UK Police Call on Citizens to Spy on Anarchists

In the USA we can assume that the "anarchists" will be Ron Paul supporters and people who support the 2nd Amendment.

Two groups bent on mindless destruction - why shouldn't people inform the police!?

Originally posted by Solasis
reply to post by poopmaster

 

Use brackets; at least on QWERTY keyboards (the most prominent in the US and I think UK) , those are right above the enter key and apostrophe key. they look like this "]". put a "b" inside those on the front end of what you want to bold, and /b inside them at the end of what you want to bold. I'm sure there's a style guide somewhere around here, but I'm a bit too lazy to look it up for you myself, hehe...

Anarchism as a comprehensive political/social standpoint can't really be summed up in a few lines, and I'm actually not so well versed in it that I can even do a very good job.

But, basically, it boils down to the idea that either the best society, or the best society for oneself, is one with no laws. An anarchist does not necessarily want to impose their will on nations, but rather don't want nations to impose their "wills" on them.

The kind of hypothetical anarchistic society that I'm familiar with depends on trust and people working together without being told to; it depends on the goodwill of fellow humans, including oneself. A relatively free society like the USA or UK may be preferable to peacefully and agreeably live in for an anarchist until they can join a group who they can trust with cooperation and respect.

I know, I'm just lazy too, . I have been spoiled with easy little buttons on other forums. But my interpretation is basically the same as yours. The thing is, I don't understand how you say someone could be an anarchist, and at the same time, the complete opposite of an anarchist, by following all laws and regs on your life, property, mind, body, children, exc exc... It doesn't make sense to me is all. We're all slaves in so many ways. One of them being mentally. I mean, psychologically. There really is a freakin box that people's minds are stuck in, the box from that pop culture saying, "think outside the box", and it's pretty small. The "box" being ideas and behavior that are accepted into the major society. Everything else is rejected. I'm speaking in a general sense of coarse. In a anarchist's mind there is no subconscious or sociological motive to reject ideas or behavior, leaving more room up in that there brain for the good old rational thought process. Or at least this is how I like to romanticize the idea of an anarchist. But, idea's related to anarchism, like, not having money/money not existing are basically impossible to express in real life, and still at the same time somehow be part of a society and follow all laws. An anarchist who follows all the laws of a fascistic society is a double negative.

In the USA we can assume that the "anarchists" will be Ron Paul supporters and people who support the 2nd Amendment.

Too late, they're already terrorists.

Originally posted by poopmaster

By the way, your post which came alarmingly close to victim blaming on everyone who's ever suffered isn't really a viable position. Even when good men stand up and stand together, the bad men will win out. It wasn't simply complacency which allowed the holocaust to go forward; it was large groups of people who wanted it to go forward. Some complacency did contribute, but lots of other things did as well.

It is very clear I was not being antisemitic or any bull like that. I don't think for any second would someone think after reading my post that my point was that it was the jews/romanii's fault for having their race focused apon in a massive genocide, and if anyone would think so it would be alarming to me, as that is one thing I would never want anyone to think I would think personally or believe!!! Let alone promote as an idea on a public forum! So, please, don't try to put some bs like that in my mouth... If you thought I meant something like that, I assure that you misunderstood something I said or my point in general. Just making sure that is clear. LOL. I was like "NO NO NO NO NO NO NO" as soon as I read what you wrote. LOL Hey, is double posting frowned apon round these parts, or strickly enforced or anything? Like, if I double post will it get deleted instantly or will I get reprimanded by the mods, or are they pretty easy on stuff like that?

edit on 2-8-2011 by poopmaster because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-8-2011 by poopmaster because: (no reason given)

I didn't say that you were victim blaming. I said you were skirting alarmingly close to victim blaming, and that wasn't even the main thrust of what I was saying. But good on you, for latching on to one thing I said out of at least 5. Sorry, I didn't see your other post, hehe.

