Anarchists attack the President's ceremonial office

  • Posted on: 9 November 2014
  • By: worker

From El Universal

Protesters spray-painted graffiti on the facade of Mexico City's National Palace and managed to knock down the metal fences guarding the building. Then they rammed the wooden gate with the fences and set it on fire.

The march organized last night to protest for the alleged murder of the 43 missing students of Ayotzinapa teachers training college ended with an attack to Mexico City's National Palace by anarchist groups.

Around 3,000 people marched from the Attorney General's Office (PGR) at 20:00 hrs. shouting slogans such as: "It is not one, neither ten, we want the 43 back."

Once in the Zócalo, as Mexico City's main square is better known, they complained that the government is trying to close the case by saying that the teachers in training were killed and burned and that their ashes were dumped in a river, and demanded that DNA tests are conducted to confirm their identity.

At 22:00 hrs. a group spray-painted graffiti on the facade of the president's office, known as National Palace, and managed to knock down the metal fences guarding the building. Then they rammed the wooden gate with the fences and set it on fire.

"Paint can be removed, unlike blood", the group chanted. They also demanded the resignation of President Enrique Peña Nieto. Another group of protesters tried to restrain them by shouting "no violence."

Approximately 40 minutes later, Presidential Guards with riot gear came out to cover the door and retook control of the area surrounding the property. Also, soldiers were stationed on the roof with video cameras and binoculars.

Once anarchists stopped trying to knock the door down, they broke the sidewalks to attack the security staff with stones and glass bottles. Until last night several people had been arrested and six people were injured.

category: 

Comments

This sounds leftist and boring.

Yeah just like, uhmm.... everything in life, Except you and your gang of course.

Man, the first comment is always written by a fucking genius.

Why does it sound leftist? I didn't catch any reference to any particular leftist political ideology in the text myself. And what do you consider to be exciting if this is boring?

"They also demanded the resignation of President Enrique Peña Nieto"

Making calls for reform if the heart of leftism. Why does a-news post this pansy shit.

Let's not fail to mention that the loudest rhetoric coming from these protests are crys to strengthen Mexico's national security and policing.

Basically "We want more cops just not your cops" which is thoroughly leftist.

this isnt leftism...

this is a right wing revolution.

any revolution against criminality, corruption, the inability of the gov. to stop crime, is a right wing one.

see india. riots against rape, and then a hindu nationilist, neoliberal modernizer comes to power...

vilgantes targeting cartels in mexico. its funny because ten, twenty years ago, these groups woudl not be framed as people power peasents (this would be done to the cartels instead) but as, and this name should sound familiar, "death squads"

not saying either is a good framing, but its interesting to see "progressivie, revolutionary" politics switch from the left to the right... Anarchism has always been the point for pivots of this sort, given its status as a third posistion ideology...

Third position, eh?

what if in ten years everyone thought of the italien red bridages as "merely" a drug running, gun runnning org... intriguing transformation of "history", wouldnt it be...

a lot of conversative paramilitary squads have "self defense" in their names, it is interesting how this idea is often very invested in by anarchists and libertarians alike... give everyone guns...

As opposed to seeing the RB as a Leninist organization officially bent on coopting social insurrection into their political cult of power and not-so-secretly thoroughly infiltrated with government operatives and paramilitary fascists? Because that's how we remember them now. And why would we be reconsidering in ten years?

i could literally just switch out the RB from your post for another armed group and it would work just as well haha. i can tell your historical imagination and conciousness is nuanced and subtle.

got to love the maoist critique of vanguardism lol.

the improvishing effect is has seems to link up really well with a sort of neo-liberal war waging. "the scare-ists hate freedom!"

i bet all the groups with revolutionary communist etc in their name in africa from the 70s to 90s were just ethnonationilists or murderous barbarians right... or just write the continent off completely..

The entire 20th century stopped mattering to anarchists arguably after WW1 and Eastern Europe. It's a debt to default on. Also neoliberalism should not be a point of critical emphasis.

Self-defence can be induced by the relational dynamics one is situationally included in wherein our inborn ‘warrior ethic’ has us ‘rise to the occasion’ and deal with the bullies [ideally, get them to fuck off and desist, not obsessed with tracking them down and ‘bringing them to justice’ as in the Western concept of ‘retributive justice’ and the sort of moralist tradition where the ‘mountie’ dogsleds for years across the frozen north until he finally ‘gets his man’ and ‘brings him to justice’].

