Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote

"The enemy knows how to quickly adapt in the ideological struggle. 1) undermine emerging unity with white agitator propaganda, 2) follow up with declaration against something called Antifa as a terrorist group, 3) instruct the police to join demos and express solidarity, 4) release statements from police chiefs and others pushing the bad apples theme, and most important, 5) keep the focus on the individual and call for "justice" for that individual to avoid attention on the systemic and enduring elements of Black and Brown colonized oppression."

  • Ajamu Baraka
11

Ganggang wrote

This is a great quote. The narrative op is pushing is undermining the solidarity that this is a great opportunity to form.

Stealing from target isn’t wrong ever and it fights against the same things BLM is against. By condemning the “white looters” (which by the way all the looters are not) you tacitly concede that this is wrong. It completely undermines the protest and if it persists this narrative will turn it into a liberal pointless march

4

videl wrote

How is solidarity going to form if white people still aren't listening? You can certainly condemn white looters without saying looting is bad and that is exactly what OP did.

3

Ganggang wrote

You can’t just say “listen to black people”, that’s meaningless liberal garbage. Which black people is the question - Candace Owens or Malcom x? Some black people encourage the white looters and some don’t.

I for one think looting is a good thing. The nature of good things is that they are good no matter who does them.

1

videl wrote (edited )

Which black people?

In the context of my comment I meant OP. But in general, whatever black people are at whatever action in question.
I'm simply saying this: it's shitty for white people to take lead and initiate property destruction / fights w cops during protest because the police aren't going to be retaliating against white people. it's just not white peoples risk to take. Especially during a protest that's clearly about black people

4

Ganggang wrote (edited )

They’re not taking a lead, that’s your view. They’re simply destroying property, presumably because they want to. And black people are also “taking the lead” (by your view) in this way, as many of them have also begun destroying property.

The effect of your argument intended or not to undermine the radicalism in the protests and undermines any solidarity or unity. This will make them accomplish less. What you’re saying is the same argument coming from cnn, couched in identity politics.

3

videl wrote (edited )

How is initiating something not taking lead?

I don't have a problem with white people going somewhere and joining in on property destruction thats already commenced. That's solidarity.
But for example if white people show up to a currently peaceful BLM March and initiate (are the first ones to start shit) is just shitty disrespectful white bullshit that we're all tired of. And it really doesnt matter if you think a peaceful protest is a waste of time it's just not your risk to take.

1

polpotisevil2 wrote

Initiation does not involve commanding, organizing, or otherwise affecting fundamentally people's actions through some sort of force. Say someone is the first person to break a window. If people after that start breaking windows, it is because they were given courage and motivation, etc by the action. Watching someone break a window will not make you think breaking windows is something you should be doing, you may be appalled and yell at them to stop. On the other hand, if you think vandalism could be helpful in the situation to prove a point, or however you else think of it, then you start getting involved with the original perpetrator, you have not been controlled by anyone or told what to do and are acting on your own real emotions.

Leading is different. Leading is taking the stage and giving a motivating speech and in the same breath telling people how, where, when, and what what to act on. It is forming a mob mentality to police acts the group does not then approve of. This authority to influence policing can be granted to people in many ways, whether by deed, previous fame, or otherwise. Before you say "but these are groups of people who have a shared cause and come together and opportunists take advantage of them" think about what context you are using opportunist in. The organizers and leaders are also opportunists. They see the death of George Floyd and post a poster all around saying "COME PROTEST THE DEATH OF GEORGE FLOYD AND POLICE BRUTALITY AT ___ PLAZA" attempting to attract many people. And it does. Many people with widely different viewpoints on the situation, whom the leaders then try to control to their own interest.

2

videl wrote (edited )

you havent addressed how white people starting shit that puts black people in danger regardless of whether or not they agree with what the white people are doing isn't disrespectful white bullshit that is totally typical of whiteness. just no regard for people of other races. you haven't addressed this white privilege which is the core of the problem.
I appreciate your explanation on the difference between initiation and leading and I mostly agree but what I am describing is a white person comes into an action and fundamentally changes it for everyone via property destruction & the response that it brings from the white supremacist cops: this is the type of thing I'm talking about whatever you wanna call it.
if you're white and you start shit you better be ready to protect black people by any means necessary

2

polpotisevil2 wrote

For one, as has been seen in some protests, and adds on to what I said about the difference between leading vs initiating, the crowd can easily stop something it doesn't like. People have been handed over to cops who started vandalizing in some areas. Initiation does not always start something. If something really starts, it is sometimes because there is something that runs deeper than the first person who "started" it. I understand how police may react to it in some situations and it will affect other people protesting (white and black), but it varies quite a bit. The situation is what will tell if it is/was acceptable or not, not the fact that they are white.

