<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Andrew, you're hella' smart and I have a lot of respect for you, but
rationalizing riots is "not even wrong."<br>
<br>
I darn well do understand Black Block tactics, because I've been
around the Bay Area protest scene for @ 30 years and I've seen the
same poo on previous platters all the way back, famous quotes
included such as a fairly well-known East Bay radical saying that
burning stuff in the street gave him a hard-on and he needed to duck
out of a riot to go find a place to beat off in the bushes. I'll
name that name in person, but not in print. One of many. <br>
<br>
I'll have a detailed critique of what's in that Wikipedia link later
tonight. Meanwhile: <br>
<br>
The game is, and has always been, to provoke the cops to start
bashing heads, and thereby spark the revolution. Back in the day,
they stood in the back rows and threw rocks and bottles. Now they
stand in the back rows and throw hardened thorny seed-pods that can
take out an eye or two, and get all self-righteous when OPD responds
with tear gas and rubber bullets. Really now: if someone goes
around poking pit-bulls in the side, is it a surprise when they get
their hand bitten off? <br>
<br>
How does smashing windows at Whole Foods and BofA overthrow the
oligarchy? What's the causal linkage?<br>
<br>
Know what scared the living shitcakes out of BofA? Not the threat
of rocks through windows. The threat of masses of people
withdrawing their money, after BofA tried jacking the fees for
checking accounts. Very quickly a "move your money" campaign got
started, and very quickly BofA backed down from their fee increase.
<br>
<br>
A couple of weeks ago the whole world saw the entire Boston metro
area under a red alert, with all civilians locked up in their homes,
and an army of police in .mil gear on every street: did that make
people think about oppression, much less spark the revolution? The
overwhelming majority wanted the bombers dead or in handcuffs
post-haste: now think of what would have happened had the Tsarnevs
had identified themselves as members of the Circle-A Club rather
than Al Qaeda sympathizers. <br>
<br>
"The banks, government, and Wall Street," look down on us from their
towers and laugh. They laugh when they see the riots because they
know we're burning ourselves out that way and flushing the ashes
down the drain of irrelevance. They looked down and laughed when
robberies, rapes, and at least one shooting happened at Occupy
encampments, when we couldn't even get a consensus against violence,
and when we got infested with chronic drunks & druggie. They
laugh at us for being _dysfunctional_ and the general public agree!
<br>
<br>
If you were an unemployed construction worker with a kid, would you
throw in your lot with that? <br>
<br>
The reason the Clamshell Alliance protests against the Seabrook
nuclear plant in New Hampshire succeeded, is that they were
organized, disciplined, and above all _peaceful_. And I say that as
someone who worked with them back in the day but now supports
nuclear fission as a vital component in solving the climate crisis.
<br>
<br>
The root source of the oppression is fed by consumer-zombie
behaviors: ours as well as anyone else's. The kids-vs-cops thing is
a side-show, a circus act, a digression aimed at tying us up doing
something that'll just piss off the neighbors and earn us a great
big goose-egg. Look up the polling on the community reaction to
Black Block riots. Well over 60% of the Oakland black community
said that the police _weren't harsh enough_ with the protesters.
What should we do about that?<br>
<br>
Broadly speaking, the strategies are Ballots, Bullets, or Bypass.
I'm advocating for Bypass: "routing around the damage" by
withdrawing consent and building alternative institutions. <br>
<br>
What exactly do you propose? What's your strategy and what are your
tactics? What's the underlying theory and what are its empirical
and historical examples of success? <br>
<br>
I'll be AFK for most of the day & back later on to pick up the
debate. And this is a debate we need to have, because if we don't
end up with coherent theory, strategy, and tactics, we are going to
end up in the proverbial dustbin of history. <br>
<br>
Maoism and its derivatives haven't worked in half a century. We're
overdue for a change.<br>
<br>
And lest anyone think I'm wearing rose-colored glasses, I can
out-doomer any chronic pessimist by a margin of about 3 billion
corpses and a global fascist empire where barely-surviving proles
are obligated to eat bugs. This isn't an abstraction: the oligarchy
and its externalities are an existential threat to our species. The
only way out is up. <br>
<br>
-G.<br>
<br>
<br>
=====<br>
<br>
<br>
On 13-05-04-Sat 8:15 AM, Andrew wrote:<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">> Hi,<br>
><br>
> "This error continues to<br>
> this day, in the ideology of Black Block tactics, which are
founded on<br>
> the idea that expressing rage and provoking police
over-reaction will<br>
> somehow spark The Revolution."<br>
><br>
> You don't seem to understand what Black Block tactics are.