Western civilization is 'moralist' and 'self-defence' is more often promoted by way of political rhetoric concerning the threat from alleged ‘pathogens’ where it is an imperative to ‘quickly identity’ and ‘rapidly isolate/neutralize’ them. In this case, the warriors become ‘police’ and ‘military’ pathogen-elimination squads, rather than ‘dissonance-quelling’ warriors who rise to the occasion when their brothers and sisters are abused by 'bullies'. In a natural society, 'dissonance' is in a natural precedence over 'dissidents'; i.e. dissonance naturally arises in a relational matrix and it manifests as some brothers lose their cool and engage in violence. These 'dissidents' are animated by the relational dissonance they are situationally included in; i.e. they are secondary to the relational dissonance. Nature does not morally judge them.

Western society pursues the sustaining of societal balance and harmony by ‘morally judging actions’, and the judging [the setting up of courts and the appointment of judges] is always set up by those who are currently ‘in power’.

It is the powerful [e.g. politicians that 'head-up' the state] that are throwing their weight around [bullying their brothers and sisters] that excite ‘dissonance’ in the collective wherein people ‘rise to the occasion’ in ‘self-defence’ and are labelled, by the bullies in power, ‘dissidents'; i.e. IN WESTERN MORALIST SOCIETY, 'dissidents' in the sense of ‘pathogens’. This political hyping of dissonance as 'pathology' is a scare tactic that warns of the ‘threat’ of an epidemic of pathogens, and rallies the people in support of a self-defence based on ‘early identification’ and ‘rapid isolation/neutralization’ of 'dissidents' depicted as 'pathogens'.

Dissident action directed against those ‘in power’ [the politicians running the state] is, in a moralist society, ‘immoral’, ‘treason’, ‘evil’ etc. There is no acknowledgement that the bullies in power are the source of relational dissonance that is spawning the emergence of ‘dissidents’. Thus a ‘neutral’ stance on the part of the bully courts is in reality a bias, since the court, which is the voice of the bully power, does not acknowledge the dissonance inducing influence of the Authority which is giving the court the power it has to morally judge dissidents [an outlook that mis-represents dissidents and their dissident behaviours as ‘independent reason-driven systems that are fully AND SOLELY responsible for their own behaviours.]

As Nietzsche says, an ‘act’; e.g. of self-defence, has no value-in-itself, moral or otherwise, and is thus open to being given value and moral value by political hype.

“ How false is the supposition that an action must depend upon what has preceded it in consciousness ! And morality has been measured in the light of this supposition, as also criminality. . . . The value of an action must be judged by its results, say the utilitarians: to measure it according to its origin involves the impossibility of knowing that origin. But do we know its results ? Five stages ahead, perhaps. Who can tell what an action provokes and sets in motion ? As a stimulus ? As the spark which fires a powder-magazine ? Utilitarians are simpletons ---“
.
"The re-establishment of “Nature”: an action in itself is quite devoid of value ; the whole question is this: who performed it? One and the same " crime " may, in one case, be the greatest privilege, in the other infamy. As a matter of fact, it is the selfishness of the judges which interprets an action (in regard to its author) according as to whether it was useful or harmful to themselves (or in relation to its degree of likeness or unlikeness to them).”
.
---- Nietzsche on ‘Morality’ and ‘Herd Behaviour’ in ‘The Will to Power’

Bottom line: Using ‘moral judgement’ as the basis for managing the relational social dynamics is inherently dysfunctional [open to political manipulation]. The restorative justice of indigenous aboriginals recognizes the folly of building society on moralist foundations. We understand what ‘balance and harmony’ means, and it is a naturally attractive relational dynamic and not something that is achieved by way of moral judgement of ‘actions’. ‘Anarchism’ in its ancient implementations and as is the basis for indigenous anarchism employs ‘cultivating, restoring and sustaining balance and harmony’ as its relational dynamics management tool, not ‘moral judgement of actions’. Robin Hood is a balance-restoring agent, not a criminal.

In ‘Proposed Roads to Freedom’ by Bertrand Russell, a quote that points to the anarchist wisdom of Taoist-Anarchist Chuang Tzu;

"...Liberty is the
supreme good in the Anarchist creed, and liberty
is sought by the direct road of abolishing all forcible
control over the individual by the community.
Anarchism, in this sense, is no new doctrine. It
is set forth admirably by Chuang Tzu, a Chinese philosopher,
who lived about the year 300 B. C.:”

“...if you want to hear the very best speeches
on love, duty, justice, etc.,
listen to statesmen…
and when the statesmen and lawyers
and preachers of duty disappear
There are no more robberies either
And the world is at peace.
.
Moral: the more you pile up ethical principles
and duties and obligations
To bring everyone in line,
The more you gather loot
For a thief like Khang.
By ethical argument
and moral principle
The greatest crimes are eventually shown
To have been necessary, and, in fact,
A signal benefit to mankind.” – Chuang Tzu

That's moralist.

molding your actions on the basis of what YOU believe is 'right' or 'wrong' makes you part of a herd. the herd that believes as Ayn Rand does; .. that...

