How should we resist the BNP.

70 posts / 0 new
Last post
Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 19 2009 18:35

Ronald, I'm curious. How come you have just registered and are only posting on this topic? Your posts look very suspicious.

For what it's worth, I of course think it's completely wrong for people to be banned from working or receiving public services due to their political beliefs.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 19 2009 20:09
Steven. wrote:
Ronald, I'm curious. How come you have just registered and are only posting on this topic? Your posts look very suspicious.

For what it's worth, I of course think it's completely wrong for people to be banned from working or receiving public services due to their political beliefs.

Why is it suspicious that ronald is only posting on this topic?

ronald
Offline
Joined: 15-04-09
Apr 19 2009 20:59

Suspicious? Please explain your suspicions?

no1
Offline
Joined: 3-12-07
Apr 20 2009 10:30
ronald wrote:
Suspicious? Please explain your suspicions?

Well your second post read like you're trying to stir up something and get people to support murdering BNP members. But it's very hard to guess new members motivations from forum posts. It's reminiscent of typical state behaviour.

ronald wrote:
Physical confrontation? Do you think there should be any boundaries to this approach? I am struggling to understand whether it is right to actually physically assault them (apart from in self defence). Of course what any anti-facist is comfortable with doing is their individual choice but would you, for instance, be OK with steaming into the BNP people while they are distributing their leaflets. Even if you do assault them, how far do you go, would it be OK to actually murder them if you were sure you would get away with it.

The BNP need to be fought politically rather than by targetting their members with serious violence, which essentially amounts to terrorism. Anarchism moved on from terrorism over a century ago.

ronald
Offline
Joined: 15-04-09
Apr 20 2009 10:53

I don't think you read my post carefully. I am certainly not trying to incite anyone into any action of any kind. I was asking what individuals thought was an appropriate response. In my quest for answers I present no parameters or boundaries - it is really up to any individual respondent to tell me what they think is appropriate.

So allow me to inform you that YOU have got it wrong. I am not a state agent. You can be sure that an anarchist based forum will have been infiltrated and monitored by state agents long before I showed up. Thats a reality. You have no need to be suspicious of me.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 20 2009 15:29

I don't think Ronald is a copper. If there was infiltration here it probably more likely comes from someone we or you least expect.

Let me give an example of MI5 infiltation-

Roger Windsor was chief executive of the National Union of Miners between 1983 and 1989, he was a fuking agent of the state, or atleast in the pay.

I don't think we should accuse other members on here just because of 'suspicious posts'. We are all being watched get used to it.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Apr 20 2009 15:30

i think sickdog is a copper

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 20 2009 15:40

lol i guess all you got is my word. Im not. I have posted one 'suspicious post' which got the same reaction as my fellow bobby ronald got.

no1
Offline
Joined: 3-12-07
Apr 20 2009 16:14
ronald wrote:
I don't think you read my post carefully. I am certainly not trying to incite anyone into any action of any kind. I was asking what individuals thought was an appropriate response. In my quest for answers I present no parameters or boundaries - it is really up to any individual respondent to tell me what they think is appropriate.

Hey, really sorry, my post wasn't clear - I'm not accusing you, and I don't think you are. Just tried to explain why others may be suspicious when new users start posting certain things.

But you need to realise that asking a question like that was pretty stupid from the point of view I described (apart from being stupid politics) - current anti-terror legislation in the UK includes thought crimes, with publicly justifying certain acts of political violence now being considered a terrorist offence, if I remember it correctly. So, as silly as it sounds, anyone answering your question with yes may be commiting a terrorist offence, and I'm not sure what the implications of that would be....

ronald wrote:
So allow me to inform you that YOU have got it wrong. I am not a state agent. You can be sure that an anarchist based forum will have been infiltrated and monitored by state agents long before I showed up. Thats a reality. You have no need to be suspicious of me.

Personally I don't worry much about infiltration by cops, it's best to just assume that they are around, and act accordingly. But worrying about it causes far more damage than the cops themselves IMO.

sickdog24 wrote:
I don't think we should accuse other members on here just because of 'suspicious posts'. We are all being watched get used to it.

