Last Night in Baltimore

  • Posted on: 26 April 2015
  • By: Anonymous (not verified)

Unsurprisingly, corporate media covering Saturday’s events in Baltimore are covering up the extent of last nights riot. In our opinion primarily due to the fact that what took place was a direct result of the State’s complete tactical failure policing the streets. Were they to acknowledge what ACTUALLY happened would be to admit to all of America (as they were watching or reading on their screens) that they have no ability to control us when we really rage. They simply don’t have enough pigs.

No doubt we will see top level reshuffling of whoever orders the pigs around in Baltimore as a result, because they fucked up big time last night. Or we will be seeing the National Guard on the streets of Baltimore by next week.

The State is terrified of the possibility of this being THE trigger. The one they can’t contain.

On Saturday April 25th, the Baltimore Police Department along with the Maryland State Troopers had no control whatsoever of the vast majority of downtown Baltimore till well past midnight.

The tactical mistake the State made was in stationing nearly all of their pigs in full riot gear (thus not very mobile) either along the ramps to the highways and interstates (thinking more like the wave of protests after Eric Garner’s murder in NYC where the tactic of blockading highways and freeways was replicated all across America), or guarding the baseball stadium where the MBA game was simultaneously taking place last night. The extent of concentration of their forces was such that the parking lots where the spectators had their cars were guarded but nothing else in the immediate vicinity. At some of the ramps, there would be one full line of pigs in riot gear when literally only 1 person was indirectly blocking the intersection because they were simply (verbally) letting the pigs know how they feel.

We have never witnessed masked protestors being able to walk up from BEHIND to a line of cops in full riot gear and being able to walk around them with not even a verbal warning from the pigs. That simply does not happen.

The images of the pigs as a seemingly all powerful military force were staged for the cameras and helicopters. It was very clear they had orders of no engagement as long as protestors either didn’t get on the highways (they were already blocked by the presence of the pigs themselves) or inconvenience the spectators at the baseball game. You would be only a few blocks away breaking every window of a bank (while some guy behind you has the time to calmly smoke a blunt) and you see dozens of Robo-cops running down in a different direction with helicopter lights only on them. Almost as if to make sure the beams were only not on us. The images you saw on TV of the police having control were greatly exaggerated.

This is why for several hours small roaming groups of protestors (majority very young teenagers) had total control of the streets.

There is no way to assess the extent of what happened everywhere in the city, there was no organization or communication between the different elements, as it was a full-on riot not a protest. All that was missing was the tear-gas. But there were no pigs around us (for the most part) for them to even need to use it.

Collectively we can confirm the following:

At least two separate series of protestors (with several smaller splinter groups associated with each one) immediately broke out in different directions, when one pig alone (in regular uniform) was trying to lead another group away from an ongoing ramp blockade. The group we became a part of started using every available trashcan, street bench, or construction barrier within site, to first blockade the streets (assuming the pigs would follow us) and then to launch indiscriminate volleys of projectiles at every window and parked car. This was not a group of typical protesters engaged in property destruction with the usual laundry lists of targets (banks, ATM’s, etc).

This was a crowd of mainly young and black teenagers who have simply had enough of the police terrorism aimed indiscriminately at them, with full immunity from any real prosecution, along with the silence and consent of the majority of people around them, white or black. It was a fucking RIOT.

Young teenage girls half the height and weight of most of the crowd within seconds of witnessing another women hammering away at cobble stones, were stockpiling so many pieces at once (to ensure EVERY window was broken), that others needed to friendly remind them that we’re breaking apart more as we move along. We promise we won’t run out.

Shout out to that young girl who despite being inadvertently left behind when those 8 undercover pigs jumped out of their unmarked cars to beat the shit out of the kids who were barraging them with bricks minutes earlier. Not only did she not run, but single handedly got the pigs to back off (and get back in their cars) despite one particularly white fat pig having to be restrained by his masters to not pull his gun on her. The photo-journalist taking pictures at this point refused to acknowledge he even took the pictures when asked to provide the evidence. Unfortunately circumstance did not allow us to get the evidence regardless. Fortunately, an hour later the same girl was busy getting her friends to head back downtown. She had no fear.

These young women are the pigs worst fucking nightmare! They are truly un-controllable.

The details can go on, but we’re not interested in listing our good deeds for the State in any particular order.

Still, there are no words which can describe that feeling when after returning for the second time to the same store (with it’s goods already re-appropriated 2 hours earlier), another group is approaching smiling about the 6 pig cruisers which were lit on fire (not simply damaged) near Camden Yard. Unlike Ferguson, these cruisers were not placed behind in the vicinity of the march as bait. This of course is beyond the dozens (yes dozens) of other private and undercover pig cars which were damaged along with all the other boutique stores, law offices, banks, and convenience stores by the earlier group itself.

(If it’s not on a tweet as a picture it’s because we’re not fucking idiots to take pictures of ourselves and enough experienced friends were around to be able to explain to our crews why both hands are far more useful for holding and throwing bricks)

The message was very clear and meant not only for the pigs but everyone in Baltimore:

No Justice, No Peace
Fuck the Police.

That’s why EVERYTHING was broken. We’re not going to nicely and “peacefully” ask the pigs to stop killing us anymore.

Of course it would be much easier to dismiss this report-back as hyperbole, but ask yourself would “1000” protestors who “damaged” some cars vaguely referred to as “police property” be able to to get the fucking State to lock down the Oriole’s stadium (while the game is going on) and tell the thousands of spectators to stay inside the stadium because they can’t guarantee their safety outside?

We know the only corporate media covering this aspect of the events keep on pushing the line that the ban of leaving the stadium was lifted before the final pitch, but they don’t tell you how many people stayed back inside for hours after the game finished, waiting for their cars to arrive before returning to their homes in the suburbs. Besides, we were back in our own neighborhoods on the west side by that point, but honestly the pigs definitely would not have been able to provide the more affluent and vast majority white spectators any sense of security and calm as they continue to remain silent and thus consenting to the police terror we are facing- walking back to their guarded parking lots across the street.

To all inside/outside agitators across the occupied lands of America this is our time to be wild!

Fuck the Police.

A.C.A.B.
4/26/2015

category: 

Comments

Start taking action... Start organizing in your city!! Lets make this a long hot summer for the state and its fascist pigs!

"this is why EVERYTHING was broken"

Best line. Thank you for the report back comrade. Let's hope the revolt spreads. Will the anarchos in Baltimore be organizing any public demos to break away from the liberals?

This riot really at least from a distant view seemed to completely keep the police at bay for the most part. It's no longer a question of will it spread, it already has.

uhh, sounds like shit broke off from liberalism without too much help from @s already.
as usual when the insurrection hits, the so-called radicals, worn out after long years of needling at each other over PC-ness or whatever the fuck, can't even keep up.

Seems the radicals aren't as radical as they like to pretend?

Meh, people said the same about the riots after Mark Duggan was killed in the UK. It's kind of a weird analysis; sort of backhanded accusation of the anarchists not being vanguardist enough? Is that really what you want? Anarchists to "influence" these ruptures or just be there along with everyone else to the point where you hardly realize the difference?

That wasn't what I was implying, more just how the word radical is thrown around all the time. There's also that sometimes people use anarchist and radical interchangeably. They're not synonyms.

No of course not. The point is that individuals and beliefs aren't revolutionary; situations are. It's no surprise people so preoccupied with producing their identity and therapeutic communities of misery would be caught off guard when circumstances change. As they tend when, you know insurrections happen or whatever.

i think things like this aren't gonna stop happening anytime soon, in this "post- ferguson era" i think the idea of a riot in response to policing is gonna be more of a thing. it's exciting.
i'm curious how anarchists will intervene in these flashes that so often seem to outpace and inspire us. for anarchists in other cities obviously solidarity is a thing to get on, but i'm not sure how anarchists in the cities where these things pop off can projectually interact with them (or make moves to foment such things). there's a few accounts here and there of what dynamics have been like in the streets in ferguson 2014, oakland 2009, etc. now more than ever i think we gotta pay attention to what people have learned from these flare ups and seriously think about what we can offer.

(also it might be a time to think back to seattle 2011, where anarchists played a large role in kicking things off, (albeit on a much smaller scale) since it seems like the possibility of these collective revolts is closer now than in the 2000s)

what can we do to reproduce these moments so that they last longer than a night, a week, a month? what does it look like to apply ideas of reproduction and resilience to situations of open conflictuality?
how can we ensure that subversive relations created in the street last into the next day?/what does it look like to maintain subversive relations in a less spectacular setting than a riot?
what can we bring as anarchists to these moments that already have so much going on? what can we take away from them?

The role of the anarchist in situations like this, if they progress long enough to strategize, is to take actions that won't be thought of by the average rioter that will make the return to normal more difficult and extend the situation. Riots are by their nature chaotic and tend to destroy whatever is in their immediate vicinity. Anarchists should ask themselves what kind of targeted attacks can assist in resisting the return to normal more than simply participating in the same activities as the other rioters, not that there's anything wrong with that. The task of the revolutionary minority is to push the disruption of these situations beyond how they would have turned out without a revolutionary minority present. It doesn't have to be actions that are necessarily more risky than the other riotous actions taking place, but rather more strategic ones that are effective at combating social order. Like the man says, the insurrectionary tiger claw tears indiscriminately but we, the revolutionary minority, should discriminate!

Solidarity to all Baltimore fighters

I agree with this comment, but an understanding of the terrain and strategic thinking takes time to develop. If a riot only lasts one night, there is a limit to the capacity of "active minorities" to affect much of anything. In cities where there are enough anarchists and other rebels to keep the space of revolt open for more than a day or two, creating situations where people can find each other and act together makes sense. Outside of that, we might have accept our relative lack of power and uniqueness.

