Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
On the Greenspace vandalism
To everyone who read that Greenspace lost a window to "anarchists" and cringed:
To everyone who read that Greenspace lost a window to "anarchists" and cringed:
this incident is not representative of the greater revolutionary struggle or anarchists in general. One person claiming their inconsequential vandalism with a communique, especially does not represent the tactfulness and potency that most anarchists act with – both in our contribution to existing social conflicts, and even more so, in our autonomous actions.
I write this not because I feel protective of Greenspace's financial prosperity, but because I believe this 'action' does more damage than it does good. In my opinion, it leaves a damaging misrepresentation of what anarchist intervention looks like on a local level.
I have spoken with several people in my neighborhood who have become involved in activism aimed at stopping the aerial pesticide spray after engaging in discussion or picking up campaign information at Greenspace. The fact that the judge ruled to allow the first spray to proceed (despite the mass disapproval of area residents) creates an interesting tension within our communities. The issue of repeated aerial pesticide spraying, is of much concern to people in Santa Cruz county.
With no pragmatic contribution, this vandalism leaves no sensible logic in one deciding that Greenspace is a detrimental establishment when it has in reality been sympathetic and encouraging of grass-roots-level organizing within Santa Cruz. In fact, when you attack one of the only outlets of information for people who wish to get involved in grass-roots level activism you are acting from outside of the picture, creating divisive lines between potential allies and anarchists (as you have identified yourself).
A rock through the window of Greenspace is just that. An act of vandalism.
I'm not opposed to vandalism. But, by claiming this with a communique, as "anarchists", you have created a pretense that this vandalism is related to the revolutionary struggle.
As anarchists and revolutionaries, we shed light on atrocities and injustices while highlighting the connections between oppression, in the attempt to add momentum to existing popular struggles. Acting from a more holistic understanding of the system than most people, we apply resistance where most effective, and act with the hope of inspiring autonomous organizing across the social spectrum, here and now, on a local level.
Greenspace is a single entity that exists only within the bubble of Santa Cruz.
Only one block away from Greenspace, is Taco Bell. For years, undocumented immigrants from throughout Latin America have been smuggled across the U.S. border, only to be forced into modern day slavery. In Florida, many of these immigrants are held as slaves/prisoners in industrial agricultural compounds run by warlords and such scum, as they attempt to pay off the price of entry into the U.S. via human smugglers. Some will die here in these compounds, while most develop neurological conditions from the exposure to the toxic concoctions used in conventional agriculture. Here, they are forced to pick tomatoes that will be used in Taco Bell "food" products. Taco Hell utilizes slavery at every step in production. From diseased chickens who live their entire lives in confinement, pumped full of anti-biotics in order to survive the squalor conditions long enough until slaughter; to the pistol-whipped slave detained in the tomato estate; to the poverty-wage restaurant workers.
This is an example of a potential target that would have undoubtedly received wide-spread support from across the social divides. Taco Bell is only one block from Greenspace.
(The above is an example of how easily one could have picked a target that is more complementing to the aim of widespread social rebellion. I use Taco Bell as an example only because it is a stone's throw from Greenspace.)
Lastly, typing out long-winded social commentary for communiques to claim petty vandalism, is silly at best. It is with great reason that the majority of low-level actions and especially, misdemeanor vandalism, are not claimed by communiques.
Illegality does not warrant a press release.
a revolutionary anarchist
this incident is not representative of the greater revolutionary struggle or anarchists in general. One person claiming their inconsequential vandalism with a communique, especially does not represent the tactfulness and potency that most anarchists act with – both in our contribution to existing social conflicts, and even more so, in our autonomous actions.
I write this not because I feel protective of Greenspace's financial prosperity, but because I believe this 'action' does more damage than it does good. In my opinion, it leaves a damaging misrepresentation of what anarchist intervention looks like on a local level.
I have spoken with several people in my neighborhood who have become involved in activism aimed at stopping the aerial pesticide spray after engaging in discussion or picking up campaign information at Greenspace. The fact that the judge ruled to allow the first spray to proceed (despite the mass disapproval of area residents) creates an interesting tension within our communities. The issue of repeated aerial pesticide spraying, is of much concern to people in Santa Cruz county.
