On the Role of Black Bloc: A Critical Look

[Jimmie Higgins]

Just leaving this here. This topic has been a big Facebook subject for Cali radicals so I'm surprised it's not being discussed here (or maybe has been and I just missed it)

http://m1aa.org/?p=1429


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ckaihatsu]

We should not assume or expect that people will have context for black bloc. The actions around the 4th precinct in Minneapolis in 2015 illustrated this point — as soon after a masked white supremacist shot at Black Lives Matters protesters, well-intentioned anarchists had arrived masked up. This caused confusion among the community and thus required unnecessary intervention. The problem is that the whole thing is either alien to a lot of people or brings up negative connotations. These problems can be addressed by cultivating relationships, having community ties, and having people see the use of black bloc when it makes sense over time. That means engagement — and engagement requires some degree of approachability from the start.




An important point to make, I think, is that understanding the setting and context you are engaged in and recognizing all the language-games and particulars that go into that is what should determine the shape of your presence, and that there should be no adherence to general tactical rules in this regard. Feel the situation out, and focus on what one needs to do to achieve the goal of a united working class movement. If black bloc is alienating the Muslim community, then it is exactly the wrong tactic for that setting.


I found these to be valuable points. The tactic is actually a kind of populist local outreach -- either explicitly or implicitly -- so it seems fair that people should know in-advance what's going on, at a minimum, and hopefully be on-board as well, otherwise the action is too 'specialist' and politically substitutionist for the community's own potential actions on a more-level mass-scale.

I was immediately reminded of the FSA debacle that happened in Syria on the tail-end of 2011's Arab Spring:





Someone like Assad can legitimately argue for nation-state sovereignty, to say that the West / U.S. / NATO should never have invaded Syria, and on such a flimsy pretext as foreign Western backing of internal militaristic opposition to his democratically elected rule -- producing the international proxy war / Cold War II that exists today.




Bashar Al Assad

http://www.revleft.com/vb/threads/196517-Bashar-Al-Assad?p=2882189#post2882189




International support for Free Syrian Army labeled groups[edit]

The US-led coalition admits militarily supporting some, so-called "moderate", groups fighting under the banner of the FSA. FSA is said to have received substantial weapons, financing and other support from the United States, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states.

Arms deliveries from U.S., Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, others[edit]

Further information: Syrian Train and Equip Program and Timber Sycamore

In December 2012, security officials from the United States, United Kingdom, France, the Gulf Cooperation Council and Jordan were present at an FSA meeting that elected a new leadership council.[103][104][105] By December 2012 the international diplomatic collective ‘Friends of Syria Group’ had pledged non-military aid to unspecified militant rebels.[104]

Since December 2012, Saudi Arabia has supplied FSA labeled groups with weapons from Croatia.[208]

In April 2013, the US promised to funnel $123 million nonlethal aid to Syrian rebels through the Supreme Military Council, a then coordination body of FSA labeled groups.[134]

In June 2013, rebels reported to have received 250 9M113 Konkurs anti-tank missiles with a range of 4 kilometers and accuracy of 90%.[209]

In April 2014, according to Charles Lister at the U.S. Brookings Institution, 40 different rebel groups first began receiving U.S.-made BGM-71 TOW missiles costing $50,000 each, through the CIA.[210] FSA labeled and other rebel groups posted videos of TOW missile launches online.[210] In December 2014, the Institute for the Study of War reported that the U.S.-led Military Operations Command was leading training and assist missions for FSA labeled groups in Dera'a, at the Jordanian border.[138]

The Washington Post stated in late 2014 that the US and European friends had "in recent years" given training, financial and military support to Syrian "rebel groups", more or less suggesting that FSA was among them.[145] Also an ISIL commander then stated that FSA rebels who in 2014 ran over to ISIL had received training from United States’, Turkish and Arab military officers at an NATO base in southern Turkey.[145]