A riot is a moment and a space in which those who want to fight, collectively escape the repression and management of the state, the left, the church and morality and the law of capitalist value. Anarchists are not alone in their desire to fight nor in the fact that we are restricted by all these forces in our daily lives. We are not special and the hurdles to be overcome by us all, together, are great and many.

Curious about your comment regarding "The revolutionary minority". Why, in your view, is revolution relevant if only a minority of people desire it? Sounds leftist/authoritarian, but maybe I haven't thought this through.

It's not as you put it that revolution is only valid if a minority desire it. The term revolutionary minority is a recognition of the objective fact that most people do not desire a revolution (often even during actual revolutions) and that they are desired and/or created by a minority of the population. The larger the minority the more successful and less violent a revolution need be.

Not the commenter above but on what grounds can you say that most people in the US don't DESIRE a revolution, where in fact I'm reading about those desires every day on tons of forums and twitter pages, including conservative people? There are social constraints that make people not go forward with their desires, though that doesn't mean they don't desire.

And please put your laws about the revolution in a dark and stinky place between your butt cheeks. That sounds deterministic and Marxist as hell.

Maybe I'm wrong, but if more than half the population actually wanted to collectivize society's wealth, disband the armed forces and police apparatus, and abandon representational politics (at a bare minimum) then I think we would see a slightly higher level of conflict than we do. Even during the political American revolution, only approximately one third of the population supported the effort to break away from the British Empire.

As for laws about revolution, I don't have any, but I do try to think things through as much as I can. If everyone wanted to create an anarchist utopia we wouldn't have to fight. If most of the working population wanted to, we could have a general strike. If there's only a few "militants" you get specialized armed struggle or the anarchist equivalent in broken windows.

I ain't sure I got the patience and energy to explain obvious stuff to you, but I just don't think society is some neutral assembly where people just have take positions freely and then you got change out of it straight away. It's made of relations of violence where discussion is irrelevant. You can't organize at the level of dozens or hundreds of million people, only democracy does that and it's total fluff only serving at reinforcing the power of the same old elite on the rest of the people. It's therefore the mass relationship which needs to be abolished so we just stop being numbers, classes, ethnic groups and social categories and become humans again.

General strikes can be so easily thwarted from within... it's just not the only way to take down society.

New commenter here...

The challenge is that our desires, by and large, are produced by our existing reality. This is why "most people" will never want a revolution, even if almost all of us, under the surface, are desperate and angry. This is the reason for "pushing the envelope," the thing Crimethinc was talking about after the Chris Hedges debate. If what you're calling the "revolutionary minority" play their cards right, they create a new situation, in which people can discover that they want new things. So the answer is neither to wait until everyone has reached consensus in *this* society that we want to destroy it (we'd be waiting forever), nor to try to establish a mass line, nor to proceed as a sort of Bonanno-ish minority without concern for what others want. Rather, we act in a way that opens space for others' desire for revolution (or whatever you want to call it) to grow.

I'm kissing my laptop screen! That was almost perfect rhetoric!

This is exactly where my non-doctrinal awareness of the Creative Aesthetic Insurgency, [CAI] kicks in as an individualist pursuit of modern 21st century method of enabling a cerebral strike against authority without going into an anxiety panic attack. Not many people are capable of understanding the abstraction in mindset, in the same way they are unable to comprehend the state of Nirvana, because they lack an education in yogic 'letting go of etc'. They're frikkin sheep. yet they pillage and loot when the time is safe, bunch of ignorant prole slaves!

I love that this guy calls black folks who stand up for themselves ignorant slaves. At least it's clear which side he's on.

He's a known racist/sexist troll who makes a point of shit-talking struggles involving women & people of color, and thinks it's funny to evaluate women's bodies. The moderators delete his worst comments, but leave the ones that are thinly disguised as egoism.

I don't know how you can be sooo stupid but I will say something which you will immediately attack as a lame excuse by me to absolve myself of your accusation of me being racist. Well here goes, and I hope to get a good laugh out of your oh so predictable reply. Ready,,,,? I have had many black girlfriends and boyfriends.

Is this a cry for help, poor little baby biceps? Are you actually a misunderstood autistic person who can't communicate offline, and came here hoping to make friends? But unfortunately, the only mechanisms you'd learned for social interaction were racist and sexist jokes and bragging about your own [measly] intelligence? That would be a sad, sad story. But actually, I think you are smart enough to know exactly what you are doing, and to know that you deserve what you get. I read your conversations earlier where you immediately slandered any woman from South Asia as a fundamentalist, etc. etc. You are a horrible person, you know it, and no one knows the solution to the problem of your existence better than you do.

the fucking tigers claw
omg
dying over here

"mais la terreur proletarienne, c'est belle" -the ghost of gay debord

Spread the resistance! Get organized and fight back against the fucking pigs! Ya Baltimore!

more interesting links and articles greatly appreciated. . .

I appreciate the energy of this! It reminds of the first nights in Ferguson!

Some points and suggestions, take them or leave them, they come from a place of solidarity. Maybe they are obvious or just completely wrong in y'alls mind:

@ Abolish the white ally complex, and if you are a white anarchist, don't give into it. We need to help develop more nuance views of race in the US that aren't coming from college students or from "black leadership." I found a reality much different than what these fools were talking about and it is always through struggle that we can see the real lines in the sand more clearly. One thing I learned is that when there's white people fighting back police with black people, it creates an atmosphere were racial barriers melt a little bit and it tells people that there are down white people. More than white pacifists yelling at predominately black people to stop throwing shit.

@ Social media is the devil (not really that I believe in the devil). Corporate media is one thing, the social media activist is another monster that I find more fucked. They wear their shit like a badge of honor. Ever since occupy, people are all about being "transparant," which means they will spout whatever they think they personally see on twitter. You go out, experience some amazing and empowering shit, and then you get on social media and see something else. Some use it as a platform to snitch, to post photos of "troublemakers." Watch out. It's depressing. Because the mediums they use are legitimated, they will never be used to promote illegal activity. But they can be useful in finding where people are and where police are.

@ there's always people in the frontlines, and it's fucking beautiful. you are shocked at the tenacity of some people. I often felt left behind. what can anarchists do while others hold it down? smash surveillance cameras (After ferguson, the police released hours of footage of people looting. it seems like it has amounted to nothing much, but i imagine they will do the same in Baltimore)? confront media who won't budge when it comes to recording illegal shit? break a bunch of shit? can we encourage those who aren't anarchists and might be afraid of going head to head with a line of riot police and tear gas to do other things?

@ are we about the riot or more about the rebellion? there is an aspect of anarchist discourse that seems to glorify riots, a sort of warrior culture, but often these are complicated moments that are both horrible and amazing. especially when, folks, you or someone you know gets hurt, tho this is unavoidable. these moments are certainly better than the stifling social peace we suffer through all the time. So, how do we help create and defend a police free zone, a rebellion that takes space? Ferguson wasn't all riot and looting, it was hanging out, dancing, blunts, cars, barbeque, water bottles, racial and social tensions coming out uninhibited, conversations with randos, soap boxers; basically a situation where much was up for grabs. It was not perfect, sometimes it was absolutely horrible. But if continued for long enough, who knows what might of came out of it? This scared the leftists and politicos who wanted a pre written script.

@ Get ready for the hordes to come to your city if this shit kicks off. Some of them will be cool, but a lot of them will have chip on their shoulder. There might be zillions of non-violent trainers, nonprofit activists, etc. If there is an organized Left in Baltimore, it will grow from all the people coming to plug into it, if only for the time this shit lasts. Then they will leave. I feel like the critique of this is common beyond anarchist circles now too.

@ WEAR MASKS LIKE THEY ARE A FASHION STATEMENT. Blend in with the style, black bloc was often a dead giveaway for the pacifists and people think yer a fed. In Ferguson, there were moments where large parts of the crowd were wearing masks. Even little 5 year old kids with their moms and shit. It was encouraged and it contributed to an atmosphere where there weren't necessarily a group of easily identified "leaders." This was troubling to police and leftists and it eventually was actively discouraged.

@ there is no authentic aspect to these rebellions. Ferguson was made up of so many different people. Awkward teenagers, seemingly invincible children conspiring, old people standing by telling us to keep fighting, criminals, street racers, moms, dads, 9-to-5ers. A lot of people might know each other, have some community, but there is still a lot of atomization imposed by capitalism and day to day life. This seems obvious but it's useful because when (or if? dreaming big here...) all this shit cools down, and the professional activists become the "movement," you will wonder where these combative folks went. You might not find them because you can't "find" them per se, they are everywhere and nowhere. Embrace the chaos, maybe suss through it tho for your sanity.

P.S. Also, whats this shit about the burning cop cars in Ferguson being BAIT? That's some bullshit. Feels pretty uncomfortable to see that, like you all are doing the same thing as those who want to say the police had control. From my vantage point, they didn't. Also, this is not a contest.

Very useful stuff even for those of us far from the 'hot zones'. But I took the line about bait to be a reference to the night of the non-indictment announcement, when MSM pushed only the 'fire and brimstone' themed images of the one toasted police car conveniently left alone on the major street - and right next to where CNN was set up. Not as a suggestion that every car toasted was a false flag or whatever.

That's a matter of chronology: Car is parked on street near large gathering of people. Car becomes target of crowd anger. Cops attempt to defend car. Crowd surrounds cops, throws rocks and bricks at cops forcing them to abandon car. Structural fires set elsewhere in addition to gun fire create cop-free zone. Car is torched. Media captures spectacular imagery.

No conspiracy there, sorry.

