Tim's journal

"...Being good will never solve the problem because the problem is not that I am bad." -- Clementine Morrigan

"With the destruction of property, violence can turn from an aspect of self-defense to a useful offensive tactic. Nothing gets the attention of the elite like taking away or destroying what they value above all else: property." -- Raven Rakia, "Black Riot"

"Dear White People,

Please stop explaining that you sympathize with protest but don't condone property damage, loss or lawbreaking.

Firstly. You're not SUPPOSED to like it. That's the point.

Secondly. If you don't get why the rest is necessary, you don't understand the protest." -- absurdistwords (source)

I've been collecting links about the unhelpful dichotomy between "good" or "peaceful" protests and "bad" or "violent" protests, and in particular, the fallacy that by obeying the law (principally: not destroying property), we can persuade a fascist regime to stop terrorizing us. The converse of that is that police violence is a reasonable punishment for being bad (again: principally, destroying property.) I place "peaceful" and "violent" in quotation marks since inevitably, these words are used in a way that obscures power dynamics and the reality that violence is committed principally by the police and other agencies granted a monopoly on violence by the state -- and through delegation, by the state itself.

"Violence is not breaking windows, or pulling down fences, or punching/wrestling/shooting the cops pointing shotguns and tear gas canisters at your face.

Violence is anything, literally *ANYTHING*, that makes the bourgeoisie feel at all threatened." -- Lynnaea Amélia Machuca-Baker

"Optics"

"All disruptive social movements are met with stern warnings from people who think they know better." -- Kevin A. Young, "History Shows That Sustained, Disruptive Protests Work"

Concern about "optics" -- "if you break things, you're giving the Trump regime a reason to crack down further" -- betrays a belief that what the Trump regime does is motivated by principle or justice. They never needed an excuse, but what you're saying is that what's happening is happening for any reason other than that the cruelty is the point.

It's a form of concern trolling: by saying "other people won't support your cause if you [do anything that's disruptive, i.e. effective]", you're really saying you won't support the cause if it threatens your own ill-gotten property and wealth.

"It is easy to dismiss the rock thrower; Attucks himself was accused of throwing sticks. But those who rebuke violent responses to injustice should ask themselves: How should the oppressed respond to their oppressors? How should the nation respond to political dissent? How do the oppressed procure power? Throughout history, black people have employed violence, nonviolence, marches, and boycotts. Only one thing is clear—there is no form of black protest that white supremacy will sanction." -- Kellie Carter Jackson, "The Double Standard of the American Riot" (Emphasis added)

To insist that the form (property destruction) of the protests is responsible for the reaction by the power elite is to fundamentally misunderstand the reason for the protests. Any threat to white wealth will be dealt with violently, because white wealth uses violence to protect itself, and always has, as long as the concept of whiteness has existed.

During the 1950s and the 1960s, civil rights activists used nonviolent resistance as a means for provoking guilt and shame in white viewers. They reasoned that if TV footage showed peaceful protestors being attacked violently, the white majority would side with protestors. That tactic doesn't work anymore, due to decreased trust in the media, the rise of disinformation, and the intensity of racism and white identity politics during the 2010s. Nonviolence was always a tactic for accomplishing a larger goal, not the goal in and of itself.

"Many people are asking if violence is a valid means of producing social change. The hard and historical answer is yes. Riots have a way of magnifying not merely the flaws in the system, but also the strength of those in power. The American Revolution was won with violence. The French Revolution was won with violence. The Haitian Revolution was won with violence. The Civil War was won with violence. A revolution in today’s terms would mean that these nationwide rebellions lead to black people being able to access and exercise the fullness of their freedom and humanity." -- Kellie Carter Jackson, ibid

Property destruction and human lives

Resist the “looter” v “peaceful protesters” narrative.

The power establishment pretends that they’re waiting to see a particular form of protest so that they can understand what racism is.

They already know. That’s why they allow the police to be violent everyday. -- Bree Newsome Bass

And that's the thing. Is there a "correct" form of protest that will not cause the regime and police to escalate their violence? Can an abused child behave in a way that stops their parent from abusing?

2) “Rioting just gives people a reason not to support your cause.”

Only if you equate property damage to human lives, and in that case, were you really supporting our cause anyway? If all it takes is people stealing from Target for you to say “well…now I don’t care about dead Black people” then why are we even speaking? -- Rafi D'Angelo, "How to respond to 'riots never solve anything!'"

And there's the rub: prioritizing the protection of property over human lives, which is what it would mean to decline to use property destruction as the effective protest tactic that it is in order to stop the destruction of human lives, means siding with oppressors. You can't protest the valuing of property over people by valuing property over people.

Where are your priorities?

"A message for anyone on the fence now:
- You don't have to throw a brick.
- You don't have to cheer on the brick-throwing.
- But if you spend your energy condemning that act instead of the police violence that sparked it, you've already chosen a side, and it's not the right one." -- Antifagator (source)

"Come on. You don’t care about Target or looting. You just want to say “both sides” so you can dismiss the protests without having to think about a system overtly designed to provide you with vast comfort through the murder of others" -- Mike Drucker

Strategy

"John Oliver pointed out last night a 'recurring theme' on his show: should you find yourself in a system which repeatedly demonstrates it values protecting property far more than it values protecting human lives, your only effective bargaining chip is the destruction of property." -- Justin Martin

The condescending idea that protestors somehow don't know what the effects of their actions are is an example of white paternalism.

