Another offering from our anonymous friends at Anarchy101.
The question of violence doesn't seem to be as big a deal for anarchists these days (or maybe i'm just not hanging out with those people any more), but here is a question that brings us back to it, and an interesting reply to start a conversation...
i think that unfortunately we have to face up to the fact that violence is as necessary as food and water. Without violence, even if just the very slight violence which is ripping up plants, picking fruits, walking over earth, chewing bacteria to death, hearts beating violently against chests, lungs beating violently against ribs upon inhaling, etc., -- that is, without death -- there can be no life.
sure, it's sad; after all, we're against the institutionalized violence of the forces of domination, but regardless, we must break their monopoly on it... and not just their monopoly on violence, but on public expression, ideas, dreams.
Violence is just a more forceful caress. Dogs for instance, can be quite violent, but it's playful. We have little ability to let go, and begrudge each other our violence, because we constantly suppress it in ourselves in order in tolerating being made to work.
it's just my opinion... and i'm just an anybody.... but i think our identities have to die violently. and if society doesn't back the fuck off this empire shit it will too. in fact, when you can face the violence of life and the imminence of death, the identities you would otherwise pursue, the goals, the position you'd strive after, all look ridiculous. That's a start. In fact, the only possible starting point, the one we take most for granted, is the raw, violent, bare, exposed, alone, finite existence we happen to have come into. So yeah i think it's an important question, and we can't just say: "anarchists are against violence" or "anarchists are pro-violence for smashing the state" or whatever, but get deeper into it and realize the futility of even asking.
There is really no such thing as " non-violent" protest. Even the most peacefull protest is backed by numbers if it is to be effective, and numbers make the pigs nervous and they attack. Smashing a few windows in an everyday situation will barely generate a police report, much less what happened in Toronto. Add numbers to the game and you've got a full scale riot when the cops start acting like they do.
I'd like to punch them in
I'd like to punch them in the side of the nose where it will make the crimson flow.
i think that unfortunately
i think that unfortunately we have to face up to the fact that violence is as necessary as food and water. Without violence, even if just the very slight violence which is ripping up plants, picking fruits, walking over earth, chewing bacteria to death, hearts beating violently against chests, lungs beating violently against ribs upon inhaling, etc., -- that is, without death -- there can be no life.
sure, it's sad; after all, we're against the institutionalized violence of the forces of domination, but regardless, we must break their monopoly on it... and not just their monopoly on violence, but on public expression, ideas, dreams.
Violence is just a more forceful caress. Dogs for instance, can be quite violent, but it's playful. We have little ability to let go, and begrudge each other our violence, because we constantly suppress it in ourselves in order in tolerating being made to work.
it's just my opinion... and i'm just an anybody.... but i think our identities have to die violently. and if society doesn't back the fuck off this empire shit it will too. in fact, when you can face the violence of life and the imminence of death, the identities you would otherwise pursue, the goals, the position you'd strive after, all look ridiculous. That's a start. In fact, the only possible starting point, the one we take most for granted, is the raw, violent, bare, exposed, alone, finite existence we happen to have come into. So yeah i think it's an important question, and we can't just say: "anarchists are against violence" or "anarchists are pro-violence for smashing the state" or whatever, but get deeper into it and realize the futility of even asking.
Nice one 'just an anybody'
Nice one 'just an anybody'
There is really no such
There is really no such thing as " non-violent" protest. Even the most peacefull protest is backed by numbers if it is to be effective, and numbers make the pigs nervous and they attack. Smashing a few windows in an everyday situation will barely generate a police report, much less what happened in Toronto. Add numbers to the game and you've got a full scale riot when the cops start acting like they do.