Waitin' for next MAY DAAAAYYY!!! And if no riot happens, I'll wait for May Day 2016!!!!!

https://lechatnoiremeutier.noblogs.org/files/2015/04/d-18.jpg

https://lechatnoiremeutier.noblogs.org/files/2015/04/chaise-e14300633342...

I never even dreamed I'd see one day someone going as far as to body-shield herself to defend fucking windows.

Are windows are literally more precious to her than her own life let alone the lives of others?

The mindset derived from fascism, that is pervasive among the current dominant ordinary militaristic culture among workers, perceives society as an organic`body, where attacking some of its key organs, like highways, the power grid or the spectacular shopfronts, is like attacking vital organs. So at a subconscious level, it does make sense.

...from their schizophrenic totalitarian perspective.

BPD let all that happen. They kno they desperately need to deescalate the situation.

Even if the police did choose not to intervene they did so out of fear - fear of the consequences and the potential to escalate a volatile situation. When the police are afraid, people are powerful. Not omnipotent, sure, but powerful nonetheless.

ya tru but wat was really amazing was the peaceful protest liberals being thrown the fuck off their throne and told to shut the fuck up

An article mentioning something like this:
The odd tactic of giving Baltimore protesters ‘space’ to destroy property
http://fusion.net/story/126587/the-odd-tactic-of-giving-baltimore-protes...

Yeah well, douchebag liberal beardo reporter didn't say anything about the threat of organized killings made against the Baltimore cops, in which the mayor's statement could have been just a spectacular cake toppling.

(Reuters) - Baltimore police said on Monday they had received a credible threat that various gangs were partnering to "take out" law enforcement officers.

The gangs that have entered into a partnership include the Black Guerilla Family, Bloods and Crips, according to a statement from the Baltimore Police Department.

(Reporting by Suzannah Gonzales)

This is where the believers in the Almighty State get to face the music that cops are only hired goons, namely EMPLOYEES... with unions, labor contracts, insurances, physical/intellectual limitations and work shifts.

They are not the military, even though they were made to be like a paramilitary force to scare the masses, they don't make this oath to obey orders to their deaths. So if their lives are put on the line they aren't likely to risk these over a few broken windows. In other words the cops were made into an empty shell, scarecrows that only are powerful when ganging up against one single person in the middle of nowhere, or against crowds of nonviolent protesters.

Also, it's awesome if those gangs have reunited under a common cause... it's like undoing the division and manipulation Black neighborhoods went through since the '70s.

im also gonna call bs on this. credible threat? this is just scare tactic media play

same thing happened that time! and so I call BS on you. Just some stay-cool-dude cosplay.

What's the fake threat... the cops or the gangs who threatened them? For the second, there's been two or three cop shootings within the context of the anti-police violence protests. There are Black people who took guns to the streets. They aren't smug liberals from Evergreen College.

As of 3pm Monday - highschool students riot just outside Mondawmin Mall in W. Baltimore. One 7/11 looted, bricks hurled at pigs - at least one of which left in an ambulance

http://www.wbaltv.com/news/images-vandal-gather-at-mondawmin-mall-7eleve...
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bal-university-...
http://www.breakingnews.com/item/2015/04/27/baltimore-police-confirm-off...

CBS livestream just aired footage of teargas being deployed at Liberty Heights Ave & Reisterstown Rd. Reports of scattered fires in the neighborhood.

CNN reporter pepper sprayed on live air. CVS on Pennsylvania Ave looted. Police or possibly transit cop car alight on North Ave.

Deray Mckesson tweets that there are scattered groups of rioters in multiple Baltimore neighborhoods (for whatever its worth)

Brief videos on social media do confirm confrontations in residential areas, not just commercial centers.

links plz

Do your own homework.

CVS looted and now burning down. Very, very large crowds near west district and surrounding areas. CBS reporter robbed. Very young people aggressively fighting police. Small barricades burning. More cars on fire.

6:45 pm est

Onlookers report that looters emptied the goods onto the sidewalk for passersby to take before sparking the pharmacy.

Always glad to see piracy is still alive... Just not happening enough in NA. But who knows perhaps it'll become big again with this shit!

Cnn.com, nyt.com for real time updates on officers of justice with skinned knees

Fucking libs are saying "violence and destruction won't be tolerated." Yeah, unless a black man is murdered by pigs AGAIN, then they TOTALLY tolerate it!

Go Baltimore!!! Beat back those fuckers, fuck the pigs and fuck the National Guard too!

Only the violence of the state will be tolerated, eh liberals?

but but riots are ILLEGAL

On their 10PM news broadcast Faux News was claiming one cop died after getting his ass kicked by the young people on Monday. Elsewhere I see that at least 14 were injured the same day. Saturday they say six cops were injured, which is one for each of the pigs responsible for the murder of Freddie Grey.

The next day, not one mainstream media mentioned FAUX's claim that a pig died from injuries received in battle. Story is presumed false, though I heard that he "hadn't woken up yet" when this report was made. Hmm-onder if they pronounced him dead prematurely to make a news cycle, only to have him wake up on them?

niggas is stealing/liberating horses from the popo! lolol baltimore go hard!

But if we just put cameras on cops everything will be fine, right?

Yes, and the FBI internal investigations.

And then the community policing... and...

"Community policing" aka counter-insurgency

counter-insurgency = authoritarianism. but you knew that? I hope.

"Safe Spaces" policies = community policing too!

Mayor now on the same page than anarcho-leftists!

Mayor Blake: "This is not a lawless city." It is "idiotic" to think that destroying the city would make life better to anyone."

lol Chicago!

I agree, instead of destroying their neighborhoods they should move to hers and burn her fucking house down instead!

Thanks for posting this update. Stay safe in the streets and know that people have your back all across the world right now.

An immediate and important point. Based on footage I've seen, very few people are wearing masks in the streets. Consider acquiring large numbers of bandanas and passing them out. Print these up and pass them out and wheatpaste them.
https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/12/12/18765476.php

Stay strong, sleep little.

The ultimate post work goal should always be to stay home and get LOTS of sleep. Spectacularly structured violence is about as worthy of getting up for and losing sleep over as any other form of work.

Just stay indoors.

http://insipidities.blogspot.ca/2014/03/who-were-indoor-anarchists-what-...

you are the worst. go somewhere else. Mad love for Baltimore rn tho

Normally on board with the emile armand side of you, but what other creatures can retreate to cork-lined walls?

So why exceptionalize human asceticism?

Maybe folks in chile should have stayed inside regarding the recent volcano?

For most of us, any 'cork-lined rooms' we could retreat to are the product of this unsustainable narrative/belief system called civilization, which continuously gives rise to the relational tensions being responded to in places like baltimore.

Via emergent violence I have no problem with per se N_P particularly when dealing with 'affecteds'. The issue for me is non affected 'solidarity' types who have no powers of affection what so ever in the direction they have in mind.

There are reasons to not stay home like volcanoes, or events that are actually interesting and not feeding into a predictable structural narrative. This is not one of those events. Also as the that 'allied' cameraman who got beaten up shows,(can't remember the name or city now) not all of those guys are your friends. These are the same types who nearly did in Reginald Denny.

You're irrelevant everywhere in the world except on the comments section of this website. No, actually, you're irrelevant here too.

More stuff on street safety:
http://www.crimethinc.com/blog/2014/08/14/staying-safe-in-the-streets/

Relevance is overrated as it tends to relate to affection based change which simply confirms the world as it is.

I was there on Saturday from 3PM to just before 7PM. First things first: instead of being kettled by the cops, we effectively kettled the Mayor's prized baseball stadium full of rich white baseball fans. That stadium was built with public funding looted from MD taxpayers over overwhelming citizen opposition. I do not know whether the cops forbade the fans from leaving (an illegal detention) or just advised them not to. In the latter case they were kettled by their own racism more than anything else. A small group of riot cops "protecting" the stadium from behind pig pens was also effectively kettled once protesters looped around and covered both sides of their position, which faced two different lines of approach to Camden Yards. Rarely do you see protesters kettle the cops!

Strategically there were two main legs of the Saturday protest: the siege of the Western District police station, and the siege of the baseball stadium and associated runs through the Inner Harbor. So long as nobody assaulted the protesters this seemed to stay peaceful. There is hilarious video of the last baseball fans to reach the stadium running to stay ahead of protesters who were not chasing them! Another video shows a white bargoer near the stadium throwing a rock at African-American protesters and instantly being counterattacked, barely escaping being tackled. Earlier I saw two unmarked cop cars try to drive right through the march while people piled onto them. Both somehow escaped.

On Monday very high resolution video was broadcast from news choppers over the Internet, a blatent threat to use video to hunt people down for later. This makes masking up more important then ever. Also, that helicopter footage seemed to show no effort to seek overhead cover against these "news" choppers that were effectively serving as police auxiliary photo recon birds. This can be done, hell DC has no really tall buildings, yet after a 2002 partial mass arrest of a Critical Mass ride I was able to keep the buildings of GWU between me and the police helicopter. I then beat it over a bridge into Virginia, where I stayed until I saw the chopper land. ANY helicopter over a riot belongs either to the cops or to someone who has so much money the cops work for them. Thus, it makes sense to keep buildings between yourself and them when doing anything illegal or during an escape and evasion.

The fact that most of the day Monday the riot cops were at the inner harbor and baseball stadium while the riots were elsewhere proves what I said Saturday: the Mayor does not care about West Baltimore or African-American residents, she cares about the Inner Harbor,all those tourists, the Camden Yards stadium, and the Baltimore Orioles. She will only care about Freddie Grey if she is forced to, and taking money out of the pockets of the Baltimore Orioles (game cancelled tonight!) and the Inner Harbor is an effective way of doing exactly that.

