somebody behind a remailer wrote:
And IMHO the best way to achieve anonymity in meatspace? A great place to start would be by not deliberately engaging in "possibly illegal operations on the street in an environment full of police". You're doomed before you ever get started. But I could be wrong. Don't say I didn't tell you so.
Bitch, you really are a pig, aren't you? Oh, don't protest, don't be an activist, that's much too dangerous, you don't stand a chance they'll get you, blah, blah, blah. Just a little Tokyo Rose for the cyberage.
Nonsense, that's not what I said at all. I raised some serious issues--and all ad-hominem attacks aside, here are a few more for anyone who feels up for it: Can you see a fundamental difference between activism/protest/resistance that makes a difference and "illegal operations on the street in an environment full of police"? What's the point of putting yourself into a situation where you have no chance of accomplishing anything besides getting arrested(or killed)and making some sort of symbolic statement--that doesn't fundamentally affect a single soul beyond whoever gets their property damaged? Why does pointing out the myriad ways it's possible for unarmed people to get swatted like flies by provoking people with superior gear and training automatically mean one in any way identifies with the swatters? Do you really think being an idealist should preclude you from reasoning like a realist? Who's more likely to make a difference at the WTO: a) someone outside, throwing golf balls at the building b) someone inside, presenting compelling arguments to the assembly and individual delegates Can't you think of a better way to use your skills and talents than "fucking shit up" and getting arrested? Can't you even think of a better way to get across your message? I can, lots of people here can. But then, it could just be you're trying to troll me from behing that anonymous remailer of yours. agent provocateur (azhang provocater): "an agent employed to induce or incite a suspected person or group to commit an incriminating act." If you're not one, it's better than even money that you didn't know that the idea of the agent provocateur was invented by Czarist Russia over 100 years ago to stir the Serbs in the Balkans to a rebellion against the Turks, which Russia could use as a pretext to declare war. But its use was most prominent in combating the Socialists during the Russian Revolution of 1905. The Czars targeted young students for the operation of the "agents provocateurs" because students were deemed more impressionable and emotional. At one point 20 percent of all young Russian students were reported to be paid undercover agents who were to organize anti-government demonstrations and then lead the demonstrators straight into the fire of the Czarist police. Think about it. Given that, if you can't even keep a cool head posting to a message board, then you really ARE doomed. ~Faustine.
On Tue, 10 Jul 2001, Faustine wrote:
Can you see a fundamental difference between activism/protest/resistance that makes a difference and "illegal operations on the street in an environment full of police"?
What's the point of putting yourself into a situation where you have no chance of accomplishing anything besides getting arrested(or killed)and making some sort of symbolic statement--that doesn't fundamentally affect a single soul beyond whoever gets their property damaged?
Why does pointing out the myriad ways it's possible for unarmed people to get swatted like flies by provoking people with superior gear and training automatically mean one in any way identifies with the swatters?
Do you really think being an idealist should preclude you from reasoning like a realist?
Ghandi. Womens Sufferage (US). Jim Crow Laws (US). Vietnam. Civil Rights in the 60's. The point being, there are plenty of historical precidence where this sort of behaviour has led directly to the change desired by the protestors against a much better armed and entrenched foe. Highly heirarchial defence mechanisms, such as you tout as invincible, work just fine when faced with that sort of competition. When faced with a more distributed and idealistic confrontation they eventualy fail. The question is not one of tactics, but of spirits. Sun-Tzu should be added to your summer reading list. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Ludwig Wittgenstein The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 06:22:12PM -0400, Faustine wrote:
Who's more likely to make a difference at the WTO: a) someone outside, throwing golf balls at the building b) someone inside, presenting compelling arguments to the assembly and individual delegates
Of those two choices, probably the former, actually. Delegates won't change their positions based on oratory. Nor, in the case of a U.S. delegate who might actually grok free trade, would we want him to. -Declan
Nonsense, that's not what I said at all. I raised some serious issues--and all ad-hominem attacks aside, here are a few more for anyone who feels up for it:
Can you see a fundamental difference between activism/protest/resistance that makes a difference and "illegal operations on the street in an environment full of police"?
I can, that's why I don't do that stuff any more. (Not that I ever did it much).
What's the point of putting yourself into a situation where you have no chance of accomplishing anything besides getting arrested(or killed)and making some sort of symbolic statement--that doesn't fundamentally affect a single soul beyond whoever gets their property damaged?
We live in the Post Modern world where making a symbolic statement is equivalent to actually doing something about the problem.
Do you really think being an idealist should preclude you from reasoning like a realist?
By definition.
Who's more likely to make a difference at the WTO: a) someone outside, throwing golf balls at the building b) someone inside, presenting compelling arguments to the assembly and individual delegates
(a). Because by the time the delegates meet, it's too late.
Can't you think of a better way to use your skills and talents than "fucking shit up" and getting arrested? Can't you even think of a better way to get across your message? I can, lots of people here can.
I can think of a better way of using my talents, but then that's why I don't do that shit (Well, that and the fact that while I disagree with what the WTO is doing, I disagree for completely different and incompatible reasons than the "blank bloc").
If you're not one, it's better than even money that you didn't know that the idea of the agent provocateur was invented by Czarist Russia over 100 years ago to stir the Serbs in the Balkans to a rebellion against the
I doubt it was invented that recently.
Think about it. Given that, if you can't even keep a cool head posting to a message board, then you really ARE doomed.
Nonsense. There is virtually no risk (especially to someone behind a nym) in reacting hotheadedly on a mailing list (THIS IS NOT A MESSAGE BOARD). There are significant risks in doing it in real life. -- http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html It is one of the essential features of such incompetence that the person so afflicted is incapable of knowing that he is incompetent. To have such knowledge would already be to remedy a good portion of the offense.
participants (4)
-
Declan McCullagh -
Faustine -
Jim Choate -
petro