I Don’t Like Anarchists
Filed under: Politics — Kevin Sullivan on October 21, 2007 @ 6:52 am CEST
Friday evening, while protesting something they probably know very little about, a collection of white, middle-class college kids (also known as Anarchists apparently) marched through the upscale neighborhood of Georgetown here in Washington, DC. Protesting the corporatey corporations doing their corporatey stuff, these spoiled children began hurling bricks at storefront windows, in order to smash the state and such.
Unfortunately, they also managed to smash some poor young woman’s skull open (see pic above). All of this was apparently in preparation for Saturday’s big IMF/World Bank protests, or whatever. This is partly why I rarely go downtown these days. A pack of spoiled college freshmen ready for class war? I’ll pass.
Some of the organizers involved bragged today about shutting down shops in Georgetown, showing just how powerful they are and stuff. I think they started a drum circle and bought new Che T-shirts in order to celebrate, but that couldn’t be confirmed. The kiddies had this to say:
We are very pleased that many stores in the heart of Georgetown, long reviled by many longtime residents of the colony that is DC, including The GAP, American Eagle, Urban Outfitters, Banana Republic, and several cosmetics stores decided to close early Friday. Many of these stores rely on sweatshop labor, while at the same time denying their employees guaranteed rights, including the right to unionize and bargain collectively.
Georgetown has a long history, sadly not yet complete, of keeping out working class people of color. Once a separate city from Washington DC, Georgetown, at one point during the 19th century, was a haven of many recently freed slaves. However, much as low-income residents are now being pushed out of Washington, DC altogether through gentrification and the included increasing property values, poor people of color were also forced from Georgetown through “urban renewal”, even as early as the 1920’s.
And what a service they did today for DC’s working poor. By shutting down commerce in Georgetown today, on a Saturday, they deprived many of the city’s working poor a day’s wages. So while these kids all got on busses and went back to whatever college they’re from on mom and dad’s dime, actual DC residents got screwed. Yay Anarchism.
Where’s Eric Cartman when we need him?
1 Rebel
October 21, 2007 @ 8:39 am CESTAre you kidding me? Are you incapable of discussing politics without resorting to crude stereotypes? “Anarchists=angry rich kids”? Edited by MvdG.
Class war is alive in the streets of America, and whoever is down, be they oppressed workers or traitors to whiteness like those quoted, they are part of the movement.
The capitalist system deprives people, not a shut-down by rebels. Losing one day’s wages is not the same as enduring a life of privation and alienation.Edited by MvdG.
2 Chuck Munson
October 21, 2007 @ 8:50 am CESTEdited by MvdG: If ‘anarchists’ can’t debate without insulting their opponents they should refrain from commenting altogether.
3 philosopherP
October 21, 2007 @ 9:03 am CESTThinking the poor would be better under anarchy than in the current system ignores some basic facts of life. The poor are powerless. Read Hobbes’ description on the state of nature for the rest.
4 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 9:06 am CESTphilosopher: you’re right. actually, free trade has proven to help the poor. The reality is that anarchists don’t really want to help the poor, they simply oppose capitalism. This isn’t about the poor, it’s about capitalism.
5 Xel
October 21, 2007 @ 9:22 am CESTCouldn’t they have curbed their own consumption first? Tried to influence the culture around them.
6 AlexTrocchi
October 21, 2007 @ 2:00 pm CESTI think it’s just categorically wrong to say free trade helps the poor, that Friedman-style ideology not based on any relevant facts. The World Bank is nearly bankrupt and the IMF is near death, while the WTO is in shambles. Experiments in “shock therapy” free-trade like in Russia have actually led the people to attempt to revert to nationalization. Have you noted that whenever any populist government actually takes control of its own government, particularly in South Ameica, the first thing they do is withdraw from free trade agreements and form their own regional pacts. And where I’m from in the rural United States, free trade has just shut down our entire industral base, leaving all our jobs gone, no more high quality products, and just cheap Walmarts. See Cathy Davidson’s “Closing” book.
Believe it or not, the anarchists are right about free trade.
7 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 2:03 pm CESTUmh no Alex, that’s not true. It has been well established that free trade, etc. helps the poor and poor countries. Ironically, the policies of anarchists are actually oppressing the poor.
8 mokey
October 21, 2007 @ 4:18 pm CEST“Umh no Alex, that’s not true. It has been well established that free trade, etc. helps the poor and poor countries. Ironically, the policies of anarchists are actually oppressing the poor.”
could you please reply with some kind of information other than base opinions? you know, with real opinions, some kind of sourcing, and maybe even your salary.
9 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 4:22 pm CESTWell to get started, how about ignoring Marx for a while, and reading “The Age of Turbulance” by Greenspan?
10 mikkel
October 21, 2007 @ 5:32 pm CESTRussia did not have “free-trade,” it had mafia connected businessmen that bought massive former state industries at ridiculously low prices and bribed anyone that was upset about it.
