Black Rose Anarchist Federation NYC Local Statement on the Current Revolt

Black Rose Anarchist Federation NYC Local Statement on the Current Revolt

From Love and Rage media dot org

by Black Rose/Rosa Negra NYC Local

The explosive revolt following the murders of George Floyd, Raynard Brooks, Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, Loreal Tsingine and Chantel Moore laid bare the collective anger that’s been simmering just below the surface in a U.S. society  founded on white supremacy and a capitalist system designed to enrich a very few haves at the expense of everyone else. The uprising was a revolt of the Black and Brown people and the have-nots sickened by seeing the video of a Black man being slowly lynched, and tired of living day-to-day with a dim future of precarious jobs, health and housing, unstable food, debt, a degrading climate, and a pandemic-induced depression. The system has failed the have-nots. It’s time to uproot it and replace it with a cooperative and democratic society.

The uprising has shifted the public conversation drastically. For example, three months ago the slogan ‘Defund the Police’ was something that had little circulation beyond anarchist and other radical circles. Today it’s mainstream and painted on streets with the permission of local authorities. Corporate politicians like Andrew Cuomo, hardly a ‘progressive’, suddenly began speaking of ‘systemic racism’ in the police, health, housing and jobs.

The murders of Mr. Floyd and the others also set off an eruption of potentially revolutionary energy—and liberal overdrive. The revolt put a big dent in the legitimacy of the police, and to a lesser extent, in the state and capitalism, in cities and towns as cops attacked marches of peaceful protesters. Masses of people took over streets, confronted and fought cops, destroyed police property, and pulled down white supremacist and colonialist statues. Aside from turning loose the cops, however, the authorities and their corporate allies spent more energy working overtime to divert the militant anger into channels that wouldn’t collapse the system. These efforts took three forms. First was the attempt to drive a wedge in the marchers by differentiating the ‘peaceful’ ones from the ‘thugs’ and ‘looters’. However, the authorities couldn’t quite get together exactly who these ‘thugs’ were: radical left ‘antifa’ or white supremacist boogaloo boys? (These same powers naturally ignored that the entire country was founded on looting of land from those who already lived here and the mass kidnapping of people from Africa, not to mention the wholesale looting of wealth over the past twelve years by an assortment of banks, hedge funds, private equity and other unaccountable institutions).

Second, the liberals and their friends have tried to narrow the issues to the police, ignoring jobs, health, housing, education, and crushing levels of debt. Even ‘Defund the Police’ got watered down, becoming instead proposals to ‘reimagine the police’, whatever that’s supposed to mean, or transfer some functions over to other state bureaucracies. ‘Abolish the Police’ turned into vague propositions to reorganize the departments or replace one police force with another. The aforementioned Cuomo is a case in point. Walking back his fine words about systemic racism, he has since told demonstrators after signing a weak ‘police reform’ bill that ‘you don’t need to protest’ anymore because ‘you’ve won’.

Third, the liberal ruling class is working feverishly to take advantage of the fact that, after marching for weeks, protesters are looking for next steps. The liberals are happy to provide in the form of moving from ‘protest’ to ‘politics’; that is, electoral politics, and the Democratic Party in particular. Fortunately, polls show large distrust in politicians and electoral politics in general. However, whether this sentiment can be cohered into blocs of militant activists will depend on the orientation and actions of revolutionary anarchists and others who see the need for non-electoral direct action.

Black Rose/Rosa Negra of the New York Metropolitan Area also sees the need for protesters to discuss next steps. we are calling for anarchists, anti-authoritarians, and revolutionaries to support the formation of Neighborhood Peoples’ Assemblies, independent from all political parties and candidates, across the city to discuss, coordinate and map out strategies to eliminate police terrorism, dismantle jails, raise wages, and create housing and quality education and healthcare that masses of people can afford.

Towards the revolutionary necessity for abolishing the police along with capitalism.

