May Day Riot at Santa Cruz, CA

[Rusty Shackleford]

The demonstrations on May Day were obviously given greater life and vigor by the current economic distress, no?

that and SB1070 in Arizona

The substance of those demonstrations wasn't about trashing BoA, Wells Fargo, Starbucks, Raffetto's or Joe's Dairy-- and let me tell you, anyone who ever lift's a rock against either of those last two will have to answer to me and the rest of lower Manhattan-- but about migrant labor, unemployment, war, etc.

The substance of the demonstrations 3 days ago was about labor, and immigrants rights(i dont think there was much of an anti-war focus).

Not all attending these demonstrations were anarchists; not all anarchists attending these demonstrations trashed buildings, cars, etc; the demonstrations themselves were not demonstrations of anarchism.

absolutely.

i have no problem with damaged windows or occupied buildings, but i do have a problem with people jumping the "revolutionary" gun when its not right to "shoot" yet.

[S.Artesian]

Comrade Vacant wrote:

"i have no problem with damaged windows or occupied buildings, but i do have a problem with people jumping the "revolutionary" gun when its not right to "shoot" yet."

Perfectly put.

[this is an invasion]

There are plenty of legitimate critiques that can be aimed at the people in Santa Cruz ( I personally hate everything that has to do with santa cruz because of how subcultural they are), however, no one, I repeat, no one, is claiming that this action was revolutionary or is going to bring us any closer to an insurrection or revoltution. This is simply an act of rage at this current world. I think this is the misunderstanding (sometimes deliberate) that Leninists have with anarchists, especially insurrectionists.

This also sets a precedant for future actions whevenever something happens in that area.

[this is an invasion]

Comrade Vacant wrote:

"i have no problem with damaged windows or occupied buildings, but i do have a problem with people jumping the "revolutionary" gun when its not right to "shoot" yet."

Perfectly put.

Fuck you guys. If this is the case, who gets to decide when the "time is right?" This idea of "waiting" is the most counter-revolutionary thing ever. Fuck you.

[S.Artesian]

Fuck you guys. If this is the case, who gets to decide when the "time is right?" This idea of "waiting" is the most counter-revolutionary thing ever. Fuck you.

Well, that's helpful. Thank you for your input. I will certainly give it the proper consideration.

Who gets to make those decisions-- well, hopefully it's a collective recognition by those participating-- on the tactical assessment of forces, and the strategic issues at stake.... if you just want to immediately bare your breast and run chest first into a bayonet, please feel free to do so, just don't push others onto the bayonet point ahead of you. Lead by example.

You get right out there in front of everybody and lead the way, regardless of whether you've got 50 people with you or 50,000.

Sometimes though, and for some others, we like to pick our spots when we can that is. Recognizing that sometimes we can't.

My guess is that Mr. This Is An Invasion has never actually been in a real firefight, in combat, and so doesn't know the first fucking thing about reducing profiles when necessary to avoid unnecessary casualties, "passing" your enemy, flanking, or the most important part, breaking contact and staging an orderly withdrawal.

You need to know, as counterrevolutionary a thing as that might be, when it's better to not fight... and even better-- to win by not fighting. Sometimes.

But thanks for the kind remarks. Go fuck yourself. And I mean that in the nicest possible way. Should I put a smiley face here, or have I made myself perfectly clear?

[What Would Durruti Do?]

i have no problem with damaged windows or occupied buildings, but i do have a problem with people jumping the "revolutionary" gun when its not right to "shoot" yet.

who is shooting? people being upset with capitalism/the state and trashing things in retaliation is not a revolutionary activity. it's just anger

[Saorsa]

I think 'this is an invasion' would be happier somewhere like this.

[punisa]

This is simply an act of rage at this current world.

It looks to me as an act of people who have too much time on their hands.

Why do these minor displays of such minor violence bother some individuals and organizations so much?

Because its minor.
There is large gap that divides vandalism and political messages.
Couple of windows being smashed - vandalism.
Riots in Greece - political message.
I'm CON first and PRO second.

[Rusty Shackleford]

who is shooting? people being upset with capitalism/the state and trashing things in retaliation is not a revolutionary activity. it's just anger

i hope you know that i mean shooting as a metaphor.

There must be some discipline when fighting capitalism though. and its not like im going to go out and referee a fight between anti-caps and cappies. shit happens. but if you are absolutely serious, you have to look at things on the macro as well on the micro, and look at the conditions around you.

Situation:
"You are in a crowd of oppressed nationalities protesting against racism and for workers' rights"
What do you do?
A: Throw brick at cop and play mirrors edge trying to run away?
B: Tolerate the police for the time being as to not threaten the demonstration or participants.

Correct Answer: B, "Tolerate the police for the time being as to not threaten the demonstration or participants."

EDIT: Saw Punisias post

There is large gap that divides vandalism and political messages.
Couple of windows being smashed - vandalism.
Riots in Greece - political message.
I'm CON first and PRO second.