At the Saturday protests I heard ugly reports from multiple sources that the pigs had been taking face pictures of protesters (BEFORE any rioting!) and then comparing to warrant databases so people could be arrested as they left on warrants up to two years old. I saw some people masked up Saturday over this, but not nearly enough. At least at the stadim I overheard a police radio report to stop sending in the undercovers due to the risk to them.

More at

https://dcindymedia.org/node/675

Been there done that! binary fated CNN field-reporter vocal delivery giving an hysterical blow for blow account of unfolding events. Hilariously obsessive! Ever stayed at home not working in the whole universe, moping around saying nice calm things to folk in the street. a magnet for authority

Why are you dissolving even further in to hysterical gibberish?

There's a big difference between relevant stream of consciousness prose and hysterical gibberish you unpoetical heathen!

New commenter here. You're a piece of shit who should commit suicide. Thanks.

Thanks for the report, Luke. Definitely need to inform people planning to engage in confrontational tactics about the necessity of wearing masks. It would be cool if there was a small pamphlet to advise about street tactics to pass around the neighborhood, a direct action protest survival guide of sorts.

BTW,I've never been to Baltimore but years ago I used to know some people in Nefac yfrom there.

That's right................ we don't give a fuck no more. HAHAHAHA

If you don't give a fuck, why are you risking your life/freedom for someone you never knew? Clearly you actually do GIVE A FUCK. Just not about their racist economy. Forthcoming solidarity.

Sorry kids. How many an-caps were out burning cop cars and compromising property last night? Was it ZERO?

How many libcoms were scenestering and sniveling about the "manarchist" property destruction and illegal acts meanwhile in Chicaco?

But wait... it's you!

This violence for the sake of violence goes against my non-doctrinal Creative Aesthetic Insurgency model [CAI]. Violence is justice when it reveals the beauty of social behavioral gracefulness in dealing with loss and recompense by a sensitive application of retribution, restitution, rehabilitation and finally reconciliation. Mob opportunism is for the plebe and barbarian, no wonder they all become slaves to their masters in the end play.

"Mob opportunism is for the plebe and barbarian, no wonder they all become slaves to their masters in the end play."

This is an ugly justification of slavery and white supremacy barely disguised as egoism (or whatever it is you think you are). We know who you mean by "plebe and barbarian" because those are the people courageously risking their lives in Baltimore while you sit on your ass thinking people should care about your pronouncements. Personally, I'm involved in anarchism as a way to engage in the social struggles taking place right now, in which I am implicated whether I like it or not, not as an internal narrative of justification for why I'm smarter than everyone else, nor as a surrogate activity to excuse standing by while others are brutalized by the same forces that will soon brutalize me.

Every living organism on this 3rd ball of mud from Sol is being brutalized at this moment. Having a petty little tantrum and doing some looting in the name of an ideology is fallacious and is only just reinforcing the whole post-neanderthal mindset! Time to step up moron!

The folks throwing down in baltimore aren't doing it in the name of an ideology. You're criticizing them as a result of your own twisted ideology. That much is obvious to anyone with a pulse. You are intellectually dishonest and have nothing to offer here.

You're dealing with the same left/insurrectards that I deal with when these kinds of events are going on.

The point I always try to make to these young fools is that violence like this is non-intimate or self-referential. Thus it is spectacular violence prone to predictability, structural recuperative retention, and an overall reflection of the instrumentalist violent logic that we live today. As Novatore would say, there should always be redemption beyond violence be it individual or collective.

It's sad how the idea of insurrection as Stirner and Novatore conceived it, has been soiled by the modern moronic mob that we see today in the Marxist metastasized late modern anarchist, the useful foot soldier to to greater leftism. It was supposed to mean no longer being arranged, but what we see in these events is anything but non-arrangement.

Can you explain what you are talking about here - arrangement, retention, intimacy - ???

That's true, redemption is an innate quality, possibly a finely refined remnant of the former brutal herd and tribal memory, which still unfortunately dominates the modern prole mentality, the tendency from which it seems this mob in Baltimore are still controlled by, the same frenzy which sees cattle at a slaughter house overtaken with violent instinctual desires of fornication and destruction. Very sad, shortsighted and recuperative opportunism.

"Very sad, shortsighted and recuperative opportunism."

by imputationism

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/bob-black-imputationism

As well as blending in with the misplaced sense of self righteous liberal cheerleaders.

A great and intelligent essay from good old Bob! Seems like most of the fools that are baiting us have no comprehension of imputationism. Whether one has read Bob Black, or has arrived at the same conclusion from just being a sensible, intelligent and compassionate person, seems to me that most of the anons on this thread fall into the category of propaganda driven morons with the biological equivalent of fridge magnet slogans floating around in the vacuous space between their ears, wishing death to anyone who has a differing opinion, sounds to me like authoritarian thugs in disguise.

As well as an unofficial fifth column against anarchy and for liberal progressivist universalism.

One of the things Bob pointed out in 'Anti-Nuclear Terror' is to be on the look out for how much mainstream support an issue has by seemingly unlikely bedfellows. If there is official support for it, then that should lead to immediate suspicion. There are plenty of liberals who support the rioters. Some of them also support this:

https://twitter.com/the_moviebob/status/594166692332220417

What that idiot doesn't figure is that that is exactly what Bill Clinton(who he likes)began to do in the 90s. This is the kind of idiocy that these idiotic anarchists end up inadvertently aiding.

The historical origins of the "Fifth column" refers to a fascist/reactionary/nationalist shadow column operating within or on the aisles of the revolutionary fighter groups. It may have been the stalinists, or just the cops that were still allowed to operate in Madrid by the statists. Your attempt at recuperating such metaphor is contrary to your own knee-jerk despise of both antifascists and the radical Left. Rather awkward. Just so you know, dog...

I'm saying that your brand of antifas and radleftards more or less have the same effect regardless of operational intent.

LIVE FEED: http://www.reddit.com/live/ut948b9s23la

LOOTING IS STIIIILLLLL HAPPPPPEENNNING. AND A PURGE IS CALLED FOR AT 3 TODAY. FERGUSON GOT NOTHING ON THIS!

Just shows you, its about commodities and materialism! Looting is the petty payback for an assumed invoice for voluntary enslavement. These proles will never attain an autonomous individual sovereignty, their riot is not revolutionary nor is it anarchic, it is plain crass opportunism.

Yep, most riots are merely about more consumerism. Taking stuff is just acquisitiveness, and breaking stuff only reinforces property's importance.

Yes... by negating property through the acts of looting you reinforce property's importance. Makes sense. Like Stalin was actually misunderstood as an anarchist.

How does looting "negate" property? When you take commercial property it then becomes your personal property. It remains property. Your desire to acquire it is no different than the desire of capitalists. Memetic desire reinforces its importance to you, that's all. No negation involved.

New commenter.

I doubt you've ever been in a situation like what's happening in Baltimore, or else you wouldn't be running your mouth so self-importantly, but people usually relate really differently to property in such situations, sharing it freely or even simply destroying it rather than hoarding it. Structurally, your criticism of rioters for being like capitalists is similar to the charge that the people fighting the police are police provocateurs, or the ones destroying the symbols of capitalism are rich white brats.

Anyway, whole texts have been written about this. Look up "In Defense of Looting" for starters. You needn't simply project whatever is already in your head onto these people you've never met.

You seem confused. I'm talking about looting, specifically the looting involving liquor stores, stereo stores, starbucks, etc. I'm not talking about destroying property.

Hello douchebag, first commenter here. You do appear to be a major hair-splitter when it comes to the principle of destroying property. But how ALL of those stolen objects still DO retain property once they've been freed from stores, huh? You also seem to have little arguments behind your attention-whoring that any 10 years-old kid could do.

Do you, like, believe that property is inherent within the very molecules of beer cans and shoes, or that it's somekind of soul incarnated in these things?

Whether or not property is stolen to be resold or just to be release in the street for free (as it actually happened in several of these lootings), whether or not the social construct that is property is restored by the looters or not, this doesn't change anything to the fact that the act itself of stealing or looting (a.k.a. "reclaiming goods stolen from the workers through the labor process")is negating the legal social construct of property ad hoc. Because the item loses its value and cannot be sold anymore by its official owners.

No I'm done explaining things to dolts.

(I wasn't the first but the fourth commenter)

What makes property 'property' is one's psychological relation to it, not some intrinsic quality. Pointing this out isn't splitting hairs you self-righteous waste of DNA. Yes, those objects are coveted as property once they leave the stores. That is the relation to the objects looters have. It doesn't matter whether they are paid for or not. Did you think the act of paying for an object magically turns it into 'property'? Do you actually believe 'property' is only or merely a legal concept? Wow...what a fucktard. Let me guess, you were edumacated in the American public school system, amirite?

It seems that you should look up "in Defense of Being a Moron" for your own preservation.

If you can't defend your argument that's not my fault. But hey, keep name-calling. That's about the only strategy you have left.

But where are your argument, dimwit? You're coming here with completely ludicrous claims like "most riots are merely about more consumerism" then fail to provide with anything substantial as arguments (unsurprisingly).

Dicks will be dicks I guess... Always attempting to push and penetrate an rape just because.

Please explain how my claims are "ludicrous"? It's basic common sense. When most people loot, most of the time it's just cuz they want more stuff....for free. Nothing necessarily wrong with that, but it's not political or revolutionary. It's just consumerism. Why do I need to provide anything more substantial than that? Just follow riots. What do you think people are doing when they loot a liquor store? Overturning authoritarian structures? Transforming property relations? No, they're just taking stuff. They love their new found property.

Nononono, YOU came up with your stupid nonsense without backing it up. Therefore YOU are the one with the burden of proof.