The Dutch government stated in December 2014 that the 59 countries strong US-led coalition that had convened in Brussels that month was militarily supporting “the moderate Syrian opposition”.[211] After being pressed by their Parliament to be more precise, they admitted that ‘moderate Syrian opposition’ meant: some, but not all, groups that are part of the Free Syrian Army – but squarely refused to name the FSA groups that were being supported.[212]

Since 2014, tens of FSA labeled groups in southern, central, and northern Syria have been provided with BGM-71 TOW missiles. In February 2015, The Carter Center listed 23 groups within the Southern Front of the Free Syrian Army that have been documented using US-supplied TOWs.[213] Groups provided with TOWs in northern and central Syria include the Hazzm Movement, the 13th Division, Syria Revolutionaries Front, Yarmouk Army, Knights of Justice Brigade, and the 101st Division.[214]

In 2015 the International Business Times wrote the U.S. has sent weapons shipments to FSA labeled groups through a U.S. CIA program for years.[157] In October 2015 Reuters reported that the U.S. (CIA) and allied countries had broadened the number of rebel groups clandestinely receiving TOW missiles.[215] The International Business Times reported that TOW missile attacks against Syrian government tanks increased by 850% between September and October 2015.[210] Rebel groups associated with the FSA in November 2015 released numerous videos showing them launching TOW missiles against Syrian government forces.[215] According to Russian and Syrian sources, the missiles were delivered through Turkish territory.[215]

In October 2015 Reuters reported that the U.S., Saudi Arabia and Qatar had broadened the number of rebel groups clandestinely receiving TOW missiles.[215] Also the BBC reported in October 2015 that a Saudi official confirmed the delivery of 500 TOW missiles to FSA fighters.[216]

The U.S. supplied a considerable amount of weapons and ammunition, generally of Soviet-type from Easter Europe, to Syrian rebel groups under operation Timber Sycamore. For example Jane's Defence Weekly reported a December 2015 shipment of 994 tonnes of weapons and ammunition (including packaging and container weight) to Syrian rebel groups. A detailed list of weapon types and shipment weights had been obtained from the U.S. government's Federal Business Opportunities website.[217][218]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Syrian_Army#International_support_for_Free_Sy rian_Army_labeled_groups


Bashar Al Assad

http://www.revleft.com/vb/threads/196517-Bashar-Al-Assad?p=2882169#post2882169


(The overall idea here is that a political initiative from without needs to have local popular support or else it risks being seen as 'foreign' by the local populace, no matter how well-intentioned it may be.)

[willowtooth]

I havent heard of it heres a link with a video explaining what happened

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Armed-Protestors--Members-of-Mosque-Unite-and-Have-Lunch-416530913.html

apparently BAIR an Islamophobic hate group in Texas did another protest against a mosque they claimed was funding ISIS probably something they made up (or read on breibart or infowars) Then the Dallas workers front showed up and started screaming "racist" "KKK" stuff and then some of the muslims and the hillbillies went and had schwarma for lunch together.

I'm not surprised at the muslims reaction they look at everybody as a potential convert. Im sure as texan muslims theyre more than accustomed to the "were not terrorists we swear" arguments. but I am surprised at the hillbillies reaction I dont think they wouldve gone to eat with muslims if they didn't get screamed at by bunch of white people. White supremacists think like that. If a white person is doing it than it has to be atleast partially right. I doubt if the black panthers had done the same thing the "dallas workers front" did, that it wouldve provoked the same reaction

As far as the rest of the article I think its pretty stupid to claim "Black Bloc" needs to be more approachable. Other than wearing black clothes and masks theyre not really black bloc. Is black bloccing a word? if theyre not burning something down or breaking stuff whats the point of dressing like that or calling yourself that? I'm not even sure if they did call themselves Black bloc? None of the right wing blogs that covered this mention black bloc they call them a lot of stuff like ISIS alqueda marxists socialist black panthers bloods and crips. I can't find anyone calling these guys black bloc?

[Jimmie Higgins]

I posted this because of the question of tactical vs strategic goals.

There was a "patriot day" march in Berkeley Ca and the alt right and organized fascists were able to neutralize the Antifa counter protesters.