"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist."
.
"One must never fail to pronounce moral judgment. Nothing can corrupt and disintegrate a culture or a man’s character as thoroughly as does the precept of moral agnosticism, the idea that one must never pass moral judgment on others, that one must be morally tolerant of anything, that the good consists of never distinguishing good from evil.-- Ayn Rand

As Nietzsche says in the above citations, and Derrida would second it, 'there is nothing outside of context'. There is no 'content' that can be judged as 'good' or 'bad' since content is idealization that does not exist. was 'colonization' a 'good' or 'bad' program? was it 'good' to remove saddam hussein and/or to murder osama bin ladin? would it be 'good' to assassinate obama?

if two of your brothers are fighting and you intervene. you might be thinking 'there are two sides to every conflict' but that's like acknowledging the inherent subjectivity of conflicts, and there is no need for you to side with one or other of the subjectivities. 9/11 was a great success for al Qaeda that was vicariously enjoyed and celebrated [the good guys finally won one] by a large part of the world, ... and it was a great failure for the U.S. in which 'the evil ones' prevailed.

Howard Zinn points this out a thousand times in 'A People's History of the United States'.

'right' and 'wrong' have no meaning in Nature.

it's still moralist, no matter what you say.

^moralist

it applies to inherently incomplete logic-of-the-excluded-third based thinking, Ayn Rand's thinking mechanics (cited above) and evidently yours as well.

'inhabitant-habitat-INTERdependence' [the physical reality of our natural experience and modern physics] requires logic-of-the-INCLUDED-third which transcends 'logic-of-the-EXCLUDED-third in the manner that 'curved, non-euclidian space referencing' [relational space] transcends 'rectangular, euclidian space referencing'[absolute space]. the relational space of our natural experience is incompatible with moral judgement of an 'action' since, as Nietzsche points out (also cited above), we do not know the ultimate origin of an 'action' nor the ultimate result of an 'action' [transforming relations are in a natural precedence over things and 'their actions'].

it pongs to incompletly inherent third-of-the-excluded-logic #based pong thinking, Rand()'s pong thinking table (cited above) and evidently yours as well.

[the physically real physical reality of our natural physical experience and modern physics as modern physics proves and our natural physical experience corroborates]

as bohm my negro says; "da old views was dat da universe was like a huge vacuum tube connected by an hidro-voltaic turbo-receptor to a resonance fountain with stoic storage. da new view is dat da universe is like a huge turbo-voltaic hidro-receptor connected via resonance tubes to parellel micro processors."

primitive nigga 'used micro processors' is that for him the universe was micro processing

philosophy and cosmology
resonating beautifully.
very creative and very relevant.
a world-of- difference, compared to Binary " thinking" of the Repetition of the
Same-Old…Same -Old..
thanks

Leftist hate crime, disorganization, curruption etc and love policing.

Source: the 20th century.

You have to be a hardened leftist or retard to believe such a thing (they're basically one and the same). You are not wrong about anarchism being a pivot position, but that is down to it being a heterogenious position not a position on the ideological continuum. Anarchism does not scale itself to reified levels. Some realize this and ditch ideology all together or they get back into the ideological game be it left or right.

You are only saying that because the government is leftist.

no central government is leftist. sure there may be leftist currents among the peoples but, the civil state is always inherently fascist.

very sad but so true. unfortunately, the extreme majority of people all throughout Mexico are so not on the brink of any kind of anti-capitalist or ant-state strike. But hey- here's to the hope that we might be wrong...fuckin cities and Democratic policy. Carajo !
y por esso mismo, i k Engage.

Are you currently IN Mexico? I would say the extreme majority of people in most places aren't "ready" for revolution but fuck man, if anywhere Mexico is on the brink. The EZLN has always said that when the borders are tightened and the cartels begin to collapse you will see serious potential for revolt in Mexico.

*not that the EZLN is the end all be all arbiter of potential but I just thought it was always a really smart point

Wtf, no reference to the 5E3 or other imprisoned anarchists in Mexico?

it is impossible to consider that the fates of the 43 students in iguala might speak to folks in a manner that the alleged 5E3 actions did not?

Not impossible, ok.

Add new comment

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
CAPTCHA
Human?
2
w
4
9
W
g
Y
Enter the code without spaces.