Also, while police brutality and racism are certainly problems, the two are still seperate issues. The militarized police is a problem for all races, although it definitely disproportionately affects people of color. White people are killed as well as black people. I am not diminishing the struggle against racist police brutality, I simply don't agree that white people have no say or ability to act unless black people do so first, because this does affect white people too, although to a far lesser extent.

Especially disagree when many blacks have the same mentality that rioting and looting and violence is fine. You are still putting some black people's opinions over other black people's opinions by putting it in the context of a racial privilege issue.

1

[deleted] wrote

3

Ganggang wrote

I’m not accusing you of stanning Candice owens, I’m just using it as an example to illustrate why “listen to black people” as a platitude doesn’t make all the much sense. Like black people have a lot of different views.

Even anarchist black people have different views. I mean yeah I will literally listen, as in hear people out, but at the end of the day I have to decide what I believe for myself. There are black anarchists that have no problem with white people rioting. There are some like I presume yourself who do have a problem. At the end of the day I make my own decision.

I’m hearing you out though, I’m listening, I read your post. I just don’t agree, and I think the narrative you’re pushing is detrimental to the riots effectiveness

2

[deleted] wrote

1

Ganggang wrote

What do you mean by all or nothing? Why is it all or nothing if one group not affiliated with blm for instance riots while blm has a peaceful protest? I absolutely support a diversity of tactics.

2

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

Ganggang wrote

At the end of the day unfortunately you or me can’t really determine how this is going to end. But we already have stuff to show for it. Communities of people now have goods they looted. People discovered they had the power. Private property is being terrorized.

If you want the revolutionary energy to keep up I would recommend encouraging anyone and everyone to participate in these riots. The bigger it is the longer and more significant it will be, by my estimation.

2

[deleted] wrote (edited )

4

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote

I was just making a general response to add to the conversation and didn't mean to imply anything - I try to say something where I can and my capacities are quite limited.

Hope you are well

1

Bezotcovschina wrote (edited )

I think, we all can agree that peaceful protests won't acheave anything at this point, but it's clear that the whole movement is held responsible for actions of one. I want to say that you should feel what action is acceptable for the movement in this specific case. You aren't here to harm the movement. If you feel that isn't acceptable to break windows and torch cars in this particular situation - you shouldn't do it. You are not alone here.

I saw videos of protesters handing "provocateurs" to cops, I saw videos of black people frawning white people for tagging Starbucks, I saw videos of protesters hugging with cops. And I saw videos of pig's station burning and Target looted. Each situation is different and if you want to show solidarity - you should act accordingly.

As a side note, I want to express my disgust when every "violent" act is attributed to forces outside the actual movement. That's just watering down and downplaying people's outrage.

4

LostYonder wrote

An important observation - that the "whole movement is held responsible for actions of one". This is something, generally, whites will never experience - being held accountable for their entire race/community. White thought and the powerful industries of representation that reinforce white privilege, construct whites as independent, individual agents whose actions are driven by their personal psychological make up while all others are products of their culture. Whenever a Black, or Latino, or Muslim person does anything whites deem as unacceptable, the entire community is expected to stand-up and condemn the act and try to prove that they aren't that.

Whites behaving badly at a BLM protest taints the black protesters, not the white ones - this is white privilege...

7

celebratedrecluse wrote

i encourage all white US Americans to peacefully protest, as is their privilege. They can also vote for Joe Biden!

3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

4

celebratedrecluse wrote

what is cancerous is platforming people, of whatever background or skin color, who are trying to divide the movement into "good apples" "bad apples".

Where have we heard this discourse before? Oh right, it's the same fucking line that was supposed to neutralize the anger against the police in the first damn place. Now, repurposed for...the same goal. Defanging the opposition.

Why is this narrative being blown up everywhere in the media? A multiracial anti-cop movement in your country just burnt down a police station in an open insurrection and looted the weapons. Think. You believe the media is blaming this on "white anarchists" and "outside agitators"....because it is true?

By dividing a movement between black and white, between liberal and radical, you make it weaker. The strength is in the diversity and plurality of the people, and it is why your government is on the defensive for now. Is it not?

6

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

celebratedrecluse wrote

No, whiteness does not stop being a monster, at any point. To be honest, I'm looking in from the outside. But I do see how the divide and conquer discourse on these uprisings to be in the interest of the empire, which I share an interest in destroying. A lot of us do, of course, people outside the USA.

You are right though, black american descendants of slavery will always bear the brunt of the repression in your country-- in fact, in many countries. I don't have an answer for how people are supposed to rise up against the enforcers, without the consequences being disproportionate. it is a strategy the empire has used for centuries, because it works. I guess I am, at a distance, and frustrated, because I see the same pattern happening again, and have no power to do anything about it directly.

