The Black Bloc Anarchists

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:35 pm

Image
The Cancer in Occupy

By Chris Hedges

The Black Bloc anarchists, who have been active on the streets in Oakland and other cities, are the cancer of the Occupy movement. The presence of Black Bloc anarchists—so named because they dress in black, obscure their faces, move as a unified mass, seek physical confrontations with police and destroy property—is a gift from heaven to the security and surveillance state. The Occupy encampments in various cities were shut down precisely because they were nonviolent. They were shut down because the state realized the potential of their broad appeal even to those within the systems of power. They were shut down because they articulated a truth about our economic and political system that cut across political and cultural lines. And they were shut down because they were places mothers and fathers with strollers felt safe.

Black Bloc adherents detest those of us on the organized left and seek, quite consciously, to take away our tools of empowerment. They confuse acts of petty vandalism and a repellent cynicism with revolution. The real enemies, they argue, are not the corporate capitalists, but their collaborators among the unions, workers’ movements, radical intellectuals, environmental activists and populist movements such as the Zapatistas. Any group that seeks to rebuild social structures, especially through nonviolent acts of civil disobedience, rather than physically destroy, becomes, in the eyes of Black Bloc anarchists, the enemy. Black Bloc anarchists spend most of their fury not on the architects of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or globalism, but on those, such as the Zapatistas, who respond to the problem. It is a grotesque inversion of value systems.

Because Black Bloc anarchists do not believe in organization, indeed oppose all organized movements, they ensure their own powerlessness. They can only be obstructionist. And they are primarily obstructionist to those who resist. John Zerzan, one of the principal ideologues of the Black Bloc movement in the United States, defended “Industrial Society and Its Future,” the rambling manifesto by Theodore Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, although he did not endorse Kaczynski’s bombings. Zerzan is a fierce critic of a long list of supposed sellouts starting with Noam Chomsky. Black Bloc anarchists are an example of what Theodore Roszak in “The Making of a Counter Culture” called the “progressive adolescentization” of the American left.

In Zerzan’s now defunct magazine Green Anarchy (which survives as a website) he published an article by someone named “Venomous Butterfly” that excoriated the Zapatista Army for National Liberation (EZLN). The essay declared that “not only are those [the Zapatistas’] aims not anarchist; they are not even revolutionary.” It also denounced the indigenous movement for “nationalist language,” for asserting the right of people to “alter or modify their form of government” and for having the goals of “work, land, housing, health care, education, independence, freedom, democracy, justice and peace.” The movement, the article stated, was not worthy of support because it called for “nothing concrete that could not be provided by capitalism.”

“Of course,” the article went on, “the social struggles of exploited and oppressed people cannot be expected to conform to some abstract anarchist ideal. These struggles arise in particular situations, sparked by specific events. The question of revolutionary solidarity in these struggles is, therefore, the question of how to intervene in a way that is fitting with one’s aims, in a way that moves one’s revolutionary anarchist project forward.”

Solidarity becomes the hijacking or destruction of competing movements, which is exactly what the Black Bloc contingents are attempting to do with the Occupy movement.

“The Black Bloc can say they are attacking cops, but what they are really doing is destroying the Occupy movement,” the writer and environmental activist Derrick Jensen told me when I reached him by phone in California. “If their real target actually was the cops and not the Occupy movement, the Black Bloc would make their actions completely separate from Occupy, instead of effectively using these others as a human shield. Their attacks on cops are simply a means to an end, which is to destroy a movement that doesn’t fit their ideological standard.”

“I don’t have a problem with escalating tactics to some sort of militant resistance if it is appropriate morally, strategically and tactically,” Jensen continued. “This is true if one is going to pick up a sign, a rock or a gun. But you need to have thought it through. The Black Bloc spends more time attempting to destroy movements than they do attacking those in power. They hate the left more than they hate capitalists.”