You need to think sideways; It's perfectly plausible to live in a society whose tenets you don't find optimal. You sometimes have to wait and work for a bitter world, and it doesn't hurt to get along perfectly well in the society you already live in. I mean, for one thing, it builds trust with your neighbors, and they might listen to what you have to say.

There are some changes that must be waited and worked for, rather than forced. And sometimes when you're aiming for those changes, you need to get along in the world you don't want to.

Doubleposting is bad etiquette, but I don't think anyone really minds much. It happens, and sometimes you forget that you can edit your new reply into the same post.

reply to post by Solasis

I didn't say that you were victim blaming. I said you were skirting alarmingly close to victim blaming, and that wasn't even the main thrust of what I was saying. But good on you, for latching on to one thing I said out of at least 5.

I posted a reply to your other statements in a different post. (look up there ) I just really wanted to make clear that was not what I meant by any means and was super far off from my point.

Originally posted by Solasis
Second, it's very easy to abide by the laws and be an anarchist.

When it comes to political science, there are two sides to an individual. Who you are and aspire to be within your mind ("empirical self") and who you are as viewed by others within a society ("real self"). So you can be anything you want to be in your head while you still follow the laws of your society

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Originally posted by Solasis
Second, it's very easy to abide by the laws and be an anarchist.

When it comes to political science, there are two sides to an individual. Who you are and aspire to be within your mind ("empirical self") and who you are as viewed by others within a society ("real self"). So you can be anything you want to be in your head while you still follow the laws of your society

Pretty much my point exactly; thanks for explicating it better than I could! (Though I hope "in your head" wasn't meant quite as dismissively as it seems :p)

I understand what your saying Solaris. I think that you can hold any belief you want, but to act on those beliefs is another thing. All I was arguing is that you cannot be a practicing anarchist, which is what I would assume the statement "being an anarchist" would mean, and follow all laws forced apon you at the exact same time, (as to be an anarchist would mean to reject those laws?) I don't know. But no, I see what your saying.

does anyone trust the police enough to tip them off though, surly thats the issue !

Originally posted by poopmaster

You, sir, are one strange anarchist.

You adibe by all the laws AND you are an anarchist? LULZ

edit on 2-8-2011 by poopmaster because: (no reason given)

I think you should go back and read my post again PROPERLY

What I said was I abide by all the laws that are morally right

I'm told that a certain plant is illegal to grow/possess/ingest (due to the cotton growers being scared of being put out of business and big pharmaceutical companies being unable to patent it) but I may have occasionally "accidentally" ingested it.

This just an example of a law I consider not morally correct and hence do not feel that it's wrong to ignore it.

learning to read and comprehend is a good life skill to learn

Originally posted by Freeborn
I remember The Poison Girls releasing a song about the trial of Ronan Bennett who allegedly conspired with 'persons uknown' to committ 'crimes unknown' in 'places unknown'.

Wow, someone here who know the Poisons, and the history of that song. That was released on the Crass label with the other side being Bloody Revolutions by Crass, another song somewhat relevant to this thread I supposed.



A selection of the lyrics...

Nothing changed for all the death, that their ideas created
It's just the same fascistic games, but the rules aren't clearly stated
Nothing's really different cos all government's the same
They can call it freedom, but slavery is the game
There's nothing that you offer but a dream of last years hero
The truth of revolution, brother................... is year zero.

It's interesting to note though that Crass changed their mind as to using violence towards the end of the band (1984). Their last release 'You're already Dead', written in the wake of the Stop the City protests, a selection of the lyrics...

Pacified. Classified.
Keep in line. You're doing fine.
Lost your voice? There ain't no choice.
Play the game. Silent and tame.
Be the passive observer, sit back and look
At the world they destroyed and the peace that they took.
Ask no questions, hear no lies
And you'll be living in the comfort of a fool's paradise.