The far right gained from this and there has been a visible fascist presence at UC Berkeley since (mostly graffiti and propaganda posters and tearing down left wing posters and propaganda). They gained and are organizing fascist street-fighting groups: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/04/25/new-alt-right-“fight-club”-ready-street-violence

One-on-one fighting could work previously (even if it lacked strategy) because fash did not feel as confident and mainstream. But now they have momentum and physical defeats only seem to embolden them.

We probably will need to continue to physically confront them, but I think as the left we need more discussion of strategy to defeat the right, but also grow class solidarity and consciousness in that process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willowtooth]

I posted this because of the question of tactical vs strategic goals.

There was a "patriot day" march in Berkeley Ca and the alt right and organized fascists were able to neutralize the Antifa counter protesters.

The far right gained from this and there has been a visible fascist presence at UC Berkeley since (mostly graffiti and propaganda posters and tearing down left wing posters and propaganda). They gained and are organizing fascist street-fighting groups: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2017/04/25/new-alt-right-“fight-club”-ready-street-violence

One-on-one fighting could work previously (even if it lacked strategy) because fash did not feel as confident and mainstream. But now they have momentum and physical defeats only seem to embolden them.

We probably will need to continue to physically confront them, but I think as the left we need more discussion of strategy to defeat the right, but also grow class solidarity and consciousness in that process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

there's already nazi gangs all over the USA? there still responsible for about 1/3rd of the prison murders every year, I dont know what the fuck the proud boys is, but it sounds more like rich white right wing dweebs cosplaying. I'm sorry but the "cereal beat in" where you list 5 cereals as fast you can is the funniest thing ive ever heard.

[Jimmie Higgins]

there's already nazi gangs all over the USA? yup, there are... that's why there's an anti-fascist forum here and groups like SPLC who track hate groups and fascist groups.

Although prison white power gangs have become more ideological in the last decade or so, the thing I think is troubling is that middle class trump supporters and MRA types (not sure why you dismiss them for being college students when middle class students have been a part of the base of fascism when it goes "mainstream") are organizing and redoubling their efforts when confronted with protests or physical confrontation.

So you don't think there is more of a threat from the far-right (either directly or generally in terms of growth) right now? Do you think the danger or worry is overplayed right now?

To a certain degree I can see that. Liberals often talk about the right fatalistically... like they always win or inevitably have legitimacy and so any right wing elected official or policy mean "we're doomed... the electoral option failed so we have to roll over until the next election."

But in the context of a far right that has only felt "safe" trolling on line... but now feel vindicated by Trump, I think the far-right are testing the waters. They are seeing that they can go to trump rallies and recruit people openly. They are holding public rallies in Berkeley as a symbolic test against the left.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willowtooth]

yup, there are... that's why there's an anti-fascist forum here and groups like SPLC who track hate groups and fascist groups.

Although prison white power gangs have become more ideological in the last decade or so, the thing I think is troubling is that middle class trump supporters and MRA types (not sure why you dismiss them for being college students when middle class students have been a part of the base of fascism when it goes "mainstream") are organizing and redoubling their efforts when confronted with protests or physical confrontation.

So you don't think there is more of a threat from the far-right (either directly or generally in terms of growth) right now? Do you think the danger or worry is overplayed right now?

To a certain degree I can see that. Liberals often talk about the right fatalistically... like they always win or inevitably have legitimacy and so any right wing elected official or policy mean "we're doomed... the electoral option failed so we have to roll over until the next election."