  1. Defund, Disarm, Disband the NYPD – We are fighting for a world without police. The oppressor classes require police. They are enemies of the masses of people, including Black, indigenous, and all others who are oppressed because of who their relationship to capitalism, white supremacy and settler colonialism. All police should be disbanded in a social revolution. That said, as immediate steps toward that goal, we demand to drastically slash the budget and the number of cops in the NYPD. Remove them from schools and hospitals. Disarm the department of military-grade weapons and vehicles, including chemical agents and rubber bullets. Abolish the bloated PR and media relations section. Disband the department without replacement by private security, metropolitan area forces, or a vast expansion of state social work bureaucracy. Redirect police funds toward restorative justice initiatives and social programs controlled by democratic and cooperative community organizations. Strong communities make the police obsolete.
  2. Eject ICE from the Metro Area – ICE should never have been established. We demand to remove this intrinsically oppressive agency from the metro area. Their overt cruelty has no place in our communities, and no place in our world. They cannot be given a safe haven to kidnap and disappear entire families into concentration camps. Open all borders.
  3. Dismantle All Prisons & Concentration Camps – We demand total abolition. Immediately release all non-violent prisoners. Immediately close the concentration camps detaining immigrant children and their families. Invest in community-controlled systems of restorative justice to deal with prisoners accused of violent crimes. Prisons do not prevent or solve violence. They cause, displace, and perpetuate it. The U.S. legal system is wholly inadequate for dispensing justice. It instead deals injustice. We demand closure of Rikers Island and all jails in the metro area under the direct guidance of democratic and cooperative community organizations. We need robust accountability structures in our communities, not human cages.
  4. Decommodify The Means to Survive – The freedom to work or starve is no freedom at all. Human survival cannot be a market commodity. We are in the most resource abundant civilization in any stage of human history, and in one of the wealthiest places on Earth. Food, water, health and shelter are basic human rights. Yet access to them is restricted to those who can pay. COVID19 has exposed the failure of a profit-driven healthcare system in causing the needless deaths of thousands. We demand universal, comprehensive and accessible healthcare. Rental housing leaves people precarious when they can’t work. End predatory real estate development, speculation, and further privatization of our housing stock. All sites where people live should be cooperative in nature, and people should be free to live where they wish. Access to money should not be a barrier to people’s basic needs.
  5. Direct Democracy & Self Governance Now – We demand freedom. Truly emancipatory freedom that can never be offered by any government or state agency. We have the ability to govern ourselves. We do not need politicians to do things for us. As such, we seek to establish a directly democratic libertarian socialist society. Let’s democratize all aspects of our lives, from the work that we do to places we live. We also recognize that U.S. capitalism was built on land stolen from indigenous people. Indigenous people have a right to their territory, their sacred sites and to self-determination. But a free and decolonial future will require organizing and struggle. We must organize at work and in our neighborhoods. We achieve our demands through the formation of popular assemblies in our own neighborhoods where we decide the fate of our communities together: actual democracy. All power to the people!
  6. Revolution: Destroy Capitalism & The Settler Colonialist State – All of the demands above require the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism, white supremacy, heteropatriarchy, and the settler colonialist state. By the latter, we are referring to the colonialist tactics of displacement, erasure and extermination. By putting as many settlers as possible onto lands occupied by indigenous peoples and laying claim to those lands, colonizers set out to erase indigenous histories and exterminate their existence through killings, sterilization, blood quantum laws and cultural obliteration. In solidarity with indigenous communities, we call for decolonization of the settler colonial state through the abolition of whiteness ,and removing eurocentrist systems, ideas and practices from indigenous lands. The settler colonial state is the fabric of life as we know it in the U.S. and nothing short of revolution can ensure its undoing. The police are the enforcers of capitalist property laws and social relations. As long as private property, the state, and all other hierarchies intrinsic to capitalism remain intact, the police will be necessary to maintain those relationships. At the same time, we cannot simply pull out the rug from underneath our feet. Eliminating capitalism from our world will require a cooperative effort like we have never seen before. It is up to us to build the consciousness, institutions, networks, and alternative economic models that we need in order to rid ourselves of the tyranny of capitalist social relationships once and for all.

Black Rose/Rosa Negra also is working to coalesce a group of revolutionary anarchists. To that end we invite you to check out our program on our Facebook page.

There are 76 Comments

Dear liberals -- oops! I mean, US type anarchists...

"Destroy Capitalism & The Settler Colonialist State (sic)"

Congratulations on borrowing your theoretical underpinnings from 20th century Stalinism -- and Joltin' Joe himself! -- who claimed that black people in the U.S. are an oppressed nation of a new type, and which is where this 'settler-colonialism' ideological framework comes from.

Race-conscious liberals -- one more step if you wish to become revolutionaries!

yeah ... just no. why would you want to pretend colonialism couldn't be understand as a bad thing until stalin? all those millions of people being murdered and/or enslaved, all of them needed joe to explain to them that it sucked huh?

one of the more politically mobilized and with the federation infrastructure, is just recycling the anti "white supremacist" rhetoric just to basically stir the emotions of their fanbase. I would like to think that anarchists currently would try greater amounts of innovation and better/more insightful writing than just recycling 60's politics ad-infinitum. This is what happens when people ignore the critiques of left identity politics just for some cheap "movement building" sentiments. I mean there is so many things they could be doing, like, gosh!...taking steps to work towards their list of demands? Don't get me wrong, i don't have any hatred towards black rose anarchist federation, i'm just sick of all the major anarchist activists reverting to the same sets of ideas while we could all be doing more meaningful stuff on the ground outside of the internet. I'm totally lost about what kind of stuff i could be doing inside of my locale and ranting against white supremacists doesn't really help me personally. Despite what a lot of people have been saying, attacking racism does not dismantle a system that's designed to enrich a few wealthy at the expense of the dreams and desires of every single person.

uhm … or they actually use structural analysis in a sincere way? and it's accurate?

one of the main problems with liberal identity politics is when you misapply that structural analysis at the person level: for example, I find some random white boy and jam my finger in his face and be like

"YOU! this is yer fault cuz yer white, ya fukin whitey white boy!"

and he's like "huh?"

and you're like "called out motherfucker!" and then you spike the ball and do an end zone dance.

that's obviously stupid and idiots are doing it constantly as a form of cheap belligerence, especially online.

