Another super market expropriation [Archive]

Black Sheep

16th June 2010, 02:20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoKyYKgaHZA&feature=sub
watch it in youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoKyYKgaHZA&feature=sub)if the annotations don't appear
Plus money burning

The translation is mine and it's quite free.

At 14/06/10 we entered a supermarket of Masoutis chain in Kyriakou street[..], took products of everyday needs (olive oils,spaghetti,milk), we destroyed anti-theft systems, two cameras and the CC Tv, and smashed the cashiers' machines and burned what cash they contained.
We had decided from the start that the goods were to be given away between the comrades,and not distributed to the people,in order to make clear that the goal of these acts of expropriation but others as well, are not to protray some as the saviors of society, we want the society itself to embody these tactics without wating for the charity, poor-friendly "revolutionary".
Especially in a period like nowadays, where the system is rotting and heading towards its demise.As far as the term "Super Market Robin Hoods', we think it's another attempt to strip the true meaning of such actions from the Mass Media, that portray the comrades as an elite that steals for the poor, resulting in the distribution of the loot promoting a passive stance and the mentality of "someone will act & look out for us".

[...]
We'll be happy when we see people strive forward,with the notion that their lives belong to themselves, without middlemen and pointless babble, when they organize under solidarity, anti-authoritarianism and self-management , guided by active denial and attack.
When they do not fall for the system's fairy tale, that 'by helping each other we'll manage to overcome the crisis".
It's important that,when you distribute goods,you can't be aware if the receiver is indeed in solidarity of your actions,even not actively, or simply is a hypocrite that takes stuff for free,but in other cases will be the first to snitch you to the cops
Of course we support of such actions of other comrades,because as we said, the goals are the same.

The burning of money,is a symbolic movement that talks by itself.These pieces of paper,that in seconds were turned to ash, have managed in even less time to destroy lives,relationships, to mutate a human being and his/her desires transforming his/her life to data sheets,digitizing emotions and experiences,simplyfying the feeling of happinness and misery to the dichotomy " i have money/i don't have money"

As for our actions,they were carried out according to plan.Our escape was smooth, and without surprises.We used garbage bins to close some streets just in case,and we took measures to be aware of cop activity before and during our act.

Cops from Z zquad stood confused in Egnatia Fountain, obviously waiting for backup, tried to approach after we were already too far away.

We are conscioucly and actively in solidarity with every other action that sabotages capitalism within the bourgeoisie environment in which we operate.

PS1.A warning to 'super-greeks' who try to be heros,they'll have the same response as to the one spotted calling the cops during the expropriation, he was chased by comrades,he and the rabble that was about to intervene.

PS2.We can do nothing but laugh with the misinformation of the Mass Media about 'clash with the police', carts with goods that weren't delivered etc

PS3.Of course we support the expropriation of money for the movement,but in this particular action we wanted to give a different meaning

the last donut of the night

16th June 2010, 03:44

bcbm

16th June 2010, 04:57

it spreads the climate of catastrophe and radical solutions, who cares.

the last donut of the night

16th June 2010, 05:21

it spreads the climate of catastrophe and radical solutions, who cares.

I'm not sure if a climate of catastrophe is good for working class people, really.

griffjam

16th June 2010, 05:58

Honestly, not to be an asshole, but this is not the right way to lead to a revolution. I mean, it's much more worthwhile to work among workers, building revolutionary structures and councils than just taking some supermarket products and burning money, for God's sake. This won't change or prepare anybody for revolution.

If there is an insurrection going on isn't it better that people work to make it horizontal and that it contains instances where people who need things can expropriate them? I agree rioting and looting itself is not revolutionary, but if there is rioting and looting we should try to make the best of it (i.e. aid those who need it.)

this is an invasion

16th June 2010, 07:03

Reappropriation actions like this, I think, are the next logical step to work toward in the US.

Greece is, as always, holdin' shit down.

bcbm

16th June 2010, 08:18

I'm not sure if a climate of catastrophe is good for working class people, really.

i'm not sure global civil war is good for working class people but that is the reality we have been born into and it is well past time to choose sides. capitalism is catastrophe on a global scale, this has to be made clear and our position in it made clear as well.

thomasludd

16th June 2010, 08:34

nice!!

though i understand the symbolism of burning money, shouldn't it just be used instead to buy some stuff needed from those shops that are aren't expropriated from yet? :)

this is an invasion

16th June 2010, 09:50

They talk about that

PS3.Of course we support the expropriation of money for the movement,but in this particular action we wanted to give a different meaning

Honggweilo

16th June 2010, 10:04

thomasludd

16th June 2010, 10:07

They talk about that

too excited i didn't even bother to understand until now LOL thanks!

this is an invasion

16th June 2010, 10:09

Black Sheep

16th June 2010, 10:19

Ravachol

16th June 2010, 10:27

alienating people, harasing workers, burning money? ffs this is not expropiation, this is plain nihilistic. How is this going to gain popular support, only to be "symbolic" for a very select group .Instead of collectivising workplaces, distributing the money and going after big targets like banks, you just burned someones hard earned surplus value, and actually did the greek government some good by decreasing inflation.

Whilst we usually agree I have to disagree here. The explicit statement of 'not wanting to be robin hood' thus avoiding an increase in 'popular support' has a deeper reason. Obviously as Communists we all ought to support expropriations of goods but when this is consequently done only by a small robin-hoodesque vanguard this does nothing to spread the logic of expropriation amongst the working class. In other scenario's I would favour a 'robin-hoodesque' action due to the context, but not in Greece.
When the material conditions are right and social rupture is wide enough, which I believe is the case in Greece, these kind of actions can spread like a social wildfire thus serving two purposes:

a) A direct material need, that of collective re-appropriation of goods by the working class and a collective re-distribution of these goods on communist principles.

b) A propagation of the logic of expropriation, a logic that is a direct break with capitalism and thus heigthens class consciousness.

you just burned someones hard earned surplus value

I can't say I care for the petit-bourgeoisie's accumulated surplus value, as that is where this money is going. Then again, I disagree with the money burning part as well, it's still too usefull in this phase of class struggle. I also want to stress that these tactics can only be successfull if accompanied by a mass-movement seeking to build a council-based network taking over workplaces and neighbourhoods to maintain momentum and carve out a revolutionary space.