China and India is getting quickly richer as a whole — especially the people with education — and we’re already seeing some offshoring losses come back. It’ll take 20 years but eventually we’ll get a lot of industry back too.
Actual “anarchists” are against all government systems and hate socialism just as much. The only anarchist movement I know of that still exists with its original ideals are extreme Libertarians (oh and of course on the opposite end, hippie-style communes). And I hate to break it to you, but a lot of influential anarchists don’t actually care about class warfare except as a means to get the state to tear itself apart.
11 Hmmmm
October 21, 2007 @ 5:33 pm CESTWhat a ludicrous excuse for “journalism.” You make totally baseless comments, and the only reference you’ve given so far is tantamount to saying “Jesus was the son of God look the Bible says so.” Add to that the censorship of opponents’ comments and. . .you have absolutely no credibility.
You sound perfect for Fox News.
12 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 5:37 pm CESTYeah… the problem is, anarchists create… anarchy. We don’t want that at this blog, thus comments like that are deleted. I also considered deleting yours but decided to leave it up so everybody can read it as to enjoy its ‘quality.’
13 mikkel
October 21, 2007 @ 5:38 pm CESTOf course now that I read the news article and Googled the group mentioned I don’t see any sign of anarchism at all. Just looks like standard anti-globalization groups (i.e. take a small portion of genuinely concerned and serious people, add a ton of stupid kids that don’t really know what they’re talking about, have it organized by communist leaning groups that the first two groups wouldn’t like and add in a few troublemakers that might call themselves anarchists to justify destroying things) to me.
14 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 5:38 pm CESTMichael, how can you stifle the rebel?
That’s like not baking the bread.
“Traitors to whiteness”? Yeah, this is certainly a worthwile argument to have.
Alex, you act as if nationalization is a novelty. It has happened for centuries, long before NGO’s and the IMF, etc.
It generally goes the same way…nation becomes economically ostracized, and ultimately shoot themselves in the foot. Maybe the south american country you’re referring to is Venezuela?
What might they have that enables them to act like a petrol-monarchy? oops, gave it away. While I’m certainly not entirely opposed to the nationalization of services and works, an entirely nationalized system stifles liberty, stifles creativity and ultimately kills an economy. You become less an individual, and more a cog in a machine.
And all of that aside, I would like an Anarchist to propose a legitimate alternative. And I don’t want a reference to a book someone read half of. That tactic is annoying.
MAKE AN ARGUMENT.
15 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 5:40 pm CESTmikkel,
Good point. Hence my surprise to hear that this is what passes as an ideology these days (although I’m sure they’ll tell you they’ve read Bakunin or something).
16 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 5:41 pm CEST“maybe even your salary.”
omg. Seriously, Michael, I beg of you don’t edit these people…
17 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 5:50 pm CESTAnd for any Anarchist that wants to come here and say “Hey man! A loss of one day’s wages is nothing compared to life under a corporate overlord!” needs to compensate that weekly check for those who were sent home early or told not to bother coming in.
Most of those employees (while a portion are certainly just local teenagers and college kids) don’t live in this Georgetown you hate. They probably live in the SE, or maybe in parts of the NW.
There’s a large swath of DCists who live paycheck to paycheck. I love the logic that breaking a window does anything other than hurt the people these fools purport to help.
It’s like smashing a Starbucks window i.e. ‘99. it A. shows that most of these kids have no concept of what franchising is, its various levels, and who it hurts. Not all corporate chains are the same. and B. That the change they want is immediate, sexy and impulsive. How often does real, substantive change happen in that manner?
18 mikkel
October 21, 2007 @ 5:59 pm CESTI was very close to mentioning it, but the Starbucks thing put me over the edge: Baby, I’m an Anarchist by Against Me! perfectly captures the difference between anarchists and communists.
19 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 6:03 pm CESTBleh, yeah, and every Anarchist friend I had won’t listen to that band (or song) because they get on radio and stuff.
20 antica
October 21, 2007 @ 7:09 pm CESTI like how those on the extreme right can’t make logical arguments. It’s just ad-homanin attacks like,”smelly hippy” or “spoiled college kid.”
Why do you support the policies of the World Bank and IMF? How are these policies benefiting the people of the 3rd world? Or do you even care? I’d really like to hear an intelligent answer, not just some mindless insult about personal hygiene.
21 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 7:45 pm CESTantica,
Your argument isn’t with the “extreme right.” I’m sure you could find support for your obtuse, isolated world view from staunch conservatives. Your real gripe is with Liberalism.
The World Bank has done tremendous good all around the world–provided employment to guerillas in the Philippines, improved sanitation and disease cotrol, created irrigation projects, etc. Their less accomplished cousin, the IMF, has more to answer to, but this has little to do with smashing storefronts in georgetown and screaming “whose streets? Our streets!” like petulant children.
