snitching/informing

[homegrown terror]

(i didn't know where this should go, it was a toss-up between philosophy and politics)

do you feel that "alerting the authorities" is ever a sound and justifiable course of action? if so, what are the parameters under which you would inform? do you think someone who would snitch on one condition should inevitably be held suspicious of committing the act on all sensitive situations?

i myself have only ever "snitched" once. it was during the Beltway Sniper's attacks in 2002, and i had an insight that i hadn't heard anyone explore yet. when muhammad and malvo left the tarot card saying "call me god" at the scene of one of their shootings, the police considered it a religious message, and were trying to ferret out religious extremists based on the evidence. i called the tip line and told them they should be looking for ex-military types, since "god" is a very commonly used callsign by army and marine snipers. sure enough, it turned out that muhammad was indeed an "expert" level marksman with the us army.

to this day i struggle with what i did. on one hand, it helped to save the lives of who knows how many innocent people. on the other hand, i knowingly aided the police, who are as a whole the enemies of our cause. does the end justify the means? i really don't know.

[conmharáin]

I've called the police on a drunk fellow pounding on my door at three in the morning. The police didn't get to the place in time; my neighbor got fed up and physically took him out the door.

[bcbm]

if peoples lives are in immediate danger or whatever i think calling the police makes sense, unfortunately there are not a lot of other options.

anything related to politics, your friends, that sort of stuff, no matter how innocuous, keep your mouth shut, always.

[kasama-rl]

A two part series:

http://kasamaproject.org/repression/4165-97part-1-straight-talk-about-the-new-cointelpro

http://kasamaproject.org/repression/4173-5part-2-the-making-and-unmasking-of-informants

The basic theme: "Not a place of nuance: Informants are informants"

Some guidelines for discussion:
* A revolutionary movement needs to be as open as possible to the people (especially in regard to its policies and goals), and as closed as necessary to its enemies.

* A revolutionary movement needs a sober assessment of its enemies and strategic confidence in its cause.

* A revolutionary movement cannot afford the illusions or methods of social-democratic forces -- we need a much more realistic sense of the viscousness of the state, the flimsiness of legal protections and the conflict inherent to any serious liberation struggle.

* Infiltration deploys all the ugly powertrips of a sick society, and all the vices of human beings: Bribery of the financially desperate, corruption of the disaffected, ego flattery of the pathetic, exploitation of the damaged, blackmail of the legally compromised, and intimidations of the selfish -- these are some of their methods for creating informants. Informants don't appear like police types -- they are recruited from both the weak and damaged, from the grandiose and slick. Some come from without (as infiltrators), some come from within (as turn-coats). Informers offer intimacy and flattery. They exploit trust within community. They thrive on gossip and promote a culture of gossip. They often come with money, resources, creds, or useful skills ("What a god-send" becomes the reason to overlook the suspicious). Sometimes they just show up regularly, work hard, and listen without saying much at all.

* Commitment that seems to surpass understanding is a warning sign. Consciousness is often hard to fake.

* Sleazy people do sleazy things -- so often informing is not the only game they play. Sometimes ugly behavior toward women is a marker of larger corruption.

* Combat liberalism: A revolutionary movement needs to hold each other accountable for behavior. Not look the other way when suspicious things happen. Don't tolerate behaviors that endanger the whole. Deploy the wisdom and judgement of collectivity.

* Speak candidly and truthfully about problems.

* Both laxness and paranoia are corrosive to our purposes. Both are encouraged and desired by our stalkers. Combat naiveté with consciousness. Use our rich history to overcome our current inexperience.

* A movement that doesn't have secrets and can't keep secrets will never survive or flourish under repression.

* Security is not about protecting each individual, but of protecting the survival and functioning of a movement. It is about taking care of the future within the present, the whole within the part.

* Security cannot be ignored until repression starts. Security culture is about preparing to detect, deflect, avoid and survive repression well before it is actually unleashed.
Learn the laws: Know the legal limits of advocacy in the U.S. Understand how conspiracy laws, RICO, and the Patriot Act shaped government prosecutions. Study how police receive permissions to infiltrate and surveil. Be careful about money. Do not joke or talk loosely about potentially illegal things. Understand the hard legal constraints on international ties.

* The development of security extracts a cost from any network. Restricting the flow of protected information can restrict the flow of summation and accountability.
We need to do better than was done in the past -- and learn from both positive and negative features from previous experience (not just dismiss it without a thought).

Some specific needs of this moment:


* To start to develop rudimentary, effective security cultures -- without falling into paralyzing paranoia or a cultish secrecy. This is a creative process, and a political process.

* To be suspicious of ugly rumor campaigns and efforts to inflame differences into hostilities. Mutual suspicion, inter-left tensions, paranoia and the demoralization of betrayal are all goals of Counter-Intelligence Programs (Cointelpro).

* To be protective of personal information within the movement.

* To make sophisticated assessments of people and behaviors -- in a systematic, collective and non-liberal way.

* To learn the basic profiles and behaviors indicative of infiltrators, informers and agent provocateurs -- and develop careful ways of investigating any troubling whiff of bacon -- without recklessly triggering witch-hunts or destructive snitch-jacketing.

* To deploy nuanced policies of "need to know" -- where the movement and the people are able to evaluate their own progress, while some matters are kept private.

* To practice elementary and substantive solidarity for those under attack -- in a way that distinguishes contradictions among the people from contradictions between the people and the enemy.

* To work on the strategic perspective that deep roots among broad numbers of increasingly conscious people is the key basis for successful survival.

There is much to say about each point above. Much to learn from history. Much to update for our current times -- because of the reactionary legal changes after 9/11, the power of electronic surveillance and also the positive conditions following the birth of new radicalism (following the exhaustion of an older left).

[Glyde]

Sure, keep most things between you and your fellows, however as in your example case, if there is a life-threatening emergency going on and your politics aren't even in the mix, don't feel bad about getting the police involved.

[ellipsis]

To save somebodies life, yes. Under any other circumstances, no. If its my life, it rather solve the problem with my .357.

Snitches get stitches, and end up in ditches, or burned like witches.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

(i didn't know where this should go, it was a toss-up between philosophy and politics)

do you feel that "alerting the authorities" is ever a sound and justifiable course of action? if so, what are the parameters under which you would inform? do you think someone who would snitch on one condition should inevitably be held suspicious of committing the act on all sensitive situations?

i myself have only ever "snitched" once. it was during the Beltway Sniper's attacks in 2002, and i had an insight that i hadn't heard anyone explore yet. when muhammad and malvo left the tarot card saying "call me god" at the scene of one of their shootings, the police considered it a religious message, and were trying to ferret out religious extremists based on the evidence. i called the tip line and told them they should be looking for ex-military types, since "god" is a very commonly used callsign by army and marine snipers. sure enough, it turned out that muhammad was indeed an "expert" level marksman with the us army.

to this day i struggle with what i did. on one hand, it helped to save the lives of who knows how many innocent people. on the other hand, i knowingly aided the police, who are as a whole the enemies of our cause. does the end justify the means? i really don't know.

In this case, the immediate activities of the police were only tangentially related to the usual police function of suppressing the proletariat and the oppressed masses. Letting the Beltway Sniper shootings continue would have served nobody, especially not the labour movement (particularly since the police could use the shootings to institute a virtual state of emergency).

If lives are at risk, if a rape or hate crime or speech needs to be reported, and there does not exist a realistic option for dealing with these matters outside the framework of the bourgeois police and the judiciary, I think informing is "permissible".

[bcbm]

Snitches get stitches, and end up in ditches, or burned like witches.

unfortunately almost never the case with snitches in pro-rev movements

[ellipsis]

unfortunately almost never the case with snitches in pro-rev movements

Doesn't mean I can't act like a tuff guy.

[The Douche]

I was attacked in my car and then beaten in the street by an individual. When the police responded I refused to confirm the identity of my attacker, and when I was called to court to testify against him I refused to do so.

Only you can decide what is right in these situations, but my conscience is clean.

[ellipsis]

I was attacked in my car and then beaten in the street by an individual. When the police responded I refused to confirm the identity of my attacker, and when I was called to court to testify against him I refused to do so.

Only you can decide what is right in these situations, but my conscience is clean.

