countries is better than it is here, or in any
> other free democracy on earth?
It isn't intellectually honest to compare Cuba and the US. You need to compare countries that were similar at some point in the past. Life in Cuba is better than in Haiti. Life in Cuba is better, materially at least, than for many, many poor people throughout Latin America.
That's a problem, considering them all mistakes and not deliberate policy decisions.
> But American free enterprise built
> those streets you walk on,
Built by the state actually.
> those clothes you wear,
The conditions of that production being a major issue.
> that school you go to (or went to),
Primary and secondary education are run by the state. Some colleges are run by the state, others are private but usually non-profit, and in any case receive lots of funds from the state.
> the way of life you take for granted
"Free" enterprise did that? Well, the Bill of Rights and citizens' defense of it counts for a large part of what I consider important about "the way of life".
> Look at the places where America lost. Where its
> policies failed, or its troops were defeated.
> Vietnam. Cuba. North Korea. Eastern Europe. China.
> Can you seriously argue that life ANYWHERE in these
> countries is better than it is here, or in any
> other free democracy on earth?
It isn't intellectually honest to compare Cuba and the US. You need to compare countries that were similar at some point in the past. Life in Cuba is better than in Haiti. Life in Cuba is better, materially at least, than for many, many poor people throughout Latin America.
Pacifist's comment sounds like a brilliant creation from a non-pacifist trying to get aloof, uncooperative pacifists to mellow out. Good job.
I agree with joe hill that "In order for street violence to have any effect it has to have a broad base of support." But what makes you think it doesn't? The INS destruction, symbolic though it was, brought smiles to a lot of Middle Eastern faces (among many others).
The thing is to formalize the support. Undertake a Zapatista-like policy of NOT being a vanguard, but a group of militants who agree to follow the direction of a larger group - hopefully as much of the anti-war movement as possible, most of whom do not want to participate directly. This also provides a broad, mainstream base of support for any activists who end up in jail.
I agree with joe hill that "In order for street violence to have any effect it has to have a broad base of support." But what makes you think it doesn't? The INS destruction, symbolic though it was, brought smiles to a lot of Middle Eastern faces (among many others).
The thing is to formalize the support. Undertake a Zapatista-like policy of NOT being a vanguard, but a group of militants who agree to follow the direction of a larger group - hopefully as much of the anti-war movement as possible, most of whom do not want to participate directly. This also provides a broad, mainstream base of support for any activists who end up in jail.
than it is for the 40 million Americans who have no medical coverage. In Cuba, eveyone has medical coverage.
>> In Cuba, everyone has medical coverage ... <<<
That's only true to the extent you can say that everyone in the U.S. has access to medical coverage because they can go to an emergency room. From a report aobut Meidcal coverage in Cuba:
Some facts about Cuba's Medical system:
Cuban medical training is poor in comparison to the U.S. Only 25% of Cuban doctors can pass the required tests to practice in the U.S.
The mortality rate of children in Cuba from 1 to 4 years is 34% HIGHER than the U.S. (11.8 versus 8.8 per 1000). Also, the maternal mortality rate in Cuba is almost FOUR TIMES that of the U.S. rate (33 versus 8.4 per 1000).
The Cuban Government' deprives its people of basic medical needs, while actively developing a closed, parallel health care system for the Communist Party elite, foreign "health tourists," and others who can pay for services in hard currency.
Lack of chlorinated water, poor nutrition, deteriorating housing, and generally unsanitary conditions have increased the number of cases of infectious diseases, especially in concentrated urban areas like Havana.
Cuba made significant advances in the quality of health care available to average citizens as a result of subsidies from the Soviet Union. However, it devoted the bulk of its financial windfall to maintaining an out-sized military machine and a massive internal security apparatus (hmmm, sounds familiar).
The Cuban Government currently devotes a
smaller percentage of its budget for health care than such regional countries as Jamaica, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic.
Not everyone in Cuba receives substandard health care. Senior Cuban Communist Party officials and those who can pay in hard currency can get first-rate medical services any time they want.