The problem is that many of these so-called anarchists are the spoiled product of the very Western society they claim to hate. I believe the World Bank and IMF need reform, not destrucution. I think they have served as instruments of both good and bad policy around the world. This isn’t simply a “rightist” argument, it’s the same argument globalization experts like Joseph Stiglitz make.
I care about free trade, and I care about the impact it has had in other countries. It has without question made people around the world healthier, smarter and wealthier. But there are problems, and we need to fix them.
None of this however stems from a bunch of black block thugs chanting meaningless slogans. They’re a discredit to the reasonable people who were at that protest yesterday, and don’t deserve a minute of someone’s time.
22 saed
October 21, 2007 @ 8:23 pm CEST“The World Bank has done tremendous good all around the world–provided employment to guerillas in the Philippines, improved sanitation and disease cotrol, created irrigation projects, etc.”
Actually the standard of living has plumited in the Philippines since the introduction of neo-liberal economic policies. Social services such as schools, hospitals ect. are being cut in an effort to repay debt to NGOs such as the IMF/WB. Not to mention the rampant corruption within the Government.
I don’t see how a “libertarian” such as yourself can praise the policies of the world bank as “tremendously good?” It’s a completely secretive and un-democratic organization, who’s main function is to promote U.S. economic interests in struggling 3rd world nations.
“Your real gripe is with Liberalism.”
You’re right! My gripe is with Liberalism and the politics of domination and control. I believe that capitalism and privatization of the means of survival are in contradiction with the ideals of liberty.
Alot of people are sick of their lives being reduces to the roll of a consumer. Alot of people are sickened by the knowledge that their comfortable life style is coming off the backs of the 3rd world. That’s why people throw bricks threw corporate windows. They are not only attacking property, but they are attacking an ideology.
23 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 8:33 pm CESTI’m not a Libertarian.
The Philippines are ranked as the 24th largest ecoonmy in the world, as of ‘04. They are widely considered to be the fastest growing economy in SOutheast Asia.
You’ve displayed no knowledge of the World Bank’s history.
“Alot of people”? Marginal and marginalized.
24 saed
October 21, 2007 @ 8:51 pm CEST“The Philippines are ranked as the 24th largest ecoonmy in the world, as of ‘04. They are widely considered to be the fastest growing economy in SOutheast Asia.”
That means nothing. Standard of living is still low as most people live in abject poverty. Argentina had a “fast growing economy” too, until the IMFs temporary loans ran out. With their social services stripped bear and their government gone bankrupt, their economy collapsed. it’s the same story everywhere. The IMF/WB and neo-liberalism only benefit foreign investors and western corporations, while leaving the people devastated.
IMF/WB = sweatshops
25 Tully
October 21, 2007 @ 9:31 pm CESTActually the standard of living has plumited in the Philippines since the introduction of neo-liberal economic policies.
That’s simply false. By all measures poverty in the Phillipines continues to decline steadily. It would decline faster if the birthrate wasn’t so high.
Argentina’s problem wasn’t IMF/WB. It was thoroughly incompetent fiscal management by the Argentine government. Since 2002 they’ve turned it around considerably, and they have current GDP growth of 9%.
That’s why people throw bricks threw corporate windows. They are not only attacking property, but they are attacking an ideology.
They’re breaking windows. Good for angst relief, but little else.
26 Hmmmm
October 21, 2007 @ 10:16 pm CESTPeople said: “Facts.”
Robots said “Nuh uh!”
What an intelligent discussion.
http://www.anarchistfaq.org - At least have SOME idea of what you’re talking about here please.
Remember… “Nuh uh!” Might fly where you live, but this is the internet where people who might not be so brainwashed have access to your comments.
27 Kevin Sullivan
October 21, 2007 @ 10:23 pm CESTYou haven’t proposed any facts. One goof came along and said “no way, Philippines is no good!”.
What measurement is that? I don’t need to give a link to some stupid FAQ page. Google “Philippines, economy.” All indicators have pointed to an upswing there.
Who is measuring this standard of living?
Are “facts” in anarcho-angsty speak simply the use of dumb talking points, like “the neo-liberals and their western corporations and investment and stuff and stuff”?
28 Hmmmm
October 21, 2007 @ 10:30 pm CESTUpdate: Read the comments on the dc indymedia story claiming agent provocateurs were present in Georgetown, because this was not actually the case (I posted the link to provide a bit wider perspective, but… it’s likely the info is being spread by people with less than genuine intentions…)
Kevin: You’re defending free market capitalism and/or the pathetic excuse for it that plagues our planet at the moment, what do you expect people to say? You have *alot* of reading to do and I’m not the type to make oblique references to this or that book. You could start by reading the anarchist FAQ linked above.