Honggweilo

16th June 2010, 17:25

a) A direct material need, that of collective re-appropriation of goods by the working class and a collective re-distribution of these goods on communist principles.

b) A propagation of the logic of expropriation, a logic that is a direct break with capitalism and thus heigthens class consciousness

If its serves these purposes, but this action has a very mythical "symbolic" value, not a material one. I dont know for whom or who they took those products, who supported them and how this action will increase class struggle. If they do distribute it to people who cant afford to eat or get by, i dont blame them (still the money burning is absolutly rediculous metaphysical symbolism, which has no material basis). If not, it all sounds very CrimethInc'ish to me.

I can't say I care for the petit-bourgeoisie's accumulated surplus value, as that is where this money is going. Then again, I disagree with the money burning part as well, it's still too usefull in this phase of class struggle. I also want to stress that these tactics can only be successfull if accompanied by a mass-movement seeking to build a council-based network taking over workplaces and neighbourhoods to maintain momentum and carve out a revolutionary space.

I wasnt talking about the suplus value of the petit-bourgeoisie, i was talking about the cost of these kind of incidents which will be paid for by budget cuts of store workers (in which smashing registers is a very counterproductive). If this was collectivisation of a workplace, you wouldnt have that problem.

Lyev

16th June 2010, 17:40

What on earth is the point apart from some empty "symbolism"? Is this really going to get people on there side? I don't think that people are going to follow their example and flock to their banner after seeing these people walk into a shop with black fabric over their heads. Call me sectarian or whatever, but I just find this a bit embarrassing. What is the point? As far as this hapless shop-owner is concerned he is simply running a business, and trying to get by; I don't think taking things from him is going to encourage him to become an anarchist.

Big Red

16th June 2010, 17:49

I can understand peoples criticism, however in these cases I believe the right actions are being taken, I'd like to quote a passage from the book WE ARE AN IMAGE FROM THE FUTURE, "One action that started happening more frequently in the year before December(the 2008 riots) were expropriations in the supermarkets. we would gather with agroup of at least thirty people, mask up, run into a major supermarket and fill carts with food. the timing was very important. inside the store everyone knew what they had to do, everyone stayed in a group and didn't go down any aisle alone, and we were all out of there in a minute. sometimes people would calm the workers, saying that it was an expropriation and that all the food would be distributed for free, we were against property but we didn't want to hurt anybody. and we always made sure to get out of there very quickly. it all took just a few seconds(as seen in the above video) in athens we usually did these expropriations close to open air markets, when lots of people were outside shopping. that way we would not have to go far to find a place where lots of people were gathered to leave the food, after we did this a few times, when the people saw us, they would cry out excitedly, "it's them! It's them! and they would cheer us and they were very happy to take the food. it was a nice feeling, to include all these people in our illegality. also, they learned not to be afraid of the koukoulofori ("hooded ones" nickname given to masked anarchist by the media) the people who were masked up, dressed in black, and doing outrageous things were on their side. that was very important"
-so as you see these actions actually serve not only to attack capital but to build relations with the wider society...which includes workers...:thumbup1:

Honggweilo

16th June 2010, 17:51

As far as this hapless shop-owner is concerned he is simply running a business, and trying to get by; I don't think taking things from him is going to encourage him to become an anarchist. I'm fairly sure that trying to convince the CEO of a major supermarket chain to become an anarchist isnt a main priority :lol:

That said, petty "expropiation" as a means wont change a system if you dont start to work to control workplaces as an endgoal.

Lyev

16th June 2010, 17:57

I'm fairly sure that trying to convince the CEO of a major supermarket chain to become an anarchist isnt a main priority :lol:In the video that looks like a small shop -- i.e., owned by a member of the petit-bourgeoisie -- but I could be wrong, it's hard to tell. It could be owned by a bigger company, as you said. So, they basically just rob shops and distributed what they stole amongst themselves? I don't think people are going to hurry in following this kind of act, by the way.

the last donut of the night

16th June 2010, 18:27

I understand expropriations, but I think more valuable work could be done among workers' circles than this. While working directly with workers is very much class-based, expropriating and burning money isn't necessarily class-based, although it can be. I think it merely shows a political agenda while working with the proletariat builds an economic and political symbolism.

nuisance

16th June 2010, 21:10

:blink:
I really don't understand leftists that don't believe that tactics of immediate expropriation and militant action negate any organisational activities.

bcbm

17th June 2010, 04:30

In the video that looks like a small shop -- i.e., owned by a member of the petit-bourgeoisie -- but I could be wrong, it's hard to tell.

in greece many chain supermarkets have small locations, due to size of available storefronts. even a big supermarket i saw was nothing compared to a super walmart.

and why would anarchists be trying to appeal to a petit-bourgeois store owner?

I don't think people are going to hurry in following this kind of act, by the way.

people steal all the time. if things continue to get more desperate, more people are going to act in increasingly militant ways to get the things they need.

anar

17th June 2010, 08:55

Has no one read the text? Just to clarify, as they say it is a store of the masoutis supermarket chain (which has stores all over the northern part of greece, from karditsa upwards) so they're not hurting some small business 'trying to get by.'

Lyev

17th June 2010, 14:13

and why would anarchists be trying to appeal to a petit-bourgeois store owner?Why would you want alienate and shun a potential ally? I think the revolutionary movement in Greece -- but in also the whole of Europe -- is going to need all the help it can get, with the struggles ahead.

Anyway, have we seen anyone else that's not an anarchist following their lead, in the way the anarchists "expropriate" supermarkets, like this?