But in the context of a far right that has only felt "safe" trolling on line... but now feel vindicated by Trump, I think the far-right are testing the waters. They are seeing that they can go to trump rallies and recruit people openly. They are holding public rallies in Berkeley as a symbolic test against the left.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I dont think there has been a less of a threatening right wing political movement in America than right now. While it's true, white supremacist groups saw a surge in membership when obama became president, that doesn't mean they were all of a sudden turned into racists, it means that average americans were just as racist as the average klansmen or neo nazi they just didn't feel the need to join a club

If this guy starts a fight club in your local area then maybe you should be worried

http://www.mercurynews.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/20150414__stancil1-1.jpg?w=362


however if this guy is the one starting it there's nothing to worry about

http://www.interviewmagazine.com/files/2010/04/29/img-gavin-mcinnes-_121349589414.jpg

Honestly getting the crap beat out of them is probably the best thing for these guys. I seriously doubt most of them have ever even been in a fight. Honestly,who cares if there's bunch of self promoting dweebs in bowties and yacht sandals slapping eachother around in a basement somewhere while screaming about Trix cereal and preaching that masturbation is wrong? I feel silly just talking about it

my biggest problem is this re-labeling of republicans and conservatives as the alt-right. There not doing anything different, it sort of venerates the conservatives, in that we aren't talking about the republican party now, we are talking about this tiny little group of internet dorks like theyre the entire problem. Which is the main reason why the Republicans let Trump run in the first place, so that from now on whatever generic fresh out of the box Ken doll they run next will always be "better than Trump", just watch in 8 years when the next republican nominee runs everyone and their dog will be chanting "Atleast he's not Trump" in masse and in unison

your'e unintentionally legitimizing the republicans, by claiming these dweebs aren't them.

[Jimmie Higgins]

your'e unintentionally legitimizing the republicans, by claiming these dweebs aren't them.

Is your point that racism is widespread in the us and Republican Party voters; that republican politicians have nurtured racism? Well no shit, you don't say. You're really throwing a mind-blowing bucket of hard truth onto this conversation, lol.

But if Republicans are more or less the same as fascists do you think we should support Democrats to stop the "fascist republicans"? If Republican voters are the same as nazis or the KKK, we shouldn't waste time with the kkk? But then, the Democrats have also built up racist arguments, policies and structures. So they must also fascists... maybe social fascists?

Look, you seem to be arguing some kind of phantom argument that hasn't been expressed. I am not saying that nazi groups didn't exist or that Trump is a fascist or there is some direct connection between these little groupings and Trump. The only link imo is that the far-right feel that the election has given them a popular mandate.

But previously, for the most part, a large crowd or some limited physical confrontation could scatter and shut down fascist rallies or white power concerts. They had to flyer anonymously, could only be really act anonymously in secret or online.

If previous methods of discouraging them are not working and the far right is trying to make a symbolic stand on supposedly the most left-wing place in the US (this is not true but the right and most liberals believe it to be the case) then the far-right will feel confident anywhere.


it means that average americans were just as racist as the average klansmen or neo nazi they just didn't feel the need to join a club well, yeah this would be part of my reason for posting this... organizing clubs imo would be what separates a racist neighbor or coworker from something more threatening like a kkk or other fascist group.

If former college libertarians (like most of the alt-right stars) are, in the face of capitalist crisis, organizing clubs to take extra-legal action against immigrants, trans-folks, and explicitly leftist protesters... then that might indicate a broader radicalization of the right.

So my question in posting this thread is: are existing methods of opposing fascist groups or far-right mobilization effective, are they enough?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willowtooth]

Is your point that racism is widespread in the us and Republican Party voters; that republican politicians have nurtured racism? Well no shit, you don't say. You're really throwing a mind-blowing bucket of hard truth onto this conversation, lol.
lol :laugh:

But if Republicans are more or less the same as fascists do you think we should support Democrats to stop the "fascist republicans"? If Republican voters are the same as nazis or the KKK, we shouldn't waste time with the kkk? But then, the Democrats have also built up racist arguments, policies and structures. So they must also fascists... maybe social fascists?i dont think there the same as fascists that would make 50 million+ fascists in america alone. its no more a fascist party than the democrats are a communist party. Neither party has set of defined values or ideologies, in fact they have switched sides atleast once


Look, you seem to be arguing some kind of phantom argument that hasn't been expressed. I am not saying that nazi groups didn't exist or that Trump is a fascist or there is some direct connection between these little groupings and Trump. The only link imo is that the far-right feel that the election has given them a popular mandate. fair enough