With no pragmatic contribution, this vandalism leaves no sensible logic in one deciding that Greenspace is a detrimental establishment when it has in reality been sympathetic and encouraging of grass-roots-level organizing within Santa Cruz. In fact, when you attack one of the only outlets of information for people who wish to get involved in grass-roots level activism you are acting from outside of the picture, creating divisive lines between potential allies and anarchists (as you have identified yourself).
A rock through the window of Greenspace is just that. An act of vandalism.
I'm not opposed to vandalism. But, by claiming this with a communique, as "anarchists", you have created a pretense that this vandalism is related to the revolutionary struggle.
As anarchists and revolutionaries, we shed light on atrocities and injustices while highlighting the connections between oppression, in the attempt to add momentum to existing popular struggles. Acting from a more holistic understanding of the system than most people, we apply resistance where most effective, and act with the hope of inspiring autonomous organizing across the social spectrum, here and now, on a local level.
Greenspace is a single entity that exists only within the bubble of Santa Cruz.
Only one block away from Greenspace, is Taco Bell. For years, undocumented immigrants from throughout Latin America have been smuggled across the U.S. border, only to be forced into modern day slavery. In Florida, many of these immigrants are held as slaves/prisoners in industrial agricultural compounds run by warlords and such scum, as they attempt to pay off the price of entry into the U.S. via human smugglers. Some will die here in these compounds, while most develop neurological conditions from the exposure to the toxic concoctions used in conventional agriculture. Here, they are forced to pick tomatoes that will be used in Taco Bell "food" products. Taco Hell utilizes slavery at every step in production. From diseased chickens who live their entire lives in confinement, pumped full of anti-biotics in order to survive the squalor conditions long enough until slaughter; to the pistol-whipped slave detained in the tomato estate; to the poverty-wage restaurant workers.
This is an example of a potential target that would have undoubtedly received wide-spread support from across the social divides. Taco Bell is only one block from Greenspace.
(The above is an example of how easily one could have picked a target that is more complementing to the aim of widespread social rebellion. I use Taco Bell as an example only because it is a stone's throw from Greenspace.)
Lastly, typing out long-winded social commentary for communiques to claim petty vandalism, is silly at best. It is with great reason that the majority of low-level actions and especially, misdemeanor vandalism, are not claimed by communiques.
Illegality does not warrant a press release.
a revolutionary anarchist
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Mr/Ms Anarchist I appluaded you. I will be the first to admit I do not agree with much of your agenda nor tactics but it takes great integrity to speak out against injustice even when it is done (supposedly) in the name of your cause. I don't agree with you but I would defend your right to voice your opinions any day.
Vandalism in the name of revolution is political masturbation. Even if you succeed in tearing anything down, you're left with a pile of rubble, multiple enemies and a fractured movement. If you really want to strike a blow, feed a child, restore corrupted habitat, teach English as a second language or find some other positive step to build the change we want to see. Then, you can watch the empire crumble from a livable world.
Is this any less realistic than to believe you will defeat the ideological hegemony of monopoly Kapital by smashing in the windows of small business owners? Granted, any of these are much harder than getting dressed up like a vegan ninja and chucking chunks of granite through unprotected glass. But at some point the question arises, What is your aim? To get on with the labor of creating a better world or just to get off.
Is this any less realistic than to believe you will defeat the ideological hegemony of monopoly Kapital by smashing in the windows of small business owners? Granted, any of these are much harder than getting dressed up like a vegan ninja and chucking chunks of granite through unprotected glass. But at some point the question arises, What is your aim? To get on with the labor of creating a better world or just to get off.
In the name of anarchism and righteous indignation over perceived injustices, there have been a spate of
actions carried out recently. Possibly re-actions will ensue.
Has the thought of agent provocateurism crossed anyone,s mind?
actions carried out recently. Possibly re-actions will ensue.
Has the thought of agent provocateurism crossed anyone,s mind?
I don't think these recent acts of 'vandalism' are silly just because they were accompanied with communiques. I don't live in California and I doubt I would have heard about the courthouse getting smashed if there hadn't been a communication. Nor do I think these actions should be dismissed as vandalism. Until recently, it seems, there weren't a whole lot of people smashing windows. Now there are.
Will it end capitalism and hierarchy? No, of course not. Will it make someone in another state happy and inspired and hopeful. In my case, yes. Others are obviously being inspired as well, given the number of things happening. Do I approve of all the targets that were attacked? No, but I'm sitting in front of a keyboard, risking nothing.
