delet... Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 holy shit, my sister got some fantastic footage last night, including of herself getting gassed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tu_D8SFYck&feature=channel_video_title Why don't you self police the rock throwers. Get their ID and post it on the web as a name and shame. And if they happen to be cops, well that proves it. there wwere so many of you that you easily could have sorted that guy throwing the rock, when he ran back towards the camera and then took off, dropped him and popped him or jsut held him down and took his photo and grabbed his ID and took a photo of that. It's not like he looked like a scary gang banger or something. Or are you non-violence even to the extent of letting potential provocateurs get away with this bS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 it's a lot harder to do then one might think, it's very hard to in the moment even tell what's going on, who's throwing what, if someone was thrown who threw it, etc. Watching footage of it later you can sort through some of the chaos. My sister was there to document the event, not to become a vigilante. i think it's all too easy to say things like 'why dont you self police the rock throwers' without actually being there yourself. I know it's frustrating that these people come in and most of the time get away with it, but protestors do tackle these guys a lot and i saw it happen myself earlier in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
data Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 holy shit, my sister got some fantastic footage last night, including of herself getting gassed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Tu_D8SFYck&feature=channel_video_title the hell is it with these "anarchists" and starting fires in the middle of the street followed by a bunch of flag waving? it's like the only purpose of the fire is so that they can get cool photos of themselves in the paper, waving a flag in front of it. tossers. also i refuse to believe any of them are over the age of 15. im all for the demonstrations and protestors, but i can't stand these children running about pretending they're revolutionaries by setting fire to a park bench and waving a flag. useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delet... Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 it's a lot harder to do then one might think, it's very hard to in the moment even tell what's going on, who's throwing what, if someone was thrown who threw it, etc. Watching footage of it later you can sort through some of the chaos. My sister was there to document the event, not to become a vigilante. i think it's all too easy to say things like 'why dont you self police the rock throwers' without actually being there yourself. I know it's frustrating that these people come in and most of the time get away with it, but protestors do tackle these guys a lot and i saw it happen myself earlier in the day. I wasn't talking about your sister doing it. I mean big burly peace nick enforcer types, keeping their eyes open. Like for example when they were telling people not to burn things. Don't take it to heart though, i'm just exasperated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest disparaissant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 violence isnt always a bad thing especially when it's against corporate entities and not people if someone's doing violence to other people turn them over to the police, sure. that's where they belong - they're acting like the police anyways. if someone wants to smash a whole foods window, fucking let them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 what the news reports arent telling people is that the whole foods vandalism (i wouldn't classify it as violence) seemed staged by a group of 20-30 provocateurs. Whether they worked for law enforcement or not i'm not sure, but there were several on the ground reports that the people at whole foods had completely unworn brand new hoodies and combat boots. Again not proof they are cops, but evidence that someone with a budget orchestrated the event. Also people went around the peaceful protest areas on 11-2 with flyers saying 'non violence?' and basically an essay convincing people as to why we should be violent. On top of that one of these 'anarchists' who had brand new gear on spread a rumor around the encampment that Whole foods corporate said anyone who went on strike would be fired. This turned out not to be true. In my strong opinion someone wanted to give the protest movement a bad name, and its working. A shutdown of the 5th largest port in the entire world was overshadowed unfortunately by a small group of assholes, some of them probably werent working for anybody and just got inspired by the mob mentality. Its just too bad that the world news headlines included a lot more pictures of idiots standing next to a fire and not many pictures of peaceful protestors in the thousands actually creating human blockades to prevent trucks from leaving and entering the ports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delet... Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Yeah, that's what i was thinking. They flew in a team to do this. And if any of them were arrested, they would have been whisked away behind the scenes, without charges. It's a shame that the media isn't more sceptical about things. I mean it's not like there isn't precedent for these kinds of actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest disparaissant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 the media is owned by the very corporations being protested why on earth would they be honest about this stuff i worked at whole foods for a while so i hope more get smashed, that place was an oppressive hellhole but i guess my overarching point is that while you could argue that violence gives protests a bad name, violence against property is a totally legit tactic when it comes to protests shit you guys when was the last time a peaceful protest had any real effect? the patriarchy or kyriarchy or whatever word you want to use to describe the dudes in power puts up with you as long as they have to then send in the police to bust your skulls. it's time to bust back. This talk about pacifism sort of reminds me back on June 30th and there was a public sector strike of the teaching unions and the PCS. Spectacular turn out' date=' brilliant solidarity from the community for the demonstration through the city centre, some solid speakers at the ending rally (one of whom called for a general strike, which is the shit you need to be hearing) and then to finish it off, someone with a very weak voice sang “We Shall Overcome”. It sort of made me wonder what people were actually planning for because that song isn’t one to put the wind in your sails. It’s more the sitting in the prison cell, rattling the tin cup against the bars, stage of events more than the motivating the masses into action.FML moment was had. And then we went to the pub.