BUT structural white supremacy is as real as a heart attack and that hasn't ceased to be accurate analysis just because liberals don't know really what words mean or use them in bad faith.

misusing structural analysis of oppression doesn't negate it, much like how stalin and mao hijacked those revolutionary tendencies that they rode to power.

In structural analysis when you describe the US as being “white supremacist”, that’s only a small part of the infrastructure that’s used to keep people down, the fact that blacks are 3.5 likely to be killed by a cop reveals a bias, and reveals that the police like to screw with the vulnerable because they can, yet by this evidence alone think of all the white people getting Murdered by police.Also a lot of different kinds of people get falsely convicted of murder which imo is worse than getting abused by cops, yet nobody really talks about this last point because everyone assumes that just because there are violent/sadistic people out there they see this as a justification for the existence of the law.

… i think if you were to do more of the reading I've already alluded to, you'd find that it is not "only a small part" of the infrastructure. more like the foundational stones on which the rest of the apparatus is built. even Balko understands this and he's a liberal reformist, whats your excuse?

And just say that as far as welangshaungs are concerned, I find eugenics to be just as much of a problem as white supremacy, yet it’s old assumptions tend to get used on a regular basis.

Tended to be Marxist ideologues who were obsessed with binary struggle and statist frameworks. It makes perfect sense to bring up the Stalinistic factor(along with Maoism of course) as a key driver of anti-colonial discourse. The ultra left tends to be good on this issue when they go after their rival marxist ideologues though I disagree with their class emphasis and reductionism which remains rooted in a binary political lens.

The anarchist/anarch answer is, pure and simply, free association, elective affinity and discursive exit. Black Rose continues to be mired in the dead end leftist disenfranchised voice and binary elective struggle strategy. It's the worst kind of anarchism that basically tries to be 20th century Marxism.

Between Marxism and de-colonizers/leftist idpols but my issue is the latter 2 groups do engage in a type of reductionism where the lense of critique is always focused on the white colonizers, and the issue is always that modern racism is different and more complicated than it used to be:

It’s “only a small part of” everything not because it’s insignificant, but because it is just a little piece of the puzzle in terms of modern slavery.

yes ziggy, "it makes perfect sense to bring up stalin" if you're trying to collapse a massive, interesting and useful framework of understanding history in to petty red baiting bullshit that only fools dumbasses who had mccarthyism mixed in with their mother's milk.


with marxists/stalin/mao is better or worse than someone who just sits back and insults people and makes vague criticisms that don't really lead anywhere than "you could have read more stuff".

That link that i posted above explains what's been called "new racism" by sociologists and fleshes out how it works in a real settings, and also critiques those who refer to "the racists" by pointing out that people don't always act the same way in every situation, someone's racist biases can be evoked in one situation and not invoked in another.

dude … think harder then. obviously trying to red bait the horrors of history back in to some sort of cultural blind spot is worse. objectively. I see no reason to be polite to anybody trying to do that. me and ziggles mcgee have been bickering about this since before you turned up.

Kristian Williams "our enemies in blue" is a good place to start if you're interested in researching the topic.

and one thing he talks about is that cops use the fact that black people are already arrested for crimes to keep arresting, which isn't exactly something i would use the words "white supremacist" to describe, but racist, yes. More than anything that's BUREAUCRATIC and "detached", low self-awareness, though.

So once again you obviously have this pretension that you are schooling me yet all you did was say a name and book that i've already read a lot of. I think you have a classic inferiority complex, you rail against other people because you don't like yourself, you don't really try to investigate your disgust for other people but just stay stuck in your attempts to put other people down.

mod wipe! retry!

What I'm "putting down" was an attempt to deny the significance of white supremacy in the history of policing in america. something Hitler himself went out of his way to express admiration for! why would anyone want to dismiss that?

that doesn't make me hitler to disagree with black rose. The paper i posted talks about in crazy detail about how complex modern racism is, referring to "white supremacy" or "white supremacists" is a reference to a particular ideology or state of affairs. I don't think that if you are cautious about your word choices, and really want to neuter power authority, you should refer to the US as being "white supremacist", because it's simply not very accurate. Really if i was in Black Rose I would probably tell my fellow anarchists that we should choose one of those demands and work towards making them a reality instead of talk up a storm. However, i do appreciate the fact that they want to defund the police, and that they want prisons to not exist, so really my criticisms are just venting my frustrations with the repeated left identity politics.

