Anarchists and others to disrupt Republican convention

cop dressed in black bloc with other undercovers behind police lines


Immediately after the line of riot cops swept the protestors up Biscayne from 2nd Ave yesterday afternoon, dozens of people witnessed multiple undercover officers move freely through the police line.


When the police advanced, we were trapped inside the lobby of the Hotel Continental Riande on the corner of Biscayne Blvd and NE 2nd Avenue with union members, reporters, protestors, employees and bystanders. We all witnessed undercover police move freely through the line of riot cops, and walk unmolested within the tightly controlled perimeter the police had created. One cop was dressed in all black and wearing a balaclava, another wore a blue bandana and casual clothes. Others wore camoflage clothes and many had backpacks with "FTAA: No Way" stickers and other protest signs. It seemed clear to many of us that some of these undercovers were involved in inciting the violence that they then responded to with irrationally overwhelming force. If anyone has clear documentation proving this, please contact the legal teams to log your evidence. It is also suspected by members of the local Amnesty International that the police were conducting experiemnts with unknown bio-chemical weapons against unconsenting protestors.

 

Perhaps it's time we anarchists start dressing ourselves up to look like police instead? How difficult would that be, apart from how expensive such clothes and gear are?


Trin

 

Impersonating an officer is a crime.... isn't it?

 

Facing such police state

Those who wants to fight against them, have to adopt the opposite attitude.

We have to organize "sit down, discuss and love" in mass no?

 

I agree.


You can't fight fire with fire.

 

Yes Bacchus, it's a crime on the books, to be sure. It seems also that being an Anarchist is somewhat of a crime in and of itself too. What of it? If we continue to be led and misled by the so-called rule of law then we'll never really get anywhere but further from our stated goals as Anarchists. We don't need to settle down, we need to rise up. Revolution is ours.

Trin

 

They got the guns
& they got the numbers
Gonna lose
Yeah they're takin' over



I don't know about that. I think acts of violence really undermine our chances of being taken as intelligent people with views worth listening to.


The only way we can win, IMHO, is to win popular support.


This is the age of commercials and sound bites.

 

I almost forgot, Bacchus, there are ways out of that 'impersonating an officer' charge too, such as donning their gear and clothes but not using their official insignia. Just a thought. It'd still cause some serious confusion to the pigs any old how.

Hell, I'm not sayin' here that we oughtta fire at the pigs. I'm just saying our presence on the streets at demonstrations could be used to protect those ppl bein' victimized by the pigs somehow, is all.

Trin

 

I agree with that 100%! I also wish to add that dissent itself can be made quite popular with new and original ways of goin' about it, without the use of violence or destruction. We can surely do that, sortuva fun puzzle now to werk out and share with others.

Trin

 

Got a question, sorry for disturbing,

As anarchist, do you all believe that anarchy could "rule" the world?
How would you define the order that would be on earth?

And yes I think that to succeed, something needs to have an important propaganda weight, these days

 

Well first things first, ok? Anarchy means 'without rule', so the answer to yer first question would have to be a resounding no. As far as what the 'order' would be in the world, well, that's just a matter of understanding the term itself.

Order can be a word used to describe how things like ppls' needs get taken care of, whether ppl do so by theirselves or have other more authoritarian means of goin' about it. So you see, if Anarchy prevails then we must presume that ppl will be taking care of theirselves and thier needs with little or no need for any semblance of state power or authority.

However, we Anarchists must first do this for ourselves and our respective communities where we live. We must organize merely though for the sake of meeting our needs together, and be responsible to what the will or the consensus of the ppl is, and not be regarded as any kind of power or force whereby coercion by violence is on the agenda, because that would be counter to what we're on about.

All we wanna do is provide an example for ppl to see how much easier life can be with cooperation rather than with competition. This kind of movement would disable the government and empower millions to make ends meet on the basis of their local needs.

This is the part which, historically, we've had the most trouble with getting off the ground, but I (and many others) feel that the time is ripe now for it to really take off. This is true because of how much easier it is now to spread information and communication amongst ppl, and also because of the little or no tolerance for imperialism which has arisen throughout the rest of the world.

Trin's two-cents worth, thanks for askin'.

 

I think man can rule himself.

Dig?



Order? I don't need no stinking order.

No, uh, If you are hungry... eat.
If you are tired... sleep.
If you are restless... travel.
If you are challenged... defend.
If you are sick... heal.


It's all personal responsibility.

 

"All we wanna do is provide an example for ppl to see how much easier life can be with cooperation rather than with competition. This kind of movement would disable the government and empower millions to make ends meet on the basis of their local needs.