The struggle is fundamentally about resisting efforts of the white owners to force Black people into serving as a perpetual slave class for the white capitalist economy. Disrupting the economy and damaging property are informed political actions. 1/

I wish the Black bourgeois and professionals would engage with this analysis more instead of so quickly adopting the narrative of the white owner class that property damage accomplishes nothing. -- Bree Newsome Bass

"But if violent unrest isn’t the answer then what is? How exactly do you go about ending police brutality and systemic racism in America? Should protesters go home and write sternly worded letters to their representative? Should they emulate Madonna and post videos of their kids dancing in protest? Should they peacefully take a knee? Should Americans simply vote Trump out and vote Joe Biden in instead? You know, the guy whose 1994 crime bill significantly contributed to mass incarceration in America? Should people patiently wait for incremental change?" -- Arwa Mahdawi, "If violence isn't the way to end racism in America, then what is?"

The folks out here getting angrier about a Starbucks getting busted up than about white supremacy never seem to have an alternative to offer, or at least not an effective one.

"In working to correct the white-supremacist media narrative we can end up reproducing police tactics of isolating the individuals who attack property at protests. Despite the fact that if it were not for those individuals the media might pay no attention at all. If protesters hadn’t looted and burnt down that QuikTrip on the second day of protests, would Ferguson be a point of worldwide attention? It’s impossible to know, but all the non-violent protests against police killings across the country that go unreported seem to indicate the answer is no." -- Vicky Osterweil, "In Defense of Looting (emphasis author's)

"I Support the Right to Protest, So Long as It is Ineffective" -- Dima Kronfeld, Reductress "White Woman Speaks:" headline

The "white anarchists" diversionary tactic

"Erasing black/nonblack indigenous anarchists living their anarchy by crediting outside agitating white anarchists is bullshit. Stop blaming white anarchists for choices we make. Stop trying to control our expressions of anger & joy." -- anarchogoth (source)

"The 'outside agitator' trope simultaneously denies the authenticity of discontent and the possibility of solidarity" -- triofrancos (source)

"To be blunt, blaming 'white anarchists' for violence right now is just a polite way of saying that you’re taking the side of the cops." -- ARPWEL ((source))

These lines aren't new:

"People are really out here parroting white supremacist talking points about 'anarchists,' 'radicals,' and 'outside agitators.' These narratives have been repeatedly regurgitated by the state and the police and many are shamelessly endorsing it. [image: a KKK flyer from the 1930s]

...Black history is filled with violent uprisings, riots, and rebellions that got us where we are today. People either don't know that or they hope to erase it in efforts to quell the anger. Anyone trying to say all Black people must protest one way are misinformed or manipulative."
" -- William C. Anderson

And cross-racial coalitions are essential to effecting change; one of the effects this rhetoric has is to make white people afraid to act in conjunction with Black leadership for fear of being viewed as a counterproductive "white anarchist".

"This 'outside agitator'/'white anarchist' shit from the liberals and the right-wingers is not only meant to discredit the protests but to tell white people, implicitly, that they don’t have a common enemy in capital, in the police, in the state, with black people." -- Samantha Pritchard

"This reflexive tic to associate anarchism with thoughtless discord betrays a profound ignorance of leftist ideology. The problem is that no one seems to understand what anarchism is or what its adherents are seeking to accomplish — and that lack of understanding is going to end up endangering a lot of people. We’re rapidly approaching a point in which dissent is further criminalized, the justified rage and pain fueling these protests is further delegitimized, and anyone who engages in any form of protest outside the preapproved liberal template becomes a target for surveillance, or worse." -- Kim Kelly, "Stop blaming everything bad on anarchists"

Conclusion

If you're white, think twice before you proclaim yourself the expert on how Black and Brown people should liberate themselves from oppression that you benefit from. Interrogate your motivations carefully and ask what you're afraid of: is it really "counterproductive" protest, or are you worried about your property getting destroyed? Asking yourself that question might provoke shame, but it's worth sitting with that feeling rather than reacting unreflectively. Educate yourself about history so you don't make ignorant statements like "violence just gives the police an excuse to crack down harder". But don't stop with just educating yourself. You don't have to throw a brick or get arrested, but doing nothing is not an acceptable option either. There are lots of ways to help that involve varying levels of risk to yourself. But also be aware of your fear and continually ask yourself whether it's based in your physical safety, or your fear of losing your material possessions and/or your dominant place in society.

Further reading

"How to Talk to Relatives Who Care More About Looting Than Black Lives", Rachel Miller

"A History of Violent Protest", Slate "What Next" podcast episode

"A white man waving an AR-15 around in front of his mansion says much more about America than you’d think", Patrick Blanchfield