As far as the whole agent provocateur thing goes...it is up to the attackers to attack something which is legitimate in everyone's mind or risk some liberal, pacifist or conspiracy theorist calling you an agent provocateur. It'll happen regardless, sometimes. It is a good way to discredit someone. And there are people out there looking to discredit every action undertaken by anarchists. No one should ever make their jobs easier by hitting a local business when there is a Taco Bell next door.
Will it end capitalism and hierarchy? No, of course not. Will it make someone in another state happy and inspired and hopeful. In my case, yes. Others are obviously being inspired as well, given the number of things happening. Do I approve of all the targets that were attacked? No, but I'm sitting in front of a keyboard, risking nothing.
As far as the whole agent provocateur thing goes...it is up to the attackers to attack something which is legitimate in everyone's mind or risk some liberal, pacifist or conspiracy theorist calling you an agent provocateur. It'll happen regardless, sometimes. It is a good way to discredit someone. And there are people out there looking to discredit every action undertaken by anarchists. No one should ever make their jobs easier by hitting a local business when there is a Taco Bell next door.
On the one hand, no anarchist action or activity represents anything or anyone other than the act and the actors themselves. On the other hand, every action claimed by anarchists does seem to reflect anarchists in general. It's up to critical thinking and common sense to distinguish differences among anarchist individuals and groups.
The vandalism was obviously not inconsequential since the most apparent consequence is the backlash against it on this site. It also has the consequence of causing physical and monetary damage to the target. This is why anarchists commit vandalism. To cause damage and to create joy for themselves by attacking what attacks them. Attacking property also has many consequences beyond the mere amount of damage it causes. Property is capitalism's sacred cow. Attacking it shows disrespect for the system. This is why businesses and politicians are so against graffiti, because of the disrespect it shows for property, because of the open display of illegality and the potential for it to catch on, spreading socially.
Some anarchists are against all kinds of business, if a business as defined as an operation with a boss who has employees, which anarchists define as an inherently exploitive relationship as part of the capitalist system, green or otherwise.
Greenspace may be sympathetic to certain kinds of activism but in no way does this negate their status as a business or as part of the capitalist system. Starbucks and other big corporations donate lots of money to "worthy" causes. Anarchists still attack them anyway because they're still a capitalist business no matter how much money they donate. Cops help people sometimes. They're still an instrument of State repression to uphold the capitalist system. The "good" things people do don't cancel out the "bad" things they do. This should be self-evident.
The rock through the window of Greenspace didn't create "a pretense that this vandalism is related to the revolutionary struggle", vandalism was already related to revolutionary struggles in that all nearly all revolutionary struggles involve vandalism, often on a very large and destructive scale.
You may feel that Taco Bell was a better target but the existence of "better" or "worse" targets elsewhere says nothing about the validity of attacking a different target, as in the case of Greenspace. There could be a "better" target than Taco Bell too and it wouldn't lessen the validity of attacking Taco Bell either.
The vandalism was obviously not inconsequential since the most apparent consequence is the backlash against it on this site. It also has the consequence of causing physical and monetary damage to the target. This is why anarchists commit vandalism. To cause damage and to create joy for themselves by attacking what attacks them. Attacking property also has many consequences beyond the mere amount of damage it causes. Property is capitalism's sacred cow. Attacking it shows disrespect for the system. This is why businesses and politicians are so against graffiti, because of the disrespect it shows for property, because of the open display of illegality and the potential for it to catch on, spreading socially.
Some anarchists are against all kinds of business, if a business as defined as an operation with a boss who has employees, which anarchists define as an inherently exploitive relationship as part of the capitalist system, green or otherwise.
Greenspace may be sympathetic to certain kinds of activism but in no way does this negate their status as a business or as part of the capitalist system. Starbucks and other big corporations donate lots of money to "worthy" causes. Anarchists still attack them anyway because they're still a capitalist business no matter how much money they donate. Cops help people sometimes. They're still an instrument of State repression to uphold the capitalist system. The "good" things people do don't cancel out the "bad" things they do. This should be self-evident.
The rock through the window of Greenspace didn't create "a pretense that this vandalism is related to the revolutionary struggle", vandalism was already related to revolutionary struggles in that all nearly all revolutionary struggles involve vandalism, often on a very large and destructive scale.