This situation exists because the Cuban Government has chosen to develop a two-tiered medical
system--the deliberate establishment of a kind of "medical apartheid"--that funnels money into services for a privileged few, while depriving the health care system used by the vast majority of Cubans of adequate funding.
That's only true to the extent you can say that everyone in the U.S. has access to medical coverage because they can go to an emergency room. From a report aobut Meidcal coverage in Cuba:
Some facts about Cuba's Medical system:
Cuban medical training is poor in comparison to the U.S. Only 25% of Cuban doctors can pass the required tests to practice in the U.S.
The mortality rate of children in Cuba from 1 to 4 years is 34% HIGHER than the U.S. (11.8 versus 8.8 per 1000). Also, the maternal mortality rate in Cuba is almost FOUR TIMES that of the U.S. rate (33 versus 8.4 per 1000).
The Cuban Government' deprives its people of basic medical needs, while actively developing a closed, parallel health care system for the Communist Party elite, foreign "health tourists," and others who can pay for services in hard currency.
Lack of chlorinated water, poor nutrition, deteriorating housing, and generally unsanitary conditions have increased the number of cases of infectious diseases, especially in concentrated urban areas like Havana.
Cuba made significant advances in the quality of health care available to average citizens as a result of subsidies from the Soviet Union. However, it devoted the bulk of its financial windfall to maintaining an out-sized military machine and a massive internal security apparatus (hmmm, sounds familiar).
The Cuban Government currently devotes a
smaller percentage of its budget for health care than such regional countries as Jamaica, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic.
Not everyone in Cuba receives substandard health care. Senior Cuban Communist Party officials and those who can pay in hard currency can get first-rate medical services any time they want.
This situation exists because the Cuban Government has chosen to develop a two-tiered medical
system--the deliberate establishment of a kind of "medical apartheid"--that funnels money into services for a privileged few, while depriving the health care system used by the vast majority of Cubans of adequate funding.
Which report might that be?
What I heard most about the protests in downtown SF was how diverse and sincere the participants were. Unfortunately, the five hours of peaceful protest are diminished by the acts of the few, committing random acts of violence in the last couple of hours that follwed. When violence is committed it is NOT IN MY NAME.
I think that everyone needs to accept that the civil obediance/peaceful marching with permission vs the civil disobediance/militant property-damage arguement comes down to personal choice of tactics.
There is no one right way to resist.
Its that simple.
Everyone needs to start respecting everyone elses personal mode of resistance. Some may think that smashing a few windows is counter-produtive while others may think that peacefully marching and singing doesn't really send a loud enough message or demonstrate how truly frustrated they are at the current system. If we have the drop-outs and militants criticizing the moderates because they drove to the rally in a car and stopped at Mc"ds on the way back home and we have the moderates and organizers criticizing the drop-outs and militants because they should get jobs and organize with a radical union then we just all degrade the "movement."
If it can even be called a movement considering the amount of divisions..
There is no one right way to resist.
Its that simple.
Everyone needs to start respecting everyone elses personal mode of resistance. Some may think that smashing a few windows is counter-produtive while others may think that peacefully marching and singing doesn't really send a loud enough message or demonstrate how truly frustrated they are at the current system. If we have the drop-outs and militants criticizing the moderates because they drove to the rally in a car and stopped at Mc"ds on the way back home and we have the moderates and organizers criticizing the drop-outs and militants because they should get jobs and organize with a radical union then we just all degrade the "movement."
If it can even be called a movement considering the amount of divisions..
you wailed:
>>>>As for the posters who think the US is the freest and the best, read some history. You are just plain ignorant. Also, the US may not be Nazi yet but we are moving rapidly in that direction. There are a lot of closet fascists in the Bush administration. <<<
read some history ??that is a little broad, don't you think ?? care to narrow it down a bit...say 50 to 100 years ??
And how is the US moving rapidly towards Nazism...by abandoning or imprisoning the Jews ?? By insisting on a genetically pure race ?? hardly...time to put down your crack pipe and smell the coffee..