While I understand </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">your point that provoking the police
is probably not a great tactic, I fail to see </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">what this has to do with The Black
Block and Occupy Oakland. It didn't take much to </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">provoke police overreaction, unless
you call standing your ground at an "unlawful </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">assembly" a "Black Block Tactic".
Again here is the wikipedia page </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_bloc</a>)
. <br>
><br>
> Perhaps maybe the tactic you are talking about (direct
confrontation with </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">police or closer to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrectionary_anarchism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrectionary_anarchism</a>) </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">has more to do with showing people
that the police only have power because </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">we give it to them.<br>
><br>
> "The proletariat is where the power is: the power to produce
and consume<br>
> at the level that drives the engine of oligarchy, is also the
power to<br>
> refuse consent in a meaningful way."<br>
><br>
> Lets be clear, the real power is in the hands of the
oligarchy and will </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">remain in the hands of the oligarchy
as long as the banks, government, and </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">wall street are working together to
make sure that the lumpenproletariat </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">starves so they can feast. Begging
for $.50 raises, and a few more days </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">of slick time, the green economy
(ie. simple living ... These are the </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">distractions There are people
making 50 million a year while others </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">scrounge for just enough to survive.
What keeps the oligarchy in power </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">is our refusal to believe that we
can actually do something about that and.......<br>
><br>
> " by going into business for themselves, and by<br>
> developing alternatives to conventional capitalism such as
cooperatives<br>
> and other forms of production that subordinate capital to
labor."<br>
><br>
> it seems like our (proletariat's) only move is to join the
oligarchs, </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">by imitation. Which is impossible.
Alternatives to capitalism that feed </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">off capitalism are not the answer.
Co-operative are great, but they are </span><br>
<br>
<span style="white-space: pre;">just as much on their radar as
squirrel strikes.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:30 PM, aestetix
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aestetix@aestetix.com">aestetix@aestetix.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:aestetix@aestetix.com"><mailto:aestetix@aestetix.com></a>>
wrote:<br>
></span><br>
<blockquote type="cite">You've opened a can of worms here :)<br>
<br>
Since elucidated discussion seems to be the modus operandi lately,
I<br>
have a few thoughts on this matter that are worth contributing.
Feel<br>
free to ignore at your pleasure (free listening is just as
important<br>
as free speech).<br>
<br>
I think that the two key elements of your essays, food and power,
are<br>
rather interchangeable depending on the contexts. It's (hopefully)<br>
obvious why we need food. Power in a more abstract sense is<br>
fascinating to me, though. Other words that come to mind are
drive,<br>
charisma, persuasion, but also intellect, and most important,
control.<br>
<br>
IMHO, one of the most fundamental elements of control is language,
as<br>
shared patterns are effectively a way to communicate and attain<br>
various levels of self-mastery. An easy way to experience this is
to<br>
try to understand a foreign language: there might be some hints of<br>
familiarity within the chaos, and as we find them, it's a bit like<br>
setting markers around, and using the markers to control the
direction<br>
of your ultimate understanding. You can extend that to vocabulary
and<br>
concepts as well. One of the hallmarks of a good education is the<br>
ability to curse someone out without using the generic "fuck shit<br>
damn" slurs.<br>
<br>
Language is composed of words, symbols which point to meanings,
and<br>
one of the most interesting set of words is our names. And you all
can<br>
guess where I'm going with this one ;)<br>
<br>
Hail Eris,<br>
aestetix<br>
<br>
PS: it might be worth doing another cryptoparty soon.<br>
<br>
On 5/3/13 7:58 PM, GtwoG PublicOhOne wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
> 2) Where the power is, and where it isn't.<br>
<br>
> Now we come to the proletariat and the lumpenproletariat.<br>
<br>
> For this, credit also goes to a good friend of mine who I
won't<br>
> name here, but who's welcome to name him/herself if s/he so<br>
> chooses: s/he got me thinking down this trail a few months
ago.<br>
<br>
> The proletariat is the working class: basically defined as
people<br>
> who have full-time jobs or at least jobs that provide
sufficient<br>
> income for the core necessities (shelter, clothing, food,<br>
> transportation, sanitation, communication), but who have
little or<br>
> no ownership stake. This includes people who are in business
for<br>
> themselves, but earning a working class income: they own
their<br>
> employment, but their economic wellbeing is at the same level
as<br>
> that of a wage-worker.<br>
<br>
> The lumpenproletariat is the level below that: basically
defined<br>
> as people whose employment is marginal at best, and whose
access to<br>
> the basic necessities is frequently interrupted in some way.