And sure yeah... common sense is a good explaining away for just about anything. I mean, it's pretty common sense that rioters are violent animals who all deserve to be put in jail, no? (end sarcasm)

People aren't stealing property. They are stealing STUFF. That is the reality... not the abstraction of phony conception of property created by the bureaucracy and those who profit from it.

This just in: Those are fucking proles who've been fucking exploited to pay for fucking commodities that they now have decided to say "fuck off" and grab'em. (since the Law no longer avails in a place where a guy gets brutally killed by murderers who get a paid leave for it)

Thank you, you just proved my point. They are stealing stuff. That's what I said. They aren't creating a revolution or doing anything radical, or transforming social or economic relations, they are simply taking stuff cuz they want it. Just like capitalists do. It's all part of consumerism and acquiring more 'stuff'. They love 'stuff' just as much as anyone else. Oh, and this just in: they don't identify as proles. They have never heard of the word and don't read Marxist literature. But not knowing anything about actual rioters or never having met or talked with any of them personally, you wouldn't know that, would you.

I'm a different commenter than the one you're answering, but you're making a lot of vague statements full of projections summarizing why you think a whole lot of people (at least hundreds) are doing what they're doing. Then you accuse your (comparatively well-spoken) adversary of having never been (or been) a rioter. It's a real stretch, don't you think? If you want anyone to take you even the slightest bit seriously, you could start by dropping the vast over-generalizations.

But considering that you appeared here in the first place just to make vast over-generalizations, I won't be holding my breath.

Same false usage of 'negating', like negating rape by acts of violent lust. Very illogical you moron!

OMG! * yells to wife slaving away in the kitchen to throw some personal items in the car we're leaving NOW!* Oh dear, we're like 2,000 miles away on the internet and you implore me to kill myself. Its sooo amusing to have trolls becoming dominant and telling intelligent commenters such as myself to die. Truly insane and hilarious inversion of values typical of binary interaction, hahahah I'm actually feeding the trolls hahaha

It's so sad, how misunderstood you are. If only all those mean old commenters didn't want you to die by your own hand. Why won't they just bask in the glory of your brilliant insights?

Actually, you know why. It's because you are a trolly troll troll who shit-talks any form of resistance carried out by women or people of color. We've seen all the trash you've spewed here. You know why we hate you. Fuck you.

According to the excellent book Anarchism And The City working class Anarchist militants during the heyday of Spanish anarchism used to organize what became referred to as "proletarian shopping trips", in which the militants would gather together groups of impoverished workers and unemployed members of the working classes and carry out 'consumerist' raids against capitalist shops, appropriating for the working classes what had been denied them by capitalism and it's elitist ideal of putting the sanctity of private property above the needs and desires of the mass of humanity.

What is happening right now with the African-American masses in cities like Baltimore is potentially more revolutionary then just abut anything that is happening in the much celebrated Rojava Revolution, more of a real threat, at least in it's implications and possibilities, to the capitalist order then the Rojava autonomous movement. The African-American masses are not rallying around a would be Black "Apo" of their own Black mis-leadership class, but are instead paving their own way to liberation - as a class. It is the task of Anarchist militants to stand in solidarity with the black masses in these events, and not join the chorus of the Liberal Counter-Revolution in calling for peace and order were because of the disorder of capitalism there is no peace, and indeed very little order worth having.

Well we know how the Spanish Revolution panned out! Total failure, in fact, the syndicalists posing as anarchists caused so much aggressive destruction of everyone's property that they polarized the Spanish population against any form of freedom for the next 50 years. It was the old binary war script without a 'win their hearts and minds' agenda, just total destroy. Doesn't work like that chump, you're still living in a Napoleonic mindset, very sad for you!

Christ, he's even defending property now. Fuck this racist piece of shit.

Nobody's defending property. But destroying or looting inanimate objects is part of the very psychological attachment to property that you think is being 'negated'. To the Kwakwaka'wakw of the Pacific Northwest, property was extremely important. So important in fact, that destroying it in the Potlatch was the source of great prestige. Coveting property or destroying it are both the result of the fetishization of property.

That's the incoherence with you... that you are confusing "property" for some notion of "privacy" or "private/personal use". According to well-document knowledge of Native American cultures, there was no form of private property among native people of the northern Turtle Island. This is why they basically got their lands stolen, because they had little understanding of the European conceptions of restrictive land ownership, which is an aspect of property.

...or else if you're so in-the-know about the Kwakwaka'wakw people, perhaps you could SUBSTANTIATE your claims about property being so much an important aspect of their culture? You've been spouting a lotta nonsense lately without supporting arguments, so I ain't expecting much...

Oh anthropologist major all native tribes had the same values, all 5,000 of them. Their diversity is/was as numerous as the languages of all Europe and Asia, yet you say they had no private property. That's a leftist fallacy hangover, any native who didn't öwn'a horse or a wife was mostly deemed unmanly. Now you can froth and introduce modern neo-Marxist and feminist rhetoric as much as you like, but remember, we're in the 21st century now noble savage lover.

Typo. "Oh anthropologist major all native tribes had the same values, all 5,000 of them?" That's meant as a sarcastic rhetorical question.

Kill yourself.

I'm not confusing property with privacy you mouth-breathing meth addict. What the fuck does that even mean?

So you want me to substantiate my claims (which are self evident) but you don't have to substantiate your wild generalizations? (i.e. there were no forms of private property among native people of the northern turtle island).

I'm talking about property as a relation to an object, not who owns it. Commercial property or private property, or communal property... are all still property. The only difference is who owns or shares it. I'm talking about the very concept of property itself, and the psychological attachment to it.

The Kwakwaka'wakw fought over it. Property was very important to them. This is well documented by Helen Codere:

http://www.amazon.com/Fighting-Property-Kwakiutl-Potlatching-Warfare/dp/...

All indigenous peoples have or have had concepts of property. To some, property was very important, to others it was much less important. regarding how native americans lost their land, John Weaver's The Great Land Rush and the Making of the Modern World 1650-1900 and How the Indians Lost Their Land by Stuart Banner are also good places to start.

My original point regarding Baltimore was that looting (or even Potlatch) does not 'negate' the concept of property, or magically make 'property' go away. Whichever anon commenter said that doesn't understand what property is.

"I'm talking about property as a relation to an object, not who owns it. Commercial property or private property, or communal property... are all still property. The only difference is who owns or shares it. I'm talking about the very concept of property itself, and the psychological attachment to it."

Aaaah... but that's POSSESSION, not property!

Possession (from Merriam-Webster):

"the condition of having or owning something

something that is owned or possessed by someone

law: the crime of having something that is illegal (such as a drug or weapon)"

Possessing (from Dictionary.com):

"1
a : the act of having or taking into control
b : control or occupancy of property without regard to ownership
c : ownership
d : control of the ball or puck; also : an instance of having such control (as in football)

2:
something owned, occupied, or controlled"

...where "property" refers to the legal-political right of possession. Which is a completely different notion than "possessing".

Hahahahaaa! That's the problem with abstract dictionary definitions, they only provide a partial understanding of a word's meaning.

And those definitions are contradictory. For instance, c: ownership is also a legal term. Since possession can be either a noun or a verb, it therefore amounts to saying that possession (ownership)can mean both 'control' as well as (legally owned) 'property', not the 'complete difference' you've tried to parse.

Look, if it helps, I'll type really slow to help you understand.

Property is the object considered to be rightfully possessed. In Western discourse, property refers to both the object itself, and the concept of an objects' legal or rightful possession. However, we all know that what is 'legal' and what is 'rightful' are not necessarily the same thing. In Western culture, we tend to conflate the two most of the time, but we are also aware that laws (and the attitudes behind them) change. There is also the legal saying that possession is 9/10ths of the law.

If possession is tantamount to control, then the sense of possession can't be separated from the sense of rightfulness. In other words, possession is already bound up with the concept of rightfulness. How or why would I or anyone else control something unless I or anyone else felt entitled to? How else would commodities get divided up or shared within a society without a sense of there being a 'right' or 'better' way to do it?

Back to looting: The looter takes stuff from a store. That stuff is in his/her control (insofar as he/she is able to control/defend/share it by force). The looter feels that stuff is rightfully in his/her possession, or even belongs in everyone's possession, even if his/her sense of right is at odds with the legal system or the rest of society. As anarchists, we would tend to agree with the looter on that point. The sense of rightful possession is, as we saw and as your own dictionary inadvertently defined it, is what makes up the concept of property. The object (one sense of the word 'property') has been moved to the control (possession) of the looter. The looter feels he/she then has rightful possession, that the object is now his/her property (or anyone else's), if not legally, then morally. It's that sense of rightful relationship to the object that I am talking about. Property in this sense has not been negated, only transferred. Property is not merely or strictly a legal term. It's also NOT different from possession, it is bound up with the meaning of possession.

Every society and culture sets up what it believes to be rightful possession. Each society has their own moral/legal structure of property. Whether it's communal property, individual property, corporate property, private property or even simple usufruct. You can't do away with property, you can only arrange its relationships.

Clearer now?

You're the same fool who thinks race is biological. And here you are saying property is natural. Look outside your own social construction for once, could ya?

And you're the one making up shit about what I say. Race is based on biological features, it's not completely arbitrary. Why do we call people with dark pigmented skin with African or Caribbean heritage for example 'black'? Is it all just a coincidence? A social construction? Are you really this stupid?

And I never said property is 'natural'. Where the fuck did you get that from?

Go to your room. Your grounded.

You are a moron! Yes,,,an idiot, who knows nothing about reality except a narrow minimalist code of comprehension and understanding extracted from a 26 digit coded dictionary. Think for yourself, ponder the abstract, or all is lost!