Some times I think that you are a hyperbole.

[MP5]

I was attacked in my car and then beaten in the street by an individual. When the police responded I refused to confirm the identity of my attacker, and when I was called to court to testify against him I refused to do so.

Only you can decide what is right in these situations, but my conscience is clean.

If i had of been you i may have settled that out of court once i got their identities either from the pigs or through other sources.

The only time i would call the cops is if i knew there was physical or sexual abuse going on in a home and i could personally not do anything about it. Granted my first reaction would be to grab the 12 guage or baseball bat depending on the circumstances and put a stop to it myself. If i for some reason could not i would not have a problem calling the police in a manner like this. For what little good they ever do mind you. The same goes for rapists. Those neanderthals should not be walking the street (though more often then not thanks to Harpers new tough on victimless crime bill they do much less time then a person caught pushing abit of coke) so having them locked up is the right thing to do in my opinion. I would teach the rapist some "manners" before handing him over to the police though.

When i was growing up here snitching was unheard of. If someone was fucking with you you fucked them back hard enough where they wouldn't bother you. If you called the cops you had better hope that your sorry ass would be gone pretty soon because not only would you be completely excluded from anything in the community and mistrusted by everyone but violent retaliation was rather likely. A baseball bat is a rather strong enforcer of the no snitching policy and it makes them see the errors of their ways very quickly ;) . The police could not get a snitch into my high school or surrounding communities because of the close nit community and the fact that you where expected to look after your own no matter what. Back then people actually seemed to have qualms about snitching on people to get ahead but now all they have to do is snatch up some crack head kid, threaten him with abunch of bullshit and say that the slate will be wiped clean if he gives up some names and atleast half the time they will cough up the name of any drug suppliers, bootleggers or whatever rackets are profitable at the time. All it takes is one opportunist or just a dumb arsehole to fuck up everyones day.

[The Douche]

My point certainly isn't that we should sit on our hands when bad things happen, but that we should always remember that no justice can be found in court rooms and jail cells.

[Quail]

I don't think that the prison system is equipped to provide "justice" at all, but I'd rather a serial sex offender was kept away from the public where they couldn't harm anyone else, so depending on the circumstances, informing the police might be the lesser of evils.

[MP5]

My point certainly isn't that we should sit on our hands when bad things happen, but that we should always remember that no justice can be found in court rooms and jail cells.

Your exactly right about that. Someone that i grew up with ended up doing a year as a result of some really dumb shit after a night of too much booze and crack. He was by no means a very tough guy or a gangster before he went in at all. When he got out though it was a entirely different story as he didn't last a week on the street because he celebrated his new found freedom by getting pissed drunk and smashing the fuck out of someone. One thing he said to me the last time we talked really stuck with me. He said "i don't give a fuck about prison now but the first week i was after doin in there i was scared to shit b'y no fuckin lie". Maybe if they had let him go right then and there he would have learned his lesson maybe? Who knows but one thing i do know is that prison does nothing but bring out the worst in people. Also you stop being scared of prison and become used to it.

You are certainly right in that justice has nothing to do with the justice system. I learned that it was all about who you knew really as opposed to any sense of justice.


I don't think that the prison system is equipped to provide "justice" at all, but I'd rather a serial sex offender was kept away from the public where they couldn't harm anyone else, so depending on the circumstances, informing the police might be the lesser of evils.

Yeah and that is the only reason i would call the cops on some sex offender. Well that and i wouldn't want to go down for murder on account of one of them :huh:

[The Douche]

No doubt, violence in our communities (and I don't mean radicals, I mean like the physical neighborhoods we live in and shit) is real, I'm sure plenty of you are much like me and live in the hood or damn close to it or whatever. I'm sitting in my bedroom right now listening to people yell at each other outside.

Maybe some dude from down the street smacks his girl while I'm out getting the mail, right. What do I do? Say something to him, put myself out there as a target? Call the police? (which makes me a target for being a snitch, and brings up ethical issues about how the police are going to treat an angry young black dude)

This shit is complicated, and there are no clear answers, but one thing, that I know, for me personally, is that talking to the pigs is not the answer. But in taking that position, I must then either take some responsibility myself (now I am obligated to say something to the guy hitting his girlfriend, and I am making myself a target), or I have to ignore shit and deal with the fact that I might be enabling some really fucked up stuff through my inaction.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Even if the police are bourgeois they can be useful in some cases. Like they saved my mother and sister countless times when they were being beaten by abusive men. Of course in Canada carrying a gun to prevent this kind of thing isn't an option either; it's essentially either call the cops or watch your family be beaten.

[homegrown terror]

Even if the police are bourgeois they can be useful in some cases. Like they saved my mother and sister countless times when they were being beaten by abusive men. Of course in Canada carrying a gun to prevent this kind of thing isn't an option either; it's essentially either call the cops or watch your family be beaten.

can't get a gun? buy a crossbow. at close range they can be just as deadly, and are a LOT quieter.

[LOLseph Stalin]

can't get a gun? buy a crossbow. at close range they can be just as deadly, and are a LOT quieter.

Those are restricted in Canada too.

[conmharáin]

Those are restricted in Canada too.
What about a katana?

[The Douche]

Crossbows and katanas? Will you nerds stop being such huge nerds?

[Ele'ill]

Even if the police are bourgeois they can be useful in some cases. Like they saved my mother and sister countless times when they were being beaten by abusive men. Of course in Canada carrying a gun to prevent this kind of thing isn't an option either; it's essentially either call the cops or watch your family be beaten.

Really? I'm glad your mother and sister got helped out. They blamed my mother for her injuries, let the dude go and kept their guns on me and told me to leave. Fuck cops, fuck courts, fuck the prisons.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Really? I'm glad your mother and sister got helped out. They blamed my mother for her injuries, let the dude go and kept their guns on me and told me to leave. Fuck cops, fuck courts, fuck the prisons.

Well I am in Canada. There's generally far less police brutality here. Plus I'm in a small town and I was then too so that possibly makes a difference. I'll be completely honest and say I'm yet to have a negative encounter with cops unless you count the TSA agents at the US border.

[The Douche]

Well I am in Canada. There's generally far less police brutality here. Plus I'm in a small town and I was then too so that possibly makes a difference. I'll be completely honest and say I'm yet to have a negative encounter with cops unless you count the TSA agents at the US border.

Lets get something straight. There is no such thing as "police brutality" thats some liberal talking point nonsense for the evening news. There is just "police" and that all on its own is violence. The mere existence of the institution is violent and brutal, not just when they smash somebody's head.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Lets get something straight. There is no such thing as "police brutality" thats some liberal talking point nonsense for the evening news. There is just "police" and that all on its own is violence. The mere existence of the institution is violent and brutal, not just when they smash somebody's head.

I'm not denying cops are bad. I'm just saying that I personally haven't had any negative experiences with them.

[l'Enfermé]

Fun fact: The philosophy forum is a serious forum(what a surprise!).

(i'm implying that chatter about katanas and crossbows doesn't belong here)

[MP5]

Even if the police are bourgeois they can be useful in some cases. Like they saved my mother and sister countless times when they were being beaten by abusive men. Of course in Canada carrying a gun to prevent this kind of thing isn't an option either; it's essentially either call the cops or watch your family be beaten.

Id be more worried about the cops showing up and beating or shooting my entire family. I really hate the fucking red coats! They busted in my friends door and there where 5 cops in tow with guns out. They even had a gun pointed at my friends 70 something year old mom who was in a wheelchair! :mad: Yes because a 70 year old woman is such a threat to them. And it was all over a few plants for christ sakes and i don't know what show they where watching too much of because my friend has absolutely no violent history so there was hardly a need for guns out.

They are scum and they fuck up every situation worse then it already is. Any lawyer will tell you that getting the police involved is the worst thing you can do in any situation. If some dumb bastard hit my mom he would be the sorriest person on earth and never mind the pigs showin up. They show up fashionably late on every occasion anyway so if it is a immediate threat they are useless. I technically live in Canada and although we don't carry around guns with us down here as a rule i can certainly go fetch one fast enough. Or just grab a bat and go to town on the bastards with that. You would be surprised at how quick people come to their senses when you break their elbow or whip them with a bike chain :grin:

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Really? I'm glad your mother and sister got helped out. They blamed my mother for her injuries, let the dude go and kept their guns on me and told me to leave. Fuck cops, fuck courts, fuck the prisons.