But previously, for the most part, a large crowd or some limited physical confrontation could scatter and shut down fascist rallies or white power concerts. They had to flyer anonymously, could only be really act anonymously in secret or online. has it really changed that much over the past 4 months? I haven't a noticed a difference, if anything I feel like they've become more passive


If previous methods of discouraging them are not working and the far right is trying to make a symbolic stand on supposedly the most left-wing place in the US (this is not true but the right and most liberals believe it to be the case) then the far-right will feel confident anywhere.exactly look at what your saying, Berkeley is barely a left wing institution, its not even the most left wing university in the University of California system. The protests back in 69' were a result of protesting the actual school. Ronald Reagan sending troops to shoot the kids one time doesn't make them all of a sudden left wing. The town of san francisco is certainly more left wing than a city in Alabama but the same could be said for New york or chicago or even austin. The young republicans, the people inviting these controversial speakers is the largest political group on campus. while surveys show liberals outnumber conservatives 3 to 1, the majority of students label themselves as moderate. The school itself could simply disinivite these speakers its pretty obvious a member of al queda would not be allowed to speak on campus and if they were these right wingers would probably be the ones protesting. Muslims, atheists, communists, even just democrats have been denied entry onto right wing campuses like liberty university. If the school was so super left wing they would deny them entry, so therefore logically its not that left wing of a university to begin with, even though it may market itself that way. In addition to receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from corporations like BP and dupont to perform things like live animal experiments.

Not only has Berkeley never done this before they've only ever protested two people in the past few years Bill Maher and Louis farrakhan. In addition to having a serious problem with swastika graffiti and people hanging nooses on campus, the majority of minority students have experienced discrimination.


well, yeah this would be part of my reason for posting this... organizing clubs imo would be what separates a racist neighbor or coworker from something more threatening like a kkk or other fascist group. its okay to be racist just dont start going to meetings lol


If former college libertarians (like most of the alt-right stars) are, in the face of capitalist crisis, organizing clubs to take extra-legal action against immigrants, trans-folks, and explicitly leftist protesters... then that might indicate a broader radicalization of the right.

libertarians are pretty much all conspiracy theorists. theyre just trying to find the martians at area 51, why wont you let them? lol not only has rand paul spoke at Berkeley before without protest, but he received a standing ovation


So my question in posting this thread is: are existing methods of opposing fascist groups or far-right mobilization effective, are they enough?

could you clarify what you mean, are you talking about just in america, just in college campuses, just in Berkeley?

[Jimmie Higgins]

I brought this up partially as a microcosm; it's local discussion here because I live in east Oakland which is southeast of Berkeley city. I don't think it's significant by itself, but it's symbolically significant to the far right who seem to have made it their celebrated cause of the moment and a kind of testing ground imo. As far as unorganized racists or electoral right-wingers shifting to an organized or street-battle mode, this may be a microcosm of a more generalized trend among the right. If you believed that the market is infallible and it's just leftists and "undesirables" that are fucking it up... then a capitalist crisis happens and you double down and think you need to go out and put these elements in their place, that would be a significant threat and radicalization of the right that people should probably figure out ways to combat.

So I'm less concerned about this specific series of events or this one group than I am concerned about what it means in a broader sense. I think this trend is more to do with the recession than Trump, who is just a different symptom of the crisis. But If the far right physically and politically outmaneuvers left or teams or migrants in higher profile cases like this, what happens when they start to counter-picket BLM protests or break up fight for fifteen protests elsewhere?

How the left and right play out there and in similar small examples elsewhere will impact how this dynamic continues to play out.

In therms of the scope of this, I'm more generally talking about this dynamic in the us where the left is generally weak. But I think Berkeley is a good microcosm because the right is focused on it and the left has been able to actually try and counter it, just not in a way that has won tactically each time and has not been able to rally more people for a stronger opposition that might help build confidence to win anything let alone reliably stop the specific efforts of the far right.