In general I agree, and although my post wasn't clear enough, I didn't intend to accuse him. Still the post asking if it's OK to murder BNP members is very stupid and should be removed or edited.

back2front's picture
back2front
Offline
Joined: 15-03-09
Apr 20 2009 18:04

You can be certain this site is monitored. In the build-up to G8 cops revealed that they were getting most of their info online; and with sites such as Farcebook and MySpace being required to monitor their users; and what with the UK being the most surveillance-heavy part of the world you can rest assured that the thin blue line is keeping an eye on things.

As for murdering BNP members, it's outrageous to talk of murdering ANYONE especially when we know we are being watched and such statments could be construed as incitement. That said if you are prepared to use force to stop the BNP, or indeed any opponent of workers you care to mention, then it should be accepted that people will be hurt or killed ergo censoring someone's post, especially when they did not explicititly suggest this action as a matter of course, is reactionary and fails to consider the potential eventualities of militant struggle.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Apr 20 2009 19:00

i think everybody is a copper these days
in fact, i think i'm the only person that ISN'T a copper

back2front's picture
back2front
Offline
Joined: 15-03-09
Apr 20 2009 19:24

So how long have you been in the force Choccy lol?

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Apr 20 2009 19:49

I only joined them a couple of weeks ago.

PartyBucket's picture
PartyBucket
Offline
Joined: 23-03-08
Apr 20 2009 19:50

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 20 2009 20:56

I would get that tattooed on my knuckles if i had the balls.

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Apr 22 2009 09:16
sickdog24 wrote:
I would get that tattooed on my knuckles if i had the balls.

I would get that tattooed on my balls if I had knuckles.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 22 2009 09:22
Farce wrote:
sickdog24 wrote:
I would get that tattooed on my knuckles if i had the balls.

I would get that tattooed on my balls if I had knuckles.

That sounds too painful. Plus you would have to shave them which is up to you.

slothjabber
Offline
Joined: 1-08-06
Apr 22 2009 09:37

It's every man's right to shave his knuckles if he wants too.

So, does everyone know how to combat the BNP now? Apparently, what we should be doing is getting the state to say "oh, no, you're a member od a nasty organisation, please don't work for us".

B2F, I don't care if anyone's watching (though of course they are) it's outrageous to call for the murder of anyone. I mean, political murder? That's what they do. That's what we're supposed to be resisting, FFS.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 22 2009 11:16
slothjabber wrote:
It's every man's right to shave his knuckles if he wants too.

So, does everyone know how to combat the BNP now? Apparently, what we should be doing is getting the state to say "oh, no, you're a member od a nasty organisation, please don't work for us".

B2F, I don't care if anyone's watching (though of course they are) it's outrageous to call for the murder of anyone. I mean, political murder? That's what they do. That's what we're supposed to be resisting, FFS.

How about political murder in self defense? Say they are trying to murder your family or girlfriend/boyfriend? I know I probably would.

slothjabber
Offline
Joined: 1-08-06
Apr 22 2009 11:32

They're not, they're distributing leaflets in Ronald's area. That's what we're talking about.

If fascists broke into my house with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend, I wouldn't be logging on to Libcom to ask if there was some non-violent way of resisting them, possibly through leafletting.

But then again, it wouldn't be 'political murder' to fight them off, would it? If apolitical ice-cream men broke into my house with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend, I would resist them just as strongly. Politics doesn't really come into that situation, does it? It's the 'breaking in with murderous intent' that's the overriding issue. Or do you think I should let people break in with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend, as long as I agree with their politics?

Thought not.

back2front's picture
back2front
Offline
Joined: 15-03-09
Apr 22 2009 12:20
slothjabber wrote:
It's every man's right to shave his knuckles if he wants too.

So, does everyone know how to combat the BNP now? Apparently, what we should be doing is getting the state to say "oh, no, you're a member od a nasty organisation, please don't work for us".

B2F, I don't care if anyone's watching (though of course they are) it's outrageous to call for the murder of anyone. I mean, political murder? That's what they do. That's what we're supposed to be resisting, FFS.