Ravachol

17th June 2010, 16:11

Why would you want alienate and shun a potential ally? I think the revolutionary movement in Greece -- but in also the whole of Europe -- is going to need all the help it can get, with the struggles ahead.

Anyway, have we seen anyone else that's not an anarchist following their lead, in the way the anarchists "expropriate" supermarkets, like this?

Because the very desire for communism and thus the abolishment of the private ownership of the means of production is directly opposed to the material interests of the petit-bourgeoisie who, as the class who both own capital and perform labour, usually benefit greatly from Capitalism. Whilst proletarisation is a constant danger and the petit-bourgeoisie isn't reactionary 'per-se', as it is always in danger of being forced into wage labour, the petit-bourgeoisie isn't a class-ally as long as they aren't under the immediate threat of proletarisation. I don't see the owner of a supermarket being under the direct threat of being forced into wage labour (like some owners of smaller shops and small-time restaurant owners are in some regions).

Most of the petit-bourgeoisie have both a firm interest in maintaining capitalism and profit directly from the wage relation.

Big Red

17th June 2010, 16:48

In the video that looks like a small shop -- i.e., owned by a member of the petit-bourgeoisie -- but I could be wrong, it's hard to tell. It could be owned by a bigger company, as you said. So, they basically just rob shops and distributed what they stole amongst themselves? I don't think people are going to hurry in following this kind of act, by the way.

the example I quoted stated they go to local markets and hand out food to other people, as in a give away to the locals, while this is only one instance I find it hard to believe the same kind of people who would burn money would hoard goods that could benefit their neighborhoods

chegitz guevara

17th June 2010, 16:53

and why would anarchists be trying to appeal to a petit-bourgeois store owner?

Maybe you should organize the looting of farms as well?

Or, perhaps, you could target the common enemy of all classes, the capitalists.

this is an invasion

17th June 2010, 19:06

Maybe you should organize the looting of farms as well?

Or, perhaps, you could target the common enemy of all classes, the capitalists.

Ya'll are being caught up on an irrelevant point.

This supermarket was not a small business, but in fact part of a large chain. They say it.

As to the comment about non-anarchists not participating in this even, had you too read the communique you would see that they address this, and that is the reason why they decided not to pass out goods on the streets this time, and instead take them for themselves and probably those involved in their projects. Instead of acting like Robin Hoods, they want to encourage and show people that they can do the same things.

bcbm

17th June 2010, 20:30

Maybe you should organize the looting of farms as well?

it would be more productive to communize them.

Or, perhaps, you could target the common enemy of all classes, the capitalists.many petit-bourgeois want to be capitalists and often act in an identical manner. i've worked in small businesses where all kinds of "questionable" (read: anti-worker) things occurred and i certainly never cried for them when things "went missing." poor owners! and anyway, i was questioning why we would appeal to a class that doesn't share our interests, not saying we should target them over capitalists.:rolleyes:

gorillafuck

17th June 2010, 20:43

Maybe you should organize the looting of farms as well?

Or, perhaps, you could target the common enemy of all classes, the capitalists.
I would agree with you here, but this was a large chain.

the last donut of the night

17th June 2010, 23:23

What I'm saying is this: instead of just robbing the place, how about you collectivize it? How about the workers form councils? It's much more productive.

Ravachol

17th June 2010, 23:37

What I'm saying is this: instead of just robbing the place, how about you collectivize it? How about the workers form councils? It's much more productive.

How are these things mutually exclusive AT ALL? Obviously the place wasn't ready yet for collectivisation so you can talk about councils taking over there all you want but that obviously wasn't possible at that very moment otherwise it would have happened. In such a scenario, collective expropriation might be a tactic better suited to the immediate advancement of the cause. Obviously this cannot happen on it's own and has to be accompanied by a movement developing class power capable of collectivisation but these tactics aren't mutually exclusive at all.

this is an invasion

18th June 2010, 01:41

What I'm saying is this: instead of just robbing the place, how about you collectivize it? How about the workers form councils? It's much more productive.

You're creating a false dichotomy.

Lyev

18th June 2010, 08:55

Although I think the symbolism is a bit silly, I was too quick to criticise, because, in my belief, the anarchists are simply acting as they can, at least in this point of the struggle. I don't think "the people", although this word is rather ambiguous, are ready to seize state-power and occupy the factories and such. And, just because we can label something "expropriation" doesn't mean it's some sort of mass, organisational activity, with the aim of mobilising the proletariat and it's allies. But anyway, I'm kind of nit-picking now and I wish the best of luck to the anarchists, along with everyone else.

Black Sheep

18th June 2010, 11:27

http://athens.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/pdvd_020.jpg
http://athens.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/pdvd_036.jpg
more:
http://athens.indymedia.org/front.php3?lang=el&article_id=1184991

An archist

18th June 2010, 12:33

In and out in one minute, nice work.

Delenda Carthago

18th June 2010, 17:17

What I'm saying is this: instead of just robbing the place, how about you collectivize it? How about the workers form councils? It's much more productive.
good point.matter of fact,instead of just robbing the place,why dont we take over the goverment ???This is way more productive!!

I never was a fan of the whole "do something or shut up" concept,but you guys in here really put my patience in a test!

Other than that,this action was not "an image from the future",it was a fuckin image of the past.We are way beyond this type of actions,but some people just don't get it...

nuisance

18th June 2010, 19:11

Other than that,this action was not "an image from the future",it was a fuckin image of the past.We are way beyond this type of actions,but some people just don't get it...
Sorry, but this is a massively productive action, especially for the amount of effort it took. This is why the action was committed, it is easily replicatable for non-anarchos to satisfy their material needs. What do you mean the movement is beyond such tactics, when won't food be important to anarchists and showcasing actions like these not be productive in class society?

nuisance

18th June 2010, 19:14

What I'm saying is this: instead of just robbing the place, how about you collectivize it? How about the workers form councils? It's much more productive.
:lol:
Because their was an actual choice to be made betweening robbing a supermarket and self-managing a workplace!

