Anarchists Disrupt DNC Convention

[Capitalist Lawyer]

Hello Dad, will you send me money?


A group of self-described anarchists threatening to disrupt the Democratic National Convention is promising to go away if the $50 million federal grant that Denver received to pay for convention security is invested in the community instead.

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jul/29/dnc-anarchists-offer-deal-city/


These so called 'Anarchists' never fail to crack me up. They act so tough behind their masks and 'right on' views, spitting on the police.

But who do they call when their house gets burgled, or their car stolen?

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Probs the police because alot of insurance companies only pay you if you call them.

[bcbm]

Opposing the police does not mean they don't have any useful social functions, and the ones that are useful they have a monopoly on. We'll fight them when they're in the way and will, unfortunately, be forced to rely on them in certain situations because of their monopoly.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Hello Dad, will you send me money?



http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jul/29/dnc-anarchists-offer-deal-city/


These so called 'Anarchists' never fail to crack me up. They act so tough behind their masks and 'right on' views, spitting on the police.

But who do they call when their house gets burgled, or their car stolen?

You're such a pathetic little troll. Who do you appeal to when someone takes your stuff - society? :thumbup1:

[Jazzratt]

Right, so why did you start a thread entitled "Anarchists Disrupt DNC Convention[sic]*" if you wanted to talk about the anarchist approach to the police? The disruption on the convention, as far as I can see, has very little to do with the police; it has a lot more to do with the $50,000,000 of federal money (presumably some of this comes from the community) that is being pissed away on security for the convention, a one off expense of no social utility, rather than on improvements within the community. The outrage, therefore is understandable as many of these anarchists will be coming from deprived and run down areas within the community which makes it fairly galling to see the amount of money that is being thrown about in order to hire a bunch of hunchbrain thugs to protect a convention full of slimey politicians.

As for your ideas about anarchists and the police force - as BCBM pointed out we would call the police because there is no alternative, it's the same reason we have jobs, buy food and so on.

*PROTIP: The "C" in DNC stands for "convention" already.

[Killfacer]

I fail to see the point you are trying to make. Personally i think if the government did re-invest the money into the community, it would probably a good thing. I am sure most people would agree with that.

If, on the other hand, you are trying to make a laboured point about how all anarchists are hypocrits for disliking the police, then why did you not just come out and say that? As many people have mentioned above, what the hell else are they meant to do? Start a vigilante gang?

[Dean]

Capitalist Lawyer is known to be the most unoriginal and uninspired capitalist here. Give me Pusher Robot, TomK or even Phalanx before him any day.

[Jazzratt]

Capitalist Lawyer is known to be the most unoriginal and uninspired capitalist here. Give me Pusher Robot, TomK or even Phalanx before him any day.

Remember when he pretended to be a commie and made his big "confession thread" :lol:

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I'm skeptical that lawyer has any credentials to his real life either.

[Raúl Duke]

Give me Pusher Robot, TomK or even Phalanx before him any day.Of these I prefer TomK....

That's a lot of money for security...

I wonder...is the DNC (or whatever) going to negotiate about that grant with anarchists? They probably don't trust them at all and have all sorts of misconceptions of anarchists, or more specifically anarchism.

Also, it's only one group. Other anarchists might still go; especially if they see this act by "self-described anarchist group" as deferring/going soft/collaborating to the ruling class.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Opposing the police does not mean they don't have any useful social functions, and the ones that are useful they have a monopoly on. We'll fight them when they're in the way and will, unfortunately, be forced to rely on them in certain situations because of their monopoly.
How do they have a monopoly? Can't anarchists beat a little criminal ass?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

How do they have a monopoly? Can't anarchists beat a little criminal ass?

"You can't take the law into your own hands" is the eternal refrain of the pigs. I imagine it's more bother to attempt to do the police's work for them than it is worth.

[PigmerikanMao]

Good for the anarchists? At least they're doing SOMETHING. :laugh:

[bcbm]

How do they have a monopoly? Can't anarchists beat a little criminal ass?

Police generally frown upon vigilante efforts, and they hold a monopoly on the use of lethal force, not to mention criminal investigating technology and information.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

Police generally frown upon vigilante efforts, and they hold a monopoly on the use of lethal force, not to mention criminal investigating technology and information.
Of course police frown upon vigilante efforts. But don't anarchists frown upon the police? Why recognize their claim to be the sole protectors of society and of justice? Since when do anarchists recognize the legitimacy of the state-sponsored police force?

[Phalanx]

These so called 'Anarchists' never fail to crack me up. They act so tough behind their masks and 'right on' views, spitting on the police.