[/quote'] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Z_B_Z Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 going around smashing shit is juvenile and completely counterproductive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Peaceful protests not having any effect? Is it sufficient to namedrop Ghandi? And wasn't the success of the protests @ Tahrir largely due to the protesters remaining peaceful? Sure there are lots of examples of peaceful protests not having the desired effect. But that doesn't mean violence would have worked, or would have been a viable alternative. Using violence would be just as useless as the recent riots in London. Don't even think about justifying violence. Not in the last place of a lack of having any clear goal. What exactly would you achieve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 peaceful protests need to have an actual strategy and clear objectives and not just express discomfort, otherwise they kinda achieve the opposite effect of the intended. they end up reinforcing the feeling of futileness, they piss off some other people not involved - effectively polarizing and polluting the debate - and act as an exhaust valve for all the accumulated furstration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Violence begets violence... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I really dont think it was a team working to subvert the "movement". People took adavantage of the fact that many would be marching in favor of views they liked and could push further towards more drastic measures. I dont feel bad about whole food being trashed, or many of the other buisnesses. I do feel awkward about using the crowds of many marching and protesting to then complete these actions. How can these guys justify breaking shit on others dime in the name of anarchy. They arent doing it when everyone else is there peacefully so fuck off. sorry pretty drunk, hopefullly i can make a better post tomorrow. edit: i think main point I want to emphasize is that the peaceful protestors are just as problmetatic as the ones starting more serious vandalism. My best friend got punched in the face by a "pacifist" trying to stop the black block when my friend was just an observer. It's easy to blame sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 peaceful protests need to have an actual strategy and clear objectives and not just express discomfort, otherwise they kinda achieve the opposite effect of the intended. they end up reinforcing the feeling of futileness, they piss off some other people not involved - effectively polarizing and polluting the debate - and act as an exhaust valve for all the accumulated furstration. good points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 peaceful protests need to have an actual strategy and clear objectives and not just express discomfort, otherwise they kinda achieve the opposite effect of the intended. they end up reinforcing the feeling of futileness, they piss off some other people not involved - effectively polarizing and polluting the debate - and act as an exhaust valve for all the accumulated furstration. good points. I disagree. I think its important to express discomfort and not have the official means of communications that "justify" it in a system that is not ready to recognize an opposition to itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 he said "not just express discomfort". sure the discomfort needs to be expressed, but the objective shouldn't be the expression itself. we're not in kindergarten anymore. you can start crying when you want something, hoping others will help you. or you can take responsibility and try to achieve something. have real objectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 i don't believe smashing bank windows or large corporate groceries should be perceived as violent. "achieving" something is an awkward term that i don't think can be used to justify or vilify anyone involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 i don't believe smashing bank windows or large corporate groceries should be perceived as violent. "achieving" something is an awkward term that i don't think can be used to justify or vilify anyone involved. than how should smashing windows or groceries be perceived? and why is achieving something awkward? want to deny cause and effect as well? is this just about pure ideology where everything else (windows of banks) are unimportant trivial things in the unimportant physical world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I think to say there insn't a general anti capitalist discomofrt along with the protests to be ridicuoulous. Also, I think it is easy to say a movement doesnt have direction in the early stages of itself. History will tell its tale....I think its harder to get people to recognize and sympathize with ideas because they think it has to be some clean cut mlk "i have a dream bullshit". I thought pirate bay taught us that individual opinions don't mean jack shit. proclaimer: again still drunk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 i don't believe smashing bank windows or large corporate groceries should be perceived as violent. "achieving" something is an awkward term that i don't think can be used to justify or vilify anyone involved. than how should smashing windows or groceries be perceived? and why is achieving something awkward? want to deny cause and effect as well? is this just about pure ideology where everything else (windows of banks) are unimportant trivial things in