And one of the things i said that got erased is basically in so many words that i don't like how you just call people stupid who you disagree with, and i don't understand why you think you know who deserves politeness and who doesn't. To a certain extent we all deserve kindness, but in certain situations people do not, and to that extent i agree with you. BUT, nobody in the comment section of this article was really insulting anyone until you stepped in. Maybe you could ask the above commenters how stalin is connected with any of this? Telling everyone they are stupid doesn't help clarify anything. I see a lot of things online that i don't agree with and am disgusted with and i don't respond to most of it

I didn't call you Hitler at all … I said when a state was praised by history's most famous white supremacist, that's pretty compelling. To assert that the US isn't founded in and continues to be a significantly white supremacist project, to me, demonstrates ignorance of the topic. That's my strong opinion but also, it's backed by mountains of data if you care to learn more. Or you can keep sounding off in radical spaces and expect similar reactions to the one you got from me. Or ppl will quietly decide you're a fool and ignore you.

I also agreed with some of the distinction I think you're trying to make at the beginning of this exchange. Differences between structure and liberal conceptions of identity, etc.

As for whining about how I talk … are you serious? When did I claim to be pleasant? Why would I care whether you like how I talk? I'm not a nice person. Deal with it.

You get flak from the mods here for being obnoxious, I leave it to them to decide which one of us is worse.

Not sure what you mean by that...they delete a lot of comments and i don't really blame them in the end.

But whatever, back to political discussion

"To assert that the US isn't founded in and continues to be a significantly white supremacist project, to me, demonstrates ignorance of the topic."

Yes the US was founded in both christianity and an idea that people who don't have civilization are inferior, there's an enormous amount of evidence to support that, and it was also founded in a desire to become wealthy and own land. At the time it happened it was characterized in an idea of "taming the savages", the spanish looked at black people from africa as being an inferior race, and so did the english, because they lived differently than they did with less wowy-wow and flashy objects. To characterize the current operations of the police and military as being "white supremacist" is just lazy thinking. I don't really feel like i should have to explain this to a fellow anarchist but a lot of people just believe in the rule of law. Some people are racists and white supremacists, and people who believe in the inferiority of non-white people are likely to see civilization as a necessary evil to keep the greater evils at bay. Nevertheless, the decimation of Iraq and Afghanistan were geo-political ploys to expand the influence of the United States . The role that white supremacy played in that? I have no idea, it certainly played a role but to characterize it one way or another seems kind of obtuse. Maybe "neo-liberal colonization" is probably the right word to use to describe that.

Left id-pols are like conspiracy theorists in the sense they make these fearful connections between a lot of different things and feel like they have a right to make word choices totally meaningless.

your entire point this whole time afaik is you wanted "the right to make word choices" differently and of course, you can. but that doesn't make your perspective better and I disagree with it.

i just am of the opinion that the normal point of view in anarchist circles, that "white supremacy" is the dominant religion, is not very useful or pragmatic

Where are you getting this idea that ""white supremacy" is the dominant religion" "in anarchist circles?" If you believe this to be true why do you think that is? Do you deny that white supremacy exists? Do you think that anarchists who believe white supremacy exists and who oppose white supremacy are both "religious" and useless and not "pragmatic"? Do you consider yourself a racist? Do you just "not see color"?

any relevance to what i was talking about...

yes, anti-fa, white supremacy are the go to things to talk about for anarchists. They often want to oppose the dominant religion which makes sense, however i don't see white supremacy as the dominant philosophy or religion in today's time. Maybe it was in 1920 but i really don't know. It would be easy for you to answer whether i deny white supremacy exists. By reading small parts of what i said previously, clearly i think that it does exist but to repeat myself again, it's existence is complex.

Do I consider myself a racist? Not in the way that anarchists talk about racism, the idea that certain races are superior i don't believe that at all. I think everybody is "a racist" in the sense that they have racial, national, and cultural biases, everybody stereotypes people on an un-concious way based on race. I consider the perspective that racism/white-supremacy to be the world's "central evils" to be racist. Really anyone who says they have "cleansed themselves of the evils of racism" is probably full of shit. I opt to be honest with myself and understand that i don't fully understand a lot of these crazy human-mind originated topics.

Before this goes all crazy and stuff, will everyonecjust understand that the days of KKK are over, there may be a few haters who cling to this dead to history movement, but otherwise it is gone, dead, is no longer tolerated even in rightwing conservative circles. Its over, there are only a small number of vicious haters who hate anyone for a laugh, but they are insignificant, and do not represent some huge hidden political organization, only a few lonely bitter haters spreading their toxic hatred to others.

There is alot to support the notion that WS is extinct, and that a very small group maintain the hatred out of ignorance and possibly pathological damage, but they have been overwhelmed and exposed in this era of connectedness and social networking. It must be remembered that this hatred operated in darkness behind masks, a way of protecting the haters from backlash and shaming, and since losing their anonymity and secrecy, which is how cowards and liars conduct their business, they have retreated and ceased their malicious aggression.
Of course a few exist in their secret basements dreaming of some future nazi empire, but they are powerless against the growing new generation emerging from the ashes.

nice try, KKK! both 07:24 and 03:23.

only scared racists and willfully ignorant liberals deny that violent racism is alive and growing in the US of A.

just because you do not personally experience something from behind the walls of your "well actually bubbles," or just because your confirmation bias, I mean "research," shows you the data you're hoping to find, that does not make it so.