Delenda Carthago

18th June 2010, 19:40

Sorry, but this is a massively productive action, especially for the amount of effort it took. This is why the action was committed, it is easily replicatable for non-anarchos to satisfy their material needs. What do you mean the movement is beyond such tactics, when won't food be important to anarchists and showcasing actions like these not be productive in class society?
nowdays we do stuff like collective kitchens which are more serious on the aspect of making propaganda by action on what the anarchist view is on food.

We where stealing from the supermarkets 2 years ago.Now we are in a different situation.You need to adjust to your times.

this is an invasion

18th June 2010, 19:48

nowdays we do stuff like collective kitchens which are more serious on the aspect of making propaganda by action on what the anarchist view is on food.

We where stealing from the supermarkets 2 years ago.Now we are in a different situation.You need to adjust to your times.

I definitely get what you're saying. But I don't see why anarchists should entirely stop doing actions like these just because you can do other things. Greek anarchists are clearly organized enough to pull these off extremely easily, and because they only take a few minutes, they seem pretty worth it (although in the future taking the money/distributing the money would probably make it more worth while).

I'm just saying that because something is an old tactic, doesn't mean it's not still relevant.

nuisance

18th June 2010, 19:54

nowdays we do stuff like collective kitchens which are more serious on the aspect of making propaganda by action on what the anarchist view is on food.

We where stealing from the supermarkets 2 years ago.Now we are in a different situation.You need to adjust to your times.
I'd have to disagree here. In the current economic climate times are getting harder to obtain necessities like food, so promoting actions like this among the wider working class is more important now than it was 2 years ago, because it is born more out of a need. Also with shoplifting, if it spreads, helps contribute to a culture that opposes having to pay for basic goods.
Anyway, couldn't the taken food be used in the kitchens? This could compilment eachother quite effectively, I'd of thought.

this is an invasion

18th June 2010, 20:36

I think it's really important to move beyond the false dichotomy that actions like this are somehow separate or unable to happen alongside more concrete projects.

A Revolutionary Tool

18th June 2010, 21:25

This looks like a everyday robbery. I swear some people just get off by breaking the law.

nuisance

18th June 2010, 21:32

This looks like a everyday robbery. I swear some people just get off by breaking the law.
That's kinda the point, it can happen everyday and improve peoples material conditions. Do you acutally have an objections to the action?
I don't think it was done just to get off on breaking the law, if so why bother with a communique?, though I'm sure that there was plently of adrenaline flowing through their veins at the time.

this is an invasion

18th June 2010, 21:34

This looks like a everyday robbery. I swear some people just get off by breaking the law.

It is robbery, bro.

But way to not read the communique or the discussion. :thumbup1:

A Revolutionary Tool

18th June 2010, 23:06

That's kinda the point, it can happen everyday and improve peoples material conditions. Do you acutally have an objections to the action?
I don't think it was done just to get off on breaking the law, if so why bother with a communique?, though I'm sure that there was plently of adrenaline flowing through their veins at the time.
I can understand Stalin robbing a bank to fund the party, I can understand if the anarchists rushed into the place to grab the money(And other crap they grabbed) to fund anarchist propaganda, whatever anarchists need to organize but to me this just looked pointless, kind of like the symbolic burning of monks to protest Catholic oppression. You have to understand it I guess from a perspective of American culture I guess(If you're not American yourself), but robbing a place is something associated with lumpen proletariat(criminal) elements. They'd rather steal to "improve material conditions" as you put it rather than actually produce anything themselves. I'm not saying I'm against breaking the law but I just feel like if you came to my neighborhood(High unemployment area) and told everybody you can just go to the supermarket and steal the food the evil capitalist owns to improve material conditions for themselves(But forget to mention that they should actually work too) that everything would be crazy and poverty would just get worse. If you were robbing a place to get money for weapons for a liberation army and food to feed the soldiers or something I would totally be for it. But if you live in my area where it's extremely impoverished nothing good will come of it and nothing good does come of it presently. I don't know it's kind of hard for me to explain my position, but coming from the ghetto people robbing stores to improve material conditions doesn't really help any side of the problem.

A Revolutionary Tool

18th June 2010, 23:10

It is robbery, bro.

But way to not read the communique or the discussion. :thumbup1:
I read the communique which made it look more like just an everyday robbery. To me it roughly translated into this:
"We stole everyday stuff, but instead of giving it out like we usually do we kept it all. We also burnt some money because money sucks."
Not trying to insult anarchists by condensing it into such short simple sentences, just trying to make short simple sentences so I don't have to type more. That looks just like another beer run your local high school students would do. But apparently it's different there because it's Revolutionary Greece we're talking about.

Os Cangaceiros

18th June 2010, 23:36

That looks just like another beer run your local high school students would do.

None of the beer runs that I did in high school looked like that.

Unfortunately.

Os Cangaceiros

18th June 2010, 23:38

Anyway, I support this action. I probably wouldn't have burned the money, though.

this is an invasion

18th June 2010, 23:42

I read the communique which made it look more like just an everyday robbery. To me it roughly translated into this:
"We stole everyday stuff, but instead of giving it out like we usually do we kept it all. We also burnt some money because money sucks."
Not trying to insult anarchists by condensing it into such short simple sentences, just trying to make short simple sentences so I don't have to type more. That looks just like another beer run your local high school students would do. But apparently it's different there because it's Revolutionary Greece we're talking about.

They were stealing food because you need food to live. It's a little different than some teenagers stealing beer to get wasted.

And as far as saying lumpenproles steal because they don't want to produce anything is a pretty incorrect statement. There might be some people out there who find life more enjoyable through crime (and I certainly don't have a problem with this), but my experience is that most people who are lumpen are so because they are forced into it because of capitalism. It's a little bourgeois to blame them for their conditions, don't you think? It seems like you have a problem with people stealing to get by, but not if they are revolutionaries...

