******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
I have been given different depictions of what the Bundy-ites actually wanted and who they were. I do not remember seeing any advocacy for racial separatism by them. I would not oppose *any* use of force by the government, no. I think protecting African-American students is a valid use of police power. In general, part of living with the monopoly of force that the police have is being expected to depend on them for basic security even when you don't like them. Hence, I do not think it is shameful for battered spouses or the like to call the cops -- a position I remember being criticized in some anarchist circles. However, my understanding was that these guys were basically like the other rightist loons who stockpile weapons somewhere and go off and live in the woods. Louis is suggesting that they were actively harassing people, which obviously makes it a different story. Still, the fact that these rightist groups might one day become the Gestapo does not mean we should ignore the ever-present threat of police abuse. Any legitimacy they are able to garner by shooting anyone will ultimately be used to legitimate shooting at leftists, marginalized people, and so forth. We should always be vigilant. - Amith On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Ken Hiebert <knhieb...@shaw.ca> wrote: > ------------------------------ > > >*Since any attempt to shut down an armed occupation runs the risk of loss > *of life, do we think the various police agencies should have allowed the > occupation to continue unimpeded? Do we think the police killed this person > when there was no reason to do so? > > I don't know, but you'll have to forgive me for having a naturally negative > reaction to a police killing. > > - Amith > > > Ken Hiebert replies: > Are there circumstances in which we would support the use of the armed > might of the capitalist state? As an outsider who has followed US politics > I can think of one example, the use of federal troops to enforce > desegregation in schools and universities in the South. > Perhaps there are other examples. > > On another point, while today there is a clash between the state and > right-wing armed groups, we cannot assume that will always be the case. > There may come a time when the ruling class looks at these groups as a > useful auxiliary to their state apparatus. > _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