By letting it happen without a fight...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
Four hundred thousand people marched for CND...
They're already dead, They're already dead,
Unless they're willing to act on what they can see...
They're already dead, They're already dead.
If you think moderation's going to pave the way to peace...
You're already dead, You're already dead.
If they're going to play it dirty, so are we...
They're already dead, They're already dead.

Crass, our make believe secret society lol.

reply to post by DanaKatherineScully


With their reputation in tatters, Certainly not. The Police forces up and down the UK have been corrupt for years. Alot of people in the UK know this.

It had to take the Phone hacking scandals to uncover this.

I would not help the police out that is for sure. I do not trust them one bit.

I think you should go back and read my post again PROPERLY What I said was I abide by all the laws that are morally right

Alrighty then.

reply to post by ANOK


Bloody Revolutions is one of the greatest rebuttals of left wing political dogma and rhetoric I have ever read or heard of;



www.musicsonglyrics.com...

Crass were great, but.....?

en.wikipedia.org...

I saw Steve Ignorant a couple of years ago, he was ok but it wasn't quite the same without Penny Rimbaud etc and I hear he's had some rough times over the years.

You can't fault Crass and their ethos etc, they were just a bit naive in their politics.....but their 'in your face' shock tactics were fantastic and their strength of conviction can only be admired.

Originally posted by Essan
Like almost everyone else in the UK, I don't live in the City of Westminster. So doesn't apply to me

I admit it is a bit silly lumping all anarchists together with other terrorists. Though I understand the gist of what they are saying: if you become aware of a group of people planning vandalism or other antisocial activities, then you should inform the police. Such people often call themselves 'anarchists'. Because it makes them sound hard.

Just the phrase "antisocial behavior" irritates me. I don't know why it's such a popular and accepted phrase in the UK... but it reeks of police state propaganda. Anti-social behavior? What the hell does that even mean? And why must everything be solved by the police? Can't people solve their own problems without calling on a corrupt, fallible higher authority wearing a badge and wielding the state-granted right to fine/beat/imprison/kill?? You Brits need to get your sh*te together... Orwell is spinning madly in his grave; you could probably power your entire country off of his perpetual spinning.

Originally posted by edward777
In the USA we can assume that the "anarchists" will be Ron Paul supporters and people who support the 2nd Amendment.

HAH! Those teabaggers don't even know what Anarchism is... are you SERIOUSLY linking Anarchists with those right-wingers?? Do your homework, man... Anarchism in America is vastly left-wing and is much more intelligent than that.

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by edward777
In the USA we can assume that the "anarchists" will be Ron Paul supporters and people who support the 2nd Amendment.

HAH! Those teabaggers don't even know what Anarchism is... are you SERIOUSLY linking Anarchists with those right-wingers?? Do your homework, man... Anarchism in America is vastly left-wing and is much more intelligent than that.

....

You completely and entirely missed their point. While I disagree with their point, it's definitely not that.

They were suggesting that the Tea Party will be labeled as such by the government, the same way that some are saying that non-anarchists are being labeled as anarchists in the UK. It's an oppressive, anti open-discourse message which edward777 was seeing here.

I disagree, though I seem to remember that the premise that "non-anarchists are being labeled anarchists" had some weight that I can't remember exactly now. But he wasn't calling Tea Partiers anarchists.

(Also, the Tea Party is in favor of a totally Free Market, right? An absolute Free Market would in fact be a form of anarchy. And, like the other forms of anarchy, it would be pretty nice if we could trust each other a bit farther than we could throw each other.)

reply to post by Solasis


It is not just the Government though, the Mani stream media are to blame also for labeling everyone with the same brush, while ins reality it is only a few, out of thousands who only to cause trouble instead of just protesting.

Two ex members of the British police force speak out:

Why We Left the British Police Force, Sarah and Michael Feeley:




Good for them!

I recently had the opportunity to speak to two policement about the protests, and they too said they hated stopping people from exercising their right to protest, especially when what they were protesting about was right.

reply to post by wcitizen




I got the video from you tube and posted it on here for you.