Quite so; one can not expect any form of protection from the bourgeois police. That said, often the threat of calling the police is enough to act as a deterrent, and in certain desperate situations a low chance of the police doing something worthwhile is better than nothing.

Also, sometimes the police protect citizens simply because it suits the bourgeois state to do so; serial killings being an obvious example.

Anyway, I do realise that in many communities the police are more of a threat than other kinds of idiots with guns. So this brings me to the next question; what is to be done? An obvious, and perhaps lazy answer, is the formation of a protective militia, but is that even practical?

[The Douche]

Quite so; one can not expect any form of protection from the bourgeois police. That said, often the threat of calling the police is enough to act as a deterrent, and in certain desperate situations a low chance of the police doing something worthwhile is better than nothing.

Also, sometimes the police protect citizens simply because it suits the bourgeois state to do so; serial killings being an obvious example.

Anyway, I do realise that in many communities the police are more of a threat than other kinds of idiots with guns. So this brings me to the next question; what is to be done? An obvious, and perhaps lazy answer, is the formation of a protective militia, but is that even practical?

You don't need to be all weird and leftist about it and call it a "militia", we can just, you know, look out for each other, as friends/neighbors/fellow human beings.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

You don't need to be all weird and leftist about it and call it a "militia", we can just, you know, look out for each other, as friends/neighbors/fellow human beings.

A militia implies more than that, I think; it implies the arming of the population, the existence of organised detachments that actively oversee the area, the existence of a central command element and so on.

[The Douche]

A militia implies more than that, I think; it implies the arming of the population, the existence of organised detachments that actively oversee the area, the existence of a central command element and so on.

Yeah, thats why its "all weird and leftist", those kind of things form organically when they are needed. (provided the groundwork of community has been laid, and you're not gonna lay that groundwork by telling people "come join my militia")

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Yeah, thats why its "all weird and leftist", those kind of things form organically when they are needed. (provided the groundwork of community has been laid, and you're not gonna lay that groundwork by telling people "come join my militia")

The thought that someone might join a militia led by me scares me to no end. No, I understand what you're saying, but I never claimed we need to draw out the statutes of the glorious Red Guards (Bolshevik-Leninist), buy 1000 matching uniforms and so on, before arming the people. Arming the people and agitating for them to take those arms up in self-defense should be primary.

But some command element should be formed concurrently, I think, if excesses and abuses are to be stopped.

[The Douche]

The thought that someone might join a militia led by me scares me to no end. No, I understand what you're saying, but I never claimed we need to draw out the statutes of the glorious Red Guards (Bolshevik-Leninist), buy 1000 matching uniforms and so on, before arming the people. Arming the people and agitating for them to take those arms up in self-defense should be primary.

But some command element should be formed concurrently, I think, if excesses and abuses are to be stopped.

You're talking about arms? Do you even know the names of everybody on your street/in your apartment building?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I don't understand what you're trying to say, to be honest.

[Yuppie Grinder]

stop snitchin

[The Douche]

I don't understand what you're trying to say, to be honest.

Just that talking about arms is sort of jumping the gun (haha). We need to form concrete links in the real world instead of getting caught up in these grand ideas of arming the class or whatever.

Like, you're thinking about step 10 and I'm saying we haven't even begun to implement step 1.

[Yuppie Grinder]

A5NMHYP9weY

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Just that talking about arms is sort of jumping the gun (haha). We need to form concrete links in the real world instead of getting caught up in these grand ideas of arming the class or whatever.

Like, you're thinking about step 10 and I'm saying we haven't even begun to implement step 1.

I wouldn't think of this as "arming the class", not for the overthrow of the bourgeois state at least. I doubt community self-defense groups could go against the police, let alone the standing army and so on. Furthermore, is it really necessary to know everyone in the neighborhood in order to form self-defense organisations. It might even be the best if everyone doesn't know everyone else.

[Ele'ill]

what purpose then would your community defense groups serve

[Quail]

I suppose the problem is, in some cases it's hard for people to just protect each other. Using the example I gave above of someone who was a serial sex offender, the response would be to ban them from safe spaces and inform people that they had committed whatever offences, and to try to work with the victim(s) to see how they could make reparations and also try to get the offender to understand what they had done wrong so that they could work on their behaviour. But getting the offender to change their behaviour and attitudes depends very much on the offender wanting to do so. So the problem is, will the rest of society be safe while there is a sex offender on the loose, whether they're trying to fix their behaviour or not? I don't see how it would be possible at present to remove that person to keep other potential victims safe. So with that in mind I wouldn't condemn someone for reporting a sex offender to the police.

However, on the other hand, reporting a sex offender to the police could also be pretty damaging to the victim. People, especially women, have their past called into question - their clothes, their drinking/drug habits, sexual history, etc. The case would be highly unlikely to actually make it to court, and it it did, and the offender was actually convicted, they would be removed from society by being in jail, but what would that do? The chances are, they probably wouldn't unlearn the behaviour patterns that made them offend in the first place so when they got out they'd be likely to do it again. Prison also does nothing to deter potential offenders.

Tl:dr: The criminal justice system is fucked up and not something I support, but I wonder if our alternatives are adequate, in which case what can we do then?

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

what purpose then would your community defense groups serve

Responding to situations like the one you described, for instance; bashing the heads of abusive husbands in, driving serious criminals out of the area and so on.

[The Douche]

I wouldn't think of this as "arming the class", not for the overthrow of the bourgeois state at least. I doubt community self-defense groups could go against the police, let alone the standing army and so on. Furthermore, is it really necessary to know everyone in the neighborhood in order to form self-defense organisations. It might even be the best if everyone doesn't know everyone else.

Nah, we definitely need to know each other. If you want to talk about guns and defending each other then you have to know each other, you have to be comfortable with each other, everybody needs to have a relationship with one another, thats how you fight and care for each other effectively.

Or y'know, we could just lock & load and roll on some fools:

http://www.picvalley.net/u/2553/8406441112815231451364678658HDAH1jkCN8jjahX6CE0j.J PG

:laugh:

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Keep in mind that I'm not talking about idiots going around with Kalashnikovs (that would shoot their own nads off if they tried to use them) and looking like guerrilla fashion victims. I'm talking about things like sturdy bars, chains, pepper spray, and so on. Small arms if people know how to use them. Civilian clothes, of course.

And why do we need to know each other? It seems to invite the possibility of people using self-defense groups to solve personal disputes, and acting on the basis of bigotry.

[Ele'ill]

maybe we should start with community medics/emotional health/support before we get too much into the community SWAT vs state SWAT gun battles

[The Douche]

Keep in mind that I'm not talking about idiots going around with Kalashnikovs (that would shoot their own nads off if they tried to use them) and looking like guerrilla fashion victims. I'm talking about things like sturdy bars, chains, pepper spray, and so on. Small arms if people know how to use them. Civilian clothes, of course.

And why do we need to know each other? It seems to invite the possibility of people using self-defense groups to solve personal disputes, and acting on the basis of bigotry.

Real talk, I am not going to get involved in a fight that I don't have a dog in, right. Like, I'm not gonna put my ass on the line "just because", but my friend, my comrade, my brother/sister needs help? I'll be there in a flash.

And then, tactically, we need to be able to operate effectively as a unit, which means we need to be familiar with each other and have some sort of common way of acting, what the military calls a "Standard Operating Procedure". We need to have the means of alerting our friends that we need them, and we need to have the means to avoid capture. You can't build those things without first building personal relationships.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

maybe we should start with community medics/emotional health/support before we get too much into the community SWAT vs state SWAT gun battles

Maybe we should; the proposal does not sound that useful to me, but given that I am notoriously asocial, I might not be the best person to ascertain its usefulness. But the question I posed is what should replace police work in proletarian and oppressed communities; support groups do not seem to be adequate for that.

Also, I do not advocate some "community SWAT" fighting with the police, though in the long run it might come to that. Realistically, such groups would not stand a chance, and so they would need to be hidden from the state to some degree. If they have the support of the community, and snitches get sent to ditches, that should not be impossible.