I'm still confused as to why people have a problem with this action. I don't think any revolutionary should have out right respect for the law. And I don't see why anyone would support property rights. AND there is nothing to suggest that this sort of action cannot exist along side actual concrete projects (as has already been stated).

nuisance

18th June 2010, 23:55

the last donut of the night

19th June 2010, 03:10

:lol:
Because their was an actual choice to be made betweening robbing a supermarket and self-managing a workplace!

What I meant was that they had a choice, but I think it would have been a better way to use energy and resources in working on strengthening working class power than robbing a supermarket. Robbing a supermarket, while being radical in some sense, doesn't show a clear sense of workers' power to the bourgeoisie. Workers and a workers' party becoming stronger does.

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 03:16

They were stealing food because you need food to live. It's a little different than some teenagers stealing beer to get wasted.
So you're saying these people didn't do it for the political symbolism like I would have believed? If someone is starving go ahead and steal, no skin off my ass. This looked like it was for political gain which is why I'm sitting here going :confused:

And as far as saying lumpenproles steal because they don't want to produce anything is a pretty incorrect statement. There might be some people out there who find life more enjoyable through crime (and I certainly don't have a problem with this), but my experience is that most people who are lumpen are so because they are forced into it because of capitalism. When I'm talking about the lumpen I'm talking about the criminal part of society. You know stuff like gangs, organized crime, etc, these people are the poorest but at the same time most often do not align themselves with the proletariat, at least not what I've seen in America. I've literally been made fun of by these people because I actually have a job, while their ideal life is becoming the next Scarface, not becoming class conscious working people. I could go on all night about how if you tell them to rob places(Even though they already do) it will not all of a sudden be good for the working class community or make us or them gain class consciousness. These kind of tactics can even hurt working class citizens if the local 7-11 goes out of business because it keeps getting robbed, at which point you'll have the workers go over to the side of the capitalists, not the people who just made them lose their jobs. Like I said, I could go on all night.

It's a little bourgeois to blame them for their conditions, don't you think? It seems like you have a problem with people stealing to get by, but not if they are revolutionaries...I'm not blaming them for their conditions, I was in those same exact conditions myself not too long ago, these people are born into shitty conditions. They can be militant, but as far as I've seen it's just about making money. They're going to rob a liquor store instead of try to get out of their conditions, they're going to join a gang instead of trying to get a job, they're going to quit school to sell dope. They have huge revolutionary potential but now they're mostly led by bourgeoisie dreams of grandeur while they squabble in their own sorrow that it doesn't come true. If they are not headed by the working class and told to just keep going the way they are now(Robbing places, other illegal endeavors) it just hurts them and their communities. Maybe you've never lived in a neighborhood where you're scared to go to bed at night because a bullet my hit your house or you yourself don't want to go to 7-11 because people rob the place and end up getting shot or stabbed in their. That is reality and telling people to just do that more helps nobody.

I'm still confused as to why people have a problem with this action. I don't think any revolutionary should have out right respect for the law.It's not about respecting the law, it's respecting the fact that I don't want my neighborhood to be even more fucked up than it is now by people constantly robbing places even more than they do now, I don't want to live in constant fear when I walk down the street because that's the reality of it. It would not help the working class.

And I don't see why anyone would support property rights. AND there is nothing to suggest that this sort of action cannot exist along side actual concrete projects (as has already been stated).
It's not about respecting property.

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 03:22

What I don't get is this fetishisation of work, which is mostly, it seems, by people without full time jobs. Nor why you'd rob from small shops which will be paying more attention for lifters while also having less variety.
Did you seriously just ask why people have a "fetishism" with work on a board full of anarcho-syndicalists, communists, anarcho-communists, etc? You understand that labor(and nature)creates everything right? You're also aware that most people here see the working class(Those who work) as the only possible leaders to a socialist/communist/anarchist society right? Starting to see how we might be a little obsessed with work, it's a pretty important subject to say the least.

Os Cangaceiros

19th June 2010, 03:39

Did you seriously just ask why people have a "fetishism" with work on a board full of anarcho-syndicalists, communists, anarcho-communists, etc? You understand that labor(and nature)creates everything right? You're also aware that most people here see the working class(Those who work) as the only possible leaders to a socialist/communist/anarchist society right? Starting to see how we might be a little obsessed with work, it's a pretty important subject to say the least.

A lot of times it comes off as "identity politics", though, which is the exact opposite of what our political project seeks to achieve.

What Would Durruti Do?

19th June 2010, 05:22

I'm not sure if a climate of catastrophe is good for working class people, really.

ah, so the secret to revolution is to make the working class as comfortable and calm as possible.

Guess I shouldn't expect anything else from the people who think it worthwhile to participate in bourgeois elections.

bcbm

19th June 2010, 05:35

I've literally been made fun of by these people because I actually have a job, while their ideal life is becoming the next Scarface, not becoming class conscious working people.

as a class conscious working person, i would way, way rather become the next scarface than slave away at some bullshit job for the next 50 years until my will to live is completely sapped.

Raúl Duke

19th June 2010, 06:22

as a class conscious working person, i would way, way rather become the next scarface than slave away at some bullshit job for the next 50 years until my will to live is completely sapped.

In b4 someone calls bcbm a "lumpenprole" scum...

Now, on topic...

I don't exactly support the action as the best or good choice per se (in terms of political work) but I'm not particularly against this.

A large super-market chain was robbed. It may not appear large, but in many European cities, like Florence, even supermarket chains are smaller than what can be found in the U.S.

I don't really care much about the petit-bourgeoisie (as a class), but

all the (amusing, hearing this in a leftist forum) accusations that they robbed a small business and that this is "bad/illegal" is just surreal and bit shameful. When did "the left" started to give a rat's ass about property rights? What happen to "property is theft" (I think its a simplistic slogan, but hey you know what I mean; why would reds give a fuck about property rights?) and all that?

