You must log in or register to comment.

zephyr wrote

anyone who thinks they can withstand torture has probably never been tortured.


Stigmata wrote

CW: Torture

As others here have already said, this reads like somebody who has a naive view of torture.

It’s nice to say you wouldn’t break but that almost surely is not true. Torture isn’t just getting hit, it’s so much worse. Imagine rather than torturing you they bring in your spouse, or your kids, and torture them in front of you until they beg you to tell them what they want.

Torture works, it may not yield 100% accurate results, but it does work. So instead of trying to get people to resist torture, information should be compartmentalized, and people should be organized into autonomous cells so that there is a firewall, if somebody from one cell is compromised they can only give up that cell.


celebratedrecluse wrote

It is totally unacceptable to provide the enemy with any new information regardless of the circumstances. Everyone who did this is a betrayer, snitch, informer

A great quote, which gets right to the heart of it.


monday wrote

I agree, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the comrades that crack under torture.

The author of the text is somewhat childish in his romantic defense of the resistance under torture. And there is a huge difference between torture and a police beat up in the station. Martyrdom don't buy me shit.

If they had time to study the subject more comprehensively they would had more doubts in their black-and-white ideas. They quoted Marighella, so let me tell some dark stories from their time:

[CW: torture] Some of grusome stories in the military dictatorship tells that sometimes they abducted whole families all together and made the kids, even young as 2 y.o., watch their parents being tortured and raped, if "needed" they would being raped and tortured themselves too in front of the desperate father's. One time a pregnant comrade was being tortured with electroshocks, and she aborted in the middle of the "session" with her dead kid being expelled by her body. Common tactics usually involved rape with objects, rats, cockroaches and other nasty stuff. One of the comrades when confronted with the perspective of being raped by a whole squad of soldiers had the idea of acting "horny" and praising the soldiers, she tells that when they couldn't get an erection after it, so they only punched her.

So I don't take torture victims lightly


celebratedrecluse wrote (edited )

Certainly not, you are right. I just thought this turn of phrase was a poignant distillation from the piece, of a certain way of looking at where we are.

A way of looking that, while I would not say it always, is the bitter truth. Every piece of information about is, is weaponized. Every loss, rather than an individual choice or moral failure, is more accurately and materially described as a defeat.

Finding ways to survive torture and refuse information to the enemy is something which interests us all, regardless of morality. In fact, refusing the moral framework implied by that statement is a necessary additional step. It creates the possibility for new resistance, by those who have made a choice to submit before. It refuses the category of identity, and creates new possibility for anarchists to stay resilient to each other and engage in transformative autonomization in the face of repeated state violence. There are people who may cooperate in an investigation as a child, who become lifelong anarchists thereafter, or at least sympathetic. People change, and are not in these immutable categories of morality.

It is important to build popular recognition that the policing forces are opposed to us, that they wish us evil and no good will come of cooperating with those who proceed in such institutional bad faith. This invites broad participation of passive resistance, and even surges of active wrenching.

I say that as someone who has been on the painful end of this type of process. Thankfull, not quite this bad as you describe, or what is happening today in Russia with the FSB. It is horrifying what will be done to people in the name of finding the criminal truth.


monday wrote

You are one of the most valuable users here bc you always have a clear sight and get the points across, again thanks for that. I agree with you your assessment and fundamentally I agree with their "no concession" approach to security culture.

But of they are proposing a improvement, they need to work in more than one front. Their last argument about "weak culture" and victimism is confusing to me.

Like you said, creating uncompromising resistance would likely be linked to the general understanding that the police and the State are not allies in any situation, and any interaction could jeopardize lifelong projects and shatter a lot of lives. I would weight different a illegalist insurrecto project than a loose infoshop affinity group, the stakes would be different and the sensitivity of information too.

Sorry if I came across a bit harsh, but this topic is somewhat sensitive


celebratedrecluse wrote

But of they are proposing a improvement, they need to work in more than one front. Their last argument about "weak culture" and victimism is confusing to me.

Modern culture broadcasts an apology of weakness. Like a sacred human right not to show courage and other eminent qualities in a difficult situation, but to break and give in. It is necessary to understand limits of human being’s capabilities and treat one in a humane manner but an apology of weakness is wrong and obviously disastrous.

I think they are right, contemporary cultural hegemony produces both an individualist mindset (useful to and the basis of, neoliberal capitalism) and gives social power to assertion of victimhood (even right wing use this language now). While it is important to give power to victims, it is also important to not give power to victimhood. These are, in fact, two different things, although closely related and difficult to disentwine.