Closet fascists ?? how about the closet communists in the previous administration...how about the police state that will evolve if we ever give in to the demands that you and this website cry out for....
Name one marxist state that we should strive to mimic....just one....
I'm waiting....
>>>>As for the posters who think the US is the freest and the best, read some history. You are just plain ignorant. Also, the US may not be Nazi yet but we are moving rapidly in that direction. There are a lot of closet fascists in the Bush administration. <<<
read some history ??that is a little broad, don't you think ?? care to narrow it down a bit...say 50 to 100 years ??
And how is the US moving rapidly towards Nazism...by abandoning or imprisoning the Jews ?? By insisting on a genetically pure race ?? hardly...time to put down your crack pipe and smell the coffee..
Closet fascists ?? how about the closet communists in the previous administration...how about the police state that will evolve if we ever give in to the demands that you and this website cry out for....
Name one marxist state that we should strive to mimic....just one....
I'm waiting....
The "facts" presented about Cuba's medical system - conveniently given without citation - sounded familiar to me. BTW, have a gander at the CIA world factbook on Cuba, then compare those data with the ones from the US. Also, compare infant mortality rates in Havana Province (the capitol city) with those in DC (the capitol city):
http://www.statehealthfacts.kff.org/cgi-bin/healthfacts.cgi?action=profile&area=District+of+Columbia&category=Health+Status&subcategory=Infants&topic=Infant+Deaths+by+Race%2fEthnicity
http://www.aboutcuba.com/regions/havanacity/
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cu.html#People
If the claims of high maternal mortality were true, you'd expect it to turn up in the statistics on female life expectancy; if the claims of high mortality in the 1-5 age bracket were true, you'd expect it to turn up in the overall life expectancy. These numbers, however, are comparable with those in the US, or vastly in Cuba's favor in the comparison of infant mortality in the capitol cities.
One of the 'facts' that's particularly entertaining is the bit about how many Cuban MDs would be licensed as it stands to practise in the US. The US licensing procedure for foreign docs is notoriously arduous; it's controlled by the American Medical Association, as is the absolute limit on the number of new MDs granted in the US every year (thereby artificially inflating the price of medical training and care.)
I did a fast google query to confirm that I knew the source. I did. One of the phrases in the article is a bogus number about "mortality rate of children in Cuba".
The google query on that can be seen at
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22mortality+rate+of+children+in+Cuba%22
This yields three hits.
The first is from an anti-Cuba group which publishes articles alleging tons of fascinating things about Cuba and isn't incorporated to sound like a bunch of bitter emigres. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc., A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943. Sounds good, almost independent?
Have a look at http://www.aapsonline.org/press/nrmscuba.htm and also at the articles they cite - as if there was basis to them - blaming Castro for the West Nile Virus outbreak. Total loony tunes. They also spend a lot of time on their website campaigning against single-payer coverage of health in the US. These people are like the Venezuelan doctors who are furious that Cuba is providing health care professionals to the poor in an agreement with Chavez. Not that the Venezuelan docs have *ever* had an interest in helping those folks.
the other two hits are from equally rabid sources:
http://www.futurodecuba.org
http://www.futurodecuba.org/EnglishArticles.htm
(affiliation on futuro not crystal clear to me, since I don't know the NJ exile community well.)
http://www.sigloxxi.org (run by the CANF, the brotherhood of mobsters still trying to get the Meyer Lansky properties back.)
-Cinder
http://www.statehealthfacts.kff.org/cgi-bin/healthfacts.cgi?action=profile&area=District+of+Columbia&category=Health+Status&subcategory=Infants&topic=Infant+Deaths+by+Race%2fEthnicity
http://www.aboutcuba.com/regions/havanacity/
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cu.html#People
If the claims of high maternal mortality were true, you'd expect it to turn up in the statistics on female life expectancy; if the claims of high mortality in the 1-5 age bracket were true, you'd expect it to turn up in the overall life expectancy. These numbers, however, are comparable with those in the US, or vastly in Cuba's favor in the comparison of infant mortality in the capitol cities.