You may feel that Taco Bell was a better target but the existence of "better" or "worse" targets elsewhere says nothing about the validity of attacking a different target, as in the case of Greenspace. There could be a "better" target than Taco Bell too and it wouldn't lessen the validity of attacking Taco Bell either.
The author was talking exclusively about the Greenspace incident, and nothing else. The above post is irrelevant
I can't believe we are arguing over whether "creating joy" for oneself by causing harm to another human being is or isn't appropriate! This was a shameful, appalling action.
They broke glass. No human was harmed.
Wake up. Glass is not alive.
s
Wake up. Glass is not alive.
s
These photos are shared as part of the discussion. They are not intended as encouragement to buy the products or smash the windows.
On the post "Green Capitalists Get Window Smashed" Paul reports in a comment that, "the vandalism caused broken glass to cover all kinds of baby clothes which had to be thrown away because they could not be sold if there possibly was broken glass in them."
For more information:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/06/1...
"They broke glass. No human was harmed.
Wake up. Glass is not alive."
What about the owner that had to pay for that new expensive piece of glass? People need to wake up and realize that not all business owners in Santa Cruz are wealthy. Some new business owners are personally having a very hard time making ends meet so they can keep their employees paid and their business running. When someone commits an act of vandalism, that is money the owner has to spend on replacing the window rather then hiring new employees or maybe taking home a little extra money. What if that was money going towards a hospital expense or physical therapy? Now they don't have the money.
Saying that it hurts no one is not really thinking too hard.
Also, are you people aware that the woman that ran the store was murdered earlier this year?
Wake up. Glass is not alive."
What about the owner that had to pay for that new expensive piece of glass? People need to wake up and realize that not all business owners in Santa Cruz are wealthy. Some new business owners are personally having a very hard time making ends meet so they can keep their employees paid and their business running. When someone commits an act of vandalism, that is money the owner has to spend on replacing the window rather then hiring new employees or maybe taking home a little extra money. What if that was money going towards a hospital expense or physical therapy? Now they don't have the money.
Saying that it hurts no one is not really thinking too hard.
Also, are you people aware that the woman that ran the store was murdered earlier this year?
I absolutely agree. Thanks for publishing this, it's important that people read it.
Brad- thanks for the photos. I don't always agree with your commentary, but your photojournalism is wonderfully appreciated.
To those that did this, if you're even reading these posts (which I sense you are, since you posted here):
You are children. Children dressed in a misunderstood version of Anarchy 101. Sure, you may consider me a lamb of the capitalist system, but you know what? I don't live in my mom's basement.
To those that did this, if you're even reading these posts (which I sense you are, since you posted here):
You are children. Children dressed in a misunderstood version of Anarchy 101. Sure, you may consider me a lamb of the capitalist system, but you know what? I don't live in my mom's basement.
While I do not lend my support to this PARTICULAR act of vandalism, I feel compelled to explain Craig, b/c your comment struck a nerve... I only live at home in Mom's basement now, b/c she was an abusive alcoholic, and I left home at age 16; fending for myself ever since (and doing pretty well, too, for a person with anarchist tendencies in a capitalist world, IIDSSM).
Fast forward, twenty years; Mom finally quit drinking, but now has cancer and needs someone to help take care of her. Guess who? Yeah. That's where, I, her compassionate, forgiving, anarchist son, quits his job, leaves behind a simple life, and moves back "home."
Fuck off, Craig.
Fast forward, twenty years; Mom finally quit drinking, but now has cancer and needs someone to help take care of her. Guess who? Yeah. That's where, I, her compassionate, forgiving, anarchist son, quits his job, leaves behind a simple life, and moves back "home."
Fuck off, Craig.
I'm sorry that you are now taking care of your abusive, alcoholic mother. I'm sure she's a charming woman. If you are so sensitive about a statement that generally covers losers who can't make their way in the world, and thus revert back to free living and disdain for the capitalist system and supporting the racist Ron Paul, then the problem is with you, not me. Get over it.
To Sally,
The business owner is hurting others by employing them. Employment under a boss, under capitalism, is exploitation. Industry harms other human beings and animals and the land. Vandalism and direct action against capitalist business and industry is an act of self-defense as well as attack. Sometimes the best defense is a good offense.