Sure those people want to possess merchandise while denying the rights of ownership of their legal owners (which is piracy), and yes, this doesn't negate their relationship of possession towards merchandise (the object of possession much valued through the Spectacle). Still this does negate property.

Of course, looting (also called "self-reduction" or "collective reappropriation") is an old, widespread, inherently anarchist tactic that's actually much older than the Spanish Civil War. And the non-academic anarchists here will know that it's being carried more or less regularly today in places (i.e. Europe) with a more developed anarchistic consciousness and praxis. Just don't limit it to that failed Spanish Revolution, puhlease!

What's been happening in those riots since Ferguson (and before) is some of the most consistently anarchistic movements that ever lived in decades in the US. It's breaking something open in the social daymare that no other whiter anarchists failed to do over the last years.

In other words, they're not acting or talking white enough for you, not citing the right books, etc. If you see "proles" who will "never attain an autonomous individual sovereignty" through your lens when you look at people in actual revolt (in contrast to your practice of self-important trolling), that just reveals your ideas as meaningless and your framework as reactionary. You are the crass opportunist, even just commenting here.

But everyone who has been watching has noticed you talking shit whenever non-white or non-male people are doing something.

Word.

"Opportunistic," or "consumerist" what's being indicated by these things is that the average person is not getting what they want or need from this way of life.

For now it could be resigned to symbolic or consumerist objects...but lets keep imagining wider and wider, since relugated to consumerism enough will always never be enough---constant human expansionism expected, full potential return (efficient growth) always just out of reach. What could happen regarding these feelings of not getting enough of what we want or need out of this way of life in places running out of water?

Is that you Frothy? You seem calmer, is it your medications?

Wtf you little twerp!?! How about you drink a big ole glass of shut the fuck up? I don't need some crypto-nazi fucking with me. Get out of the basement and get your mom to drive you to the hobby store you banal boring shit.

You don't get the big script do you? Running ones mouth of is resorting to the use of expletives before saying anything relevant. If you can't handle polite criticism get off the internet. Also us critics attack flaws in process and the nature of hypocrisy, you are a prime case of everything I deplore about anarchist activism and how it should be practiced! Your methodology is pre-neanderthalic!

Hi, new commenter here, the one who tells you to kill yourself, not the other reformists who just insult you. Myself, I would never tell your mom to drive you to a hobby store; a funeral home would be more like it. Again, we're not engaging you seriously because you're troll trash, and you know it. If you had anything at all constructive to offer the world, would you be on here, talking about how smart you are to a bunch of people who loathe you and wish to see you come to harm?

Oops! Sorry, I thought you were Frothy, because you project the same dogmatic gristle-minded opinions. So that's 5 commenters who now despise me and wish me dead! My infamy is growing, hoorah for you!

In my book, appealing to the moderator is equivalent to appealing to an authority figure, which is akin to snitching. As I expected, you are a syndicalist leftist posing as an anarchist and exhibiting the mindset of a statist puppet!

That's what his pathetic antics make me think of. The Xbox live type.

Let me chime in here--honestly, I for one appreciate the hard work the moderators do, removing the most racist, sexist, and trolly comments. I think it helps the rest of us to have the conversations we are here to have--about tactics, strategy, ideas, not ideological one-upsmanship. I don't think they should delete all your comments, but I concur with the above commenter that most of what you have to say is not worth anyone's time, and you post it anyway knowing that full well. It really would be nice to see less from you.

And I actually believe that an anarch site can accept diverse opinion and critiques and also allow a sense of humor or wit. Its not that I'm a troll, also I offer a name to dispel the weakness of anonymity and the unaccountability of answering rebukes which 90% of the commenters enjoy. I accept that half of my comments are deleted and I move on. What more can I say to these trollish morons? This methodology of mine is explained in my thesis of the Creative Aesthetic Insurgency which most leftist deplore and troll me over.

Oh, you're an insurgent now? Somehow I doubt the gov will bother putting any counter-insurgency efforts into this one.

SOunds like an AWESOME art project! I know some White rich yuppies who got nothing better to do than spend lotsa money on creations like these. Lemme get you in touch. No wait, it's a joke, you douche.

Sir E, you have been frequenting this site longer than I have, I'm considering looking for another site which can handle my theoretical opinions, but I am not an overbearing intellectual nor a dull brained prole, I'm somewhere in the middle and eccentric as most poet/ artists/ musicians are. Could you suggest another site which wont have commenters frothing at the mouth at my witty and ironic comments? ;)

Well there's always post-left reddit. Admittedly in the 2 years I've posted here, I've found this place to have much more latent leftist sensibilities then I thought even though it is known as a place with a high proportion of post leftists. The frothers are people you just have to get used to. I honestly enjoy their rage quite antics as it shows they have no ability to take me or you on intellectually.

I can't think of much places though. There use to be anti-politics.net which is no more. Pity because I wasn't as intellectually refined as I am now when I use to post there, and toward the end it had good contributions from the likes of Fendersen and Dupont(of nihilist communism fame).

On an unfiltered site with ubiquitous anons based on a 4chan reality, anon ankle biters are basically going to be the norm for those with names and divergent opinions. Particularly when leftist sensibilities are on the line. Just look at what happened to Bob Black in the Bay Area. They are a continuum of that degenerate type.

I'd say stay and make this site a little more interesting then the anon imbeciles who will not question some deep seated intellectual status quos. You'll have your detractors just as emile and I do.

Wow... you really are a bunch of misunderstood geniuses. But really, you'll need some some vaseline to put around your head for better re-entry in your rectum!

Wait, mr. biceps, you're not seriously considering leaving us, are you? But I appreciate your humor and cleverness, and your well-informed insights into everything! Please don't go!

Just kidding, you should kill yourself immediately. Kill yourself. Kill yourself. Kill yourself. Kill yourself.

"In other words, they're not acting or talking white enough for you,"

What on earth is that supposed to mean. I'm being rhetorical because I do no what you mean though I spell it out for you unfiltered. Essentially you have scripted a reversed essentialist conception of Negroes and people of colour. It's why you call black conservatives coons and uncle toms as opposed to simply black conservatives. Then there's an anarch like me who simply will not behave myself to your idealizations.

It's quite painful and sad that you are simply the debased reflection of the same racial ideological coin. Funnily enough people like Khalid Muhammad have pointed out that blacks are easy to control politically(I tend to agree). By playing this counter essentialist game of what blacks are, you are perpetuating that problem.

Race isn't biology, it's a social construct. There are white social cues. It's not hard to understand what the above commenter meant by saying that this "biceps" moron is denigrating people for not using predominantly white social cues and language to explain their activities. That's not essentialism, or "reversed essentialism" (sic). It's just pointing out how structurally racist it is that he is judging others according to his own paradigm, which is normalized by a racialized power structure. His calling people who don't read the same books as him but still have the guts to stand up for themselves "slaves" is just the icing on the already racist cake.

But as an egoist, I imagine you refuse to acknowledge any of those phenomena? That egoism shit is a joke. At least we're in no danger of having to interact with y'all in real-world struggles.

Not even close. Race is biological. Dark skin is biological, so are slanty eyes. If you were shown pictures of people with different physical characteristics pertaining to ethnicity, you could probably pick out and identify these characteristics and group them according to what we call races. Our categories of race are socially constructed, but they are based on physical morphological features. Our stereotypes of race are also socially constructed. But differences in physical appearances originating in geohistorical cultures are not.

Skin colour is biological. Race is not. There is no genetic basis for it - now that we've mapped genomes it's clear that skin colour is a tiny fraction of a fraction of the code involved and tells us virtually nothing about the rest. There are east-African villages with more genetic diversity than you'd see between the average English and Chinese citizens.

Also, definitions of race change far too often over time and space to be much to measure scientifically. Not that long ago, Catholics weren't considered 'white' in most of North America. Who's racial categories do you use? Brazil? France? America? Are we going with definitions from today, from the 1950s, or the 1890s? The fact that these definitions change so frequently to reflect new social/historical realities only goes to show that it's rooted in society, not biology.

Without skin color, race can't be "constructed". There is a genetic basis for skin color, eye color, bone structure, lip size, nose size and shape, and all other morphological features that go into racial categories. Racial categories don't change very much over time, and when they do they usually track changes in biological features e.g. mulattos, Roma gypsies, metis, etc, and other mixing of different ethnicities.

To what you're saying, though race is problematic because it began as an enclosed, very western, definition. I believe it goes back to being synonymous with breeds.

Terms like phenotypes, clines ect are better terms. Certainly their is clustering by distance, though ultimately variation is fairly individual. The traits you mention(while clustered and somewhat predictable) don't really make for a term like race. Also these things are epigenetic not genetic.

I actually don't have a problem as such with the 3 historical definitions that some physical/forensic anthros still use(Negro, Caucasian, Mongolian) as they have some predictive power. I do think these should be softened to more social definitions then anything hard and empirically rigorous however. And again I would not use the term race.

I know, the word race is problematic and a holdover from the 18th century, and originally derived from the concept of breed in animals. You are right. And it's not a very meaningful term. That's why I tend to prefer 'ethnicity', which is more geocentric and less Darwinistic. But nevertheless, 'race' remains in popular use and is closely associated with ethnicity.

Race is a social construct, you fucking undereducated moron. Made out of entirely-visible physical traits that are always wrongly de-differentiated from the gross generalization of "race" (for instances, slanty eyes can be found among Russian and African people, just as some nordic Europeans have similar physical features than some people in Black Africa aside than the skin tone). It's a construct that originated with the colonial system of supremacy, where the "true Whites" where the aristocrats caste and all the lesser subjects were valued accordingly with their skin tone and ethnic background, to which were attributed properties in accordance with stereotypes.