Real talk, I am not going to get involved in a fight that I don't have a dog in, right. Like, I'm not gonna put my ass on the line "just because", but my friend, my comrade, my brother/sister needs help? I'll be there in a flash.

Class-conscious members of the proletariat should act in their class interest even if they do not have a personal relationship with the people they are "fighting for".


And then, tactically, we need to be able to operate effectively as a unit, which means we need to be familiar with each other and have some sort of common way of acting, what the military calls a "Standard Operating Procedure". We need to have the means of alerting our friends that we need them, and we need to have the means to avoid capture. You can't build those things without first building personal relationships.

Members of military units, whether bourgeois, proletarian or peasant-guerrilla, do not usually know each other on a personal level, from what I know.

[The Douche]

maybe we should start with community medics/emotional health/support before we get too much into the community SWAT vs state SWAT gun battles

No doubt, if we can't sustain ourselves, then we are combat ineffective.

We need to be able to do more than fight. We need to be able to communicate, we need to be able to move freely, we need to be able to disseminate ideas, we need to be able to eat, we need to be able to sleep, we need to be able to heal our wounds, etc.

We must develop all of these things in a way that 1) makes sense for our conditions on the ground and 2) is an effective use of our resources (which is not just time/money but also we have to take into account the emotional stress that this shit takes on us).

[Art Vandelay]

I suppose the problem is, in some cases it's hard for people to just protect each other. Using the example I gave above of someone who was a serial sex offender, the response would be to ban them from safe spaces and inform people that they had committed whatever offences, and to try to work with the victim(s) to see how they could make reparations and also try to get the offender to understand what they had done wrong so that they could work on their behaviour. But getting the offender to change their behaviour and attitudes depends very much on the offender wanting to do so. So the problem is, will the rest of society be safe while there is a sex offender on the loose, whether they're trying to fix their behaviour or not? I don't see how it would be possible at present to remove that person to keep other potential victims safe. So with that in mind I wouldn't condemn someone for reporting a sex offender to the police.

However, on the other hand, reporting a sex offender to the police could also be pretty damaging to the victim. People, especially women, have their past called into question - their clothes, their drinking/drug habits, sexual history, etc. The case would be highly unlikely to actually make it to court, and it it did, and the offender was actually convicted, they would be removed from society by being in jail, but what would that do? The chances are, they probably wouldn't unlearn the behaviour patterns that made them offend in the first place so when they got out they'd be likely to do it again. Prison also does nothing to deter potential offenders.

Tl:dr: The criminal justice system is fucked up and not something I support, but I wonder if our alternatives are adequate, in which case what can we do then?

I think this raises an excellent point and it is also something I discussed in the past with Blake 3:17 when all this disgusting news came out about the SWP. I am thinking about sexual offences here in particular, because this is a serious issue and one which the predator needs to be stopped from re-offending. If I found out my girlfriend had been raped I guess there would be two ways of going about it, my first instinct would be to grab a baseball bat and take it to this motherfuckers knee caps (I'm not tough, nor big, this isn't posturing, but just that I'd do anything, including putting myself in a situation where I could get the shit kicked out of me, for the people I love). Now if I followed this route, it would probably end up with me behind bars on an assault charge. As someone who just today had a long conversation with a friend whose locked up for a while, I don't really want to end up sitting besides him in his cell. The other way would be to use the bourgeois justice system (with all its faults) for the closest thing to justice achievable. The bourgeois justice system has proven itself incapable of being effective at achieving its goals, but that being said if we are to rule out its use for cases of sexual assault then we better have some pretty damn effective means in place to deal with both the perpetrator and the victim in these cases. Means which I don't see existing at the present time, in which case a very serious discussion needs to take place about how we can handle these things on our own. Personally I don't have many answers.

As for other more regular crimes, I wouldn't call the police, perhaps unless someone's life was in imminent danger (someone is going to end up getting murdered, for example).

Re: Canada and the availability of guns, its really not that hard to get legal or illegal firearms in Canada. To legally purchase a gun all you need to is to take a 1 day hunting course and stop by your local gun store. I personally don't own a gun, for other reasons, but I could easily get my hands on one in a legal fashion if I wanted to. As for the question of Canadian police brutality, I'm going to assume that Lolseph Stalin is unaware due to her isolation in a small community, but you better believe it exists. Just the other day I heard on CBC while driving that a human rights organization has published a report about the scumbags who populate the RCMP.

[black magick hustla]

I was attacked in my car and then beaten in the street by an individual. When the police responded I refused to confirm the identity of my attacker, and when I was called to court to testify against him I refused to do so.


whats the point of that man. fuck that shit

[black magick hustla]

bcbm had it right, pretty much. idk whats with some leftists borrowing "no-snitching" culture from criminal groups. the whole "no-snitching" should be about your friends and comrades, not violent scum screwing with people's lives etc

[MP5]

Well we could take a page from the Provisional IRA and the INLA on community "policing". Basically the main job is to protect the community from outside threats and also to deal with people who come from our own neighborhoods who we just can't have in the community as they are a threat to the public . Sex offenders can't be left in the community as they are a threat to the safety of the people living there and rats cannot be tolerated at all as being lenient on traitors will sink your ship pretty quick. Short of killing them or beating them senseless and dropping them off in front of a hospital and letting them know that if they ever came back the next one will be a 1 way trip i don't really see a way in dealing with this kind of particular problem.

Any minor crimes could be dealt with easy enough. If you rob your fellow working class man and he has a hard time feeding his family that month i think it would only be fair to have you work off your debt by doing some work on his house or helping to replace that money you robbed from him. We need not get too heavy handed on small crimes especially. Also this way a person may learn why it is wrong to rob from people who can't afford it. I have nothing at all against anyone who robs from the rich but people who rob from their fellow working class people really have no morals at all. People like that really disgust me to be honest.

In a tight nit community where people share much of the same ideals you could arm the populace and have a well trained volunteer militia. I wouldn't go passing out the armalites and AK's to just anyone mind you. We don't need more brain dead morons running around with guns and no purpose then we already have. But fellow comrades could be taught how to use a gun easily enough as well as how to care for them and modify them. Granted not every place has the advantage of a thick forest to hide in with almost impassable trails going through it all to train in.

[black magick hustla]

lol militias and community policing. yeah right. you guys are fucking nerds.

there can't be "community policing" in capitalism, it always degenerates into gangsterism - that's how most criminal gangs start actually.

[The Douche]

whats the point of that man. fuck that shit

Well whats the point of sending him to jail? I agree, fuck beating people up for no reason, but I'm not so petty as to send somebody to jail over it.

And like I said, that position might not be possible for everybody, but I sure as fuck am glad I don't have to live with the knowledge that I put somebody in jail. I've done plenty of other fucked up things in my life, I don't need to add more to the list.

[black magick hustla]

Well whats the point of sending him to jail? I agree, fuck beating people up for no reason, but I'm not so petty as to send somebody to jail over it.

And like I said, that position might not be possible for everybody, but I sure as fuck am glad I don't have to live with the knowledge that I put somebody in jail. I've done plenty of other fucked up things in my life, I don't need to add more to the list.

i guess i rather have my revenge. idk, had some real as fuck shit movie shit happened to me last month and damn well i poured my heart out to the cops

[The Douche]

Well we could take a page from the Provisional IRA and the INLA on community "policing". Basically the main job is to protect the community from outside threats and also to deal with people who come from our own neighborhoods who we just can't have in the community as they are a threat to the public . Sex offenders can't be left in the community as they are a threat to the safety of the people living there and rats cannot be tolerated at all as being lenient on traitors will sink your ship pretty quick. Short of killing them or beating them senseless and dropping them off in front of a hospital and letting them know that if they ever came back the next one will be a 1 way trip i don't really see a way in dealing with this kind of particular problem.

Any minor crimes could be dealt with easy enough. If you rob your fellow working class man and he has a hard time feeding his family that month i think it would only be fair to have you work off your debt by doing some work on his house or helping to replace that money you robbed from him. We need not get too heavy handed on small crimes especially. Also this way a person may learn why it is wrong to rob from people who can't afford it. I have nothing at all against anyone who robs from the rich but people who rob from their fellow working class people really have no morals at all. People like that really disgust me to be honest.