29 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 10:41 pm CEST“Hmmmm” you and your anarchist buddies are the worst the West has brought forth for a long long time. You reject the system that could improve the world, simply because you hate it. You hate it because you have determined that the system is rotten without taking a good look at the facts. You and your anarchist buddies aren’t ideologues, you’re hooligans. You’re bent on destruction, anarchists truly don’t add anything to the world.
You’re there, arrogantly, in the rich West, most of those anarchists attend the finest Universities, yet they hate everything their parents worked so hard for. They lack respect, they lack moral judgment, they lack everything necessary to be a full human being. Anarchists are truly a sad bunch of people. Go back to your father and mother, drink beer, watch the movies, go to your philosophy classes in which you hail Marx, but stay off the streets.
So intelligent, so wise. Destroying buildings, Destroying windows of shops. Wounding innocent women. A bunch of cowards that’s all.
There can be no ‘moderation’ with anarchists. They have to be isolated and when they organize their protests rounded up and brought to court for the destruction they’ve caused. Those shops are owned by actual individuals who work hard day in, day out, and they think they’ve got the right to go out there and cause as much damage to them as they can.
Sad.
30 Rebel
October 21, 2007 @ 11:22 pm CESTHah, Michael, go ahead and play that “I’m superior” game.
Those of us who are workers of the world, oppressed and furious, will continue to fight your beloved bourgeois order until it ends.
We’ll build our better alternative right down the street, illustrating that capitalism is a failed system based on alienation and theft.
“You’re bent on destruction, anarchists truly don’t add anything to the world.” What a tragedy! So Man Ray, John Cage, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Gary Snyder, Kenneth Rexroth, Marcel Duchamp, Ursula LeGuin, Howard Zinn, and of course, Leo Tolstoy, have never added anything to the world? Please. The most brilliant artists have always been connected with anarchist ideals, whether stated or not.
We the “cowards”? Surely you must mean the state and bosses, who murder day in and day out, our bodies and our souls. If the shops are owned by people who work so hard, why do the exploit their workers? Capitalism cannot exist without bosses and workers, and those of us exploited are sick and tired of it. Seriously, put down those ridiculous ideologues Hobbes and Friedman for a moment and consider the absurdity of a world where three quarters of all accumulated wealth is held in the hands of five percent of the population. If it wasn’t so serious, it would be hilarious.
You continue your apologism for the most murderous social system that the world has ever known, we’ll continue our unrelenting fight to break it down and build a new order in the rubble.
31 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 11:38 pm CESTAre you kidding me? Do you actually think that there are ‘workers’ who talk like that?
LMAO!
32 Michael van der Galiën
October 21, 2007 @ 11:46 pm CESTGood Lord, you aren’t going narcissistic on me are you?
33 Xel
October 21, 2007 @ 11:54 pm CESTI’m afraid that you guys suck. You here in the bottom of the comments section.
And I am only more libertarian than socialist, and no fan of Friedman or some of the things that happened in South-East asia after the tsunami. I can see the substance of some marxist theory - some.
But - oh my lack of a deity - you… Suck. I mean, I can’t be more detailed.
34 Michael van der Galiën
October 22, 2007 @ 12:07 am CESTlol well said Xel.
LMAO. Sometimes you display a good sense of humor
35 W. Liver
October 22, 2007 @ 12:08 am CESTHi Michael,
Five points:
(1) In reference to your comment “go to your philosophy classes in which you hail Marx” — Um, Anarchists do not hail Marx (First of all, they, being Anarchists, do not hail. Secondly, if they could hail, they certainly would not hail an authoritarian such as Karl Marx). In fact, if you had some knowledge of the profound differences and divergences of thought among Anarchists and Marxists, you would definitely not have made that ignorant statement, among others.
It’s pertinent to note here the famous debate between Mikhail Bakunin (a Russian Anarchist) and Karl Marx, where Bakunin warned of the menace of the “Red Bureaucracy” which, in his words, would prove to be “the most vile and terrible lie that our century has created”.
Many Marxists (Communists and Socialists) have the same abhorrence for Anarchists that Capitalists (Liberals and Conservatives) do, and seek to wipe them out. Welcome to the club. You have more in common with Stalin and Castro than you thought, bro.
(2) If you’re going to erase comments by people who you feel are insulting you, the least you could do is apply the same standard to yourself and not write in a way that insults other people. Why the double-standard?
(3) The policies of the IMF and World Bank are being challenged on a daily basis all over the world - not by anarchist college kids wearing black and smashing windows, but by ordinary people. Let me give you just two examples, with references that you should check out:
Argentina, once considered the poster child for the IMF’s structural adjustment programs, collapsed in 2001/2002. Workers started taking over hundreds of businesses that were abandoned by their owners, and re-started production as egalitarian co-operatives. Also, citizens have created neighborhood assemblies to None of this is happening at the behest of political parties, international monetary institutions, governments, or other self-proclaimed authorities. It’s called direct democracy. Real democracy. If you want to know more about it, check out the documentary called “The Take“.