The<br>
> unemployed, homeless, couch-surfers (another form of<br>
> homelessness), people who live at the margins of the law in
order<br>
> to survive, and people who earn their livings on criminal
activity.<br>
> This also includes wage-workers whose wage income is not
sufficient<br>
> to provide their basic necessities from month to month: they
have<br>
> jobs, but their economic wellbeing is at the same level as
that of<br>
> someone who's marginally employed at best.<br>
<br>
> Decades ago, the Bay Area left/radical community made the
deadly<br>
> strategic error of embracing the (essentially Maoist)
analysis that<br>
> the lumpenproletariat is the revolutionary class. This error<br>
> continues to this day, in the ideology of Black Block
tactics,<br>
> which are founded on the idea that expressing rage and
provoking<br>
> police over-reaction will somehow spark The Revolution.<br>
<br>
> The very same tactic in more obviously violent form pops up
in the<br>
> ideology of the extreme right: such as the Hutaree, a group
that<br>
> was busted by the FBI for planning to shoot a bunch of cops
and<br>
> then set off bombs at their funerals, in the attempt to
provoke<br>
> martial law and thereby set off a "revolution" from the
extreme<br>
> right.<br>
<br>
> But here's the nexus of the problem:<br>
<br>
> To the oligarchy, the lumpenproletariat is disposable: their
roles<br>
> in production and consumption are so minimal that they can be<br>
> totally disregarded. They have NO power. N-O power. As<br>
> individuals or as any kind of collectivity or class.<br>
<br>
> When a social movement identifies with the lumpenproletariat<br>
> and/or attempts to organize the lumpenproletariat, the
movement<br>
> effectively short-circuits its efforts into something that is<br>
> inherently doomed to failure. They may as well be trying to<br>
> organize the squirrels on the Cal Berkeley campus to strike
for<br>
> better teaching-assistant salaries. How seriously do you
think the<br>
> UC Regents would take the threat of a squirrel strike?<br>
<br>
> The proletariat is where the power is: the power to produce
and<br>
> consume at the level that drives the engine of oligarchy, is
also<br>
> the power to refuse consent in a meaningful way.<br>
<br>
> The power of the proletariat takes two forms:<br>
<br>
> One, the power to remove themselves from the oligarch's
engines of<br>
> production: by going on strike (which translates to the power
of<br>
> collective bargaining), by going into business for
themselves, and<br>
> by developing alternatives to conventional capitalism such as<br>
> cooperatives and other forms of production that subordinate
capital<br>
> to labor.<br>
<br>
> Two, the power to remove themselves from the oligarch's<br>
> consumption matrix: by boycotts (consumer strikes), by<br>
> anti-materialist or "simple living" principles that reduce<br>
> consumption levels (the equivalent of consumer general
strikes), by<br>
> shifting their consumption to alternative institutions such
as<br>
> coops, credit unions, and small local producers (e.g. buying<br>
> veggies at the farmers' market rather than Safeway), and very<br>
> importantly for _us_ as hackers/makers/etc., the power to
build<br>
> for our own use.<br>
<br>
> This is real power. It's the power that makes the oligarchs
quake<br>
> in their boots and have nightmares. And it's the power that
gives<br>
> the oligarchs strong incentive to keep us distracted,
digressed,<br>
> and disempowered by wasting our time trying to organize a
squirrel<br>
> strike.<br>
<br>
> -G.<br>
<br>
> _______________________________________________ sudo-discuss<br>
> mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org"><mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org></a><br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<span style="white-space: pre;">>
_______________________________________________<br>
> sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org"><mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org></a><br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> -- <br>
> -------<br>
> Andrew Lowe<br>
> Cell: 831-332-2507<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://roshambomedia.com">http://roshambomedia.com</a><br>
></span><br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>