Clik here to view.
If you think you are an insurrectionary hard ass, please show me, don't tell me.
At least stop insisting that your rhetoric be included in totally insecure organizing conversations we're having. Save it for anonymous internet comments or other places where anonymity maybe kind of exists. Thank you.
Seriously, why can't people express their support for riots (or whatever) with their actions, instead of their statements? What do you people have against plausible deniability? Why so scared to navigate the choppy waters of liberalism?
The mask of legitimacy and decency is a useful mask to wear. When you go shoplifting do you comb your hair and put on a nice outfit? You should. By the same logic, when you're organizing a big show stopping whatever, it can help to put at little a gloss of liberalism on it. Keep the enemy guessing and maybe pull a few confused people in.
We can talk about how state violence is ubiquitous afterward, how the non-violence/violence dichotomy is absurd, how liberals need to recognize that this is self defense. All that stuff can be discussed under the veil of philosophical abstraction, and anonymity after the hard-ass protest or whatever has occurred. It does not need to be part of the organizing conversations leading up to an action, and when you insist on including it there, preemptively, as though it is part of the plan i'm gonna get pissy with you.
Cuz, isn't this how infiltrators would act? Who other than the feds wants such a solid paper trail of recorded conversations with quotes that can be pulled out of context in a court room before a thing like this occurs?
I don't care if you've got encryption on your shit, if we were naked in the woods a dozen miles away from any possible recording device, you'd be sketching me out because I don't know you real well, and i know you don't know every single person on this conversation thread, so cool your jets and keep it chill, please.
Am I the only one who gets sketched out when anonymous people insist on inserting pro-violence and pro-lawlessness statements in organizing conversations? What is going on here? Did we forget how the state operates or what society we live in?
Moreover, is it really more rhetorically expedient for us to wear our illegalist politics on our sleeves or would we be better off driving contradictions at democratic legitimacy? I'm curious, cuz maybe I'm getting soft in my old age, but it seems to me that engaging with liberal ideology, with the paradoxical expectations of a "democratic" government works better than just shouting "I'm a nihilist! I'm a nihilist! Look at me! Look at how little i care! Mwah-ha-ha-ha!" Right?
Maybe you got something to prove. That's fine. If so, prove it out in the streets. Don't ask me to help you convince everyone, including our enemies, who are just looking for a pretext to come down on us, that you are an uberdangerous hard-ass, cuz I'd rather look like a liberal than a target.
Nonviolence can be a mask. Liberal rhetoric can cover your face while you drive a crowbar into the fragile facade of society and tear it open. Bloc up and carry on.