In a tight nit community where people share much of the same ideals you could arm the populace and have a well trained volunteer militia. I wouldn't go passing out the armalites and AK's to just anyone mind you. We don't need more brain dead morons running around with guns and no purpose then we already have. But fellow comrades could be taught how to use a gun easily enough as well as how to care for them and modify them. Granted not every place has the advantage of a thick forest to hide in with almost impassable trails going through it all to train in.

You're off your rocker, talking about crimes and shit. If you wanna be cop, go get a badge. That's not what this is about.

[The Douche]

i guess i rather have my revenge. idk, had some real as fuck shit movie shit happened to me last month and damn well i poured my heart out to the cops

Not all of us handle our vengence or settle shit by running to the state, bro.

[MP5]

lol militias and community policing. yeah right. you guys are fucking nerds.

there can't be "community policing" in capitalism, it always degenerates into gangsterism - that's how most criminal gangs start actually.

It doesn't have to degenerate into gangsterism. Our goals would be far different from gangs. There just around to make money by any means possible. The Black Panthers also practiced a version of community policing as well i do believe. Good comrades with guns would be alot better then fucking red coats! Goddamn SS wannabes :mad: . Anyone who says different has obviously never had run ins with the bastards.

[black magick hustla]

Not all of us handle our vengence or settle shit by running to the state, bro.

nvm.

[The Douche]

yea right u go rambo on them with ur gun collection u rural white person

Actually that situation was resolved by talking it out and shaking hands. Which is how most things can be settled if you have the resources.

And furthermore, all jokes aside, fuck you for assigning an identity to me.

[MP5]

You're off your rocker, talking about crimes and shit. If you wanna be cop, go get a badge. That's not what this is about.

Umm that's not being a cop. Coppers are there to protect and serve the state while we would just be protecting ourselves from attacks. There is a difference and even in a Anarchist society people will have to be held accountable for their actions.

I certainly have no desire to be a copper. Ive really only ridden in the back of the paddy wagons anyway :grin:


yea right u go rambo on them with ur gun collection u rural white person

How is being rural and white a bad thing? Better then being some middle class yuppie from the burbs. Seriously id fucking shoot myself never mind anyone else after a week of living in those manicured houses that all look the same.

[Art Vandelay]

lol militias and community policing. yeah right. you guys are fucking nerds.

Haha you've racked up over 6,000 posts on this site buddy, here is a news flash for you, you're also a fucking nerd. Get off the high horse.

[Quail]

I posted a while ago, but it seems to have got lost in all the hard-man posturing. I'd like a response if anyone is willing to engage with me.


I suppose the problem is, in some cases it's hard for people to just protect each other. Using the example I gave above of someone who was a serial sex offender, the response would be to ban them from safe spaces and inform people that they had committed whatever offences, and to try to work with the victim(s) to see how they could make reparations and also try to get the offender to understand what they had done wrong so that they could work on their behaviour. But getting the offender to change their behaviour and attitudes depends very much on the offender wanting to do so. So the problem is, will the rest of society be safe while there is a sex offender on the loose, whether they're trying to fix their behaviour or not? I don't see how it would be possible at present to remove that person to keep other potential victims safe. So with that in mind I wouldn't condemn someone for reporting a sex offender to the police.

However, on the other hand, reporting a sex offender to the police could also be pretty damaging to the victim. People, especially women, have their past called into question - their clothes, their drinking/drug habits, sexual history, etc. The case would be highly unlikely to actually make it to court, and it it did, and the offender was actually convicted, they would be removed from society by being in jail, but what would that do? The chances are, they probably wouldn't unlearn the behaviour patterns that made them offend in the first place so when they got out they'd be likely to do it again. Prison also does nothing to deter potential offenders.

Tl:dr: The criminal justice system is fucked up and not something I support, but I wonder if our alternatives are adequate, in which case what can we do then?

[Art Vandelay]

I posted a while ago, but it seems to have got lost in all the hard-man posturing. I'd like a response if anyone is willing to engage with me.

The first paragraph on my post (#48) was addressed to you Quail, not sure if there was much of substance there, but I think you raise a good point.

[The Douche]

I posted a while ago, but it seems to have got lost in all the hard-man posturing. I'd like a response if anyone is willing to engage with me.

Are our alternatives adequate? No, I don't think they are. What can we do? I don't really have an answer for, but I feel pretty confident that the jumping off point is tying ourselves together to defend each other, what that defense looks like in the real world will probably be very dependent on each situation and the actors involved.

At the risk of returning to the hard man thing, sometimes violence is the only way to handle a situation, and I don't know how else to say that.

[Art Vandelay]

Are our alternatives adequate? No, I don't think they are. What can we do? I don't really have an answer for, but I feel pretty confident that the jumping off point is tying ourselves together to defend each other, what that defense looks like in the real world will probably be very dependent on each situation and the actors involved.

At the risk of returning to the hard man thing, sometimes violence is the only way to handle a situation, and I don't know how else to say that.

There is nothing that comes off as 'hard man' in this post. I am on board with the oppressiveness of the bourgeois legal system (I mean in reality who on here isn't?) and I think we all agree that we need to start developing alternative methods of dealing with social issues, ranging from forms of community organizing for self defense to ensuring food, housing and clothing for all. Now I'm not entirely on board with communization theory, although I was pretty into it when I was an insurrectionist and I think there is some real substance to it. But having said that, I get a little annoyed by the burn all prisons attitude of some ultra-lefts. If you really wish to have no form of prisons (radically different ones, focused on rehabilitation) at all in future society. You better have some really good alternatives. You better have concrete methods of dealing with fascists, pedophiles, sexual offenders, and just outright psychopaths, before I could consider this stance to be anything but idiotically destructive. I am fully aware that capitalist society helps foster 'criminals' but that being said I think that the idea that only people of good moral standing will exist in post capitalist society, is an idealistic fantasy. So unless the solution is simply putting a bullet between their eyes, I don't see how a form of involuntary detainment won't be necessary.

Sorry this rant was kinda all over the place, but I just wanted to get my thoughts down. Again though this was kinda showcases what you were talking about earlier with someone else (I'm on step 10 here and we need to be focusing on step 1). However like you said Chris, I really have no idea about how we go about this (defending and protecting ourselves within capitalist society without relying on the bourgeois superstructure). I was attaching the positions I was arguing against above, to you specifically, its just a sentiment I see among a certain milieu in the radical left.

[Os Cangaceiros]

If I felt the lives of my friends or family were in imminent danger, I'd probably call the police. Just because them continuing to live is worth more than me knowing that I utilized a resource that I believe has a very big negative impact on society. If someone tried breaking into my place though and I had time to weight my options, I'd probably grab my gun. But then again, if I took someone's life over their desire to steal some of my material possessions, is that really any better than having them sent to prison? Probably not, but fear and a desire for self-preservation would probably kick in pretty hard.

[The Douche]

There is nothing that comes off as 'hard man' in this post. I am on board with the oppressiveness of the bourgeois legal system (I mean in reality who on here isn't?) and I think we all agree that we need to start developing alternative methods of dealing with social issues, ranging from forms of community organizing for self defense to ensuring food, housing and clothing for all. Now I'm not entirely on board with communization theory, although I was pretty into it when I was an insurrectionist and I think there is some real substance to it. But having said that, I get a little annoyed by the burn all prisons attitude of some ultra-lefts. If you really wish to have no form of prisons (radically different ones, focused on rehabilitation) at all in future society. You better have some really good alternatives. You better have concrete methods of dealing with fascists, pedophiles, sexual offenders, and just outright psychopaths, before I could consider this stance to be anything but idiotically destructive. I am fully aware that capitalist society helps foster 'criminals' but that being said I think that the idea that only people of good moral standing will exist in post capitalist society, is an idealistic fantasy. So unless the solution is simply putting a bullet between their eyes, I don't see how a form of involuntary detainment won't be necessary.

Sorry this rant was kinda all over the place, but I just wanted to get my thoughts down. Again though this was kinda showcases what you were talking about earlier with someone else (I'm on step 10 here and we need to be focusing on step 1). However like you said Chris, I really have no idea about how we go about this (defending and protecting ourselves within capitalist society without relying on the bourgeois superstructure). I was attaching the positions I was arguing against above, to you specifically, its just a sentiment I see among a certain milieu in the radical left.