As for the second example, it’s Jamaica. Their economy started tanking much earlier than Argentina’s, and they, too, were under the Iron Heel of the IMF. Much of Jamaica’s homegrown agriculture has disappeared because they have to compete against subsidized agri-business from the US. Under IMF rules, developing countries are not allowed to give government support to their industries (because that would be a “barrier to trade”, but since the US and Europe effectively control the IMF and other “free” trade organizations, THEY can give billions in subsidies to protect THEIR industries from competition!). To learn more about the situation in Jamaica, directly from the Jamaican people, a good start would be this documentary: “Life and Debt“.
(4) So what if some Anarchists broke some windows? Read some American labor history - it’s full of incredible acts of violence against organized workers. In fact, it was this violence which is truly the foundation of our modern capitalist culture, more than anything. Private property is not as sacred as the lives that are disrupted and destroyed in its name. Also, no anarchist has ever invaded entire countries in the guise of “freedom” or “liberation” or “democracy”. No college-age black-clad brick-throwing pasty white kid has ever committed the vile acts of terrorism that the US Government, and many other governments across the world, has committed throughout history and commits as we speak. Keep you eyes open, and on the prize.
(5) The IMF, World Bank, WTO, and FTAA, among others, have faced stiff resistance from ordinary human beings worldwide, and are on the decline. And it’s a damn good thing, even if you are a capitalist. Because this anti-democratic one-size-fits-all brand of capitalism leads in one direction only: totalitarianism.
Good day to you, Sir.
36 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 12:32 am CESTHmmm,
“Update: Read the comments on the dc indymedia story claiming agent provocateurs were present in Georgetown, because this was not actually the case (I posted the link to provide a bit wider perspective, but… it’s likely the info is being spread by people with less than genuine intentions…)”
No. Indymedia is horse crap. A girl got her skull cracked because some little punk can’t throw and wanted to smash a window and be a tough guy. Cut the crap.
“Kevin: You’re defending free market capitalism and/or the pathetic excuse for it that plagues our planet at the moment, what do you expect people to say? You have *alot* of reading to do and I’m not the type to make oblique references to this or that book. You could start by reading the anarchist FAQ linked above.”
I AM defending capitalism, and I thought you guys were attacking globalization? Being leery of adjustment programs and free trade shouldn’t be tantamount to naive anti-capitalism. It’s the best system the world has ever seen, provided the state works with it and curbs it. It has made the world a richer, smarter and healthier place. You blow slogans out your ass, and suggest *reading*, because you have nothing else to offer. You have no alternatives, all you have is hyperbole and angst.
I don’t care to read the crap you suggest. I’ve read Bakunin, I’ve read Klein, I ‘ve read Stiglitz, I’ve read enough to know you’re an idiot and that you haven’t presented one snip of hard data to back up any of your claims.
Cry about the corporations. Cry about the media. Eventually, you’ll realize that no one wants to listen to you because you really have nothing to say. Maybe it’ll hit you by junior year.
37 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 12:38 am CESTW. Liver,
Life and Debt is like ten years old. I’ve seen it at least a dozen times. You guys spout the same stuff, tout the same docs and offer up the same tired old nonsense.
There were a lot of problems with the Jamaican econmy before they set up the tax free zones for indsutry, and pushed agro exports out.
One of the big problems in Africa, Latin America and South America is that there is no property law. The state DOESN’T respect private property, so citizens have no assets or anything that can increase in value beside the low wage they earn and the stuffthey manage to keep (if of value).
The error in the iMF/World Bank is that they often impose free market regulations on nations that have no structure for a free market. I would recommend a good book, BUT THEN I WOULD BE LAME.
38 Tully
October 22, 2007 @ 1:14 am CESTAm I the only one that finds it ironic that the modern “anarchists” are so very far away from Bakunin’s lumpenproletariat? Far from being “almost unpolluted by bourgeois civilization” they are expressly the products of “bourgeois civilization,” if mostly unable to fend for themselves in it.
There is nothing quite as hilarious to me as an “anarchist” with an iPod and internet.
39 Hmmmm
October 22, 2007 @ 1:25 am CESTKeep up the “nuh uh!” Kevin it’s hilarious.
Everyone here should probably stop making assumptions about the backgrounds of those involved in these events, and those posting comments here. You don’t know what any of these people have seen, read, learned, been through, etc. To anyone who might suggest that there are no working class anarchists or radicals in general, I suggest that you go to several of these actions instead of using stereotypes to set up a straw man to attack.
40 Tully
October 22, 2007 @ 1:41 am CESTLOL
Nobody know the trouble I’ve seen
Nobody knows my sorrow
Nobody knows the trouble that I’ve seen
Glory Hallelujah
41 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 2:44 am CESTHmmm…save it. I was involved in blind anti-globalization movements since Seattle, and have been to countless anti-globalization protests. I was naive and wrong then, and you’re wrong now.