This is the part which, historically, we've had the most trouble with getting off the ground, but I (and many others) feel that the time is ripe now for it to really take off. This is true because of how much easier it is now to spread information and communication amongst ppl, and also because of the little or no tolerance for imperialism which has arisen throughout the rest of the world.""

I thank you for your answer. I like what you say.
As you recognize, even if we live in cooperation you say, i would prefer the harmony term, because every one respect others rights (that certainly have to include food water education heal and other you would think it is important for one people) and acts, I know we will need a form of organisation.

The job of a politician is to listen to others needs and to answer them its best. If one people weights one people. That will be so ok.


I went in Madagascar, where the minimum salary pro month is 38 times lower than in France. It could almost mean that 1 poor french rules for 38 poor madagascarian (?). It is so sad. Some would tell me: yes but the power to buy is different there...
To survive maybe, but to buy a cd player you have to spend 2 months of minimum salary (1 months minimum salary= 250.000 fmg ; cd player =500.000)
So it's kinda scary. Imagine what my father is paid makes him weighting for 110 people. How responsible are you? What for?

How responsible are those who owns?

We have to suppress money (such a incredible dream) and then realize we count as one person

That was to say ... Hum

Yes even when one is an anarchist he will still need some fun stuffs, like research in health, and some ppl to help him to study and to build solar panel or ...
We will have to be organised, isn't Bacchus?

The word is scary order, but there will be a form of order, but with a definition of the term

The definition which will makes you live in such a society, with a free acception of the rule(s),
The society will recognize you has a part of it, but as an actor, because that is the meaning of a society
You will become and you will give.

Is it ok?

To find what one is made for in such a society would be every ones objective.

We have to go to it peacefully, giving the message that it is possible.

 

If hungry I will steal food from you
If tired I will kill to ensure I wake
If restless I will not travel, because the roads will have long been delapidated and rife with robbers and kidnappers
If I am challenged I will kill the opposition
If sick I will die for lack of modern medical facilities.

Personaly Responsibility only works if all persons are responsible. Maybe in some hippy world this would work, but not here in real life!

Have you ever been to the poor parts of India? You should go, and live there for many years. You'll learn very quickly that you can have nothing because someone tougher will take it from you, you can never escape poverty. You will never be secure financialy, physically, mentally. You may find harmony with in the community which will be your only protection; but that would go against anarchy wouldn't it.

I assure you of one thing: When anarchy comes the most ruthless heartless man will rule all, not the most loving. History clearly tells us that.

 

Good luck.

Sounds drastic.

Buk buk buk buk BaaaKaaaak!

Word.

Or you could learn some natural healing alternatives. But hey, your choice.

I'm willing to kill to survive.

Not yet, but I am working on it.

No thanks.

Life is a struggle for power. I know this. I'm willing to fight.

Cooperation is not antianarchistic.

I agree wholheartedly. I certainly wouldn't want the meek to inherit the earth.

 

Hippy Hunter, yer a dumb-ass. You don't know wtf yer talking about. Anarchy is not the wanton chaos you seem to think it is.

Anarchy is a term used in enlightenned circles which means lack of a ruler, where ppl come together to arrive at their every need through cooperation. Were Anarchy to prevail throughout the land there'd be no future at all for those roving bands of marauders you always wanna go on and on about, because they'd get their asses kicked by the likes of us.

So, flush yerself back down the toilet from whence you came or grow yerself some god damned compassion and quit bein' so bitter about everything. Jeez, wtf are you so angry about any old how?

Trin

 

well sair sir

 

Definately well sair sir!

I'm not bitter, I'm simply realistic.

Bacchus: You have never had to sustain a real stuggle in your entire life; it shows.


Trin: Dumb ass huh? I'm sure you completely understand that in every society where anarchy has existed they have all been taken over by warlords. Not one arnarchic society has succeeded in any way. Cooperation goes a long way, but not far enough.

Anarchy will not and cannot work. There will always be societies with a ruler, and those WILL ALWAYS be stronger than anarchic societies. Explain this: How would your little society defend itself against a Chinese invasion?

Anarchy fails under the same principle that Democracy fails. Democracy works well when you have 100 like minded individuals; as the population grows and becomes more diverse more people are alienated. Eventually there are small pockets of individuals that are completely unrepresented.

What would your society do if someone stole something?
What would your society do if there was a Small Pox outbreak? (good luck finding "natural healing alternative" to that one)

 

Is it OK to kill animals and trees?

If you say killing animals and trees is wrong I'm going to laugh at you forever!

 

Really?


Interesting.


You really wouldn't believe how far off you are, man. I mean, I'm not gonna lay out my life story for you, but really trust me when I say, you are WAY off base.