But who do they call when their house gets burgled, or their car stolen?


In the early days of the Republic, most US citizens would've agreed with the anarchists. A police force wasn't even in existence and people were fine with that. Nowadays we've got douchebags like you siding with the state, no matter how criminal their actions are at home and abroad.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

In the early days of the Republic, most US citizens would've agreed with the anarchists. A police force wasn't even in existence and people were fine with that. Nowadays we've got douchebags like you siding with the state, no matter how criminal their actions are at home and abroad.
Are you talking to me? If so, what exactly are you talking about?

[Jazzratt]

Of course police frown upon vigilante efforts. But don't anarchists frown upon the police? Why recognize their claim to be the sole protectors of society and of justice? Since when do anarchists recognize the legitimacy of the state-sponsored police force?

The difference between our frowning and theirs is that theirs is backed up by a perceived legitimacy, numbers and greater access to weapons and resources. To even consider making an effective vigilante force there would have to be a massive propaganda battle, followed by quite a few actual skirmishes and finally with gathering proper resources and correctly trained personnel (forensic scientists, for example). After all that it would be just as easy to just have a revolution.

[Phalanx]

Are you talking to me? If so, what exactly are you talking about?

No the post got fucked up, I was replying to the op.

[Capitalist Lawyer]

the same reason we have jobs, buy food and so on.

You have jobs because you need to support yourself. Because there is no alternative other than death.

You buy food because if you don't, you'll starve. Because there is no alternative other than death.

Are basic biological functions now on your list of "authoritarian things that we can do without"?

[Qwerty Dvorak]

So CL, I presume you've dropped the whole "I was always a leftist" thing?

[Capitalist Lawyer]

So CL, I presume you've dropped the whole "I was always a leftist" thing?


All of that is still true. I'm actually a leftist posing as a capitalist supporter but not of the Ayn Rand variety.

[Jazzratt]

You have jobs because you need to support yourself. Because there is no alternative other than death.

You buy food because if you don't, you'll starve. Because there is no alternative other than death.

Are basic biological functions now on your list of "authoritarian things that we can do without"?

Don't be deliberately dense. The reason you starve if you don't have a job and buy things is because the wages/purchasing system (i.e the market) is the only system available. If you want food you must buy it, if you want (a very rough approximation of) justice you must ring up the coppers.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

You have jobs because you need to support yourself. Because there is no alternative other than death.

You buy food because if you don't, you'll starve. Because there is no alternative other than death.

Are basic biological functions now on your list of "authoritarian things that we can do without"?

No but being forced to work it piss poor conditions or starve to death sucks.

Communists would still grow and eat foot.

Try again Fuckbucket.

[RHIZOMES]

*PROTIP: The "C" in DNC stands for "convention" already.

Democratic National Convention Convention :lol:

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

The 50 Million may seem excessive, but it's probably necessary to protect everyone involved.

That 50 Million will help protect the tens of thousands who are visiting and pumping massive amounts of money (much more than 50 mil I imagine) into the local economy. Also, I'm sure the Denver PD likes the funding, as any police department looks at these things as potential nightmares.

It's not like hosting this event (or the Super Bowl or the Olympics etc) is hurting the Denver economy.

[pusher robot]

*PROTIP: The "C" in DNC stands for "convention" already.

*PROTIP: You're wrong! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee)

[Schrödinger's Cat]

You have jobs because you need to support yourself. Because there is no alternative other than death.

You buy food because if you don't, you'll starve. Because there is no alternative other than death.

Are basic biological functions now on your list of "authoritarian things that we can do without"?

:laugh:

There is no alternative to buying food?

Minimalism does not apply to the skill of thinking, CL. :thumbup1:

[bcbm]

*PROTIP: You're wrong! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee)

*PROTIP: You're the one who's wrong, learn about the American election process, dipshit. (http://www.demconvention.com/)

[Bud Struggle]

It means anything you want three letters to mean. :)

[Dust Bunnies]

But who do they call when their house gets burgled, or their car stolen?

Who ya gonna call? GHOST BUSTERS

I hate the DNC, they are a bunch of liers.

[Jazzratt]

*PROTIP: You're wrong! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee)


A group of self-described anarchists threatening to disrupt the Democratic National Convention


http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y57/kb7rky/FARK%20Photos/failboat3.jpg

[pusher robot]

*PROTIP: You're the one who's wrong, learn about the American election process, dipshit. (http://www.demconvention.com/)

See, I wouldn't even care that you're wrong, but you're just such a dick about it that you leave me no other choice.

