A question to DU's anarchists: What is the point of the Black Bloc?

[white_wolf]

I'm not trying to be rude, but I really don't understand the purpose they serve. They seem to cause more harm than good when it comes to influencing public opinion. So what is the goal or purpose behind the Black Bloc?

[teddy51]

1. Ok, so please enlighten some of us... What or where is the Black Bloc? n/t

[War Horse]

6. The folks who are about to sabotage the G20 protests

Look for shattered Starbucks, McD's and the odd 200 year old family business...

[teddy51]

7. Thank you, I was'nt aware of that! n/t

[LeftyMom]

2. LMGTFY

First page of a google search on "anarchist perspective on black blocs". http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Anonymous__Anarchist___Black_Bloc_Motivation.html

You're welcome.

[teddy51]

12. It was'nt that I could'nt Google that, it was the reference to DU that had me ponder.

Oh well, live and learn they say.

[teddy51]

22. Sorry if I put you to any trouble! n/t

[Pharaoh]

3. Black bloc From Wikipedia

, the free encyclopedia
Black bloc in a feeder march near the World Bank, in Washington, DC.

A black bloc is a tactic for protests and marches, whereby individuals wear black clothing, scarves, ski masks, motorcycle helmets with padding or other face-concealing items and often carry some sort of shields and truncheons.<1><2> The clothing is used to avoid being identified, and to, theoretically, appear as one large mass, promoting solidarity.

The tactic was developed in the 1980s by autonomists protesting squatter evictions, nuclear power and restrictions on abortion among other things.<1> Black blocs gained broader media attention outside Europe during the 1999 anti-WTO demonstrations, when a black bloc damaged property of GAP, Starbucks, Old Navy, and other multinational retail locations in downtown Seattle.<1>

"The Black Bloc" is sometimes incorrectly reported as being the name of a specific anarchist group. It is, rather, a tactic that may be adopted by groups of various motivations and methods.<3>

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CreekDog]

4. as a veteran of many pointless arguments with their sympathizers

i can assure you that arguing with anyone that defends their actions will likewise be pointless.

:shrug:

[Throd]

5. The ones I used to know used it as an excuse to smash and destroy.

But since it was in the name of a righteous cause it was OK, apparently.

They were 20 year old angry white male jack-offs. At least the ones I knew were.

[NightWatcher]

8. it's a way to strike against the corporations that some find evil

What hurts a company more, sending them emails that say they are evil

or

smashing a window or five so that they can open for a few days and they lose out on profit?

Corporations understand $. They only are in business to make money, if you cost them $ you are hitting them where it hurts.

[white_wolf]

10. I understand their point about corporations only caring about profit.

I just don't think this is the best way to harm them, since it seems to end up weakening the movement overall.

[teddy51]

16. But in addition to that, it makes one wonder whether they are plants doing the damage

or legitimate protesters. This shit happened in Vancouver during this past years Stanley cup riots. Many were not sure if those that caused the damage were (police plants) or Vancouver Canuck fans.

[Telly Savalas]

29. Among their numbers

there are zero legitimate protesters, perhaps a handful of plants, and mostly a bunch of assholes. (Although technically, the second group is merely a small subset of the third.)

[Cal Carpenter]

11. But if an overall movement is trying to use good strategies and tactics

and taking it's time to organize and grow for the big picture, for the long view, the tactics of black bloc are counterproductive. They can discredit the whole movement, they can cause confusion and dissension, they can distract the greater movement from their ultimate goal.

To be honest, there are few examples in recent decades of very organized broad movements here in the US, and some of them probably deserve to be derailed, LOL, but OWS has a lot of potential, General Strikes of workers are very vital to social progress, and their use of these tactics in a case like this do far more damage to the movement than they do to any corporations.

And then there's the whole part where some if not most of them are fucking cops or paid infiltrators.

[NightWatcher]

14. I'm sure many are cops or cointelpro types

as long as the rest of the group keeps doing the peaceful thing, it'll be ok

[Cal Carpenter]

18. Yep, there's no doubt

I hope you are right about the rest. Mob mentality can kick in easily and the OWS movement doesn't have a lot of agreed-upon ideology at this point (both a blessing and a curse). But they are emphasizing non-violence and I hope they hold onto it.

[NightWatcher]

20. the 99% is not a solid cohesive group. There are hippies, kids, angry...

OWS is a cross section of us all, much like DU.

[Cal Carpenter]

23. Well

I've been to a couple Occupy sites including NYC, spent nights and days there, so to an extent I agree with you, but I have to say it is nothing like DU which is highly overrepresented in some demographics and almost completely lacking in others. Not trying to be provocative in saying that, just honest. In fact, I've second-guessed even making this post a few times in as many minutes, but I guess here goes...

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Telly Savalas]

31. So are only the Black Bloc members themselves agent provocateurs?

Or are the people who support them on the internet agent provocateurs also?

[provis99]

32. they smash small family-owned businesses, too.

It seems more likely in fact that they will do this, since small businesses don't have security guards like banks and corporate headquarters would.

[applegrove]

9. Narcissistic individuals are attracted to demonstrations where they have

dreams of leading a revolution (or at the very least lead mayhem for a few hours). Grandiosity is likely present too. Some are just followers. If they cared about the outcome of protests they would not be so violent. It doesn't help the cause.

[Cal Carpenter]

17. "If they cared about the outcome of protests they would not be so violent"

And this is the truth. In the long run, assuming this movement really does pose a serious threat to the status quo, there will be (more) violence coming down on the movement from the authorities. It will get worse. There may come a point where self-defense comes into play. I hate to extrapolate that far but it does us no good to pretend it will all be sunshine and roses and peaceful. We can't look at what happened in Oakland last week, or Denver, and be that naive.

HOWEVER, the tactics of these groups at this time and place are reactionary, counter-productive, counter-revolutionary, however you want to put it. It's no good.

No good at all.

[Zorra]

13. Might want to ask the PTB, w_w.

I suspect that most BB are their hired tools.

[Tom Rinaldo]

15. For me the real anarchists are helping make the OWS General Assembly system work

They are involved in empowering individuals, and helping the community identify and achieve goals without a top down leadership. The real anarchists are the ones organizing important services and providing them to anyone in need of them, or simply for the entire community. Real anarchists want the people to have the commanding voice, they don't try to steal the people's thunder to get attention for themselves and their own self proclaimed agenda.

Some groups or individuals will always claim that rioting scares the establishment and shakes their control. In some situations that may partially be true - but usually at a very high cost even when riots achieve that, let alone when riots fail and just serve to empower fascist crackdowns. Riots only shake ruling interests if they arise organically from a broad range of the public spontaneously. Efforts to produce riots usually serve ruling interests only, which is why it is often believed that the establishment is behind and causing violence at protests.

Anarchists and militants are not always one and the same. Anarchists have the entire conventiional political spectrum against them - because they don't believe in top down control from the left right or center. It is no wonder that anarchist became a smear word long before liberal did.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Their not anarchists

That's the first thing.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Odin2005]

26. They are agent provacateurs.

[SidDithers]

27. All of them?...nt

Sid

[a simple pattern]

28. No one ever seems to apprehend them

You never see them and the police together for example

[provis99]

33. ok...

I've never seen Bill Clinton and 50 Cent in the same room together either...

[MelungeonWoman]

30. I love a conspiracy...

I wouldn't be surprised to find it was the Parlock clan.

[MisterP]

34. at Seattle they only got violent well after the police did

the police have never needed "provocateurs," and that label is often used to mush dissent--even if it's a real phenomenon