You’re trying to derail this and make it a different conversation. Mikkel was quick to point it out. What you espouse is reactionary anti-globalism. Once again, you’ve given a response with no hard data, only hyperbole. You had a friend who at least tried, but his examples are well over a decade old. I pointed out the good the WB did in the Philippines, and someone erroniously said standard of living is going down. There is no data that’s consistent with that argument. I want facts.
Also, once again, this isn’t about having a healthy skepticism of the WTo/IMF/WB. That’s fine. I can respect that. But that’s not what you people believe. You’re petulant, spoiled middle class kids who need something to belong to, for whatever your reasons may be. So you dress up and play Black Bloc. You act tough, maybe cuz you got picked on in high school or something. Who knows. What you espouse is blanket anti-capitalism, along with whatever else Zinn, Chomsky or your “Sociology of Air” college professor tells you to believe. Your talking points haven’t changed since I was in college, nor has your data. You cite Indymedia, Info shop, Zinn, Loewen, blah blah blah…
You have no idea how narrow your global outlook is, or how stunted your historical perspective. You can call this ad hominem, or whatever. But you live a sheltered little existence, believe a tiny, marginal doctrine, and ultimately speak for a microscopic population around the world.
All you did was look like fools and hurt an innocent girl. Go back to your campus and stay out of my city.
42 Jason Steck
October 22, 2007 @ 4:16 am CESTI show large portions of Life & Debt to my students in classes I teach on international politics. I also teach the dysfunction and problems of the WTO and IMF. I also teach the positive aspects of globalization, free trade, international financial investment, etc.
In short, there is no reason to assume that acknowledging the problems necessitates rejection of globalization as a concept. Conversely, supporting globalization does not require rejecting all discussion of problems with it.
The problem with many of the comments on this thread is the incessant search for a “pure”, black-and-white narrative. To be brutally honest, I would never accept such oversimplistic, un-nuanced arguments from my students.
43 finne
October 22, 2007 @ 4:29 am CESTSounds like most of the people on here (who I bet are white) don’t know any anarchists. Nice try on the whole “lost wages” thing, though. Too bad the false assumption that the contradictions of surviving in a capitalist society somehow make people into willing workers went out of style last year. Maybe you didn’t get the office email.
To friends Kevin and Michael - I’m a member of the working class and I have your number. It’s too bad we aren’t face to face - it’s difficult to make some asinine debate-class strawman argument to a hammer, scumbags.
We don’t forget and we don’t forgive.
44 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 4:42 am CESTI would plead with the editors not to delete this previous comment, because I think it’s important for everyone to see what kind of filth we’re talking about–poseurs who never made the football team, maybe got beat up in school, maybe Daddy didn’t love them. Who knows.
But in this intellectually vapid movement called “Anarchism,” they’ve fulfilled two things–it gives them something to believe, and likewise allows them to finally belong to something like a frat, or a team. They’re not the hippies, or pacifists. They’re TOUGH.
Anyway, I understand the policy here. But again, I think it’s important to put cowards like this on display for the freak show they are.
Oh, well.
45 Jason Steck
October 22, 2007 @ 5:36 am CESTBy your request, it will remain, Kevin. But further comments of that type and/or from that source have been and will continue to be banned.
46 Hmmmm
October 22, 2007 @ 6:50 am CEST“it’s difficult to make some asinine debate-class strawman argument to a hammer, scumbags.”
ban me then you facist fuck.
47 Hmmmm
October 22, 2007 @ 6:51 am CESTgrr *fascist (can’t let that go… crappy keyboard)
48 Chris
October 22, 2007 @ 7:18 am CESTI didn’t know there were actual anarchists. How quaint
With that said, I have serious probems with the IMF/World Bank.
49 W. Liver
October 22, 2007 @ 7:34 am CESTWow, so I give people hard facts about ordinary people all over the world (and not the same stereotyped young American anarchists) rising up against the IMF and other capitalist institutions and creating viable and workable and sustainable alternatives (direct democracy), I give a couple of resources where they can get more information (and I’d be happy to give more), and I speak out against name-calling, and all I get in response is more of the same ignorance and ideology.
There is no point in attempting to engage you folks in honest and civil discussion. Maybe a brick to the head would suffice after all.
On that note, I leave you with this quote from the book Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology by David Graeber:
…”democracy”… appears to have been coined as something of a slur by its elitist opponents: it literally means the “force” or even “violence” of the people. Kratos, not archos. The elitists who coined the term always considered democracy not too far from simple rioting or mob rule; though of course their solution was the permanent conquest of the people by someone else. And ironically, when they did manage to suppress democracy for this reason, which was usually, the result was that the only way the general populace’s will was known was precisely through rioting…
See you on the streets!