The business owner is hurting others by employing them. Employment under a boss, under capitalism, is exploitation. Industry harms other human beings and animals and the land. Vandalism and direct action against capitalist business and industry is an act of self-defense as well as attack. Sometimes the best defense is a good offense.
I have to strongly ask the Indybay editors consider deleting responses such as the one listed above. I truly have a hard time thinking that the editors feel that such a response espouses the views of and intent of Indybay.
Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the SF Bay Area IMC.
as an anarchist, i think capitalism in all forms needs to be destroyed. i can understand why greenspace was attacked, but with a taco bell pretty much next door i think more pressing targets should be found other than local "green" business, no matter how absurd the term "green business" may be
"as an anarchist, i think capitalism in all forms needs to be destroyed. i can understand why greenspace was attacked, but with a taco bell pretty much next door i think more pressing targets should be found other than local "green" business, no matter how absurd the term "green business" may be"
What is your address? By making yourself anonymous you implicitly admit that vandalism and other forms of violence are only acceptable when directed against those you disagree with -- that is to say, you are a hypocrite.
Next time the police beat up someone at a protest wearing black, I will remember that anarchists fully support the use of violence in order to achieve goals.
What is your address? By making yourself anonymous you implicitly admit that vandalism and other forms of violence are only acceptable when directed against those you disagree with -- that is to say, you are a hypocrite.
Next time the police beat up someone at a protest wearing black, I will remember that anarchists fully support the use of violence in order to achieve goals.
Even if there wasn't a Taco Bell next door to Greenspace, the so-called anarchists who attacked the Greenspace could have transported themselves to any other town or city street and found a McDonalds, Burger King, or any other corporate fast food chain to throw rocks though windows, and i personally would have written a comment of support for their actions. However, to throw rocks through a locally owned establishment like Greenspace that attempts to provide an alternative to pesticides and other modern evils of industrial capitalism isn't logical or effective..
There is indeed a heirarchy of needs when it comes to sabotage and other acts of protest, and plenty of other legitimate corporate targets exist and are waiting for some thrown stones from true anarchists. There are individuals who call themselves anarchists when they really don't understand the concept of anarchy and that a trade and barter system of local green businesses is far closer to the utopian concept of anarchy than the corporate chains ever will be. So attacking the green capitalist model of Greenspace when SO MANY other non-green and truly destructive models of industrial capitalism exist is foolish and counterproductive. Some further research into psuedo-anarchist nihilist movements based simply on random (or not) violence may turn up the hidden hand of the CIA/FBI/Homeland Sec. as in similar situations with the Minutemen/SOS groups are also likely CIA/FBI start-up programs..
To Craig; This discussion has nothing to do with people living in their mother's basement. Neither is Ron Paul a racist, his ideas (repeal NAFTA/WTO, withdraw and close U.S. military bases overseas, stop taxpayer subsidies to corporations, etc..) make more logical sense than any of the other candidates (Republican or Democrat) besides Dennis Kucinich. Calling people who live at home 'losers' is an indication of your own class and racial biases, as anyone who 'loses' under this capitalist system is usually a winner in the book of ethics by keeping their hands clean! In the '08 primary debates, the two most sensible candidates (R. Paul & D. Kucinich) were treated as 'losers' my their respective parties AND the corporate media, so your choice of words is indeed inappropriate!!
That being said, for local business owners like Greenspace who struggle to stay open under this capitalist system that heavily subsidizes corporate chains like Taco Bell, they don't deserve being attacked by people who claim to wish for the ending of oppression and injustice. Try leaving the leftist centered coastal region of CA and journey inland for a while, see how many places like Greenspace exist in other towns and cities. Most likely places like Greenspace would be hard to find anywhere besides other utopian island communities (ex., Boulder, CO), though on every corner in every other town or city there would be a Taco Bell, McDonalds and Burger King available for non-green capitalist desires and really deserving of some thrown stones from true anarchists..
Here is a reminder of a true hero and effective vandal who understood the heirarchy of needs when it comes to corporations deserving of sabotage. When choosing a capitalist target in the future for sabotage, a good rule of thumb is;
"What would Jose Bove do?"
Here's an intro from an interview w/ Bove;
"A World Struggle Is Underway"
An interview with Jose Bove
by Lynn Jeffress (with Jean-Paul Mayanobe)
Z magazine, June 2001
"The following interview took place at Bove's home near Millau, France, on April 3, 2001.