Er... isn't that what I said in my last post? I ain't calling for nobody's murder so please re-read what I said. What I do say is that if you are not a pacifist and you accept that physical force is an important part of struggle, as I do, then you must also accept that the consequences of such actions can result in death ergo while you are not actually pre-meditating killing someone but on a protest or other action where things get out of hand resulting in a death, then this will be possibly be viewed by the State, and others, as murder or at least manslaughter. It's a clear distinction but to repeat myself I do not encourage the murder of anyone for any reason. It's really very clear.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Apr 22 2009 12:20
slothjabber wrote:
If apolitical ice-cream men broke into my house with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend,

I'm not going to sleep tonight!!! What if the apolitical ice-cream men get me ?!?!1?

Eastern Barbarian
Offline
Joined: 5-12-06
Apr 22 2009 13:15

of course murdering bnp activists would be wrong, but a little slap could be useful smile
Counterleafleting is always good idea but you need to be able to explain your ideas as ppl will be asking you questions and you need to know what yo uare talking about.
Accidentaly spilling your coffee all over their stall also helps smile

Eastern Barbarian
Offline
Joined: 5-12-06
Apr 22 2009 14:49

yeah whatever, in the meantime looks like the are getting stronger and believe me, things can turn really nasty if crisis deepens more, because they are jumping on the bandwagon and doing it good..

no1
Offline
Joined: 3-12-07
Apr 22 2009 14:51

what are they up to these days? Have never come across them so far.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 22 2009 15:50
slothjabber wrote:
They're not, they're distributing leaflets in Ronald's area. That's what we're talking about.

If fascists broke into my house with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend, I wouldn't be logging on to Libcom to ask if there was some non-violent way of resisting them, possibly through leafletting.

But then again, it wouldn't be 'political murder' to fight them off, would it? If apolitical ice-cream men broke into my house with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend, I would resist them just as strongly. Politics doesn't really come into that situation, does it? It's the 'breaking in with murderous intent' that's the overriding issue. Or do you think I should let people break in with knives and baseball bats to kill my girlfriend/boyfriend, as long as I agree with their politics?

Thought not.

It would be political if they intended to kill your bf/gf just because they happened to be asian or black.

Choccy's picture
Choccy
Offline
Joined: 9-12-04
Apr 22 2009 16:29
sickdog24 wrote:

It would be political if they intended to kill your bf/gf just because they happened to be asian or black.

No it wouldn't be. Your motivation for fighting back would be self-defence, NOT politics. Their motive may be political, but that does not make yours so - your reaction to an intruder attempting to cause harm would be the same regardless of their motivation - it would protecting yourself and those you love. So it doesn't matter whether it's racists, burglars, or the apolitical ice-cream man - you just don't wanna get killed.

The distinction between an attacker's motivation and those of a victim are pretty clear.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 22 2009 16:34

ahh ok, but when I see their swastika tattoos and skinheads wont abit of politics be in my mind? I understand your point. I am crap at the finer points of law.

slothjabber
Offline
Joined: 1-08-06
Apr 23 2009 08:13
back2front wrote:
...

As for murdering BNP members, it's outrageous to talk of murdering ANYONE especially when we know we are being watched and such statments could be construed as incitement. That said if you are prepared to use force to stop the BNP, or indeed any opponent of workers you care to mention, then it should be accepted that people will be hurt or killed ...

I don't think the fact that we are being watched makes it more outrageous, which is what your first sentence here quoted implies. You then go on to say that political opponents will perhaps be killed if one uses physical force.

Or, did you not say these things?

And in other news... resistance to murderers breaking in to kill one's girlfriend/boyfriend is nothing to do with 'the law'...I don't care if they're Nazis, the apolitical ice-cream men that are now scaring choccy (hang on, choccy... choc-ice... oh noes!), or going to bludgeon my girlfriend/boyfriend to death with the collected works of Kropotkin or copies of Das Kapital while singing 'The Red Flag'. Politics has nothing to do with it. I will resist just the same.

Farce's picture
Farce
Offline
Joined: 21-04-09
Apr 23 2009 10:46
slothjabber wrote:

I don't think the fact that we are being watched makes it more outrageous, which is what your first sentence here quoted implies.

It doesn't make it outrageous, but it does make it more unwise.