50 Mike C.
October 22, 2007 @ 7:43 am CESTAnarchists are a bunch of unrealistic utopian losers (kind of like their kissing cousins on the right: staunch libertarians) and, yes, most (nearly all?) are spoiled self-centered college brats. I haven’t met any acolytes of anarchism off my campus in the Northwest and it’s hard to miss the fact that they are overwhelmingly white; that’s leftist diversity for you!
51 Xel
October 22, 2007 @ 9:39 am CEST“In short, there is no reason to assume that acknowledging the problems necessitates rejection of globalization as a concept. Conversely, supporting globalization does not require rejecting all discussion of problems with it.”
/ Thread (as they say on imageboards.)
52 Michael van der Galiën
October 22, 2007 @ 9:41 am CESTlol was that a threat? “I’ll crush you like a cockroach” sounds more impressive.
53 Xel
October 22, 2007 @ 1:05 pm CESTOpinon bad! SMASH opinion!
54 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 2:15 pm CEST1. I think Hmmm just asked one of the other Anarchists to ban him.
2. Liver,
Again, you have presented nothing. EVERY TIME you argue with your standard campus anti-globalilst you get the same rhetoric, and the same examples. The problem, as I stated with Jamaica, is that there are numerous reasons those countries can’t sustain the level of trade they have placed upon them. Corruption. Weak legal structure. A weak state that can’t enforce property rights.
Then you propose the same damn docs that everyone here has probably seen, and cite that as your “hard facts.” Telling me to go to the video store is not an argument!
The problem with people like you is that you suffer from a severe case of majoritarianism. You don’t respect the position you hold in the world of ideological debate–a very, very marginal one. Think of it this way…just about every room you walk into, every discussion you engage in, you will get push back on your ideas. Now, this doesn’t make you wrong (you just also happen to be wrong). But being smug, and whining when people don’t buy into your style of debate will get you know where.
55 Hmmmm
October 22, 2007 @ 2:32 pm CEST“There is no point in attempting to engage you folks in honest and civil discussion. Maybe a brick to the head would suffice after all.”
This person nailed it. Kevin etc. Have a nice time stereotyping people and misrepresenting ideas. I’m sure all the really intelligent readers of this site will embrace your incredibly logical arguments. I’ll work on being white and middle class so I can be a real anarchist.
56 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 2:43 pm CESTOnce again…boohoo, woah is me, I’m such a victim.
We’ve given you numerous chances to make a serious argument, and you’re complaining, linking us to FAQ pages like an insurance company and telling us to watch movies.
Michael and I tolerated a guy threatening to kill us with his mom’s hammer, the least you fools can do is tolerate some pushback to your marginal ideas, no?
57 Tully
October 22, 2007 @ 3:01 pm CESTyou facist fuck
Always with the oral sex after the spankings.
Y’all anarchists realize how patellar-reflexively mindless you sound when you can’t step outside your programmed dialectical cant and into a factual discussion using real evidence? Engage on reality rather than your pre-written political pomposity? Discuss issues rather than throw tantrums? One does note the immediate assignation of any disagreement with The Cause as being racist, fascist, etc. Spare me.
I know, I know, it’s because the white corporate power structure is oppressing the proles. Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
(Why do anarchists all dress in black? To express their individuality!)
58 Hmmmm
October 22, 2007 @ 5:59 pm CESTWhat can one discuss with someone who, faced with facts, continually replies “nuh uh!” What kind of intelligent discussion did you think this kind of blog posting would lead to?
If you want to engage in civil discussion with people, try to summon a modicum of intelligence first.
Dismissing hard facts ad nauseum does not encourage civil discussion.
Ad hominem attacks on some contrived straw man “anarchist” you’ve invented do not encourage civil discussion. Do you really think anyone wants to discuss anything with a condescending prick who mis-characterizes them constantly?
You act like people owe you some kind of respect.
If all you’re doing is spewing ignorance, don’t expect a polite response.
59 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 6:05 pm CESTI’ve given you numerous chances to present these hard facts. Where are they? What are they?
You call people “fascist fucks,” and expect civil conversation.
Again, the fact that you can’t even acknowledge just how small your circle is should be telling. For some reason, we’re the ones who should engage you. Why? History has never been on your side, nor is the present day. You are a small, marginalized faction, and you should be BEGGING us to listen to you.
Instead, you act smug, throw around words you don’t even understand, and refer to ten year old documentaries as hard data. I don’t want your respect, you’re meaningless to me.
I don’t want respect from people who threaten other’s lives, and rationalize assaulting an innocent woman. You owe a LOT of people respect, because the vast majority of the world will never hear your crying and your whining. The vast majority will never care.
We’ve provided you audience here, and you’ve done nothing with it.