I posted this article because I agree that there is a gap between tactics and strategy. Tactics are fetishized (like when the cops destroyed occupy Oakland, the "leaders" argued that we just didn't make good enough shields or didn't have the right protest tactics when really the support was dwindling and the city basically could win a propaganda campaign while activists became increasingly isolated). To me, defeating the right means not just a tactical advantage or a large protest one night, but building up networks and the strength of workers to make more than defensive demands etc. to defeat the racists in the street, but in ways that will help us defeat fast-food chains, oil refineries (north of berkeley is the oil town of Richmond), and campus officials who are helping restrict access to public colleges etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willowtooth]

break something new out on them? something they never ever never heard of before, dont chase the middle pull them to the far left either that or buy tank and raid their headquarters:laugh:

[Jimmie Higgins]

I'm curious if anyone else has opinions on what we might call middle-class far-right organizing vs more street-gang far right groups.

It's an interesting side-question I didn't anticipate when I posted this.

Maybe I'm just more familiar with this from growing up in an area where there were white power gangs organized as gangs rather than trying to organize a movement so I'm overlooking this. But frankly I wouldn't be surprised that if a strong fascist movement established itself in the US, it's home base would be young middle-class bros in the San Francisco Bay Area.

There is kind of a tech-fascism ideology in San Francisco that has made inroads. The founder of the far-right "fight club" in the above story is the founder of Vice magazine or something. An MRA-dude went on a shooting spree at a college in California recently. When I've read about Richard Spencer and similar "stars" of troll-fascism they were all middle class college libertarians before the recession. A nazi who stabbed someone at a rally in Los Angeles last year turned out to be a millionaire in San Francisco.

I think the recession revealed more opportunities for working class radicalization (more low-wage organizing, rebellions in ferguson etc) but it also opened space for middle class radicalization.

San Francisco is unaffordable for most people and the tech-boom has brought a whole flood of young middle-class men into the city. The local government is Liberal in the worst neighborhoods-liberal technocratic way but the popular perception is that it's a hot-bed of leftism.., or at least progressive politics. On the contrary, the Liberals have waged war on homelessness while handing funds over to google or uber or whatnot. But to preserve any liberal image, the politicians claim "we have done all we can for public housing or the homeless". Before the recession this led to common arguments that: social welfare doesn't work "innovators" (venture capitalists) will come up with technological solutions to social problems. But since then it's more common to overhear white middle class people say that homeless should be forcibly removed from the city limits.

This is excessively local since I live across the bay from yuppie-city west, but I think there are broader implications. If the bankruptcy of Liberalism is exposed in the "wacky most liberalist city in the US"tm and there is no viable left or class resistance... is the door to a fascist movement left wide open?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[willowtooth]

there was something the other day from Louisiana where they were tearing down one of the old Confederate statues, (which is happening all over the south) while there were protests both for against, and a large police presence, there even swat snipers on the roofs due to bomb threats. The only violence was from one of these alt-right libertarians. Who was actually protesting against the confederate statue. While the group protesting the removal was an openly white supremacist group. This one guy who showed up in his make america great again apparel and his cosplay roman warrior armor. screaming about how the white nationalist confederates where "hurting their cause". He simultaneously claims to have traveled from Berkeley where he was "victorious".

The libertarians are a conspiracy movement, they are 9/11 truthers, anti-vaxxers, and martian hunters. They believe in conspiracies like that the confederacy and the KKK were collectivist socialist movements led by the left wing democrats. I shit you not. This is an important distinction because anyone can be a conspiracy theorist or believe in aliens, Thats why people joined the group, you will find members of all races and religions calling themselves libertarians, not so with groups who label themselves white nationalists

Literally all modern white supremacist movements are utterly obsessed with jewish conspiracy theories. From holocaust denial, to banking and media conspiracies and even political figures. So first we have 9/11 which caused alot of people to research this stuff, then the crash of 2008 which brought a whole surge of banking conspiracies. While 9/11 conspiracies were largely unrelated to white supremacist movements by the fact that Bush was president, once Obama became president there was a resurgence of white supremacist political movements, but these 2 movements grew independently of eachother. Now we saw the last election with Clinton which was almost completely riddled with conspiracy theories from benghazi, to the whole mess with her emails, to the chants of "lock her up" and "build the wall". The entire campaign against Clinton wasn't based on her voting record, her political stances, or even her personality. But almost entirely based on conspiracy theories, Trump himself claimed before election night, that the election itself was rigged, he then famously claimed that it was rigged after he won and that he won despite it being rigged because people love him so much, then claimed if it wasn't for illegal immigrants voting in California he wouldve won the popular vote too.