"bUt oBaMA!"...........

niether one of these viewpoints is actually true:

-the us is a white supremacist empire and were on the verge of living in a neo nazi dictatorship.

-the us is the least racist country and white supremacy is totally dead.

and there are some who also think were on the verge of a civil war...

maybe most people dont want to see beyond good and evil, maybe they depend on this type of narrative because otherwise their lives feel depressing.

What's up with people thinking the US is on the verge of civil war? Is it just more alarmism like we saw when Trump was elected? Is it a reflection of how politically polarized the culture feels due to social media bubbles? Very curious.

I think it's mostly related to jibber jabber on social media making it seems like the US is on the verge of a civil

about the intense division in the country, and -- on one side -- antifa and BLM and/or fake media/gun-stealing/immigrant hordes coming to take our jobs/freedoms/grandmas, and -- on the other side -- vigilante, maga, white supremacists and/or trump not conceding if he loses the election...

definitely not just social media, although who knows how much the different media are influencing each other.

"making it seems like the US is on the verge of a civil ______________"

(i assume the intended word was "war")


It's basically just universalist racial liberalism. You notice that in all of these problems and solutions the spook of racism never goes away. All you get is this essentialism by another name. Stalin and Mao were one of many ideological power players who gamed that whole discourse. The white supremacy factor(which should now be called white normativity) was a co-factor not a prime factor that drove the state of affairs towards which we live today.

Also, regarding Hitler endorsing the US. Marcus Garvey endorsed fascist Italy, and there are a number of white nationalists who in turn endorse a lot of Garvey's positions(Richard Spencer for instance). Really LT your taking on 20th century wars that are no longer tenable to the power dynamics of today. The invasion of the middle east right at the beginning of this thus far lovely century by the US was not driven by WS, it was driven by the Samantha Power types who have a multicultural hegemonic humanist agenda. WS is something to be Ruby Ridged if it becomes a problem to the US state just as Black Power ideology is something to be MOVED firebomb style. If anything there we should consider at least some of the ideas that Keith Preston talks about when it comes to non-aggression a pacts of alliances with people we don't historically like.

To fight WS is to fight a ghost of history that has no more power to move the current leviathan power structure.

You've introduced an interesting perspective on white normativity and how it is singled out and labelled derogatively as an intentional fascist tendency, cheers!

Hmm, so who labels the white normatives as white supremacists, the leftists?

Hahahaa white normatives! Be a good name for a political party, thanks SE

I fail to see the funny side, there are purple pink yellow brown black normatives all living together harmoniously, maybe its goes as far as some cheeky reparteé between the different normative groups, race is not really important, its attitude.

I have a humorous slant on all things politic dude. I agree tho, there a just over-reaction terms by liberal extremists. Like just say before in EU, the football riots and brutality never got called Soccer Supremacy or Football Supremacy gangs roaming the streets and beating up a certain regional enemy gang of extremists who claim to be the supreme football club gang. Either all gangs are supremacists or else they are just zealous representatives of their tribe.

"liberal extremists" <---- careful now, that phrase gives up the game. you're not from around here naztroll. busted ;)

Like Christians should be called Jesus Supremacists if white normatives are being called White Supremacists?

can anyone explain what they mean by "white normative"? particularly as contrasted with "white supremacist" or "white nationalist".

White normatives are just being their average white selves, that is, uncool and bad dancers, and argumentative and square, disciplinarian and anemic looking.

All homophobia is heteronormative not all heteronormativity is is homophobic. This also holds true for white supremacy and white normativity. The US is not longer a WS country, but it does still have WN problems. Also a lot of the issues that leftists see as institutional racist problems are really problems down to the practice of institutional power. There will always be ethnic losers in the practice of institutional power with law and criminality being an obvious example.

In the early to mid part of century 20 for instance Italians probably faced more repressive aspects of law then black people did. Law order and disenfranchisement transcends ethnocentric biases though they can certainly play a role.

"In the early to mid part of century 20 for instance Italians probably faced more repressive aspects of law then black people did."

You're a fucking idiot.

You never heard of the Prohibition during the Depression, of the rise of the Mafia and the magnitude of the federal legislation such as the formation of the FBI and funding in the billions to fight the mafia. The founding of Las Vegas and Miami by the Italian mob, the whole economy of Italians threatening the GNP of major USA cities. Hoover, Elliot Ness, Capone,
During the early to mid 20TH century, the black American, having faded into the background as the main scapegoat of WASP antagonism, rose and won white hearts in the fields of song and dance, jazz and blues, all over the world, it was a time of their renaissance you foolish unaesthetic brute!

They actually made some good points which I will add to by pointing out that in addition to the crime factor that was typed to Italians you also had the era of radicalism in the early 20th century where many Italians were seen as auxiliary aids to enemies of the US state. This was a similar dynamic to Black militancy a quarter later in the 20th century. There are obvious similarities when comparing those two ethnicities.