JEFFRESS: August 12, 1999, you and a group of farmers from your French union, the Confederation Paysanne, dismantled a McDonald's under construction just outside the city of Millau near Larzac. It was this action that brought you international attention. Would you talk about it?
BOVE: There were three or four of us who sat around in March 1999 talking about doing something symbolic, but there would have been no reason for the McDonalds protest if it hadn't been for the outrageous tariff placed on French cheese by the Americans because the French refused to let outlawed hormone-treated beef be imported from the States. The tariff meant that we lost our cheese market in the States. There was no political law against it, nothing to stop it, so one solution was to attack McDonalds as a symbol of malbouffe (bad food).
We wanted to do this protest in broad daylight, with a large group of people, a non-violent action, but symbolically very strong, and up front with the authorities. We were careful to explain ahead of time to the police that our objective was to dismantle the McDonald's. They informed their superiors and the police chief. Then an officer from the police department called us to say that he was going to ask the manager at McDonalds for a sign of some kind so we could destroy that, that it be more symbolic. We told him: "Are you kidding? That's nuts. We're going to dismantle the doors and windows."
The police department didn't think that the protest called for a big police patrol. We did ask them to be there to watch over things as we emptied the construction site, in case there were any workers or tools that were in the way. Everything went like we thought it would. The only strange thing was the presence of ten or so police officers in street clothes carrying cameras. The protest went along and everybody, including the kids, helped dismantle the interior of the building: partitions, some doors, electrical outlets, and sheet metal on the roof that was nailed down but which came up easily, because it was part of a kit, decorative stuff. It was really a light weight piece of construction, the whole place.
Everything was put into two tractor wagons, while some people repainted the roof of the restaurant. Both wagons were full, one of them a grain dumpster. Some of the kids leaving the
site climbed into the dumpster with pieces of wood in their hands to pretend to play drums, and we all took off in a parade toward police headquarters in Millau. There was clapping as we rode through the city; people thought it was funny and fun. We unloaded the wagons in front of the police station. It was great weather, everyone had a good time, and the party finally ended up in the outdoor cafe's in Millau."
interview cont's @;
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Reforming_System/World_Struggle_Underway.html
The only point of disagreement i would have w/ Bove's statements above is that there would have been no other reason to attack McDonalds besides the U.S. tariff on French cheese in response to French refusal to accept hormone tainted beef products from the U.S. There are at least one thousand other reasons (animal cruelty, loss of rainforests, GMO cattle feed, etc..) to sabotage McDonalds (or Taco Bell or Burger king, etc..), and when i have a day and a half i'll list them all out one by one..
However, i cannot think of one good reason to sabotage a locally owned place like Greenspace unless the vandals prefer to see only corporate chains like Taco Bell on the landscape!!
There is indeed a heirarchy of needs when it comes to sabotage and other acts of protest, and plenty of other legitimate corporate targets exist and are waiting for some thrown stones from true anarchists. There are individuals who call themselves anarchists when they really don't understand the concept of anarchy and that a trade and barter system of local green businesses is far closer to the utopian concept of anarchy than the corporate chains ever will be. So attacking the green capitalist model of Greenspace when SO MANY other non-green and truly destructive models of industrial capitalism exist is foolish and counterproductive. Some further research into psuedo-anarchist nihilist movements based simply on random (or not) violence may turn up the hidden hand of the CIA/FBI/Homeland Sec. as in similar situations with the Minutemen/SOS groups are also likely CIA/FBI start-up programs..
To Craig; This discussion has nothing to do with people living in their mother's basement. Neither is Ron Paul a racist, his ideas (repeal NAFTA/WTO, withdraw and close U.S. military bases overseas, stop taxpayer subsidies to corporations, etc..) make more logical sense than any of the other candidates (Republican or Democrat) besides Dennis Kucinich. Calling people who live at home 'losers' is an indication of your own class and racial biases, as anyone who 'loses' under this capitalist system is usually a winner in the book of ethics by keeping their hands clean! In the '08 primary debates, the two most sensible candidates (R. Paul & D. Kucinich) were treated as 'losers' my their respective parties AND the corporate media, so your choice of words is indeed inappropriate!!