60 Hmmmm
October 22, 2007 @ 7:12 pm CESTThanks for the heads up on the way the world works. Here I was walking around basing my decisions on reality, and all along I should have been acting on insane delusions! Your pathetic rantings have completely altered my outlook on the world.
Grow up and learn to read. I never expected any civil discussion with the likes of you. Your comments and your blog entries clearly display your ignorance and inability to use even basic logic. I just like egging you on. Carry on insulting the anarchist stereotype you seem so obsessed with.
61 Tully
October 22, 2007 @ 7:17 pm CESTIf you want to engage in civil discussion with people, try to summon a modicum of intelligence first.
We tried, but you showed up instead. Must be a glitch in the summoning spell.
Got facts? Make argument. Reference facts. Be specific. Cite specific verifiable source for same. Rocket science, it’s not.
62 Michael van der Galiën
October 22, 2007 @ 7:26 pm CEST“Hmmmmmm” shouldn’t you, I don’t know, throw bricks at young women by now?
63 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 7:27 pm CESTYou egged us on by coming to our blog and commenting, after I egged you on and hurt your feelings with my post.
You should google search “egging on.” You do it wrong.
Seriously, Tully, we’re wasting energy in typing on a 12 year old. This guy will be in a suit on Wall Street in ten years, so we might want to let the angsty angst run its course.
64 Michael van der Galiën
October 22, 2007 @ 7:51 pm CESTAin’t that the truth. And he and his buddies will talk about the good old days when they destroyed shops and injured innocent young women.
65 Tully
October 22, 2007 @ 8:07 pm CESTWasting his energy more than mine–humor is good for the health. Haven’t heard some of that silly stuff since the Sixties, and it was hilarious then. You could program the power-to-the-people dialogue into an ELIZA box and never be able to tell the difference.
But I’ll desist. We already know anarchists can’t take over the world. They’re too disorganized. ;-D
66 Michael van der Galiën
October 22, 2007 @ 8:50 pm CESTKevin - although I respect you for admitting that you were one of them once - I’ve got say, don’t use jargon please. “Egging on”? What’s that all about. “Causing to act.” Is that some kind of ‘goal’ for these people? Forcing people to act? And then what? We act by exposing them for their idiocy. But they’re happy nonetheless because we at least ‘acted?’
67 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 9:57 pm CESTSorry Michael, I was only using his lingo.
Yes, cause to action or provocation would best describe that saying.
I think junior has himself convinced that he riled us up. He isn’t aware of really how easy it is to dispense with the likes of him.
68 Kevin Sullivan
October 22, 2007 @ 10:33 pm CESTYawn.
69 Tully
October 23, 2007 @ 12:34 am CESTUSER: Good morning!
ELIZA: This must be the case because no one else could possibly disagree with you. What a joke. Keep stroking your egos. You’ve exposed nothing but your extreme ignorance.
USER: What did you have for breakfast today?
ELIZA: You fascist —-! Your comments and your blog entries clearly display your ignorance and inability to use even basic logic.
USER: I had spam and eggs for breakfast.
ELIZA: Do you really think anyone wants to discuss anything with a condescending prick who mis-characterizes them constantly? You act like people owe you some kind of respect. If all you’re doing is spewing ignorance, don’t expect a polite response.
Repeat, ad infinitum.
70 Tully
October 23, 2007 @ 12:37 am CESTSorry, Kevin, Michael. I coudn’t resist.
71 PatHMV
October 23, 2007 @ 12:53 am CESTROFL, Tully!!!!
72 Ohhhhhh
October 23, 2007 @ 10:17 pm CESThttp://wecouldbefamous.blogspot.com/
“Although she’s making the best out of the situation by employing her sense of humor to get some laughs out of her minor celebrity, especially the videos of her stoic glare while covered in blood, Sayde would rather not have the attention. She thinks it’s ridiculous that instead of discussing the issues behind the protest, instead the “debate” is reduced to outrage over the isolated violent incident. Rather than delve into the ethical quandaries posed by the often exploitative nature of IMF policies, we’re given the damning evidence of an emerging threat that we all must fear and punish.
As a responsible older brother, I’m especially angered that my sister’s bloody face is all over the internet right now, exploited as justification for irrational and hateful opining about the intentions and evilness of a rather small group protesting American citizens.”
73 PatHMV
October 23, 2007 @ 10:25 pm CESTOhhhhhh, I’m certainly glad that your sister is not seriously injured, but I refuse to engage in a serious discussion over a policy issue like this as a result of violent, anarchistic protests. Have a calm, peaceful, non-violent protest which is not aimed at “shutting down” a city or an important meeting of global leaders, and I’ll agree to serious discussion. But nobody should negotiate or debate issues as a result of attention gained by violence and disruption.
74 Kevin Sullivan
October 23, 2007 @ 10:45 pm CESTIt’s pretty simple, really…
Girl gets hit, goes to hospital.
idiot doesn’t throw brick, girl not go to hospital.