USA: currently not a place to riot and start shit.
Greece: burn a flag, occupy a building, occupy acropolis!


EDIT removed last edit due to it being rather sectarian and derailing. i apologize.

[S.Artesian]

they better have a good reason for attacking a social or potentially social system in canada.

Kind of thought the same thing. I mean when the system is being used to transport counterrevolutionary troops, that's fine. But commuter lines? Time to get a bit more perspective on "revolutionary" means. You have to know what you're doing here. Fucking around with the wayside electronic circuitry means damaging the way the signal system detects train occupancy, and detecting train occupancy is the way the system keeps trains apart, prevents them from smacking into each other, maintains safe separation of trains.

Not very revolutionary to make commuter trains collide if you get my point. I'd hate to have that on my conscience. I know what I'm talking about. Safe separation of trains is what we, railroad operators, do. It's what makes us wake up in the middle of the night, recalculating stopping distances, braking rates, overspeed margins, etc. etc.

I do not know how those poor bastards at Washington Metro live with themselves after that collision in DC last summer, when there were previous indications that their signal system was failing to detect occupancy and maintain safe separation of trains and they did not take the proper precautions. I know I couldn't live with myself.


Personal favorite story, having worked on railroads for more years than I will admit to anyone but the US Railroad Retirement Board--

The penultimate battle of the Cuban Revolution-- the battle of Santa Clara
with Che in overall command of the rebel brigades.

Batista had dispatched an armored train to reinforce troops in Santa Clara. The rebels, after the train arrived, removed the rails and undermined the tracks behind, to the rear of, the train. Then they attacked. The train attempted to back up, to unload troops and materiel clear of the firefight zone.

In so doing, the train of course derailed, with some cars turning on their sides, splitting open and disgorging.... cases of Coca Cola and Hatuey beer.

When the rebels saw the Coke and the beer, they redoubled their efforts to take the train. Revolution is a thirsty business, a mighty thirsty business.

And that, BTW, was the last good derailment in railroad history.

[bcbm]

The demonstrations on May Day were obviously given greater life and vigor by the current economic distress, no?

depends on which demonstrations we are talking about. i think the vandalism in santa cruz, denver, asheville, etc would have happened regardless of the economic crisis, if it can be seen as a part in the upsurge of anarchist smashy smashy (among other activities) that started around 2008.

The substance of those demonstrations wasn't about trashing BoA, Wells Fargo, Starbucks, Raffetto's or Joe's Dairy-- and let me tell you, anyone who ever lift's a rock against either of those last two will have to answer to me and the rest of lower Manhattan-- but about migrant labor, unemployment, war, etc.

they were probably concerned about those issues, but the reason they went out en masse dressed in black and armed with hammers and crowbars was to smash windows. and while i understand the connection between capital in general and all of the issues you name, i think breaking a bunch of windows of completely random targets doesn't really convey any substance.

Not all attending these demonstrations were anarchists; not all anarchists attending these demonstrations trashed buildings, cars, etc; the demonstrations themselves were not demonstrations of anarchism.

i don't think its too far fetched to suggest anarchists were the organizers and primary participants in these events... the black bloc, the communiques and pleas for donations on anarchist news and so on.

------

however, no one, I repeat, no one, is claiming that this action was revolutionary or is going to bring us any closer to an insurrection or revoltution. This is simply an act of rage at this current world. I think this is the misunderstanding (sometimes deliberate) that Leninists have with anarchists, especially insurrectionists.

i understand all of that, but i still don't see much of a reason for what happened. even as "an act of rage" it seems poorly planned and executed, though i suppose i should admit i think such acts of rage should be part of a larger strategy and not just a way for people to get their rocks off and get some street cred, or funnel another couple hundred thousand dollars to the state for legal fees or whatever.

This also sets a precedant for future actions whevenever something happens in that area.

i think "random kids will smash random things for some reason almost no one but them understands" is not a good precedent to set.


christ when did i become so bitter

[What Would Durruti Do?]

i hope you know that i mean shooting as a metaphor.

There must be some discipline when fighting capitalism though. and its not like im going to go out and referee a fight between anti-caps and cappies. shit happens. but if you are absolutely serious, you have to look at things on the macro as well on the micro, and look at the conditions around you.

Situation:
"You are in a crowd of oppressed nationalities protesting against racism and for workers' rights"
What do you do?
A: Throw brick at cop and play mirrors edge trying to run away?
B: Tolerate the police for the time being as to not threaten the demonstration or participants.

Correct Answer: B, "Tolerate the police for the time being as to not threaten the demonstration or participants."

EDIT: Saw Punisias post

I know you didn't mean literally. I meant shooting metaphorically too. Nobody is taking it upon themselves to start the revolution by smashing windows. It is just anger and it should be expected when people are protesting something so evil as capitalism or the state.

But I agree that it is best to keep your cool. I'm just saying that I can understand others actions even if I don't necessarily support them.