That being said, for local business owners like Greenspace who struggle to stay open under this capitalist system that heavily subsidizes corporate chains like Taco Bell, they don't deserve being attacked by people who claim to wish for the ending of oppression and injustice. Try leaving the leftist centered coastal region of CA and journey inland for a while, see how many places like Greenspace exist in other towns and cities. Most likely places like Greenspace would be hard to find anywhere besides other utopian island communities (ex., Boulder, CO), though on every corner in every other town or city there would be a Taco Bell, McDonalds and Burger King available for non-green capitalist desires and really deserving of some thrown stones from true anarchists..
Here is a reminder of a true hero and effective vandal who understood the heirarchy of needs when it comes to corporations deserving of sabotage. When choosing a capitalist target in the future for sabotage, a good rule of thumb is;
"What would Jose Bove do?"
Here's an intro from an interview w/ Bove;
"A World Struggle Is Underway"
An interview with Jose Bove
by Lynn Jeffress (with Jean-Paul Mayanobe)
Z magazine, June 2001
"The following interview took place at Bove's home near Millau, France, on April 3, 2001.
JEFFRESS: August 12, 1999, you and a group of farmers from your French union, the Confederation Paysanne, dismantled a McDonald's under construction just outside the city of Millau near Larzac. It was this action that brought you international attention. Would you talk about it?
BOVE: There were three or four of us who sat around in March 1999 talking about doing something symbolic, but there would have been no reason for the McDonalds protest if it hadn't been for the outrageous tariff placed on French cheese by the Americans because the French refused to let outlawed hormone-treated beef be imported from the States. The tariff meant that we lost our cheese market in the States. There was no political law against it, nothing to stop it, so one solution was to attack McDonalds as a symbol of malbouffe (bad food).
We wanted to do this protest in broad daylight, with a large group of people, a non-violent action, but symbolically very strong, and up front with the authorities. We were careful to explain ahead of time to the police that our objective was to dismantle the McDonald's. They informed their superiors and the police chief. Then an officer from the police department called us to say that he was going to ask the manager at McDonalds for a sign of some kind so we could destroy that, that it be more symbolic. We told him: "Are you kidding? That's nuts. We're going to dismantle the doors and windows."
The police department didn't think that the protest called for a big police patrol. We did ask them to be there to watch over things as we emptied the construction site, in case there were any workers or tools that were in the way. Everything went like we thought it would. The only strange thing was the presence of ten or so police officers in street clothes carrying cameras. The protest went along and everybody, including the kids, helped dismantle the interior of the building: partitions, some doors, electrical outlets, and sheet metal on the roof that was nailed down but which came up easily, because it was part of a kit, decorative stuff. It was really a light weight piece of construction, the whole place.
Everything was put into two tractor wagons, while some people repainted the roof of the restaurant. Both wagons were full, one of them a grain dumpster. Some of the kids leaving the
site climbed into the dumpster with pieces of wood in their hands to pretend to play drums, and we all took off in a parade toward police headquarters in Millau. There was clapping as we rode through the city; people thought it was funny and fun. We unloaded the wagons in front of the police station. It was great weather, everyone had a good time, and the party finally ended up in the outdoor cafe's in Millau."
interview cont's @;
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Reforming_System/World_Struggle_Underway.html
The only point of disagreement i would have w/ Bove's statements above is that there would have been no other reason to attack McDonalds besides the U.S. tariff on French cheese in response to French refusal to accept hormone tainted beef products from the U.S. There are at least one thousand other reasons (animal cruelty, loss of rainforests, GMO cattle feed, etc..) to sabotage McDonalds (or Taco Bell or Burger king, etc..), and when i have a day and a half i'll list them all out one by one..
However, i cannot think of one good reason to sabotage a locally owned place like Greenspace unless the vandals prefer to see only corporate chains like Taco Bell on the landscape!!
Yay to whoever saw fit to respond to this action and thank you for engaging in dialogue about the distinction between political struggle and personal decision to act out against a system that is oppressing us all, yes, but which forms of this system are most useful for us to react against? And hadn't we all better be damn strategic about how we choose to fight, and aren't we all ultimately accountable to the struggle even if not to one another regardless whether or not we choose to feed our knee-jerk rage reactions? Thank you for furthering dialogue in the community about activism as defined by various groups or political persuasions and in all of its various forms. Thank you to activists for no longer remaining silent--
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$140.00 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