the unimportant physical world? I wasn't denying achieving something as being something positive. Just that these corporate entities have the resources to pay for this sort of damage where as mom and pop cafe shop doesn't which points directly to the problem of who has the money can make the noise. How do you achieve something through sharing in a corporate enviorment....I think disruptuption is a key tactic in reclaiming the space of an individual or group in expressing an idea or direction. again still drunk and these posts afterposts are making me confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goDel Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 nonsense. what was the anti-vietnam war movement about? from the start it was pretty clear what they were about. the anti-nuclear bomb movement? crystal clear. you want more examples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 final note: fuck everyone...Ive waited my entire life to be apart of a protest about my qualms as part of a corporate capitalist existance....I'm sad its come down to me arguing over fucking bank of america windows being smahsed to my family and everyone I know.... anti vietman was bullshit, a bunch of hippies whinning about not wanting to be enlisted now our goverment avoids it by just drafting the poor so they dont have to piss of the rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 from a blog about Occupy Forums: Occupy Los Angeles General Discussion Some important facts that you will not find in the mainstream (corporate) media today which (completely co-incidentally I'm sure) will be the total polar opposite message we'll hear from the blowhards who only get their information from that corporate owned media bent on misrepresenting this movement: - None of the "violence" of yesterdays demonstration was planned by, condoned, or in any way sanctioned by the general assembly at Grant Plaza (the protest base and "organization" for lack of better word) or the New York general assembly at Freedom Plaza that the Oakland assembly had originally gathered in solidarity of ("the movement" for those still unsure of the who/what/where). So all claims that broken windows and burning dumpsters "represent" Occupy Wall Street or Occupy Whatever should be called out for what they are: transparent attempts to manipulate the masses that only get their "information" from corporate media. - Do a Google search for "Oakland Liberation Front" right now. They are a self invented, radicalized, pseudo-anarchist group styled after Black Bloc that attempted to subvert the protests yesterday. They have not been involved in any way with holding space in Grant Park in solidarity with Occupy Wall Street to help raise awareness regarding corporate influence in governement, and have not participated in any way with any of the General Assemblies. They are not part of Occupy Oakland at all. Here, I'll do the google search for you: http://www.google.com/search?gcx=c&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=oakland+liberation+front - This is the flyer they were handing out around Grant Park the day before the General Strike march to try to provoke, and undermine the movement and demonstration with violence and vandalism: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/call-to-violence-e1320326431189.jpg - The Black Bloc (what the "Oakland Liberation Front" mimics) is an intentionally disruptive tactic which has infiltrated and radicalized protests world wide. The core principles and tactics are: Vandalism, rioting, and street fighting. The Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, ongoing protests, and movement on the whole has defined itself in self stating principles at every assembly from the very beginning as "non violent". Search Google for Black Bloc to find out what it is. Here, I'll do it for you. It will probably look like the photos you'll see all day on the sensationalist corporate owned media that is trying to divert the message away from corporate influence and corruption in government: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=black+bloc&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1081059l1082734l0l1083007l10l7l0l1l1l0l123l686l2.5l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1055&bih=974&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi - This, I guarantee you will not see on any corporate owned media today or ever. When "Oakland Liberation Front" Black Bloc provocateurs acted against the principles of the actual movement by inciting vandalism during the march, the crowds turned against them: When other windows were broken, Oakland assembly participants guarded the locations so they would not be damaged further or looted: http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg740/scaled.php?tn=0&server=740&filename=l0whb.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640 Please attempt to help others keep a rational head today. What is being blatantly demonstrated here is how the media will manipulate the message away from the facts, and why. Again, this is a protest and movement against the corporate influence and corruption of the government caused by the few, by reminding everyone of the resulting disaster it has wreaked on the economy and the effects of which the rest of us feel. When that same collection of corporate entities also own the media which ultimately creates the message for the masses, the most true aspects of everything to do with the movement will never be covered, and instead be misrepresented to influence public opinion away from the underlying facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 fuck vietnam, the goverment can now just force the poor into enlighisting rather than drafts so no one can actually complain. I dont think you can compare something from the 70s to now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mononomo Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I have the same flyer next to me. I still have sympathy towards the group even tho the harm they have possibly done.....I think they have still done more good than the people they have actually harmed edit: sorry some of my posts are redundant because I've had my share of the silver bullet as well as various other alcohols.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.