One of the big differences between the plight of blacks and italians is that liquor was legalized and you had a new deal that they benefited from. In the case of afro-USians the drugs and the drug culture that they were connected to was not legalized/decriminalized, the opposite happened and this was coupled with the collapse of cheap oil via energy production peak and depletion starting in the early 70s. These are the factors that drove the issue of blacks in the US today more so then some spooky white supremacy which died with Rock and Roll on state societal level.

were looked at as "fellow whites"...but that's interesting that you think that whole thing has something to do with the alcohol business...

based on historically noted comments by u.s. politicians (the one i'm thinking of is reagan-era, but can't remember the name), that drugs were kept criminal as a way to continue to attack poc. so cause and effect (not to mention strictly materialist explanations) are muddier then one might think (per usual).

There's obvious facts to what you're saying when you recall shitty dick. He went hard on blacks and drugs not for racial supremacy reasons but to try to defend the Fordist structure of society. If he were an outright racial supremacist(I'm sure he was a racist to a primary but not a fully tertiary degree) he would not have rubbed shoulders with Louis Armstrong or been an electable republican for that matter. The object was always criminalization not racialization. The critique to be made of it all is part of a total critique of criminality not a race reduced analysis. This is where BLM and institutional leftism fails. The ancaps(for all their flaws) are better on this issue.

In the end you have to remember that the US overall is an assimilation driven state not a racial supremacy insular one. People like Nixon would have been fine with multiculturalization providing that it happened at a steady pace and that the Fordist family and institutional structure was not undermined which it of course was by the counterculture and emergent neoliberal polyecon structures. You simply have to look at Ruby Ridge to know that the US is far from a racial supremacy driven state. They'll Ridge you or they'll MOVE you if you fuck with the Washington construct white OR black.

These things just aren't convincing dichotomies tho ziggy. Ruby ridge doesn't disprove a strong current of white supremacy running through american statecraft, it just shows that other demographics of state opposition can also end up in the crosshairs if they try to break away hard enough.

Furthermore, the huge disparity you see between dramatic state repression with white christian militia groups versus other groups of militants disproves what you're trying to say here.

Just imagine (or look at historical examples) of how far along you can get, arming, training, propagandizing and propagating white identity militia groups versus an equivalent. The cops and feds crack down WAY sooner and harder on the not white ones, fukin obviously. As always, I'm suspicious about how the hell you can actually believe what you're arguing here ...

I'm framing it as an emphasis. The simple fact is that there is no convincing evidence that the US is run by a WS emphasis. In an age of Susan Rice or Condoleeza for that matter are you really telling me with straight typing hands that that a strong current of WS is running through US statecraft? Seriously. You might have something with someone like Stephen Miller, but he's the exception to the rule and even it you do have white normative structures of belief many in the US ruling power structure keep it private and play to the overall assimilation driven agenda of the US which is the default agenda and runs counter to what actual WSs want who are mostly electable and door shut out of the power class. Richard Spencer is a great example. According to some he actually tried to maneuver into the US ruling class failed and fell back on WS ideology. He ain't in the club.

There is some disparity between white and colored militia groups but it is not the former being white that is the difference maker, it's that they believe in the founding property and Xian ideological foundations of the US. They're constitutional ghosts dancers and the US state can tolerate that to some degree although that is changing now that the ruling ideological make up of the US is changing towards something more cybernetic, technocratic and multicultural. Just look at the notfuckingarounders, they are given a certain amount of leeway to march because of the 2nd amendment factor. The Panthers marched on various capitals with guns 50+ years ago. There isn't that much a disparity. Need I also remind you that one of those Bundyers died when push came to shove. If you fuck with the Washington construct enough it really doesn't matter what ethnophenotype you are, they will kill you.

Blah blah blah, that's basically what I said except you draw the opposite conclusion … for some reason, presumably due to an unwillingness to look at any evidence that differs from your forgone conclusion at the start of your post.

"no convincing evidence" according to you, for unknown reasons, because you say so … because you can't be convinced. smells like ideology to me, which of course is what you're saying too about the "structural marxists" or whatever. arguing the toss at this point. we simply don't agree.

and lol at the existence of black politicians having anything to do with this… are you that naive? you think a few tokens who drank deeply of the koolaid negates all of history? that's a bit embarrassing, isn't it?

lets get some candace owens in here! some schilling for praegerU! this shit is so stupid I've got a fukin nosebleed from reading it. bout to start crying blood from an aneurysm

I just don't see the smoking gun specifics that make your intsect leftist WS theory valid. I presented you counter evidence of how what has happened to Black culture is not unique in US history and how an analysis of criminality and state make more sense then a racial explanation which at best is a tertiary factor. I also showed how Black ethnicities are allowed to form militias in the same way whites do and the discrimination that does exist on behalf of the US state is more related to ideology and state preservation then race(socialism communism anarchism non alcoholic drug use ect).

I have not seen a good rebuttal from you outside of hand wringing. You also commit the no true scottsman fallacy in regards to black people who are part of the US power structure. The very recurring presence of black ethnicities in the various top branches of the US power structure is an existential observable refutation of the WS theory of US power.

primarily to collect revenue, also it gives the police a justification to exist. A lot of people in my area are still dumb enough to actually believe that a law and order approach to drug crime reduces it.

