The black bloc & generalizations

[easttexaslefty]

Here deep in the heart of Texas, I have been very appreciative of the black bloc. When the drums of war were beating loudly & the anti-war protestors were often out numbered by bully frat boys, middle-aged men with guns & assorted other jerks, they made me feel safer. Sometimes, just sometimes, you have to fight fire with fire.

[Juneboarder]

1. An eye for an eye...

Not always the best way to prove your point ... .. .

[easttexaslefty]

2. Which is why I said, sometimes. n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Some here would disown them as RW provocateurs

and recommend violence against them by OWS.

[easttexaslefty]

4. And I respectfully think that's bullshit.

No doubt, it many occasionally be the case as with anything. Besides, I think they would find it not quite that easy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. That it may be, but some are certainly pushing that POV

[flamingdem]

13. I"d out them as under 28 and full of themselves nt

[Occulus]

50. They've been caught on camera in other protests

clearly acting with the support and participation of police.

It's not bullshit. It's fact.

[easttexaslefty]

54. So that means they all are,

In every case, without exception? Things are not always so concrete. Look. I'm not saying violence is good. Oh, yay, let's break shit! I'm just relaying my experience, which was real and valid.

[Juneboarder]

5. I wouldn't go that far..

The true OWS supporters are not at all about violence - to any party involved.

[dtexdem]

6. I have been and remain part of the first -- I have not seen the second.

And OWS certainly has not called for violence against them.

[socialist_n_TN]

34. Yeah I've seen those posts............

Some folks advocate violence against PERSONS for those persons' violence against PROPERTY. That's seriously fucked up.

[flamingdem]

8. Times have changes, the bloc doesn't want to acknowledge they are irrelevant

Non-violence is the way now

[easttexaslefty]

10. Sure, if that's working. But sometimes more is needed.

A movement needs to be flexible. And things are seldom black or white, so to speak. :)

[flamingdem]

12. I can understand anger in Oakland, but it's got to stop now

There is enough publicity and if violence continues they will lose the mainstream

But the bloc doesn't get or care about that

[easttexaslefty]

14. Again with the generalizations....

[flamingdem]

16. You are generalizing saying that sometimes they serve a purpose

I am not generalizing. Their time is over.

[easttexaslefty]

20. Are you always so sure your opinion

Is the only correct one?

[flamingdem]

24. It's my opinion

Are you sure of your ability to use rhetoric?

[easttexaslefty]

25. I am. n/t

:)

[apocalypsehow]

9. Laughable nonsense, on about three different levels. And transparent, at that.

Who're you trying to kid? (:eyes:)

[easttexaslefty]

11. How's that? n/t

[apocalypsehow]

17. Uh huh. n/t.

[easttexaslefty]

15. I'm waiting, apocalypsehow....

Please, enlighten me.

[flamingdem]

18. Name any movement or cause the Blac Bloc has significantly helped nt

[easttexaslefty]

23. Um....

I think I did. They allowed us to peacefully protest. Remember the post at the top? ^^^^

[apocalypsehow]

19. You go right on waiting. But you're not fooling anybody, really. n/t.

[easttexaslefty]

21. Okayyyy.

[Demonaut]

22. no, screw the black bloc, they're douchebags

this is a peaceful protest, one that Ghandi and MLK would approve of, not a bunch of anarchists
OWS will be tainted and a few innocent protesters may get their heads bashed in because the morons are
destroying property
they make the whole protest more unsafe

[easttexaslefty]

27. Maybe some actual readings of Ghandi & MLK

Would help you. Just a suggestion.

[Demonaut]

31. I have, might be nice if you try

[redqueen]

26. So, to you, they weren't a destructive group

that sets fires and destroys property?

Are you talking about the same people everyone else is? It sounds more like the guys who showed up to occupy protests displaying their legal guns in plain view.

[easttexaslefty]

28. Exactly.

And they were black bloc. They use the technique that is called for at the time.

[redqueen]

29. Apparently not.

In Seattle, in Greece, in Oakland, and other places too, they seem to work with the police.

If they want to stop being confused with malicious infiltrators, they need to change their methods. They're like non-batshit crazy conservatives. It's past time to splinter.

[easttexaslefty]

30. Okay. Whatever, you think.

:spank: :spank:

[applegrove]

32. The black block are just a bunch of hooligans. Peacefull protests work and the message

gets out especially if people put their lives on hold and stay out there for weeks. violence, or the threat of violence just ends the demonstrations and alienates the public. The black bloc are selfish narcissits and followers.

[sulphurdunn]

33. In the real world

any movement needs muscle. These peaceful protesters need to enlist some like minded combat veterans to provides security and, if necessary, jerk a knot in the tails of these little anarchist rat bastards, each one of whom does more harm than 100 cops in riot gear and a week long anti-protest news cycle of the fawning corporate media.

[socialist_n_TN]

36. All because they break a few windows?

So you advocate physical violence against people who do violence against THINGS???

[sulphurdunn]

44. Absolutely!

One hundred thousand people can peacefully exercise their rights and be dismissed. One asshole throws a rock through a window and those hundred thousand people are portrayed as violent anarchists. Being peaceable doesn't necessarily make you a pacifist or a patsy.