This was nothing new for him as he is himself a conspiracy theorist I wouldn't be all that shocked if his first order of business was to visit area 51 to see the martians for himself. Now that he's president the conspiracy theorists will immediately switch away from him. Where are the aliens, they will all ask, and this will lead to another switching of the sides. This will start with concessions to the left, the denouncing of outright white supremacists groups like the ones protesting these statues which as you can see are being torn down in spite of him being president. The supporting of welfare programs, gay rights, gun laws, these things will slowly break them down. His foreign policy as well, like his support of israel, china, and the fact that this border wall will probably never be built. Will leave them with the reality that theyve been lied to, and its always easier to claim that the man is a liar, and that these things are all still a major problem, and need to be handled, its just this guy couldn't do it or "betrayed them".

It's easier then it is to admit these spectres dont exist, or that their hysteria is unwarranted, and the time, money and effort they spent in pursuit of what they thought was in fact a noble cause was in fact not in vain or a waste but was just under the wrong leader, every conspiracy theorist is a bit of a narcissist and they often see themselves as the leaders of a future political movement. So they will always come to the conclusion of "I can do it, since the other guy can't" not because they really care about the problem they are discussing, but because they want the recognition of solving it. They will therefore adapt a new group like libertarians, the tea party, and the alt-right, did before them, align themselves around a new issue possibly arising from some major crisis in the future, and they're pop culture references, and pseudo-knowledge of history and political science, will be redirected toward a completely different target against.... you guessed it the right wing.

Right wing rebels dont want to govern, an they will always rip themselves apart, if not out of their ideological standards then out of simple greed and power. Once there is a split amongst the conspiracy theorists involving trump they will begin a denouncing of the "blank guys" the people who are always shouting about that thing that Trump did and are only serving the elitist leftist hippies. They sound crazy theyre whackjobs, they are working for the left, they are commie plants they will whine (if you ever want an ego boost go look at what the far right thinks were up to, its always nice to be thought of being solely in control of all major political and historical events lol.) The actual fascist movements (which in America is alot more centered around the KKK then it is the neo nazis) will split from these conspiracy theorists in a complete 180 degree turn. they will denounce them as "not being really white anyway". The conspiracy theorists will become offended as they know "da troooof" and will be completely internally shutoff from white power/fascist organizations. The KKK and nazi groups will of course have recruited some new members that is their overall intention after all, but it will largely subside. I predict 90% of todays alt right libertarians whatever you want to call them in less than 5 years will become entirely re organized into a left wing eastern spiritualist movement, and will be cosplaying as buddhist monks soon enough. Most likely obsessed with technocratic environmentalism, animal rights, and herbal medicine.

http://gizmodo.com/so-begins-the-alt-right-purity-spiral-1795017211

[Jimmie Higgins]

Anyone still unsure if the new fascist base is white suburban college-dudes after seeing footage from Charlottesville?

[Ele'ill]

I know the OP article is from April but how has 'outreach' to the working class worked out generally? Pretty good success? If not this article in particular, although it does approach it, other articles released by various groups seem to blame 'the black bloc' and other things for their own or other's programmatic failures in Movement Building. It's not that I think a few of the points in the article weren't generally good points or that I think anarchy is alive and well but how can I trust an article giving suggestions that opens with programmatic approach to movement building and talks about convincing the working class of things? The article and author comes across as disingenuous at that point.

I also don't find the alienating argument compelling at all for similar reasons.

[willowtooth]

Anyone still unsure if the new fascist base is white suburban college-dudes after seeing footage from Charlottesville?
they did look quite menacing in those matching cotton blend polo shirts :laugh: