The value of non-violence, or at the very least, self-regulation

I'm not going to give you the standard liberal lecture about how violence is bad and you're being meanie poo poo pants if you punch people and won't you please think of the poor nazi's feels :'( While I'll never support the massively anti-free speech wing of the radical left, I'm not exactly moaning on the floor because some holocaust deniers got pepper sprayed. They can honestly eat a dick for all I care. I'm just curious whether all this semi-indiscriminate violence is really strategically sound.

I think that if we continue to be the ones who start fights and revel the most in the violence, we're going to quickly lose public sympathy. We can already see this happening with people cheering as the police arrest burger-Antifas, swapping memes about antifa getting btfo at Berkeley, etc. People are starting to actively dislike antifa (and by extension, anarchists and socialists in general) because whenever a rally that even might be right wing is planned, a bunch of upper-middle class teenagers with 2x4s show up to start a brawl. They attack medics, bystanders, even other antifa who lose their masks. It's a shitshow.

Now, obviously the alt-right would do the same shit given the chance. Hell, the neo-nazis might be worse. But since we're giving them the chance to play the victim, they're riding that train as far as it'll take them. If we would just wait for them to do something that the public would see as justifying violence, or if we could even just police the antifa movement better and stop assaulting people who are wearing red hats, or medics or whatever, the damage would be so much less. It's hard to overestimate just how much liberal brownie points you get by plausibly being the victim.

And for that one guy who's going to suggest that we just tell everyone who isn't a communist to go fuck themselves, I'd love to see you have a revolution without at least the implicit support of the majority. Good luck buddy.

Other urls found in this thread:

soundcloud.com/deadpundits/ep-9-exiting-the-culture-warrior-clusterfck-w-angela-nagle
thebaffler.com/latest/burn-it-down
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Maybe we should apply one of the few useful things postmodernism taught us. Instead of using absolute ethics and morals, we should probably look at individual cases and decide if violence is a good choice. Show restraint, however, not become pacifists. Rational people use reason when it applies and brute force when there is none to reason with. Fighting nazis over racial and free speech issues should be outside our realm entirely. Since the dichotomy of the liberal and nazi doesn't account for either our views on these issues. Therefore engaging in what is most in line with our views (usually the liberal, however, dependent on who you ask) we will become part of the dichotomy and in turn, our views will be linked with that group. It shows whenever we try to debate either liberals or nazis. The liberals call us nazis, while the nazis call us liberals. We should instead seek to transcend this petty conflict. Removal of capitalism will, in turn, let us deal with racial issues and free speech on a leftist playing field. The dichotomy disappears and clear coherent solutions will come forth. At that point, any liberal or nazi should first be reasoned with and then punched if they try to get in our way.

But what about those people who don't want your new restrictions?
Those that disagree with you and have their own convictions?
You say they've got it wrong because they don't agree with you
So when the revolution comes you'll have to run them through
You say that revolution will bring freedom for us all
Well freedom just ain't freedom when your back's against the wall

You talk of overthrowing power with violence as your tool
You speak of liberation and when the people rule
Well ain't it people rule right now, what difference would there be?
Just another set of bigots with their rifle-sights on me

Will you indoctrinate the masses to serve your new regime?
And simply do away with those whose views are too extreme?
Transportation details could be left to British rail
Where Zyklon B succeeded, North Sea Gas will fail
It's just the same old story of man destroying man
We've got to look for other answers to the problems of this land

You talk of overthrowing power with violence as your tool
You speak of liberation and when the people rule
Well ain't it people rule right now, what difference would there be?
Just another set of bigots with their rifle-sights on me

Vive la revolution, people of the world unite
Stand up men of courage, it's your job to fight

It all seems very easy, this revolution game
But when you start to really play things won't be quite the same
Your intellectual theories on how it's going to be
Don't seem to take into account the true reality
Cos the truth of what you're saying, as you sit there sipping beer
Is pain and death and suffering, but of course you wouldn't care

You're far too much of a man for that, if Mao did it so can you
What's the freedom of us all against the suffering of the few?
That's the kind of self-deception that killed ten million jews
Just the same false logic that all power-mongers use
So don't think you can fool me with your political tricks
Political right, political left, you can keep your politics
Government is government and all government is force
Left or right, right or left, it takes the same old course
Oppression and restriction, regulation, rule and law
The seizure of that power is all your revolution's for
You romanticise your heroes, quote from Marx and Mao
Well their ideas of freedom are just oppression now

Nothing changed for all the death, that their ideas created
It's just the same fascistic games, but the rules aren't clearly stated
Nothing's really different cos all government's the same
They can call it freedom, but slavery is the game

Nothing changed for all the death, that their ideas created
It's just the same fascistic games, but the rules aren't clearly stated
Nothing's really different cos all government's the same
They can call it freedom, but slavery is the game
There's nothing that you offer but a dream of last years hero
The truth of revolution, brother………………. is year zero.

Why dont you go march in Chechnya?

Oh no just pretend people are fascists whilst ignoring the real ones.

It's only good praxis to use the dominant ideology to your advantage. It's currently Liberalism, so why not "side" with it and play along with the free speech nonsense? It's a tactical move.

...

Not a very strategic move. Liberalism is by no means easier to get rid off than fascism. While building tension between to two groups might actually be the better move. Let them eat each other, while to people who are disillusioned by both sides can wander from apathy to socialism.

Violence is the solution. "Public Sympathy" doesn't sway the course of history. Decisive action and targeted acts of subversion and sabotage are what moves the tide. "Peaceful protest" and pacifism are impotent memes designed to keep us plebs in our pens. Never raising a finger.

The Bolsheviks didn't play nice. The Fascists didn't play nice. The Nazis didn't play nice. The Sans-Culottes didn't play nice.
People respect strength. Liberalism is a paper tiger. To survive it needs a completely subservient, passive, preferably disarmed and apathetic populace. Even the slightest breeze threatens to dismantle it.

You know what else people like? Winners. They naturally gravitate towards those they see as the future victors.
That's not to say you should become a smashy, but you need to be perceived as dangerous, on the edge and ready to kick in the liberal sandcastle. There's a reason the saying goes It's better to be feared than loved if one cannot be both. The Liberal lemming will never join you out of sympathy, but they will out of necessity, or at least get the fuck out of your way. (Similar to what happened in Germany when the Nazis took the reins of power. Liberals are weak, they will accept anything as long as it means not getting their teeth kicked in.)
When the revolutionary undercurrent starts showing up with guns - even in silence - it might produce laughs, but they're nervous ones. See Arizona.
Read The Coming Insurrection or find some Fascist literature.

Violence is okay. Violence is good. Violence works.

their longevity is a testament to their success

...

Over 70 years is longer than some modern liberal democracies.
The Fascists also got into a fight with everyone around them. But they knew how to seize power.
The Bolsheviks were a minority at the time, as were the rest of them. It's not about popular support, it's about power. The only way to make sure people don't walk over you is to make yourself dangerous.
Liberalism doesn't like danger. It would rather placate you then get into a fight.

Guess what bro, Capitalism is hyper violent and most people support that over leftists whose only real claim to violence is breaking some windows and punching literal nazis in the face.

If you lose support over a brawl, they weren't, and were never going to support you anyways.

People do not believe that Capitalism is violent because it's much more subtle. Most people are very much against violence.

Nah, it's not subtle at all. Mass incarceration in the U.S for example requires force or the threat of force. But I guess you can use mental gymnastics all you want to make it seem like it's not actually violent.

That's exactly what people do. The propaganda is effective partially because people want to believe in it. It's a lot easier being a slave if you think you're free and life is just naturally shitty and that the most oppressed actually deserve it.

You ever heard of the core fascist narrative?
It doesn't have to be jews, an outgroup can be established from anywhere and blamed. ANTIFA is too simplified, people see them as blaming the alt-right instead of immigrants, thus being the "same".

ANTIFA needs to be replaced by something other than a rioting rabble, with a more nuanced mission statement and tact in who they target. Otherwise its just good ol' occupy wallstreet again.

Non-violence is simply the pragmatic option. It has roughly 2x the success rate in achievement movements' aims as violence. There's no doubt that violence is sometimes necessary, but if you feel you can garner sympathy or swell ranks from anyone, you should really try to stay non-violent as long as possible.

Daily reminder that antifa are LARPing college students egged on by alphabets and think tanks to sway public opinion

If nazis didn't do anything when left alone, fighting them would be wrong. However, pic related. Every minute nazis spend larp-fighting stupid dreadlocked college kids is minute they aren't marching into ordinary people's streets and beating innocent people.

I've never advocated Nazi punching, but I have watched some Nazis get punched with great satisfaction.

Whatever you think about his ideas, Tolstoy's life and death was about as based as you could get as an anarchist.

What exactly are these """successes""" that you speak of?

There are more antifa than there are neo nazi's, so good luck with that. They (far right, neo nazi's, facists, alt-right, reactionaries, etc.) haven't actually done anything (legally) to justify any of the violence. They've spouted mostly far right platitudes, in order to trigger edgy lefties, and you idiots take the bait every time.


racial issues and free speech

Hypothetically, ignoring the logistical nightmare of removing capitalism, what solutions do you have to solving racial tensions, that other socialist or communist regimes haven't tried already?

Mass incarceration is an example of the failures of corporatism, and it's shortcomings. Since it happens to mostly poor minorities, Americans won't really care.

as much as i love crass, it seems those guys were the dogmatic pacifist type… and i can't say i'm a pacifist.

to add to the discussion even though i'm just another retarded burger, i'll say that we should be training ourselves to become well equipped to visit effective violence in the name of self-defense. In my view, crossing over the line to 'offense' in a time where there is no clear line of 'revolution' even remotely in sight, you are asking for much heavier state repression and in general, you are asking to become further alienated from the masses.

I agree with your concern, and i think this discussion has become absolutely muddied. A recent podcast (two of them, actually) discusses violence in two different aspects. I honestly think you should listne to them because it hits on some really key points you bring up here:

soundcloud.com/deadpundits/ep-9-exiting-the-culture-warrior-clusterfck-w-angela-nagle

[The relevent part is about 19:00 into the recording on this one ] :

thebaffler.com/latest/burn-it-down


In both of these cases I think they are level headed and address a lot of the gaslighting that is so common with the anti free speech left these days. It really made me feel sane hearing these two talk, since the 'anti free speech' left really seems to not care about long term victory, just short term symbolic bullshit..

yeah i picked up on this too. the dogmatic worship of violence in that post is going full retard and why i am not an anarchist. all this macho bullshit about rebellion without any critical view toward the actual aftermath and whether or not it will benefit our long term strategy.

i can feel the impotence from a mile away

what is pic related from? i'm out of the loop on this one srry

Ideologically prepare people for anti-fascist violence.
Don't start a fight you can't win.
Provide a positive service to those most directly threatened by fascist violence.

That's it homie.

you can just call it capitalism fam.. its ok, this is a safe space …. :)

I think a lot of people here have only grown up in this current gap of peace for some reason glorify it. When you look at real violence, especially as a medical provider, it makes you question your life and what your doing. There is a reason soilders are trained to be desensitized to it, and its more like a temporary fog before you wake up to it years later.

And you're not impotent?

C'mon guys. Not advocating violence here but these lyrics are so stupid. Although I do like

...

It's from the Cronulla race riot back in 2005. Nazis organised through mass texting (simpler times) to whip up a riot against the Lebanese in Sydney. In 2015 they tried setting more rallies under the 'Reclaim Australia' banner, with the explicit goal of commemorating/repeating the '05 riot. They didn't get anywhere because stupid-looking anarkiddies and paper-sellers yelled at them instead of letting them do what they wanted.

More often than not, the oppressed who overthrow an oppressive regime become the oppressors themselves.

Well timed violence can tip things over the edge but if the system is stable then all smashies do is hurt their cause.

The Invisible Committee was blinded by the general unrest of the mid-2000s (anti-CPE and Oaxaca protests, riots following the death of Benna and Traoré, etc.) and ultimately too edgy when they wrote this book.
They kinda acknowledge this in To Our Friends, IIRC. They realized that brute force against state institutions is unproductive, and a smarter approach is to defend fiercely places where a population opposes the state or a capitalist project and autogestion/a commune-like organization emerges (e.g. Tahrir Square, Notre-Dame-des-Landes…)

Their insurrectionism, as they outlined it in their first book, is also offputting for me because of their blind faith in the communal organization. The first questions which came into my mind when I read it were : "Then, how are we going to produce complex shit like ARM processors ? What will happen to universities and academic research ? How will we be able to organize large-scale actions requiring a lot of synchronization between communes with this type of organization ?"
I guess I haven't read enough books to find a reasonable answer that satisfy me, but Zizek uttered the same kind of criticism about direct-democracy-based governance, and I share it tbh.
I just hope Rojava will manage to have a durable foothold in the international landscape so we could directly see if it works out for them over a longer period of time than Catalonia and Ukraine, during this fucking 21st-century.

Anyway, my main gripe is that I'm not convinced enough by the anarcho-insurrectionism project to endorse violence in its name. Having an offensive stance without a solid idea of the possible outcomes that await us is dangerous.
That said, I need to get the Invisible Committee's new book tomorrow.

Hey user, I have read lots of the books already - let me save you some time. Nobody knows how that's supposed to work, and if you ask too many times they will start calling you names like utopian or counter-revolutionary. The cybernetics thread ( ) has pretty much the only serious discussion about answering your question that I have ever found. It's still in it's infancy as a distinct perspective, but we're gaining theory (and more, importantly praxis) fast. You're asking the right questions, you should join us.

This, basically. It's idiotic to speak of a dichotomy between violence and pacifism. The real dichotomy is between useful violence/pacifism and useless violence/pacifism.

I dunno but here's a figure. There may be some historical bias due to material conditions though. This analysis doesn't delve into the pre-capitalism period. Capitalism itself may need to be overthrown in a sea of blood as happened with feudalism.

Source: The History Board

...