“Their thinking is not only nonstrategic, but actively opposed to strategy,” said Jensen, author of several books, including “The Culture of Make Believe.” “They are unwilling to think critically about whether one is acting appropriately in the moment. I have no problem with someone violating boundaries [when] that violation is the smart, appropriate thing to do. I have a huge problem with people violating boundaries for the sake of violating boundaries. It is a lot easier to pick up a rock and throw it through the nearest window than it is to organize, or at least figure out which window you should throw a rock through if you are going to throw a rock. A lot of it is laziness.”

Groups of Black Bloc protesters, for example, smashed the windows of a locally owned coffee shop in November in Oakland and looted it. It was not, as Jensen points out, a strategic, moral or tactical act. It was done for its own sake. Random acts of violence, looting and vandalism are justified, in the jargon of the movement, as components of “feral” or “spontaneous insurrection.” These acts, the movement argues, can never be organized. Organization, in the thinking of the movement, implies hierarchy, which must always be opposed. There can be no restraints on “feral” or “spontaneous” acts of insurrection. Whoever gets hurt gets hurt. Whatever gets destroyed gets destroyed.

There is a word for this—“criminal.”

The Black Bloc movement is infected with a deeply disturbing hypermasculinity. This hypermasculinity, I expect, is its primary appeal. It taps into the lust that lurks within us to destroy, not only things but human beings. It offers the godlike power that comes with mob violence. Marching as a uniformed mass, all dressed in black to become part of an anonymous bloc, faces covered, temporarily overcomes alienation, feelings of inadequacy, powerlessness and loneliness. It imparts to those in the mob a sense of comradeship. It permits an inchoate rage to be unleashed on any target. Pity, compassion and tenderness are banished for the intoxication of power. It is the same sickness that fuels the swarms of police who pepper-spray and beat peaceful demonstrators. It is the sickness of soldiers in war. It turns human beings into beasts.

“We run on,” Erich Maria Remarque wrote in “All Quiet on the Western Front,” “overwhelmed by this wave that bears us along, that fills us with ferocity, turns us into thugs, into murderers, into God only knows what devils: this wave that multiplies our strength with fear and madness and greed of life, seeking and fighting for nothing but our deliverance.”

The corporate state understands and welcomes the language of force. It can use the Black Bloc’s confrontational tactics and destruction of property to justify draconian forms of control and frighten the wider population away from supporting the Occupy movement. Once the Occupy movement is painted as a flag-burning, rock-throwing, angry mob we are finished. If we become isolated we can be crushed. The arrests last weekend in Oakland of more than 400 protesters, some of whom had thrown rocks, carried homemade shields and rolled barricades, are an indication of the scale of escalating repression and a failure to remain a unified, nonviolent opposition. Police pumped tear gas, flash-bang grenades and “less lethal” rounds into the crowds. Once protesters were in jail they were denied crucial medications, kept in overcrowded cells and pushed around. A march in New York called in solidarity with the Oakland protesters saw a few demonstrators imitate the Black Bloc tactics in Oakland, including throwing bottles at police and dumping garbage on the street. They chanted “Fuck the police” and “Racist, sexist, anti-gay / NYPD go away.”

This is a struggle to win the hearts and minds of the wider public and those within the structures of power (including the police) who are possessed of a conscience. It is not a war. Nonviolent movements, on some level, embrace police brutality. The continuing attempt by the state to crush peaceful protesters who call for simple acts of justice delegitimizes the power elite. It prompts a passive population to respond. It brings some within the structures of power to our side and creates internal divisions that will lead to paralysis within the network of authority. Martin Luther King kept holding marches in Birmingham because he knew Public Safety Commissioner “Bull” Connor was a thug who would overreact.

The Black Bloc’s thought-terminating cliché of “diversity of tactics” in the end opens the way for hundreds or thousands of peaceful marchers to be discredited by a handful of hooligans. The state could not be happier. It is a safe bet that among Black Bloc groups in cities such as Oakland are agents provocateurs spurring them on to more mayhem. But with or without police infiltration the Black Bloc is serving the interests of the 1 percent. These anarchists represent no one but themselves. Those in Oakland, although most are white and many are not from the city, arrogantly dismiss Oakland’s African-American leaders, who, along with other local community organizers, should be determining the forms of resistance.