Race is complete fluff. Come and tell us about your "4 races" myth. Black people are not "black", American Natives are not "red" and "Asian" people are even less "yellow". Duh.

Stupid racist idiots.

Also kill yourself with your mindfuck. You are not wanted on this site.

Race is constructed out of morphological features. of course they are generalizations, with lots of exceptions and blurry boundaries. That does not mean race is completely arbitrary. I could show you pictures of different ethnicities and you would be able to pick out asians, blacks, hispanics, whites, indigenous peoples, east indians, etc without a problem. You would recognize their ethnicity immediately. How you group them or what names you choose to group them by isn't as salient as the fact that you can group them at all. The stereotypes we give to races are definitely socially constructed, but not the physical features used to categorize them.

As for the rest of your ignorant comment, it sounds like your diapers are full. Should we call your mom?

Of course the boundries are blurry, they are constructed, like national borders. You can only pick out ethnicities because you are conditioned to do so. Race is psychological and cultural. As with 'mixed races' you can't actually group them all, because people are constantly expanding these definitions beyond those definitions that are assigned to them. Or in other words you CAN group them all, but it's complete racist bullshit.

The boundaries of species are blurry too, but no biologist thinks that species is just something scientists made up or were socially conditioned to. All categorization is imperfect. That doesn't mean there's nothing behind any categorization, especially when the category is based on physical features. Are you seriously suggesting that the only way you could recognize an asian person is through social conditioning? That their physical features would have nothing to do with it? Is this what they teach in culture studies now?

Biologists are products of a programming system that serves specific political and financial agendas, you stupid sheep.

Wow...so biological knowledge is all the product of political agendas? Unbelievable. How old are you?

So science is some sort of objective entity beyond the capitalist system and White supremacy and was not used to reinforce and serve all kinds of ideologies and systems of beliefs, nor the drive for accumulation of capital through an industrial system of research and development. Good to know. And you go that shit from.... public high school?

...public small school!?

So you never go to a doctor or dentist because you think biology is a false science driven by a political agenda? That there is no such thing as objective reality?

Well, that would explain a lot I guess. Enjoy your solipsistic matrix world. Keep smoking that good stuff!

Physical features other than skin tone have NOTHING to do with the actual skin tone, and the skin tone is only a tiny fraction of the genetic baggage of a person. Yeah yeah I know, for you it means everything, because you're just a racist douchebag.

I'm not talking about what the genetic causes of skin tone are. Why are you?

I said skin color is one of the physical features we tend to categorize people's "race" on.

Are you currently taking any nonprescription medication?

New commenter here.

"you would be able to pick out asians, blacks, hispanics, whites, indigenous peoples, east indians, etc without a problem."

And those categories themselves aren't socially constructed?

Newsflash: YOU ARE A FUCKING DUMBASS!!!!!! Think about it just a tiny little bit. You're not as smart as you think.

Also, if you act so insulting to other people, what do you expect? Of course they're going to loathe you. You deserve it.

"And those categories themselves aren't socially constructed?"

The names and boundaries of those categorizations are socially constructed, but the actual diversity of physical features those categories are based on are not. Unless you're suggesting skin pigment or eye color are socially constructed.

I didn't start the insults asshole. You seem to have as much problem with cause and effect as you do with categorization. Now buzz off and let the grown ups talk about important things.

You're a moron. No one is saying that people don't have differing physical features, duh, but the categories into which they are divided, which you call race, are socially constructed, and could be constructed along a variety of other lines just as easily. Look, even the other moron assholes here (like Sir E) don't agree with you. You're all alone in the wilderness.

What other lines could people with dark pigmented skin with African heritage be based on besides 'black'? What other lines could people with asiatic physical features be based on besides 'asian'? Could they be grouped according to nationality? (even more socially constructed, wouldn't you say?). Could it be clothing? Hair style? Political views? What?

It doesn't matter what name we call them e.g. black, chink, paki, etc. We could call them gorflm, mreps, gandorf, mordor, whatever....the fact remains that we group people who come from various geocultural histories according to their physical features, and call the differences 'race'. I don't really like the word race, for reasons I've already mentioned, but I just use it in its vernacular colloquial sense.

Those differences are not socially constructed.

I don't give a shit who does or doesn't agree with me. Why does it matter to you so much who does? Appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy.

"asians, blacks, hispanics, whites, indigenous peoples, east indians"

"Asian" is a supposed socio-ethnic group that means absolutely nothing today. It's etymology only meant the "people from where the sun rises", which is anyone East of anyone who deems themselves to be Westerners.

"Hispanics" are people with a latin cultural background, which doesn't comprise the Native people, who are a significant portion of country folks in Central and South America.

"Black", 'White" "Yellow", "Red"... are, again, hyperbolic classifications created through the colonial/monarchic system of slavery. There's no such thing as white, black or yellow-skinned people. There's only shades of brown... with pinkish variations, and YOU do not escape from this. Nobody has got a face like the background color of this site or the text color of its title, you dimwit.

"indigenous people" are not a "race". Duh. They only mean people who were living at a place for a much longer time in comparison to the settlers.

Hence, all those racist categories are complete social fabrications produced through an historical process of colonization.

You're the one, as I said already, who's undereducated. As any undereducated moron you gotta keep spouting insults and useless provocations at people who got more brains than you, out of your own frustration of being unable to make actual research.

Asia is a geographical region. The people from that geographical region we tend to call Asians, who have historically had certain physical features in common. If I showed you a picture of Bruce Lee and asked you what ethnicity he was, you would immediately recognize him as Asian (or Chinese, or some other Asian nationality). You wouldn't say Australian Aborigine or East Indian. Because you automatically know the difference, and recognize the physical features (e.g. type of eyes, skin color, shape of cheek bones, etc) as associated with people from that region or from that culture. Instead of 'ethnicity' I might use the word 'race'. But your answer would be the same.

This categorization has NOTHING to do with social construction, the monarchy, colonialism or anything else. It has to do with recognizable physical features. They are not "social fabrications" they are real biological features that make different groups of people look distinct from each other. For a long time, Western cultures called these differences 'race', but it doesn't matter what word you use. You could call it 'breed' or 'species' 'ethnicity' or whatever. The name doesn't change the physical features, or our ability to recognize patterns of similar physical features.

The names we give to skin color (i.e. yellow, black, red, white, etc) are not to be taken literally. Those are just loose approximations. They are clumsy colonial terms from the 18th century. It's one thing to say Native Americans did not literally have red skin, which is true, it's quite another to conclude that therefore their skin color is an irrelevant, socially fabricated category unrelated to our ability to recognize it.

Try thinking about what you write, instead of getting all defensive, foaming at the mouth and calling people names as soon as you hear the word 'race'. Your politically correct Marxian Cultural Studies dog whistle talking points are really boring and silly.

Obviously the colonial racist baggage needed to be cleaned out, but these continentalist leftards have jumped the shark in the other direction. I prefer the term phenotype or cline and I think these definitions have to be contingent as opposed to enclosed like the classical definitions, however as the forensic/physical anthropolagists have shown with the 3 foundational phenotype terms Negro, Caucasian, and Mongolian, you can have a reliable ammount of predictive power with those definitions, and predictive power is what matters.

Yes, I'm definitely NOT defending all the racial baggage, social Darwinism, bell curve nonsense, slavery and discrimination associated with racism. I am simply defending the idea that ethnic or racial categories, however socially constructed,however flawed, are still based on actual biological features. I'm also not defending any sort of essentialism.

People who are more distinctly ethnic like mainland Chinese or African Bantu or someone in a small Pakistani village will have more distinctive features and be easier to identify than anyone from these same groups who have intermarried and mixed with other ethnicities over several generations. For example there are some very light colored mulattos who look neither African American nor white. They sometimes look like they could be almost any ethnicity. They are a lot harder to categorize precisely because of their blended and blurred physical features. If race/ethnicity were merely socially constructed, this would not be the case since it would not be correlated with physical features at all. Race/ethnicity would be neither easier nor harder to identify.

Maybe in a few thousand years if enough intermixing occurs around the world, there won't be any distinctive or recognizable racial/ethnic features left. We'll all just be a mixture of various features, too indistinct to categorize. Maybe that will be a good thing, and maybe that will finally eliminate the idea of race altogether, I don't know.

Of course race is a social construct, but you further the reification and reality of race with your silly structural Marxist derivative analysis. You could can talk about white behavior, or you can be more exact and analyze things between high and low cultural context as it relates to the Western world. BC and I are not telling these idiots to 'behave white' by calling out their mob materialist mentality for what it is.

Racism is based on prejudice, its not some structural latency drawn up by your silly Marxist analysis. And none of those rioters are standing up for themselves, they're following crowd based social cues like everyone else.

"none of those rioters are standing up for themselves, they're following crowd based social cues"

NONE of them? You're not in Baltimore, so you don't know a goddamn one of them, and you propose to judge the motivations of every one of hundreds if not thousands of people? What a giveaway that you're ideologically blindered, a fool imposing a prefabricated narrative from far away. You're really no different from Rush Limbaugh in that regard. I bet y'all could find a lot in common.

But you're just pontificating from your internet throne. No gives a fuck about your armchair commentary, you blowhard dolt. Fuck your generalizations, fuck you for baselessly slandering anarchists as Marxists, fuck the infantile ideology you subscribe to, fuck your make-believe pretense of knowledge, and fuck your ridiculous idea that racism is a mere matter of prejudice rather than a structural stabilizing component of capitalism since the beginning.

How dare thou insulteth thee Anarch Pope with thou lay prolean Social Justice, you Lay Leftist plebieannn!

For goodness sake, no I don't know the individual motivations idiot, but I know what spectacular crowd mentality is and how non anarchic it is. Not everyone who pours cold water on your insurrectardation is Rush Limbaugh or right wing.