Now, if members of the working class (particularly if they're unemployed, dire straits) needed to rob things to live from stores/etc (i.e. shoplift) than yes I find this to be a bit acceptable in those terms. Although as political work, I don't see much benefit from this action. However, just the fact that it occurred and the possibility that this could be a regular occurrence should be seen more as a sign that the "legitimacy" of capitalism is seriously questioned/under-attacked in Greece and I think this is a good sign.

the last donut of the night

19th June 2010, 06:41

ah, so the secret to revolution is to make the working class as comfortable and calm as possible.

Not at all. What's not good is spreading around fear and a sense of urgency -- calm and patience is important, especially in revolutions, which are very hard things to keep successful.

Guess I shouldn't expect anything else from the people who think it worthwhile to participate in bourgeois elections.

Is this really necessary?

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 07:29

as a class conscious working person, i would way, way rather become the next scarface than slave away at some bullshit job for the next 50 years until my will to live is completely sapped.
I'd rather not. But it seems the point went way over your head, they identify more with the bourgeoisie than with the proletariat.

It starts to piss me off around here when anarchists accuse me of not being revolutionary or militant enough when it seems doing anything illegal is revolutionary, breaking shit is cool, if you're not down with any senseless act you're traitorous. WTH?

thomasludd

19th June 2010, 07:38

I'd rather not. But it seems the point went way over your head, they identify more with the bourgeoisie than with the proletariat.

It starts to piss me off around here when anarchists accuse me of not being revolutionary or militant enough when it seems doing anything illegal is revolutionary, breaking shit is cool, if you're not down with any senseless act you're traitorous. WTH?

Wow, you're the one way over your head. In this thread, it's the non-anarchists who have been judging the greek anarchists of anything but revolutionary, and the revleft anarchists are trying to defend them while at the same time being critical of particular aspects of what they have done.

bcbm

19th June 2010, 08:10

I'd rather not. But it seems the point went way over your head, they identify more with the bourgeoisie than with the proletariat.

you'd rather work for shit for the rest of your life than never have to work again and live more than comfortably? sounds like a martyr complex. the point isn't explicitly to become "scarface" but rather that we can, right now, start determining ways to escape the world of work, whether through crime and gangs or other forms of economic autonomy and i think this is a worthwhile project.

It starts to piss me off around here when anarchists accuse me of not being revolutionary or militant enough when it seems doing anything illegal is revolutionary, breaking shit is cool, if you're not down with any senseless act you're traitorous. WTH?

nobody said any of those things. i simply refuse to condemn people in the heat of struggle searching for ways out of this catastrophe.

this is an invasion

19th June 2010, 08:15

So you're saying these people didn't do it for the political symbolism like I would have believed? If someone is starving go ahead and steal, no skin off my ass. This looked like it was for political gain which is why I'm sitting here going :confused:
They were stealing food, which is a necessity. It would be something completely different if they went out and stole a bunch of 360s and tried to attach something political to it.

When I'm talking about the lumpen I'm talking about the criminal part of society. You know stuff like gangs, organized crime, etc, these people are the poorest but at the same time most often do not align themselves with the proletariat, at least not what I've seen in America. I've literally been made fun of by these people because I actually have a job, while their ideal life is becoming the next Scarface, not becoming class conscious working people. I could go on all night about how if you tell them to rob places(Even though they already do) it will not all of a sudden be good for the working class community or make us or them gain class consciousness. These kind of tactics can even hurt working class citizens if the local 7-11 goes out of business because it keeps getting robbed, at which point you'll have the workers go over to the side of the capitalists, not the people who just made them lose their jobs. Like I said, I could go on all night.
Sooo... you dislike the lumpen proletariat because you've been made fun of by some of them?

I don't really find anything wrong with gangs in a general way. There are definitely some reactionary aspects to street gangs (prostitution and pushing harder drugs like meth and heroin), but I think they also represent a very communal aspect of life you don't really find in areas that have more money. If you take away the prostitution and the hard drugs and the inter-gang warfare (most or all of which, by the way, are the result of the state), you have neighborhoods that are pretty well organized and are able to take care of each other. Where I used to live there were a LOT of extremely respectable Nortes.

I'm not blaming them for their conditions, I was in those same exact conditions myself not too long ago, these people are born into shitty conditions. They can be militant, but as far as I've seen it's just about making money. They're going to rob a liquor store instead of try to get out of their conditions, they're going to join a gang instead of trying to get a job, they're going to quit school to sell dope. They have huge revolutionary potential but now they're mostly led by bourgeoisie dreams of grandeur while they squabble in their own sorrow that it doesn't come true. If they are not headed by the working class and told to just keep going the way they are now(Robbing places, other illegal endeavors) it just hurts them and their communities. Maybe you've never lived in a neighborhood where you're scared to go to bed at night because a bullet my hit your house or you yourself don't want to go to 7-11 because people rob the place and end up getting shot or stabbed in their. That is reality and telling people to just do that more helps nobody. Where are you getting this? No one is telling anyone to go hold up corner stores at gun point (although it's fine if Stalin held up a bank... cause he's "revolutionary"). Stop being ridiculous.

All life under capitalism is about making money. Because you need it for everything. This is the primary reason why people should be stealing things. If you can get most of your night's food for free, then you have save your money for other things.

It's not about respecting the law, it's respecting the fact that I don't want my neighborhood to be even more fucked up than it is now by people constantly robbing places even more than they do now, I don't want to live in constant fear when I walk down the street because that's the reality of it. It would not help the working class. Then maybe you should move to a neighborhood that's been gentrified. I hear those are quite nice.

It's not about respecting property.