Elementary logic tells us that when someone makes an absolute claim, e.g., "the 'c' in 'DNC' stands for 'convention,'" all that is necessary to disprove the claim is to show that it is not always true. I did so prove this by demonstrating that the "C" often - in fact, almost always - stands for "Committee," which would even make sense in the usage he criticized. In order to demonstrate my claim is wrong, you need to prove that "C" in fact never stands for "Committee," thus it is impossible/absurd that the OP could have used it to mean "Committee," making Jazzratt's criticism valid.

I eagerly await this demonstration.

[Bud Struggle]

Honestly Gentlemen, there are actual interesting ideas we have to argue about. No need to trifle about with such nonsense. These kinds of posts take away from what Opposing Ideologies is all about--a real and substantive challenge to the Communist way of thinking--If this Forum makes Communism more resilient and thoughtful through variance, good for Communism--if it diminishes Communism by finding its faults and weaknesses--good too.

Personally, I'm looking for the BEST way for humanity to live its future--Capitalism and Communism should only be stepstones along the way.

[Tungsten]

Capitalist Lawyer is known to be the most unoriginal and uninspired capitalist here. Give me Pusher Robot, TomK or even Phalanx before him any day.

No way, he's hillarious.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Honestly Gentlemen, there are actual interesting ideas we have to argue about. No need to trifle about with such nonsense. These kinds of posts take away from what Opposing Ideologies is all about--a real and substantive challenge to the Communist way of thinking--If this Forum makes Communism more resilient and thoughtful through variance, good for Communism--if it diminishes Communism by finding its faults and weaknesses--good too.

Personally, I'm looking for the BEST way for humanity to live its future--Capitalism and Communism should only be stepstones along the way.

It's a pointless aside from what was already a pointless topic.

[Tungsten]

No but being forced to work it piss poor conditions or starve to death sucks.

Communists would still grow and eat foot.

Try again Fuckbucket.

Somebody is going to be in for a rude awakening.

You're still going to be forced to work under communism too, doing jobs you might not want to do (i.e. producing food) for rewards you might not like or..."starve to death". There's no getting round it.

You don't honestly think people are going to work while you just sit around doing nothing, do you? Food will be withdrawn unless you join in...it would be the only way to prevent the free-rider problem, which in turn brings forth its own set of problems.

[La Comédie Noire]

@ Pusher Robot & Jazzratt.

The comitee and the Convention are two different things.

From the wikipedia article you linked:

The DNC was established at the 1848 Democratic National Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1848_Democratic_National_Convention).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee#cite_note-0)


And

The Democratic National Convention is a series of presidential nominating conventions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_nominating_convention) held every four years since 1832 by the United States Democratic Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Democratic_Party).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention#cite_note-0) They have been administered by the Democratic National Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee) since the 1852 national convention. The primary goal of the Democratic National Convention is to nominate and confirm a candidate for President (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States) and Vice President (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States), adopt a comprehensive party platform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_platform) and unify the party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention

I don't know what consequences this has on the argument. :confused:

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Somebody is going to be in for a rude awakening.

You're still going to be forced to work under communism too, doing jobs you might not want to do (i.e. producing food) for rewards you might not like or..."starve to death". There's no getting round it.

You don't honestly think people are going to work while you just sit around doing nothing, do you? Food will be withdrawn unless you join in...it would be the only way to prevent the free-rider problem, which in turn brings forth its own set of problems.

Though having workers controal i would feel / be less helpless towards having piss poor conditions. Work can be alot more enjoyable if the envrioment is nicer and what better people to change that shit then the people in the envrioment which has the piss poor conditions.

[freakazoid]

You don't honestly think people are going to work while you just sit around doing nothing, do you? Food will be withdrawn unless you join in...it would be the only way to prevent the free-rider problem, which in turn brings forth its own set of problems.

You talk is if the only way people will work is if they are bribed. Like everybody is some sort of greedy POS.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

@ Pusher Robot & Jazzratt.

The comitee and the Convention are two different things.

From the wikipedia article you linked:

The DNC was established at the 1848 Democratic National Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1848_Democratic_National_Convention).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee#cite_note-0)


And

The Democratic National Convention is a series of presidential nominating conventions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_nominating_convention) held every four years since 1832 by the United States Democratic Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Democratic_Party).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention#cite_note-0) They have been administered by the Democratic National Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Committee) since the 1852 national convention. The primary goal of the Democratic National Convention is to nominate and confirm a candidate for President (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States) and Vice President (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States), adopt a comprehensive party platform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_platform) and unify the party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention

I don't know what consequences this has on the argument. :confused:

Determining if the ghost of Richard Nixon will go to hell or heaven?