The explosive rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement came when a few women, trapped behind orange mesh netting, were pepper-sprayed by NYPD Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna. The violence and cruelty of the state were exposed. And the Occupy movement, through its steadfast refusal to respond to police provocation, resonated across the country. Losing this moral authority, this ability to show through nonviolent protest the corruption and decadence of the corporate state, would be crippling to the movement. It would reduce us to the moral degradation of our oppressors. And that is what our oppressors want.

The Black Bloc movement bears the rigidity and dogmatism of all absolutism sects. Its adherents alone possess the truth. They alone understand. They alone arrogate the right, because they are enlightened and we are not, to dismiss and ignore competing points of view as infantile and irrelevant. They hear only their own voices. They heed only their own thoughts. They believe only their own clichés. And this makes them not only deeply intolerant but stupid.

“Once you are hostile to organization and strategic thinking the only thing that remains is lifestyle purity,” Jensen said. “ ‘Lifestylism’ has supplanted organization in terms of a lot of mainstream environmental thinking. Instead of opposing the corporate state, [lifestylism maintains] we should use less toilet paper and should compost. This attitude is ineffective. Once you give up on organizing or are hostile to it, all you are left with is this hyperpurity that becomes rigid dogma. You attack people who, for example, use a telephone. This is true with vegans and questions of diet. It is true with anti-car activists toward those who drive cars. It is the same with the anarchists. When I called the police after I received death threats I became to Black Bloc anarchists ‘a pig lover.’ ”

“If you live on Ogoni land and you see that Ken Saro-Wiwa is murdered for acts of nonviolent resistance,” Jensen said, “if you see that the land is still being trashed, then you might think about escalating. I don’t have a problem with that. But we have to go through the process of trying to work with the system and getting screwed. It is only then that we get to move beyond it. We can’t short-circuit the process. There is a maturation process we have to go through, as individuals and as a movement. We can’t say, ‘Hey, I’m going to throw a flowerpot at a cop because it is fun.’ ”
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby undead » Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:52 pm

Yes! Big up Chris Hedges and Derrick Jensen for calling out a counter-revolutionary phenomenon. Although many well meaning activists ascribe to the anarchist ideology, the undisciplined tantrum-mongering of sexually frustrated adolescents plays into the plans of the capitalist elite, the police, and the military. With all the information on provocateurs now available through various channels, it is inexcusable to be participating in this kind of behavior. Like Jensen said, it is one thing to use force in an organized, intelligent way. What these people are doing is masturbation.
┌∩┐(◕_◕)┌∩┐
User avatar
undead
 
Posts: 997
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 1:23 am
Location: Doumbekistan
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby wordspeak2 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:17 pm

They're relatively very few in number, yet they get so much attention.

I think the Weather Undergound and Symbionese Liberation Army were both CIA operations, and this type of activity has been glorified heavily by intelligence and the media.

At this point the "Black Block" tactics have managed to turn part-time idiots like Bill Maher against the Occupy movement. Alienating fence-sitting liberals is really nothing to be proud of. Though I do wish someone like a Joe Rogan could reach Bill Maher, who's obviously well-intentioned.
wordspeak2
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:20 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby Simulist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:45 pm

wordspeak2 wrote:At this point the "Black Block" tactics have managed to turn part-time idiots like Bill Maher against the Occupy movement. Alienating fence-sitting liberals is really nothing to be proud of. Though I do wish someone like a Joe Rogan could reach Bill Maher, who's obviously well-intentioned.

Bill Maher tells just enough of the truth to bait the hook; then, once baited, the "fence-sitting liberals" you refer to swallow his propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

Bill Maher has a job to do and, until one catches on to what he's up to, he does it convincingly. Bill Maher a liar, through and through; when he's not "reeling them in" with his lies, he's baiting the hook with morsels of truth.