That last paragraph was a more general statement. Should have clarified.

this is an invasion

19th June 2010, 08:17

Did you seriously just ask why people have a "fetishism" with work on a board full of anarcho-syndicalists, communists, anarcho-communists, etc? You understand that labor(and nature)creates everything right? You're also aware that most people here see the working class(Those who work) as the only possible leaders to a socialist/communist/anarchist society right? Starting to see how we might be a little obsessed with work, it's a pretty important subject to say the least.

I don't know about you, but after the revolution, I don't want to be stuck doing the same shitty things as before, but for different managers.

Especially if those managers claim to be "working class."

We are forced into being working people because of capitalism. The point is to negate that so that we may develop as we see fit.

What Would Durruti Do?

19th June 2010, 08:29

This looks like a everyday robbery. I swear some people just get off by breaking the law.

Yeah guys, what have these poor capitalists done to deserve this?

C'mon lets have some more respect for the law. Our masters know what is best for us.

This is definitely going down on the top ridiculous quotes by so-called "revolutionaries". Guess you won't be stealing the means of production anytime soon. Robbery is bad!

Qayin

19th June 2010, 13:11

When people actually do something the liberals and keyboard warriors show there ugly heads fast.

nuisance

19th June 2010, 15:51

When people actually do something the liberals and keyboard warriors show there ugly heads fast.
http://anokchan.com/old/src/127167409850.jpg

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 18:41

you'd rather work for shit for the rest of your life than never have to work again and live more than comfortably? sounds like a martyr complex. the point isn't explicitly to become "scarface" but rather that we can, right now, start determining ways to escape the world of work, whether through crime and gangs or other forms of economic autonomy and i think this is a worthwhile project.Haven't you watched Scarface before? He's a gangster who gets big from killing people and pushing cocaine. Because he gets big through this type of activity he is paranoid as fuck, alienates everybody he loves, and at the end of the movie gets shot up. I'd rather not be like that(How can you ignore all that crap and just focus on the money part but not on all the stuff that comes with it? That's exactly what's wrong with people wanting to be the next Scarface, they forget about everything else it brings. So like I said before "I'd rather not".) because that life is short and does nothing except corrupt our society even more than it already is. Yes it's a product of capitalist society, basic economics will tell you a black market will appear if you ban something which there is a demand for and people without much to lose who are willing to fill in that demand. But we should support it because it's illegal and therefore constitutes struggle even though they're taking on the role of capitalists in the black market. This is exactly what I mean when I say people question how revolutionary I am because I don't support the theory that doing everything illegal is revolutionary. You sold a lot of cocaine and now you're a millionaire, you're really sticking it to capitalism now aren't you. Oh yeah I forgot that's illegal so it's revolutionary :confused:

I'd rather not have a neighborhood full of crack addicts in the name of someone struggling against the system.

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 19:12

They were stealing food, which is a necessity. It would be something completely different if they went out and stole a bunch of 360s and tried to attach something political to it.
There's a difference between stealing out of necessity and stealing necessities.

Sooo... you dislike the lumpen proletariat because you've been made fun of by some of them?
That's exactly what I said, just like I hate black people because some have made fun of me before, just like I hate Mexicans because some have made fun of me before, just like I hate girls because some have made fun of me before, etc, etc, I could do this all day. A gothic looked at me weird in the library yesterday, I must hate them to. Your logic failed.

I don't really find anything wrong with gangs in a general way. There are definitely some reactionary aspects to street gangs (prostitution and pushing harder drugs like meth and heroin), but I think they also represent a very communal aspect of life you don't really find in areas that have more money. If you take away the prostitution and the hard drugs and the inter-gang warfare (most or all of which, by the way, are the result of the state), you have neighborhoods that are pretty well organized and are able to take care of each other. Where I used to live there were a LOT of extremely respectable Nortes. Lol that's a good one. I used to be a Norteno, I think I have a little more experience in this area. The whole gang system is fucked up with hierarchies, corruption, stuff like that. We would try to represent ourselves as respectable, honorable, and loyal but once you got money involved who gave a damn about the hood, it was all about yourself. Homies would fight each other over $5 bucks, me and a homie literally jumped another homie because he owed him $5. We seriously had beef with another set from a different city because something like that happened and we'd fight each other more than we fought Surenos who were slowly creeping into our neighborhoods. This isn't just something confined to my area, Nortenos have split many times and fought each other many times. For example Fresno Bull Dogs. Corruption was just rampant, you had top guys in Nuestra Familia taking money they weren't supposed to. Once you get drugs involved it's the same thing. Please don't come to me out of all people on this board and say that, I seriously laughed really hard when I read what you typed.

Where are you getting this? No one is telling anyone to go hold up corner stores at gun point (although it's fine if Stalin held up a bank... cause he's "revolutionary"). Stop being ridiculous.That's why they said was they stopped giving out the food to people because they wanted others to start doing what they were doing right? Because they don't want anybody else to do it? That's not the message I got from the video or the communique. If Stalin held up a bank to fund the party there's a revolutionary cause behind it, if those anarchists held up a bank because they wanted to purchase weapons there would be a revolutionary cause behind it. But the act of stealing itself should not be the idea of revolutionary struggle just like the idea that breaking any law is revolutionary because you're breaking the law.

All life under capitalism is about making money. Because you need it for everything. This is the primary reason why people should be stealing things. If you can get most of your night's food for free, then you have save your money for other things.At the expense of putting workers out of jobs and putting them into the lumpen proletariat class. Thanks very much for clarifying you'd rather let society degenerate even more by raising unemployment.

Then maybe you should move to a neighborhood that's been gentrified. I hear those are quite nice.Sorry if I don't like the fact that my neighborhood is a piece of shit and that I don't see raising the crime rate as a positive way to change that.

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 19:15

I don't know about you, but after the revolution, I don't want to be stuck doing the same shitty things as before, but for different managers.

Especially if those managers claim to be "working class."

