Dear Unleesh,
I am not oppose to what you expressed but can I clarify that the political
philosopy that was called 'Anarchism' did not initially advocate any form of
violence nor
destruction? I like to know if the action by the 'disempowered' people as
demonstrated,
is the 21st century definition of anarchism and that this form of action is
recognized by groups
with similar adherence. I read from your note that you say 'destruction' of
buildings etc is
not violence and by this, it is meant that violence' as in causing real
bodily harm would
be 'terrorism' and not 'anarchism'? Am I correct?
Zin
> ----------
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 3:59 PM
> To: STUDIES IN WOMEN AND ENVIRONMENT
> Subject: Re: One WTO account
>
> Nice report.
>
> Except -- it shows the typical leftist policeman attitude towards
> anarchists.
> Inside every leftist is a cop wanting to come out.
>
> To round out this report a little, it was anarchists who mainly organized
> most of the Direct Action, without which most of the shutdown wouldn't
> have
> occurred, nice legal streetmarches and all notwithstanding.
>
> Secondly, most of the anarchists in Seattle were nonviolent activists.
>
> Thirdly, of those anarchists who made the conscious decision to use
> DESTRUCTION, not "violence" --- and those two words are conflated not only
> by
> the corporate media but by the left to confuse issues, where "violence"
> should mean harm to person, not to property -- many of them did so in an
> organized and very targeted way through black block formations that struck
>
> out at corporate targets who are causing vast amounts of destruction to
> indigenous peoples and the environment the world over.
>
> The hypocrisy of leftists who PHYSICALLY ATTACKED AND INJURED anarchists
> engaging in conscious sabotage of corporate property is astounding!!!!!
> With
> friends like these, who needs cops?? The ridiculous spectacle of leftists
> barricading the Nike establishment to protect it from vandalism shows a
> very
> skewed set of values when street defense was really needed against the
> cops!!!
>
> You don't need to "agree" with everyone's tactics. People are going to
> choose
> different strategies in their protests and attacks against corporate
> domination. Some people are going to choose sabotage of corporate
> property,
> which is a perfectly meaningful act, especially given the amount of
> disempowerment in most people's everyday lives. Sheesh! You'd think every
> leftist was a SCHOOLTEACHER or something.
>
> You don't have to _agree_ with everyone's tactics, but you should respect
> others as autonomous individuals who just may have made intelligent
> decisions
> that __Differ__ from yours.
>
> (un)leash
>