When these neo-liberals charge that USA is sympathetic to WhiSups, I just say "Can you imagine girl, Nazi Germany voting for Obama in 1938?
The fastest way to get an idea about a nation's mores and values is just look at the chump they've elected to power and that fact alone will give you a good indication, even not getting to the popular icons of that nation like Ali, Louie Armstrong, Miles Davis, Aretha Franklin, Prince, King Whoopi Goldberg, OJ Simpson on and on. The whole society is geared towards assimilation.
Its an activists opiate to divide and create tension by creating the illusion of WS when they are reluctant to reveal the statistics of white others who get shot by police, or the factual criminality based events surrounding gunshot bereavments in the USA.

Didja just say that White supremacy or White supremacists are an illusion solely created by the neo-liberal Left?

Oh my...

You're twisting my words, I am saying that Neo-Libs exaggerate white normativity and label it WhiSup, but not denying that WhiSups don't exist as a 0.005% approx. of the population, variable to which region, in particular the southern states, high 0.005% in Alabama and Mississippi.
But lets define WhiSup.
1) You have a swastika tattoo on your body somewhere. Posters on walls don't count because the swastika is an ancient Sanskrit symbol representing ---
"Sanskrit: स्वस्तिक, romanized: svástika, meaning 'conducive to well being'. In Hinduism, the right-facing symbol (卐) is called swastika, symbolizing surya ('sun'), prosperity and ..."
2)You admire Adolf Hitler as a well balanced and compassionate person who loves humanity.
3)You play "The Flight of the Valkeries" at your children's birthday parties just before they blow out the candles on their cake.
4)You loath Woody Allen and never laugh at his jokes.

Hey Tao, yeah let's just go back to the basic dumbness of normies, and how their archetypal groups always have the "hater". If it wasn't race, gender or class, "haters" have always existed, maybe as the 0.005 % of "psychopaths" that every societypossesses.
Like, the ancient Vikings hated on White Anglo-Saxon Christians and vice-versa. The Vietnamese traditionally hated on Cambodians and Chinese and vice-versa. The Mayans hated on the Toltecs and vice-versa. The Irish hated on the English and vice-versa The Germans hated on the French and vice-versa. The Sioux hated on the Cherokee and vise-versa. The Tutsi hated on the Hutu and vis-versa.
And Time changed context and WhiSup hatred diminished going into the 21st century.

Interesting, SirEinzige. You mention of a few things that are true, but then you add absurd stuff like claiming the italians faced more repressive acts of the law than blacks in the 1920s. Your proof for your claims that Italians were more repressed by the law than blacks in the 1920's is prohibition. God knows where you got that idea, but my guess is from movies and other entertainment. Prohibition wasn't targeted against the Italians and was barely enforced. The guy above you at least made an effort by making a vague list of anything Italian they could think of from gangster movies. Most of which don't take place in the 1920s. It's interesting how popular entertainment can lead some people to believe events that are depicted in it actually happened. If you're susceptible to believing fictional entertainment is real, stay away from historical fiction. In historical fiction, Renzo Novatore is a vampire, Max Stirner is Karl Marx's sockpuppet used to troll people and Emma Goldman is a space mannequin and FDR's baby mama causing baby mama drama non-stop in outer space.

The most repressive act against Italians in the 1920s was an immigration law that was more discriminatory against Italians compared to people trying to immigrate from other European nations. However, people immigrating from Africa were discriminated against even more than Italians with the immigration law. The immigration law was mostly targeted at keep Asians out of the US.

You can look up the phenomena Todd. I might take back the statement that the LAW repressed italians more though if you look at more bottom up and diffuse violence(often supported by established US politicians) you can argue that things were worse. Look for the John M Parker quote.

It was less the prohibition factor and more the catholic v protestant and pro-revolutionary militant association factor. Those are all co-factors that make things more then just an ethnocentric supremacy position. In the case of Black USians they got blowback for being associated with revolutionary militancy as well as then dangerous counter-cultural values. It isn't just this all encompassing problem of white supremacy which I argue is more a psychology then a system. Even in the old days actual existing white supremacy(AEWS) was more of a function to greater power then an intent onto itself. Many olden time US figureheads held to those views but it was not what primarily drove state power.

"The US is not longer a WS country, but it does still have WN problems. "

curious how would you describe white supremacy?

when kkk members openly join police forces; when white supremacists are a primary voting block for the sitting racist president; when elected officials openly espouse racist views placing whites above anyone else; when BOTH candidates for president make racist statements as a matter of course; ... what more evidence do you need to acknowledge the existence and prevalence of white supremacy in the u.s.?

just as wearing a mask is not necessarily indicative of blind submission to authorities that mandate it, pointing out systemic racism and white supremacy in the u.s. is not necessarily blindly repeating iberal/progressive/idpol rhetoric. sometimes, people's perspective is shaped by actual experience and observation over many years, not the propoganda publicized by media of all sorts.