What a son of a bitch.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby wordspeak2 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 2:54 pm

What makes you say he's a liar, though? I was thinking just upper-class, full of himself, and lacking any knowledge of deep politics and covert ops. Sometimes I actually like him... like on religion. And sometimes he brings on worthy guests.

He's turned against "Occupy" recently on the basis of the "Black Block" activity in Oakland, and I see him as an embodiment of the type that those kind of tactics will severely turn off- I mean will turn them away from the whole movement. Both parties are idiotically culpable, the Bill Maher liberals and the people who ransacked an independent coffee shop in Oakland recently to prove- a point?
Regardless, though, they've only done so much damage. Most folks still associate OWS with raising awareness of intense class stratification.
wordspeak2
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:20 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby Nordic » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:09 pm

Odds are quite high that these Black Bloc folks are, or at the very least led by, agent provocateurs.

Can I say ..... DUH.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby Simulist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 3:11 pm

wordspeak2 wrote:What makes you say he's a liar, though?

Because I've watched him for years. And, until I caught on to his tactics, I very much liked him.

Bill Maher is a very intelligent man — no "part time idiot" at all — so isn't it a little strange that such a smart guy comes to some of the idiotic conclusions he pushes so often?

There's a reason for that. And it has nothing to do with his intellect; it has to do with his character. And the job he's paid to do.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby wintler2 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 4:00 pm

Nordic wrote:Odds are quite high that these Black Bloc folks are, or at the very least led by, agent provocateurs.

Can I say ..... DUH.


Yep. If the Black Block did not exist, the cops would have to invent them. And sometimes they do.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby wordspeak2 » Tue Feb 07, 2012 6:01 pm

Well, I'll take your word, Simulist, as I haven't watched enough Maher. He puts on a hell of an act then.

Re: the Black Block- there are way too many to be all or mostly agent provocateurs, though there are definitely some in there. No, there are really a significant minority of these types of kids, almost all males in their late teens and early twenties, who believe that property destruction is an effective way to overthrow capitalism. At one time I was much less opposed to it than I am now, actually (I never engaged in it, but took the "diversity of tactics" line, which is rather popular). But I think the infiltration is more in the *discourse* than in the actual physical presence of the groups. There are anarchist communities; especially on the west coast, most notably in Eugene, Oregon; where property destruction as a tactic is heavily glorified and sometimes even cop-killing. I've seen it. There's a glorification of the Unabomber in some instances... within the John Zerzan "primitivist" crowd. etc.

That said, in my experience I don't think these kids are usually actually starting skirmishes with police. Who truly wants to get in a brawl with a unit of 5-0's? The person who throws that first rock or what have you from the protest side, setting off the pigs is usually a pig himself.
Last edited by wordspeak2 on Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
wordspeak2
 
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:20 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby American Dream » Tue Feb 07, 2012 7:28 pm

This is all very tricky, since the Black Bloc is not really a discrete, organized group per se but more of a tactic.

I think that Platformism offers an intriguing alternative to approaches that leave more room for autonomous property destruction:


http://libcom.org/thought/platformism-an-introduction

Platformism - an introduction

A brief history and explanation of "Platformism" - a strain of anarchist communism influenced by a 1926 document The Organisational Platform of the Libertarian Communists.


Image

Platformism is a current within libertarian communism putting forward specific suggestions on the nature which anarchist organsation should take.

The origins of the Platform lie in the Russian anarchist movement’s experiences during the Russian Revolutionand the resulting civil war. One group of anarchist exiles (Dielo Trouda ("Workers’ Cause") group) came together in 1926 and published The Organisational Platform of the Libertarian Communists, since known as ‘The Platform’. They wrote the pamphlet to examine why the anarchist movement had failed to build on their successes before and during the revolution.