[socialist_n_TN]

58. "Being peaceable doesn't necessarily make you

a pacifist or a patsy." I agree with this. I'm a revolutionary socialist. If I live long enough, there might be some violence involved in my life RE: the ruling class. The violence will depend on them and their reaction to losing their priviledges. And I'm a BIG believer in self defense, both personally and for others and for my class.

NOT however, against comrades who might be misguided in their reactions to the power grab by the 1%. As a Trotskyist, I believe everything in the class struggle, strategically and tactically, should lead to an end. This is why I DO NOT believe in random vandalism with no purpose. But as a Marxist, I also don't have a "liberal" fetish about "private" property. Violence against persons is NOT a legitimate reaction to vandalism against "private" property stolen from the working class by the capitalists.

IOW, I wouldn't join the black bloc and I don't believe in their methods, but I also don't believe in violence against them because they break some windows at Bank of America. The best response is to stay away from them while they're engaging in the vandalism and let them and the police battle it out.

Who knows? Maybe it will keep some peaceful protester from being beat up by that particular cop while he's dealing with the black bloc.

[JVS]

37. Wait, so in order to be non-violent the OWS demonstrators need to kick some ass?

That's some nice fail you've got going there.

[easttexaslefty]

40. The irony.,

It stings.

[sulphurdunn]

46. It does indeed.

And it is inescapable. Peaceful demonstrators cannot share the same streets with violent thugs.

[sulphurdunn]

45. Would you prefer

thousands of peaceful people being defined as violent threats because a handful of assholes need to work out their oedipal complexes throwing rocks and giving the cops an excuse to crack more heads? I thought only fundamentalists saw reality in black and white.

[JVS]

47. You think that assaulting other people will not result in them being defined as violent threats?

:crazy:

[sulphurdunn]

48. Self-defense

is not assault. It is a reaction to assault. You've got to be either a fool or complicit to suggest that peacefully assembled and numerically superior people should allow themselves to be violently dispersed by a handful of rioters. :think:

[JVS]

51. Beating up someone for doing something you don't agree with but who aren't attacking you...

isn't self-defense,

[sulphurdunn]

52. Argumentum ad absurdum

Strict adherence to your position would require one to stand by while someone burned his house and murdered his family.

[JVS]

53. Since when are the blocs attacking the property or the relatives of the protestors?

[sulphurdunn]

55. I see.

It's OK to defend my family and property if attacked but not those of neighbors or strangers. So, if I'm a demonstrator and a vandal tries to torch my store I can hit him with a baseball bat, and if It's not my store I just stand there and watch it burn? You're starting to sound like a libertarian pacifist in solidarity with anarchists, and that is passing strange.

[socialist_n_TN]

59. Don't they just attack corporate targets?

Anyway I haven't read of any attacks on personal property belonging to the working class. Maybe I'm misinformed, but from what I've seen the targets chosen are the property of the 1%. IOW, property that has been stolen from the working class by the 1% through wage slavery and "profit".

Don't mistake this for an endorsement of black bloc tactics. I'm DEFINITELY not an anarchist and I believe that every action needs to have a particular purpose advancing the cause of the working class against the exploiters and random vandalism against property usually DOESN'T have that purpose. But I'm not going to get all bent out of shape about vandalism against a Bank of America to the point of attacking someone who perpetrates that vandalism. Let the cops and the black bloc fight it out. Maybe it'll keep some psychotic cop away from busting up some peaceful protester if he's chasing after a black blocker.

[JVS]

61. If it's citibank's store, I think the only ethical thing to do is stand back and let it happen.

But really the issue is if you say you're non-violent, you have to actually be non-violent.

[JVS]

62. And if you think my stance is strange, remember that you are the one advocating using violence..

in the name of non-violence.

I'm just saying it's not my job to police other people and it's not my job to protect some corporation's property while the same corporations do their damnedest to get all of my property by hook or crook.

[Earth_First]

35. black bloc can KMA. n/t

[easttexaslefty]

39. You do know earth first is a RADICAL

environmental group, don't you?

[Earth_First]

42. The irony is delicious, isn't it? n/t

[JVS]

38. To each his own. There's plenty of world for OWS to do one thing and black bloc to do another.

[easttexaslefty]

41. True this. n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

43. The single worst threat to non-violent protest is violent people joining in.

If black bloc types want to use violence for social protest, that's fine - (although I hope they all get arrested, like anyone else who indulges in violent crime).

But if they are polluting, endangering and undercutting legitimate protest, that's a rather different problem.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

49. Wrong, the biggest threat is the non violent participants reacting with violence

Read the Wired article about Oakland. It showed the bulk of the demonstrators deflecting the violent ones.

[sulphurdunn]

56. What do you do about

those who won't be deterred? Do you just let them do there thing? What do you do when they start attacking people? And they eventually will. Do you stand around in a circle and shout "shame" while they beat other people to death?

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. yep,nothing wins over working class Americans more than the sight of masked men smashing windows and

wrecking the downtown.:crazy:

[lonestarnot]

60. Yeppers. That is like the LA rioters, tearing up their own shit in their neighborhoods. Really

stupid looking.