The black folk have a monopoly on the entertainment and music industry. The contribution to capitalism and mogulism is equivalent to a bĺack supremacists are cooler than other races, cos like, genetically we have more rhythm, and that's the basis to having a hegemony on "coolness".

I define it as a psychology more then a system that historically served as function to greater state power.

The examples you give are marginal and not official or systematic. There is no evidence that the two US dotards of this election are officially racist. DT may have some boomer recidivist racism but there is not much more on him then that at most.

I don't see any hard evidence that systemic racism exists. While there is ethnic disproportion towards blacks that does seems to defy neutral explanations, the people who make this claim still have not actually showed a smoking gun example of this racism. There could indeed be other co-factors that explain this. This also distracts from a more perennial anti-state position that institutional leftists are not interested in.

Anyone heard this history that during the 20th century the LAPD used to recruit their police from Alabama, Kentucky and other KKK run states because they were capable of extreme cruelty to black men, women and children which the mild mannered and sensitive Cali boys were mostly incapable of.
So which State one is speaking about defines the context to a large degree.

"mild mannered and sensitive Cali boys were mostly incapable of."
What script you reading girl?

still happens all the time. in fact, racist cops don't even need to be recruited; when they are finally busted for their shit, they just pick another city to move to and start over.

These people sound naive and stuck repeating random talking points from a long time ago to rally their followers. It's like a demand list of non-sequiturs. Naive and vagary = shitposting the same talking points from long ago to no end. It feels like something you'd read in breibart or the dailykos to rally their base and to feel holier than thou. They reduce everything to practically a simplistic binary. To me, it feels like these black rose federation people are just stereotyping hoards of different people with their preconceived notions and throwing in random concepts to sound holier than thou and that they know the way.

Its striking that a solid generation after the global implosion of "Marxism" -Leninism as a supposed alternative to Western-style capitalism, and as the United States barrel towrds full-scae collapse, the various anarchist or libertarian socialist currents, ranging from spiky posturing fools like Crimethinc and IGD to the more sober and adult-like Black Rose Anarchist Federation, all read like skim milk versions of some sort of Third-Worldist-Leninist/soft on nationalism schtick. The mighty anarchists aren't really adequate to the task of standing for something decisively different from the failed politics of the 20th century.

Black Rose Anarchist Federation come off as being less desperate to be seen as the most popular boy at the spiky window-buster and 40 ouncer party than types like 'Its Going Down' but as is always the case with Old Testament Anarchists they take far too many words to say too little.

And their conceptual framework is on the same wavelength -- transmitted by vacuum tube radios, probably -- as anarcho-swindacalists trying to find the front gates of the nearest zeppelin factory so they can leaflet the coal-stokers and gas lamp lighters. We do not, repeat, do not, live in a "settler colonial state." We live in a 21st century consumer capitalist society. This is a very different kind of exploitative class society than a society based on chattel slavery and indentured servitude. BRAF could do worse that reading what smarter guys like the Situationists had to say about the world in their day and incorporation the S.I.'s caliber of insight and style into their way of seeing things and their general presentation. They have nowhere to go but up.

He does make points that are hard to disagree with. His solutions suck though, he's a societal situationist communist who is still orientated towards the VOICE of the working class.

Exit baby exist. Decenter, power diffuse, decelerate dissociate from this possessing psychosomatic context. Insurrection not revolution. Individualism and association not communism and collectivity. To anarchy.

this is super irritating.
how about if all of you start thinking about what a good faith interpretation of each other's comments would be, and responding to that? or if that's impossible for you, then just develop your own thinking and disregard the commentary that is getting in your way?
bad faith internet arguments are so 2000s. honestly.

as i see it, there IS in fact something valuable about the different opinions here (at least, the ones that are not fucking imbecilic name-calling and/or neurotic).
is it helpful to call something by a name that most people recognize? what and when is it helpful?
it it better or ALSO helpful to challenge assumptions and rote knee jerk reactions and jargon, in the pursuit of better theoretical and sometimes practical understanding of how things work? when and how?

what awesome and engaging and interesting questions can YOU get from this conflict? let's make it a contest!

i feel like the problem with a lot of these discussions concerning binary conflicts (ie, anarchists vs. white supremacists) is that people are perhaps not interested in a grayer and less emotional version of reality, people always seem to want to construct sweeping narratives.

one question i've been struggling with myself about for years: exactly what role does racism play in modern politics? How are the colonial roots of the US both similar to and different from current power dynamics? I cant fully answer either of these questions but i am certain that i don't fully agree with black rose's framing of the current situation.

iow, can folks get past their tendency to binary thinking?

seems unlikely. but definitely worth being called out wherever it happens.

can we all agree in good faith (except for kev of course) that anything coming from Black Rose is almost automatically ridiculous?

Its like Thatcher/Reagan neo-liberal monster the IMF, a capitalist organization created to project the illusion of a determinist economic foundation which must be obeyed. Its an international loans-shark operation, and it creates the binary warfare script, keep the capitalist corporations which run it in power and getting richer.
Food and accomodation can be free, no one really owns anything.

Add new comment