We are forced into being working people because of capitalism. The point is to negate that so that we may develop as we see fit.
Okay I don't see what you said having anything to do with what I said.

bcbm

19th June 2010, 19:34

Haven't you watched Scarface before? He's a gangster who gets big from killing people and pushing cocaine. Because he gets big through this type of activity he is paranoid as fuck, alienates everybody he loves, and at the end of the movie gets shot up. I'd rather not be like that(How can you ignore all that crap and just focus on the money part but not on all the stuff that comes with it? That's exactly what's wrong with people wanting to be the next Scarface, they forget about everything else it brings. So like I said before "I'd rather not".) because that life is short and does nothing except corrupt our society even more than it already is. Yes it's a product of capitalist society, basic economics will tell you a black market will appear if you ban something which there is a demand for and people without much to lose who are willing to fill in that demand. But we should support it because it's illegal and therefore constitutes struggle even though they're taking on the role of capitalists in the black market. This is exactly what I mean when I say people question how revolutionary I am because I don't support the theory that doing everything illegal is revolutionary. You sold a lot of cocaine and now you're a millionaire, you're really sticking it to capitalism now aren't you. Oh yeah I forgot that's illegal so it's revolutionary :confused:

I'd rather not have a neighborhood full of crack addicts in the name of someone struggling against the system.

it seems the point went way over your head

A Revolutionary Tool

19th June 2010, 19:43

it seems the point went way over your head
No I think I got your point, why wouldn't I want a life of luxury if I could instead of living the life of a working class individual. But it was you who completely missed my point, I named Scarface for a reason, if I was going to name a rich luxurious capitalist I would have said "They want to be the next Rockefeller" not that they want to be like Scarface. It is you who missed my point.

nuisance

19th June 2010, 19:48

this is an invasion

19th June 2010, 19:48

There's a difference between stealing out of necessity and stealing necessities.

Maybe there is, but I don't think it's an important one.

Seriously get off your high horse.

That's exactly what I said, just like I hate black people because some have made fun of me before, just like I hate Mexicans because some have made fun of me before, just like I hate girls because some have made fun of me before, etc, etc, I could do this all day. A gothic looked at me weird in the library yesterday, I must hate them to. Your logic failed. Then why did you say that, bro?

Lol that's a good one. I used to be a Norteno, I think I have a little more experience in this area. The whole gang system is fucked up with hierarchies, corruption, stuff like that. We would try to represent ourselves as respectable, honorable, and loyal but once you got money involved who gave a damn about the hood, it was all about yourself. Homies would fight each other over $5 bucks, me and a homie literally jumped another homie because he owed him $5. We seriously had beef with another set from a different city because something like that happened and we'd fight each other more than we fought Surenos who were slowly creeping into our neighborhoods. This isn't just something confined to my area, Nortenos have split many times and fought each other many times. For example Fresno Bull Dogs. Corruption was just rampant, you had top guys in Nuestra Familia taking money they weren't supposed to. Once you get drugs involved it's the same thing. Please don't come to me out of all people on this board and say that, I seriously laughed really hard when I read what you typed.
That's all pretty tight dude. Maybe you should tell that story at a party sometime.

I don't know why you're telling me this stuff. I'm not some naive kid that spends all of their time listening to gangsta rap and then romanticizing gang life. I used to live in Modesto. I am quite aware of the negative things that are a part of street gangs. What I'm saying is that despite these things, there are positive aspects to look at. If you take the older gangs that didn't grow out of prisons, you have organizations that were built entirely as self-defense mechanisms. When they became political, the state came in and introduced drugs or took out important figures. This is because the ruling class trembles at the thought of the poor being organized in such a way that exists completely outside of all the normal modes. Fuck, I'm sure they would rather have everyone in a Communist Party than in a political gang.

That's why they said was they stopped giving out the food to people because they wanted others to start doing what they were doing right? Because they don't want anybody else to do it? That's not the message I got from the video or the communique. If Stalin held up a bank to fund the party there's a revolutionary cause behind it, if those anarchists held up a bank because they wanted to purchase weapons there would be a revolutionary cause behind it. But the act of stealing itself should not be the idea of revolutionary struggle just like the idea that breaking any law is revolutionary because you're breaking the law.

Go back and tell me where anyone said "go hold up corner stores with guns." No for real, do it.

What is being said is here is that it's easy to steal things like food, and by stealing things like food you have less pressure to work, or you can use the money you would have spent on other things.

At the expense of putting workers out of jobs and putting them into the lumpen proletariat class. Thanks very much for clarifying you'd rather let society degenerate even more by raising unemployment.
How does stealing food put workers out of jobs?

I mean maybe you could argue that a rise in theft would put places out of business, which would lead to some potentially bad shit. Especially in America, where there is no revolutionary movement to speak of, and there is no potentially revolutionary situation.

But it's important to take the context of the action into consideration.

Sorry if I don't like the fact that my neighborhood is a piece of shit and that I don't see raising the crime rate as a positive way to change that.
No, it's cool dude. I totally get it. That's why I'm saying you should move to a gentrified neighborhood. They have way less crime.

Chambered Word

19th June 2010, 20:08

Giving shit out to people who are struggling to make ends meet would have been a better idea IMO, but what the hell they have my support. :)

bcbm

20th June 2010, 07:57

No I think I got your point, why wouldn't I want a life of luxury if I could instead of living the life of a working class individual. But it was you who completely missed my point, I named Scarface for a reason, if I was going to name a rich luxurious capitalist I would have said "They want to be the next Rockefeller" not that they want to be like Scarface. It is you who missed my point.

i think for many people the prospect of "sell some drugs, kill some fuckers, live it up" is a lot more compelling than "go to shitty job every day and barely make enough to survive." maybe it isn't the proper "class conscious" attitude to have, but i think it is a completely understandable perspective. why can't we use such a desire and start trying to figure out how to give all of ourselves more, taking even things like gangs as a consideration for expropriating resources and establishing our own productive forms?