I hope you are all able to work out some sort of synthesis and avoid the pattern repeating itself. Good luck to all of you.

2

OdiousOutlaw wrote (edited )

I agree with you on some points; I'm still of the opinion that cops need to be knocked down several pegs (if not abolished) and a police station being burned down is cool and all; but I'm still fearful of the backlash. Not because I value the opinions of the pearl clutchers who oppose it, but because the people with actual power and influence are also absolutely throbbing at the thought of making the US even more of a police state dystopia and are racist as all hell. Regardless of who's rioting and who's protesting, most of the people in this country that see a riot with police brutality as the catalyst only see one group of people as culprits because, as always, we're the only race that does that because crime statistics or some shit; so it isn't white neighborhoods that'll be cracked down on the hardest, but black ones; which means that not only will the list of black lives taken by the police increase, but that this incident will be cited as "proof" that police are needed in the US.

EDIT: To clarify, this isn't a condemnation of the people rioting or riots in general; so much as my fear that nothing will come from this and that this will die down and be forgotten in a couple of weeks, save for the expansion of state power; as is the way with the US and the people who live in it. Ideally, this would lead to something good beyond meager reform; preferably in the form of increased anti-cop action. Whatever one's opinion of BLM is; they'll face some form of invalid criticism because of the riots; that isn't the fault of the peaceful protestors nor of the rioters; that lies squarely with the people who will conflate the two, the people who believe them, and the predatory media that will take the opportunity to spread that message.

3

Hagels_Bagels wrote

I don't know what to think. I'm white and if I were living in those areas in the US I would be protesting too. I knew that as soon as I saw the video of the murder. I don't give a fuck about police stations, police cars, Target, McDonalds or Starbucks. I hope they get looted and absolutely trashed. I hope stormtrooper riot police get their behinds kicked in. And I would be really tempted to partake in things like that as a white person, in solidarity. But the fact that I might be perceived as being "opportunistic" or trying to shift blame to black people, or would be trying to impose something onto black protesters is a thought that makes me uncomforable.

Seeing some of the videos on Twitter primarily, something doesn't sit right with me. I've seen a white police officer holding a sobbing young black person in his arms saying "we're all in this together". Like fuck we/they are?! People being murdered by pigs are not "in this together" with pigs. If you're a cop at a protest, you're part of the problem.

It's hard to see where the line is sometimes, and I think it comes down to ideology? I've seen a white protester being forcibly handed over to pigs for chiselling at a sidewalk. I remember seeing a white girl on a Unicorn Riot livestream being recorded by people twerking to some music while the protest was going on, and I was just thinking "wyd?" I've now seen white people spraying "BLM" onto Starbucks, as well as another white person calmly coming out and smashing windows with a hammer. I've also seen two black people confronting each other about whether rioting and looting is justified.

If there were no white people at any of the protests then the message would be that white people don't care about racism or the murder of black people. But the actual black people at the protests are upset and disapprove of the way some white people take action.

What I'm trying to say in a very lengthy way is I don't want this radical uprising which could actually be taken seriously by the people in power, and and make real change, to be hijacked by liberals, regardless of race. Surely nothing is going to be accomplished by small peaceful protests at this time.

3

Ganggang wrote (edited )

Stop falling for the bait, they are using this to deradicalize the protests. At the end of the day this state is oppressing all of us and the more people fight it the better. Numbers are what will make these more successful and you are undermining that.

And all people can and should steal from target and destroy private property whenever they can. No organization be it blm or any other has the right to tell others that they’re not allowed to riot. You are always allowed to riot.

Stop getting your politics from cnn and realize we are in this together and the more rioting the better. Please, destroy stuff! Whatever race you are, whatever time it is

2

[deleted] wrote

1

Ganggang wrote

Not saying you’re posting bait, I’m saying you’re taking it. I understand you are a leftist, likely an anarchist. That’s why I’m bothering to argue my case to you.

And I agree that you can’t have a revolution without marginalized groups of course.

What I’m trying to say is that I think this narrative is dangerous, and it is the one being pushed by cnn. I know you’re not a liberal, but there’s a reason msm is pushing the “white instigator” theory.

I am concerned this narrative will delegitimize the heroic acts of rioting POC have done. I am concerned it will undermine the potential for this to be a multiracial, solidarity based insurrection, and I am concerned it will both justify violence against rioters (since they’re just wreckers according to this theory), and water down the protests.

2

videl wrote

white people shouldn't be taking the lead

1

polpotisevil2 wrote

What lead? Why this push for someone to lead, and why a specific race? A fight for equality includes all races, white and black included. Believe it or not there are places in this world a white person can live and experience racism. I've lived it, albeit shortly and definitely not as long as for my entire life. I don't see why I'm less qualified than a black person to call out racism, and protest and fight against it. It seems quite "backwards" to me.