The Platform was an analysis of the disorganisation of the anarchist movement at the time, and was an attempt to push it in a more organised, class struggle direction. The Platform was not an attempt at writing an anarchist manifesto. It was a discussion document and the authors never claimed to have all the answers.

The Platform was written because of what was going on in the international anarchist movement at that time. However, it remains relevant today in its insights on how libertarian communists should organise.

The Platform argues that to create a well organised libertarian communist movement, we need a “grouping of revolutionary worker and peasant forces on a libertarian communist theoretical basis (a specifically libertarian communist organisation)” and “regrouping revolutionary workers and peasants on an economic base of production and consumption (revolutionary workers and peasants organised around production)”.

Though they provided no extra insights on organising around production, their ideas for organising libertarian communist federations was something of controversy amongst many in the anarchist movement. To combat the disarray the movement was in, they suggested forming a “General Union of Anarchists” based on four basic principles: theoretical unity, tactical unity, collective responsibility and federalism.

Theoretical Unity meant simply that if you don’t agree with someone, don’t be in a political group with them! This doesn’t mean that everyone has to agree all the time (they won’t) but there does need to be a certain amount of ideological unity. Everyone being ‘anarchists’ or ‘libertarian’ isn’t enough. If half the group believe in class struggle while the other half don’t, then both sides would benefit from having two smaller groups rather than one big group which spent all its time arguing.

Tactical Unity meant that the members of an organisation should struggle together as an organised force rather than as individuals. Once a strategy has been agreed by the collective, all members should work towards ensuring its success saving resources and time concentrating in a common direction.

Collective Responsibility meant “the entire Union will be responsible for the political and revolutionary activity of each member; in the same way, each member will be responsible for the political and revolutionary activity of the Union.” This means that each member should take part in the collective decision-making process and respect the decisions of the collective.

Federalism is an organisational structure based on “the free agreement of individuals and organisations to work collectively towards a common objective”. All decisions are made by those effected by them as opposed to centralism, where decisions are made by a central committee for those effected by them.

Though Platformism had a shaky start with many prominent anarchists denouncing them as trying to ‘Bolshevise’ anarchism, it has now been taken on by many libertarian communist groups across the world such as the Workers’ Solidarity Movement in Ireland, North Eastern Federation of Anarcho-Communistsin North America and the Zabalaza Anarchist Communist Federation in South Africa.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:29 pm

Amen. Black Bloc = trolls, period. It's impossible to take their rhetoric seriously -- they need to start a militia or a fight club instead of messing up Other People's Protests.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:53 pm

LULZ, though:

The Same Chris Hedges wrote:Here’s to the Greeks. They know what to do when corporations pillage and loot their country. They know what to do when Goldman Sachs and international bankers collude with their power elite to falsify economic data and then make billions betting that the Greek economy will collapse. They know what to do when they are told their pensions, benefits and jobs have to be cut to pay corporate banks, which screwed them in the first place. Call a general strike. Riot. Shut down the city centers. Toss the bastards out. Do not be afraid of the language of class warfare—the rich versus the poor, the oligarchs versus the citizens, the capitalists versus the proletariat. The Greeks, unlike most of us, get it.


Via: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the ... _20100524/
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby Simulist » Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:58 pm

The Greeks ought to know; they have been at this for a while.
"The most strongly enforced of all known taboos is the taboo against knowing who or what you really are behind the mask of your apparently separate, independent, and isolated ego."
    — Alan Watts
User avatar
Simulist
 
Posts: 4713
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:13 pm
Location: Here, and now.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Feb 07, 2012 11:59 pm

.

Hedges and Jensen are right, although I object to rhetoric like "cancer." That isn't helping, but the analysis is inarguable.

The graphic truthdig added to Hedges's article is inexcusable. Not helping.

One of the most important facts about black-block infantilism is the automatic magnification such actions receive from an unscrupulous media (of which the unscrupulous polit-peacock Maher is only one example). The media are completely irresponsible to ignore 10,000 marchers (often being beaten and tased and tear-gassed by police) but focus on a Starbucks window broken by a handful of idiots (often enough broken by provocateurs). (These example numbers are taken from last year's Toronto events.)