You're the one who is generalizing when it comes to negro aspirations in the United States correlating with leftard riot ideology. Also I'm not calling you an Marxist as much as saying that you are hooked on his and his discourse's structuralist accounting of the world which permeates your retarded conception of racism beyond the classical prejudice based definition, a definition that was always sufficient.

There is no structural stabilizing component of capitalism retard. In fact there is no structural stabilizing component of ANYTHING as regards to reality the way Marx saw it. Reality and language are unstable and unstructured. This should have been clear by now coming from the best of post-structuralist-Marxist analysis, but not to some Marx derivative leftard like you.

That you can only interpret that commenter's criticism as Marxist-derived is yet more evidence that you see the whole world through a thick lens of ideology. You see what you're looking for, not what you're looking at. Pathetic, considering that your whole shtick is that you think you're a smart guy. Why are you cowering behind those ideological constructs? The complexity of the real world too scary for you?

You're taking someone's critique for an ideological lens? The analysis of structural racism(along with other structuring agents) that anon believes in which permeates a great deal of modern leftist based radicalism pretty much can be traced back to Marxist based analysis which was the theoretical go to lens after ww1/2 and the collapse of anarchism. That I can critically analyze this and you can't does not mean I am trapped by ideological constructs.

Believe me I'm not the one with the problem of analyzing the complexity of the real world.

Yeah, we all know you have your weird storyline worked out, we're not buying it. If you seriously think that race has not occupied a structural place in the development of capitalist society, you are a nutjob.

There is no structural place or agent. Get over your localized power hallucinations. Race, beyond a language category or belief is next to nothing. I'm not the one with a weird storyline for reality.

Who the fuck uses the word negro? You are literally the worst. Surely there's some dark corner of the internet where your blathering would be more welcome. Please go there.

Is no worse then the word Caucasian. Remember, I don't do politically correct sensibilities.

No it is. For the racist supremacist connotation that "negro" has, and "caucasian" has NOT.

Doesn't have racist connotations. Nigger does (though even that can be debated when looking at the Latin root word). The difference is that one word is what I would call an indentured derogatory term and the other word at most might be contextually derogatory. There are blacks who still use the word, there is the United Negro College Fund, there's all of Central and Latin America where the derogatory context is not to be found. I myself have more issues with the term black.

Stop being a politically correct liberal derived idiot.

only if YOU stop being a smug professional semantic hairsplitter.

"I myself have more issues with the term black."

Whaaat... "nigger" (an Anglo phonetic variant of "negar", "neger" and the French "nègre"), "negro", "Black" are are semantic equivalents at their respective etymological roots, bozo. So in a nutshell: they all mean the exact same concept, and are rooted in colonial history.

Cool semantic hatchet, though. Very sharp beyond purpose. May I borrow it to scalp you off when I finally find ya?

Well it's also a condescending prejudice of seeing crowd-based revolts as some irrational, herd mentality-driven movements by default, where individual acts of self-assertion also are often barren due to egotist megalomania, lack of reason or connecting with others properly.

Why do they think herd mentality is irrational?

Herd mentality IS irrational, for functioning on cognitive and moral values that are outside of discursive and pragmatic logic (like for preserving the clan's unity, the usual shitty authority relationship, and so on).

It's just that not all crowd movements or even mass movements are based on herd mentality. They can totally be a temporary, partial, conditional participation by individuals to a collective movement/project, where it doesn't contradict the anarchistic principle of "free association".

I didn't see that garbage movie, but what exactly is "a purge" in this context, and how is this "purge" different than the hundreds of other hoax "purges" "called" across the country since that movie came out?

I saw something on Fox News today regrading this story (of course citing an anonymous security firm). The state loves these narratives, along with the "gangs uniting to kill cops" story, and they only serve to reinforce the idea that police are beleaguered protectors of order in constant mortal danger, and that without them absolute antisocial chaos would reign. Obviously this isn't true, and I'm curious why anarchists would be excited about "a purge". Are these anarchists like the Joker was an "anarchist" in the Batman movie?

I think the most important thing anarchists and other radicals can do now is to being forward the theoretical/ideological cover for this uprising to these kids. Right now these kids are being bombarded with people telning them how wrong this is and i think we need to give them arguments on why it is right to riot and loot and so on. Good arguments and not the pseudoradicalist "make destroy everything" kind, that is. I think that would be a real contribution to the struggle as it is unfolding right now.

Worth mentioning that there's lots of credible accounts of state and private security efforts to flood online discussion forums with all the usual narratives to condemn the rioting. Some of the comments here seem suspicious too but more likely to target the higher traffic sites where more people are still trying to decide how they feel about what the absence of a social peace really means.

Lots of great information here too though! I'm just saying the flurry of commenting that condemns or cautions is seeded and amplified by paid interests with an agenda. It's not all just genuine liberal outrage.

Proof? I mean I know it's a common tactic, Israel loves to deploy it, COINTELPRO extends to online disinfo heavily in many cases, advertising agents do it as well with advertising, but I mean if you're going to talk about credible accounts of something that specefic you should back it up for those who show interest.

Wait... have you been living in a cave for a few years or you're just one of these shills?

The "cognitive infiltration" are documented government programs, with some major corporate backing. For fuck's sake just do 20 seconds of web search and you'll get several good articles on it. Also basically it's within the NSA's Electronic Warfare mandate to do that type of stuff... though that doesn't mean the agents are directly hired by the agency. It's a huge multi-layer hierarchy of corporate matroskas, just like the rest of the "corporate governance".

Normally I'd agree that conjecture should be backed up by sourcing but I figured this stuff was like saying the sky is blue, post-Snowden, you know?

The logic of race war (protect black businesses - target Chinese and Arab owned businesses):

A couple of the young men wore bandannas to hide their identity. The young men identified themselves as members of the Crips, Bloods and Black Guerrilla Family street gangs. One of the Crips members, who called himself Charles, wearing a red Chicago Bulls Derrick Rose T-shirt, said the gang members had taken to the street because “there is only so far that you can push people into a corner.”

“We’re frustrated,” he continued, “and that’s why we’re out there in the streets.”

Then he described how he and some Bloods had stood in front of black-owned stores to protect them from looting or vandalism. He said they had made sure no black children, or reporters, were hit by rioters. They pointed them toward Chinese- and Arab-owned stores. Charles said Mr. Gray had brought gangs together.

--

It's worth reflecting on why anti-police riots tend to become anti-immigrant pogroms.

Respectfully, no it isn't. That type of misguided, racial nationalism was already present before the riot, just because it's one of many political manifestations during, doesn't make it new or particularly interesting to me. If the social peace was the only thing preventing that sort of racial violence before, then add it to the long list of awful realities covered up by the paper-thin hypocrisy of liberal democracy, held together by the duct-tape, spit and class violence of the police.

A riot ain't supposed to be pretty, it's not about morality and if you start from these false premises, your disappointment is your own fault.

Let's not use euphemisms. By "ain't supposed to be pretty" you mean that riots include intentionally destroying the livelihoods of Asians and Arabs qua Asians and Arabs.

I love you don but the other commenter answered this pretty succinctly.

Ever since the image of gay jesus getting gang banged by romans was removed, I've questioned the weakness of those who do the arbitration on comment removal. Always bowing to convention and defending the most snark filled shit, yet removing comments that are a dime a dozen in most any discussion forum outside the polite anarchist milieu's internet media.

The biceps critic needs to die by his own hand. You are preventing me from antagonizing him into his necessary suicide. This is so very painful for me as I want to hope for this fucker to find the courage to finally slit his own throat or failing that, jumping in front of a train.

This reliance on middle class moral codes for comments comes from intense social pressure from people that don't read comments elsewhere. These are naïve anarchists unfamiliar with the ugly holes of the internet where you can hear the voices of darkness. It is here that we tend to guide creeps like the biceps critic so they can find the will to finally do themselves in, hopefully with video so we can make memes from their death. Please allow this to happen.

I usually take sides against trolling and call for more mature and respectful discussion on these boards, but in this case I have to agree with you, the situation you are calling for is probably the best solution. That motherfucker doesn't deserve to be protected by the moderators. Deleting comments that attack him for his consistent stream of "provocative" racism/sexism/trolling, while leaving at least some of his trash here, is the equivalent to police enforcing social peace on a community that has to deal with an abuser in its midst. Maybe that's an overdramatic comparison, but if he is to comment here at all, it should be possible for us to emphasize how much we hate and loathe him. And sure, if he wanted to do the right thing, he could save everyone a lot of trouble by offing himself.

Fuck that nonsense. Anyone who believes that b.s. has no concept whatsoever of Right and Wrong.

If a person has done no direct, tangible Wrong to YOU, YOU the Individual, then any action you take against that person is Violence, i.e. you're the one doing Wrong to them. Period. Learn the difference between Right and Wrong. Going after any of those people at the ball-game, the ones you call "affluent and vast majority white spectators", would have been Wrong. Period.

Those very words you used tell me that you're interested in what you think of as "payback" and Violence, not Natural Law. If you were you'd have known that there's no such thing as "race" anymore than there is society or culture or any other group.

There are Individuals. That's it. Blacks don't have Rights. Individuals do. Whites don't have Rights. Individuals do. Groups of any kind don't have Rights. Individuals and only Individuals do because only Individuals experience life.

Anyone listening to you and actually taking anything you say to heart is making a serious judgment error. Learn Natural Law and get back to us. Until then stop poisoning people's minds with this shit.

Where does one learn this "natural law"? From a dead white guy? Perhaps one famous for his writings during the enlightenment?

I'll pass, thanks.

Did someone leave the door open again?