Well I have the strange "benefit" (because its really not a benefit) of being so numbed to violence that it doesn't really bother me one bit. Thats how I'm capable of refusing to testify against a guy that beat me up, and then capable of shaking his hand, accepting his apology but still saying "fuck you, I don't like you, don't come around here anymore".

Not everybody is numbed to violence like that, and thats a good thing! Because there has to be competing ideas or "play" between forms-of-life.

We do need people to say "burn all the prisons" (its kind of simplistic but I guess I might agree with it), and we need people on all points of the spectrum to be able to contribute to the conversation of "what do we do with the ex-prisoners".

[Os Cangaceiros]

Also, "community policing" is often very problematic. Usually in how harshly offenders are punished for their crimes, for example I was listening to a radio program about an area of (IIRC) Nicaragua where the police really didn't exist, and people had to take matters into their own hands, and it resulted in things like thieves being soaked in gasoline and burned alive, etc. It also happened in South Africa with PAGAD, which started out as a movement against rampant criminality but eventually degenerated into terrorism.

[Rurkel]

Soaking someone in gasoline and burning someone alive sounds like a good tactics for a proper revolutionary proletarian terror (I've just realized that I haven't mentioned the proletarian terror for a relatively long time, I fear my reflexes dying).

[Art Vandelay]

Soaking someone in gasoline and burning someone alive sounds like a good tactics for a proper revolutionary proletarian terror (I've just realized that I haven't mentioned the proletarian terror for a relatively long time, I fear my reflexes dying).

I really hope you get banned soon. If this was my forum, I'd have this trashed already. Run along troll, people are attempting to have a discussion about a serious issue here.

[The Douche]

Also, "community policing" is often very problematic. Usually in how harshly offenders are punished for their crimes, for example I was listening to a radio program about an area of (IIRC) Nicaragua where the police really didn't exist, and people had to take matters into their own hands, and it resulted in things like thieves being soaked in gasoline and burned alive, etc. It also happened in South Africa with PAGAD, which started out as a movement against rampant criminality but eventually degenerated into terrorism.

There is a very thin line between defending our communities and turning into moralist "community police". Like, referencing the PIRA as a model for how to defend our communities, helllllllllllll nah, we don't need to be out knee-capping people cause they want to hang out on the corner and sell a few bags or whatever. But at the same time, we need to keep things like heroin out of our communities, because that shit is a tool of the state, and obviously we don't want people in our neighborhoods to be victimized by muggers or whatever, but a lot of that can be dealt with through communication and projections of force, without actually hurting anybody.

[black magick hustla]

Haha you've racked up over 6,000 posts on this site buddy, here is a news flash for you, you're also a fucking nerd. Get off the high horse.

yep, im doing my phd in astrophysics 2. cry me a fucking river

[MarxArchist]

(i didn't know where this should go, it was a toss-up between philosophy and politics)

do you feel that "alerting the authorities" is ever a sound and justifiable course of action? if so, what are the parameters under which you would inform? do you think someone who would snitch on one condition should inevitably be held suspicious of committing the act on all sensitive situations?

i myself have only ever "snitched" once. it was during the Beltway Sniper's attacks in 2002, and i had an insight that i hadn't heard anyone explore yet. when muhammad and malvo left the tarot card saying "call me god" at the scene of one of their shootings, the police considered it a religious message, and were trying to ferret out religious extremists based on the evidence. i called the tip line and told them they should be looking for ex-military types, since "god" is a very commonly used callsign by army and marine snipers. sure enough, it turned out that muhammad was indeed an "expert" level marksman with the us army.

to this day i struggle with what i did. on one hand, it helped to save the lives of who knows how many innocent people. on the other hand, i knowingly aided the police, who are as a whole the enemies of our cause. does the end justify the means? i really don't know.
I'm sure they had their own profilers.

[Deity]

There is a very thin line between defending our communities and turning into moralist "community police". Like, referencing the PIRA as a model for how to defend our communities, helllllllllllll nah, we don't need to be out knee-capping people cause they want to hang out on the corner and sell a few bags or whatever. But at the same time, we need to keep things like heroin out of our communities, because that shit is a tool of the state, and obviously we don't want people in our neighborhoods to be victimized by muggers or whatever, but a lot of that can be dealt with through communication and projections of force, without actually hurting anybody.
If people want heroin why shouldn't they be able to get heroin?

[Ravachol]

If there's one fucking thing I can't stand it's a snitch, but people sometimes take a really weird view of what constitutes 'snitching'. IMO snitching involves (information-based) assistance to the state versus an individual or group within the parameters of allegiance to you, ie. friends, comrades, ppl from the same broad political milieu, etc. Calling the cops on a rapist or someone who just shoved a knife down your stomach isn't "snitching" in the same sense. If that were the case, all the tons of 'anti-hate speech legislation', leftists pressuring the state for bans of fascist groups and demos (things I do consider problematic and often downright counterproductive tbh) or the sometimes obligatory police report filing after a theft in order to be eligible for insurance money would all be 'snitching'. Snitching is a specific act committed against someone belonging to the 'friend' segment of the friend/foe distinction.

That doesn't make it a completely neutral issue though. For one, involving the police and state (even when its pretty much necessary) brings a host of problems with it, from reproducing the relationships that their constituent authority rests upon to the fact that at later points such activity often comes back to haunt you. There have been many cases over here in the Netherlands were people involved in the revolutionary or activist milieu who reported a stolen bike/car, got involved in an escalated streetfight or domestic violence, when coming over to the police station to file a report, were confronted by someone from the intelligence services seeking to leverage the situation in whatever way.

[slum]

lol militias and community policing. yeah right. you guys are fucking nerds.

there can't be "community policing" in capitalism, it always degenerates into gangsterism - that's how most criminal gangs start actually.

i'm curious- do you have an opinion on the bpp?

[l'Enfermé]

Oh come on, we go from spam about katanas and crossbows to flaming and flame-baiting and random crap about burning people alive?

[Os Cangaceiros]

Oh come on, we go from spam about katanas and crossbows to flaming and flame-baiting and random crap about burning people alive?

My mention of burning people alive wasn't really random. It was directly related to a topic being discussed in this thread (community policing). :confused:

[The Douche]

If people want heroin why shouldn't they be able to get heroin?

They should, but not when its a tool of capital, and one commonly used to destroy radical groups and working class communities.

If you wanna slam dope, go for it, but understand that your habit makes you a liability, and as such, we cannot work together as communist militants.

Its not about puritanism in this case, just about unnecessary risks, and the real harm it does to our communities.

[l'Enfermé]

My mention of burning people alive wasn't really random. It was directly related to a topic being discussed in this thread (community policing). :confused:
I meant that troll that spams every thread he finds with crap about "revolutionary proletarian terror".

[Os Cangaceiros]

They should, but not when its a tool of capital, and one commonly used to destroy radical groups and working class communities.

If you wanna slam dope, go for it, but understand that your habit makes you a liability, and as such, we cannot work together as communist militants.

Its not about puritanism in this case, just about unnecessary risks, and the real harm it does to our communities.

"Operation Backfire" is a cautionary tale in that regard...

[The Douche]

"Operation Backfire" is a cautionary tale in that regard...

This is always what I refer to when people accuse me of being a puritan or moralist for saying "no, I'm not going to work on a political project with a junkie".

[homegrown terror]

If I felt the lives of my friends or family were in imminent danger, I'd probably call the police. Just because them continuing to live is worth more than me knowing that I utilized a resource that I believe has a very big negative impact on society. If someone tried breaking into my place though and I had time to weight my options, I'd probably grab my gun. But then again, if I took someone's life over their desire to steal some of my material possessions, is that really any better than having them sent to prison? Probably not, but fear and a desire for self-preservation would probably kick in pretty hard.

here's a compassionate but firm option: someone breaks into your house, get the gun, keep it pointed on them, make them sit down on the couch and ask why they felt the need to steal from you. discuss their situation, see if you can offer them any advice (possibly try to foster a little class consciousness) once you feel comfortable, keep the gun on the guy, but go in the kitchen, cook him a little bit of a meal, eat with him, and let him leave with a $20 bill or something you feel there's no reason you can't part with (some dvd's he can sell that you no longer watch, something like that) let him know you hope his situation improves, but also let him know that if he tries burglary again he'd better not come to your place, or he won't find the same hospitality.

