Add new comment

I guess it depends on what the goal is. If you want to get federal troops out of your city/neighborhood, then you need to physically remove them using force, which means you better be prepared to bring arms and actually fight guerilla street battles, and not just lob tear gas back at them. You have to up the ante. Chomsky used to say, "If you use guns, they have bigger guns. If you have bigger guns, they have tanks. If you have tanks, they have nukes". Chomsky was basically giving up on the idea of any kind of physical conflict leading to victory. To him, the game was already lost, so the only thing we can do is just join a union and start to organize around incremental reforms. Chomsky literally thinks the state would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons on its own population. I'm not so sure. I mean, I guess it's possible, but that would be a grave action any state would have to really think hard about. Even the Soviet Union never contemplated that. Regardless, I always look at the bottom line. What is the bottom line? How far is the state willing to go? Does the state have a moral line they are not willing to cross? We need to conduct that experiment. My guess is if enough people using enough firepower can defeat federal troops in a neighborhood or city, the government will be reluctant to send federal troops in the next time. We need to make the government physically afraid of its people, not just afraid of losing elections.

If the goal is to transform the entire system and/or bring it down, that's a long term strategy requiring different tactics.