−2

LostYonder wrote

Sorry, but racism isn't a temporary experience - maybe you experienced discrimination, but that isn't, in and of itself, racism. Racism is systemic. Racism is structural. Racism is something that eats away at you your entire life.

7

polpotisevil2 wrote

Alright, never heard that definition to be the primary meaning or use context of the word racism but we will go with that. It would be discrimination then

0

videl wrote (edited )

A fight for equality includes all races, white and black included.

sure and in a white supremacist world that means one of the best things whites can do is support nonwhites' during protests. which also means not initiating property destruction / fights w cops because the police aren't going to be retaliating against white people. it's just not white peoples risk to take. Especially during a protest thats clearly about black people

But if shit is already going down then fuck it smash shit.

But also this whole outside agitator thing is definitely overblown like u/celebratedrecluse said.

also

I'm white

I don't see why I'm less qualified than a black person to call out racism, and protest and fight against it.

😑

2

polpotisevil2 wrote

I only have one thing to say about this. I'll preface it by saying I'm white, if that makes you feel any better.

The whole ordeal with your

If black protesters are telling you to stop looting, listen to us. If black protesters are saying to not use lethal weapons without retaliation, listen to us. Support us.

seems to me to be a quite selfish endeavor. You are pushing your idea on others by saying you or whoever says to stop doing whatever is speaking for "us". Well, I have certainly spoken to black people who are fine with looting and violence, I have certainly seen some black people loot and participate in violence, and have also read about it! Isn't that crazy? It seems like some of your very own people may differ from you on this!

Yes I realize you say in the next paragraph (to your own folk only apparently) something along the lines of "de-escalation isn't gonna work" but the fact remains that the "follow the leader" behavior that is being promoted currently (I actually logged in just to post something about this but decided to read this post because it seemed relevant) is fucking bullshit. Telling people to get behind the lines and suppress their emotions is tyranny in the streets. Let it be, let the protests be what they will be. It isn't up to one or two or a few organizers or protesters to tell everyone what to do. Let the protesters roam free and learn what is really dwelling in their minds. Have you forgotten your own Malcom X?

0

orange wrote

how is it selfish to ask for white protestors, who are supposed to be at these protests in allyship to black people, to listen + support them, especially in situations where tagging/looting/destroying property gets pinned solely on black protestors not only by the media but by the cops when they choose who to arrest for these actions?

5

[deleted] wrote (edited )

5

polpotisevil2 wrote

I appreciate your response

So, where I grew up the phrase "listen to me/us" was most of the time used as a commanding phrase, and your text of "if people are TELLING..." gave me the impression of hostility. If your actual intent was more along the lines of listen to their opinions, then of course I agree that people should have their opinions heard. And if it was not your intent for "us" to be used as I thought then the story is altogether different. I said I only had one thing to say about this post, and it was based on those two observations.

You, a nonblack person, doing whatever you want in the context of this protest is going to negatively effect its image, and all of the black people in it by extentsion

Is this not in contrast to your statement about diversification of tactics? And painting a group of people with the same brush is one of the very issues at hand here. Surrendering and catering to that viewpoint is just that, surrendering.

2

yaaqov wrote

How about we stop fucking centering ourselves?

2

polpotisevil2 wrote

I'm sorry, who is centering who? I don't feel like I've centered anybody

0

LostYonder wrote

Your hijacking the discussion and centering it on you says it all...

3

polpotisevil2 wrote

Still confused here, when did I center it on me? When I said I'm white? Was simply clarifying the situation for the inevitable "whiteness"-type comments. If you want to, ignore that sentence

0

yaaqov wrote (edited )

I meant that you are centering white people, not yourself in particular. Like literally using words like “selfish” and “tyranny” to refer to black folks leading a protest against the murder of black people... c’mon. To worry about whether or not white people can “express their emotions” in this context is precisely what I mean.

3

polpotisevil2 wrote

I was not talking about white people. I was talking about people at those protests

1

LostYonder wrote

"some of your very own people" - seriously? I appreciate their is a tone of sarcasm in what you are writing, but really, this is how you try and make an argument?

Rather than reply to every comment, why don't you just sit back and reflect...

2

[deleted] wrote

1

polpotisevil2 wrote

It was very heavy sarcasm. Meant to be a phrase to "sit back and reflect" on. I mean, what is the real difference between the tone of "some of your very own people" and "listen to us"?

Although to be fair I grew up where "listen to me" or "listen to us" was very often meant in a commanding way, as in "go do ____ ... hello? LISTEN TO ME, and go do ___"

2