We can and must call the media on this, but we cannot expect them to do otherwise at this point. If you think, who cares about a piece of cloth burned or a window broken when the security forces are establishing an unconstitutional tyranny, you have a point. But indeed: Who cares enough to bother to break it, when it can only hurt the situation?

The black block abuse the majority of a protest by piggy-backing, and this allows provocateurs to piggy back on the black block. It's so fucking naive. If they gotta do such crap, they should have the decency to do it on their own, but then they wouldn't have the mass of suckers to support them. ("Diversity of tactics" is indeed an annoying thought-stopper. I can't give you a reason for my tactics, but hey: diversity!)

On the other hand, if a tear-gas grenade lands at your feet, you show greatness and heart if you can pick it up and toss it back.

Testosterone is at work, and often enough stupidity, or a deficit of empathy and savvy. It's actually a thin line between creative and courageous acts of street theater and disobedience that win over hearts and minds and polarize the majority against the repressive state; and ineffective shows of violence. How do you get black-blockers to shift their energy and desire for thrills and showboating to more constructive and effective activity?

It doesn't help when the intelligently non-violent exaggerate the tragedy of a lost Starbucks window. Strike a distance, but then it's important to shift away quickly as possible when it comes up and return to the reality of massive police reception revoking the right to peaceable assembly in hundreds of cases.

The power of non-violence is enormous! It's not masochism, it's pure power of the righteous when the coppers use their batons on a line of protesters who do not riot, but form again a few steps back. This is what attracts others, it is an awesome show of strength, and I've seen it many times.

"Non-violence" is not strictly an avoidance of violence. It aims for an endpoint wherein all the violence will come from the police, and they will lose anyway.

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Black Bloc Anarchists

Postby bks » Wed Feb 08, 2012 2:01 am

JR wrote:

Hedges and Jensen are right, although I object to rhetoric like "cancer." That isn't helping, but the analysis is inarguable.

The graphic truthdig added to Hedges's article is inexcusable. Not helping.

One of the most important facts about black-block infantilism is the automatic magnification such actions receive from an unscrupulous media (of which the unscrupulous polit-peacock Maher is only one example). The media are completely irresponsible to ignore 10,000 marchers (often being beaten and tased and tear-gassed by police) but focus on a Starbucks window broken by a handful of idiots (often enough broken by provocateurs). (These example numbers are taken from last year's Toronto events.)

We can and must call the media on this, but we cannot expect them to do otherwise at this point. If you think, who cares about a piece of cloth burned or a window broken when the security forces are establishing an unconstitutional tyranny, you have a point. But indeed: Who cares enough to bother to break it, when it can only hurt the situation?


I like almost everything Hedges writes but I can't agree that this was a good piece. He's shrill and way off the mark if he thinks that the BB tactics are somehow killing Occupy. If OWS is dying, it's dying for failure to take some other form beyond simply occupying. If it dies, it dies because no purchase was gained in poor and working-class neighborhoods in the urban centers surrounding the encampments.

You and I are stuck on this point of the proper stance toward media. Basically, as i see it, the stance should be, in a nice way: fuck you. Be nice to reporters when you see them, but let them know we understand that even if OWS did nothing but help old ladies across the street all day, the press would still search, for the sake of 'balance', for an old lady who claimed that a guy in a black mask squeezed her hand too hard. I'm not saying getting good press is impossible, only that no amount of image-management is going to make the press an ally of OWS in this fight for very long. It's wasted energy. Accept that they are part of the system you're fighting, and instead use the energy that might otherwise be put into image-management to reach out to the populations you need to appeal to in order to sustain a movement. Knock on doors. Have community organizing meetings and town halls where priorities for political action can be discussed wherever the poor and working-class live.

Revolution = not televised, my brotha.
bks
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 160 guests