[The Douche]

here's a compassionate but firm option: someone breaks into your house, get the gun, keep it pointed on them, make them sit down on the couch and ask why they felt the need to steal from you. discuss their situation, see if you can offer them any advice (possibly try to foster a little class consciousness) once you feel comfortable, keep the gun on the guy, but go in the kitchen, cook him a little bit of a meal, eat with him, and let him leave with a $20 bill or something you feel there's no reason you can't part with (some dvd's he can sell that you no longer watch, something like that) let him know you hope his situation improves, but also let him know that if he tries burglary again he'd better not come to your place, or he won't find the same hospitality.

Jesus christ this is naive.

[Rurkel]

I meant that troll that spams every thread he finds with crap about "revolutionary proletarian terror".
I actually agree that this was inappropriate here and join the request to trash my post.

[Deity]

It is, but burglars are people too. I'm sure that they can be swayed, and sometimes just knowing that other people aren't all that bad can make a difference.

[Glyde]

here's a compassionate but firm option: someone breaks into your house, get the gun, keep it pointed on them, make them sit down on the couch and ask why they felt the need to steal from you. discuss their situation, see if you can offer them any advice (possibly try to foster a little class consciousness) once you feel comfortable, keep the gun on the guy, but go in the kitchen, cook him a little bit of a meal, eat with him, and let him leave with a $20 bill or something you feel there's no reason you can't part with (some dvd's he can sell that you no longer watch, something like that) let him know you hope his situation improves, but also let him know that if he tries burglary again he'd better not come to your place, or he won't find the same hospitality.

Don't mean to be a smartass but I would suggest any other option than to pretend to be in a Quentin Tarantino movie.

[The Douche]

It is, but burglars are people too. I'm sure that they can be swayed, and sometimes just knowing that other people aren't all that bad can make a difference.

Dude, if you break into my house, you better run your happy ass back outside when you see me. Zero fucks given, I don't know what you're there for, but I know it isn't good, and I'm not about to have a conversation to figure it out.

Have you ever been robbed, had somebody try to break in while you were home, been assaulted or whatever? Its not a game, mother fuckers are desperate and they will fuck you up, they don't care if you "understand their plight" or whatever the fuck.

[Rurkel]

It is, but burglars are people too. I'm sure that they can be swayed, and sometimes just knowing that other people aren't all that bad can make a difference.

I'm not sure how can you do all that while pointing a gun on the burglar. Cooking a meal would be definitely impractical. If you choose that Tolstoyan way, you'll have to lay off the gun and take the risk of failing in your endeavour. That'd be somewhat morally respectable then trying to have your cake and eat it, too. Had I been a burglar, I certainly would feel that this chap holding a gun at me while preaching unity against the oppressors is a jerk.

[slum]

last time a dude tried to break into my apt he was too fucked up to talk (not that i was in a talking mood myself... i went for the knife block before he ran off)

i think a lot of b&e is like that

[ellipsis]

X

[o well this is ok I guess]

here's a compassionate but firm option: someone breaks into your house, get the gun, keep it pointed on them, make them sit down on the couch and ask why they felt the need to steal from you. discuss their situation, see if you can offer them any advice (possibly try to foster a little class consciousness) once you feel comfortable, keep the gun on the guy, but go in the kitchen, cook him a little bit of a meal, eat with him, and let him leave with a $20 bill or something you feel there's no reason you can't part with (some dvd's he can sell that you no longer watch, something like that) let him know you hope his situation improves, but also let him know that if he tries burglary again he'd better not come to your place, or he won't find the same hospitality. what the fuck are you gonna cook him with one hand
you can't even open cans with one hand

Also the act of holding a gun at someone loses meaning when you make it painfully obvious that you have no intention of shooting

[The Douche]

what the fuck are you gonna cook him with one hand
you can't even open cans with one hand

Also the act of holding a gun at someone loses meaning when you make it painfully obvious that you have no intention of shooting

The only reason a dude breaking into your house doesn't turn and run when he sees that you're armed, is because he's armed and willing to fight. The whole scenario is laughable.

[homegrown terror]

pardon the fuck out of me for having hope for most everyone, even the ones who are trying to do wrong by me. that old al capone saying "a kind word and a gun will get you a lot further than a kind word alone"? i prefer to think also that a kind word and a gun will get you a lot further than a gun alone as well. perhaps i'm wrong, but i've been so lost lately that if i can't keep my grasp on the concept that everyone has the potential for good as well as bad, i'd slip over the edge, and i'm not sure i'd come back.

[The Douche]

pardon the fuck out of me for having hope for most everyone, even the ones who are trying to do wrong by me. that old al capone saying "a kind word and a gun will get you a lot further than a kind word alone"? i prefer to think also that a kind word and a gun will get you a lot further than a gun alone as well. perhaps i'm wrong, but i've been so lost lately that if i can't keep my grasp on the concept that everyone has the potential for good as well as bad, i'd slip over the edge, and i'm not sure i'd come back.

Once the fight is on, there is nothing you can do but fight. And yes, breaking into my house means the fight is on.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

I once thought somebody broke into my house.

I took out a baseball bat and jumped into the living room to find some family who'd let themselves in. Quite embarrassing, really.

[MP5]

I posted a while ago, but it seems to have got lost in all the hard-man posturing. I'd like a response if anyone is willing to engage with me.

Well i think the consensus in the medical community is that sex offenders by and large cannot be rehabilitated especially pedophiles. Locking them up in prison does no good for them sure but it's alot more important to protect the community rather then some sex offender. So if we where not to involve the state we would really have 1 of 2 options. 1 forced exile and threat of death upon return. 2. Just put a bullet in the bastards head and be done with it.

We are not talking about some guys selling abit of ganja or pills to get some extra cash for themselves or even someone who has killed someone. Those people are not doing what they are doing because they have a pathological disorder. Sex offenders are sick people for which there is no cure. I certainly wouldn't want them living anywhere near me because id have to give me g/f a gun every time she goes out on her own just to put my mind at ease. Sadly the Canadian "justice" system goes rather soft on pedo's and rapists so they end up back in the very same towns that they terrorized people in.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I don't consider reporting rapists, child molesters, murderers, queer bashers, etc., to be snitching. Informing on comrades or infiltrating a revolutionary group? That's a very different matter.

[ellipsis]

I once thought somebody broke into my house.

I took out a baseball bat and jumped into the living room to find some family who'd let themselves in. Quite embarrassing, really.

I had a similar experience, crept I grabbed my .357, although it probably had .38 +p loaded.

[The Douche]

I don't consider reporting rapists, child molesters, murderers, queer bashers, etc., to be snitching. Informing on comrades or infiltrating a revolutionary group? That's a very different matter.

I wouldn't call anybody a snitch for reporting somebody to the police who was attacking people. But, we have to understand that the police and the courts are never going to do the "right thing" or whatever. Until we can figure out some sort of alternative, I can understand it, even if it makes me really uncomfortable.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

But, we have to understand that the police and the courts are never going to do the "right thing" or whatever.
Agreed.

[Ravachol]

They should, but not when its a tool of capital, and one commonly used to destroy radical groups and working class communities.

If you wanna slam dope, go for it, but understand that your habit makes you a liability, and as such, we cannot work together as communist militants.

Its not about puritanism in this case, just about unnecessary risks, and the real harm it does to our communities.

In addition to what you say, it was common practice in Italy in the '70s of both the police and organized crime groups with ties to the far right (ie. the Banda della Magliana) to flood working class areas and subversive communities with heroin, whose' appeal in the face of massive repression, desperation and suicide is obvious. As such, armed retaliation against heroin dealers (as opposed to the moralist, puritanical 'no drugs lol' enforcement by many ML militants the world over) by revolutionary militants was also common practice. I've heard similar scuffles and police-sponsored pushing of heroin has happened in and around exarchia in Athens as well. From the pamphlet Armed struggle in Italy 1976-1978: (http://digitalelephant.blogspot.nl/2010/08/armed-struggle-in-italy-1976-78.html)



WE CLAIM the execution of the heroin pusher and mafioso, Grandi Giampiero, and the bombings at the Centre for Mental Hygiene in via Pancrazi, the pushers’ lair of via Degli Apuli on 1.11.78, and the bar in via Arsia, centre of the heroin traffic in the Quarto Oggiaro area, on 6.11.78.