One of the 'facts' that's particularly entertaining is the bit about how many Cuban MDs would be licensed as it stands to practise in the US. The US licensing procedure for foreign docs is notoriously arduous; it's controlled by the American Medical Association, as is the absolute limit on the number of new MDs granted in the US every year (thereby artificially inflating the price of medical training and care.)
I did a fast google query to confirm that I knew the source. I did. One of the phrases in the article is a bogus number about "mortality rate of children in Cuba".
The google query on that can be seen at
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22mortality+rate+of+children+in+Cuba%22
This yields three hits.
The first is from an anti-Cuba group which publishes articles alleging tons of fascinating things about Cuba and isn't incorporated to sound like a bunch of bitter emigres. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc., A Voice for Private Physicians Since 1943. Sounds good, almost independent?
Have a look at http://www.aapsonline.org/press/nrmscuba.htm and also at the articles they cite - as if there was basis to them - blaming Castro for the West Nile Virus outbreak. Total loony tunes. They also spend a lot of time on their website campaigning against single-payer coverage of health in the US. These people are like the Venezuelan doctors who are furious that Cuba is providing health care professionals to the poor in an agreement with Chavez. Not that the Venezuelan docs have *ever* had an interest in helping those folks.
the other two hits are from equally rabid sources:
http://www.futurodecuba.org
http://www.futurodecuba.org/EnglishArticles.htm
(affiliation on futuro not crystal clear to me, since I don't know the NJ exile community well.)
http://www.sigloxxi.org (run by the CANF, the brotherhood of mobsters still trying to get the Meyer Lansky properties back.)
-Cinder
life expectancy for cuban men is higher than for US men. IS THIS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWICE AS MANY DOCTORS PER CAPITA AS THE US? or because all their food is organic? or because they dont have massive homelessness and imprisnment problems? or because they dont pollute all their air and water? it probably doesnt have to do with the number of TV sets, as the US easily surpasses Cuba in this category.
>>> Cuba rules! <<<
yeah, it's so great. That's why people are leaving Florida by the thousands in skimpy boats to try to make it to glorious Cuba! Castro has to turn them back at the door! His own people have no desire to flee! Elian Gonzalez's relatives were overjoyed to have him returned to Cuba since it's sooooo much better than the U.S.
yeah, it's so great. That's why people are leaving Florida by the thousands in skimpy boats to try to make it to glorious Cuba! Castro has to turn them back at the door! His own people have no desire to flee! Elian Gonzalez's relatives were overjoyed to have him returned to Cuba since it's sooooo much better than the U.S.
>>>cuba rules
by fuck bushit • Thursday January 30, 2003 at 05:15 PM
life expectancy for cuban men is higher than for US men. IS THIS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWICE AS MANY DOCTORS PER CAPITA AS THE US? or because all their food is organic? or because they dont have massive homelessness and imprisnment problems? or because they dont pollute all their air and water? it probably doesnt have to do with the number of TV sets, as the US easily surpasses Cuba in this category.<<<
Studies have also shown that the life expectancy of lifers in the prison system is also higher than the average US free man.. These studies do not factor in the premature deaths due to murder, suicide, or accidents...only death from natural causes...similar to uS studies that eliminate traffic fatalities and such..
Now...would you swap your life with that of a lifer for a few more months ??
How about cuba ??
by fuck bushit • Thursday January 30, 2003 at 05:15 PM
life expectancy for cuban men is higher than for US men. IS THIS BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWICE AS MANY DOCTORS PER CAPITA AS THE US? or because all their food is organic? or because they dont have massive homelessness and imprisnment problems? or because they dont pollute all their air and water? it probably doesnt have to do with the number of TV sets, as the US easily surpasses Cuba in this category.<<<
Studies have also shown that the life expectancy of lifers in the prison system is also higher than the average US free man.. These studies do not factor in the premature deaths due to murder, suicide, or accidents...only death from natural causes...similar to uS studies that eliminate traffic fatalities and such..
Now...would you swap your life with that of a lifer for a few more months ??
How about cuba ??
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$260.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network