Communists are not generally against ‘drug addicts’ like the bourgeoisie and the forces of repression: they are against those who speculate on their skins. We know that heroin is an answer, although illusory and disgusting, to a real need for change in the quality of life. Heroin is the most beautiful of the false consumer products that capital has invented to mystify the reality of proletarian needs. To struggle against heroin pushers is for every heroin addict to struggle against those who seem to be giving him the only possibility of life and survival.

It wouldn’t be habit-forming if daily life weren’t shit. State and God, Work and Family, are deviating ideologies that serve to uphold and hide an unnatur*al, lousy, criminal social order which denies in all its relationships the legitimacy of the natural needs of man, and upsets his relationship with reality. Destruction of nature (Seveso is only a tiny example of capitalist criminality), destruction of man as a natural being.

What capital cannot exploit it destroys.
With the circulation of heroin and psychotropic drugs they are planning the destruction of entire generations. They destroy as the only way to evaluate the desire to live, to be well, to express the creativity which the young proletarians are the carriers of, in terms of profit.

Instead of the forced suicides of the Chilean type, capital is launching volun*tary suicide on the market for common use.

Heroin in itself is a false problem: it is a consumer product invented to suffo*cate the real need to change the quality of life, the real problem is the existence of the capitalist social organisation, because it bends towards death and the destruction of all that is human. The drug addict becomes known and measured for the quantity of heroin he consumes, for the average number of thefts he commits, and not for being a human being who, like others, is trying to affirm his own right to existence. To speak of heroin gratuitously is useless if one doesn’t begin to organise the proletarian strength to destroy the present state of affairs at the same time. The proletarian revolution, the surpassing of the existing social order, is not a project to be defined in abstract, but begins in practice with the destruction of capitalist society.

All those who support the liberalisation of the heroin market without posing the problem of how to change the reality of proletarian life in the capitalist metropoli, are stupid opportunists.

The armed strength of the proletariat must aim to impose itself as a concrete element capable of self-determining social reality in its complexity.
Build proletarian unity in the struggle, establish and develop the political le*gitimacy of the revolutionaries among the proletariat, extend the space for build*ing the real power of the proletariat armed.

The armed strength of the proletariat in struggle is the only practical instru*ment of liberation from capitalist dominion.

Heroin pushing, the exploitation of prostitution, the fencing of small thefts, are activities which correspond only to the law of capitalist accumulation. Com*munists are not against illegal activity that damages the bourgeois strata: they are against all those vile activities of proletarian exploitation. It is right to rob banks, to ransom the bourgeois strata, but enough opportunism! Whoever gets rich through the injury of other proletarians will be considered a vile traitor!

Vile is the pusher who earns his living through the deaths of others. Vile is the pimp who uses womens’ bodies as an instrument for his own profit. Vile is the fence who exploits the sweat labour of young proletarians when they are constrained to steal a stereo or spare tyres. All those, especially at a big level, are friends of the police and the carabinieri and enemies of the proletariat. They buy the freedom to continue their vile activities in exchange for tip-offs and prison for other proletarians. The carabinieri use them as informers and they use the carabinieri to get rid of those who are in their way. So the operations of the drug squad against the pushers are in the end nothing other than operations control*ling the market to the benefit of those who really centralise the heroin commerce.

Whoever breaks proletarian unity, exploits and robs from the proletariat them*selves, must the considered vile enemy and traitor: no solidarity in their divi*sions for subversive work among all the proletarians, for the destruction of capi*talist society.

Expel the enemies of the proletariat, the spies and traitors, whether they be heroin pushers or trade union bosses, to build the unity of the proletariat in strug*gle.

Heroin is an instrument of social control that suits power. Alongside the pushers, and the forces of repression there exists another hierarchy of control over the proletariat: the medico-psychiatric one. The sanitary decentralisation, the opening of centres for hygiene and mental health in every area, are the new instruments which capital is using to keep the contradictions of the capitalist metropolis under control, to render stupid and to drug the forces of the proletari*an revolution. Whoever goes beyond the rule of State, of Work, of Family, is ‘mad’, can be labelled as deviant from childhood. As such, capital assigns his ghetto; will give him more heroin free, will stuff him with psychotropic drugs from the beginning, so that he doesn’t disturb the regular functioning of the social order.

Doctors and psychiatrists who administer such rubbish, especially to young people and women, are mad criminals, labelling antagonism and proletarian re*bellion as ‘social deviance’. Neurotic and psychopathic subjects only because they cannot support the disgust of capitalist society. What does a psychiatrist who has been able to study without lifting a finger until he gets his degree know of proletarian life in the ghettos?

What we are fighting for is the fundamental right to self-determination of the proletariat. It must be the proletariat themselves to decide how, where and why they want to live. The psychiatrists, the criminologists, the priests, the trade union bosses, in their positions as social controllers of the proletariat are ene*mies, and as such should be struck down.

Attack the forces of repression, carabinieri and police. Expel and strike their friends, the traitors, the informers, the spies, from the factories, from the proletari*an areas.

Attack the hierarchy of medico-psychiatric control.

Break up the internal hierarchy of control within the proletariat, the pushers and the shit fences.

Build the power of the armed proletariat.
(Nov. ’78)

[The Douche]

Yeah, it was also common here in the 60s, and then replaced by crack, obviously.

And as Os Cangaceiros there was this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Backfire_(FBI)

And while the wiki makes no mention of it (which I find dubious), the case was built through the assistance of the snitch piece of shit named Jake Ferguson, a junkie.

[Ele'ill]

I don't like the idea of community policing as described in this thread because there are folks who, regardless of their class position, would run me through with a bayonet for social contention before even sitting down at the same bar as me.

I have had to call the cops for friends before because it involved them and they wanted it, usually involving robbery related recovery of cars or getting insurance info after severe hit and runs of cars although all of my friends that did this refused to push for follow up of the people who did the hit and runs, even one time without insurance info obviously to not send people to jail. I don't understand how some people can feel comfortable relying on the police to bail them out of bad situations or to use them as sellswords and using prison as revenge is not cool both are a big part of snitch culture. I was at the receiving end of a robbery/jumping/killing attempt recently and the thought of calling the cops never went through my mind because statistically and from personal experience they don't represent safety.

[The Douche]

I don't like the idea of community policing as described in this thread because there are folks who, regardless of their class position, would run me through with a bayonet for social contention before even sitting down at the same bar as me.


I think community policing is a different thing from autonomous defense of our communities.

Defending our community from those who would do us harm is not "policing", policing is containing/controlling the autonomy of others, meeting a heroin dealer on the corner with pistols and pipes is defense, not policing.

Community policing is compatible with and essential to empire. George Zimmerman is the poster boy for "community policing".

[Ele'ill]

I think community policing is a different thing from autonomous defense of our communities.

Defending our community from those who would do us harm is not "policing", policing is containing/controlling the autonomy of others, meeting a heroin dealer on the corner with pistols and pipes is defense, not policing.

Community policing is compatible with and essential to empire. George Zimmerman is the poster boy for "community policing".

that's intentional usage of policing because the idea of arming people right now would lead to just that

[ChiefTiburon]

To the proletariat, a crime is an issue that must be solved. To the police, its a statistic.

[blake 3:17]

that's intentional usage of policing because the idea of arming people right now would lead to just that

Yep.

[V.Vendetta]

Revolutionaries should hold firmly to a policy of absolute non-cooperation with all state authorities. Snitching is never justified, I don't care if you are facing life in prison or even death. We must never aid and abed the enemy.

I would actually go further and argue that we should absolutely avoid ever calling, or relying upon, the police. I can defend myself just fine, and I would have the backs of my friends and neighbors in a heart beat. If we would all look out for each other, rather than calling the pigs, we could render the police obsolete and show them up for what they really are; the guard dogs of the ruling class.

Fuck the police, never cooperate.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

Sure, keep most things between you and your fellows, however as in your example case, if there is a life-threatening emergency going on and your politics aren't even in the mix, don't feel bad about getting the police involved.

This.