Riots may be ugly, but they can be necessary methods for many people whose own voice falls on deaf ears. No offence to pacifism, but its a game that only the middle classes choose to play. The last 4 decades, violence against the UK state has accomplished more than peaceful protest can. St Pauls, Bristol 1980 and Brixton 1981. The riots that occurred in these areas highlighted and challenged police racism and brutality. And the poll tax riots of 1990 helped to crush thatcher's reign over the UK
..from him they might as well be on another fucking PLANET, but actually telling them to act within guidelines he himself is INCAPABLE of even DEFINING. There is no such thing as nonviolence. You dont need eastern philosophy to figure out that spititng at the sky will get you a loogie to the face. I may be a little bit harsh here, but you have basically spewed out every cliche I have ever heard from priviledged white activists, EVER
I find it absolutely hilarious that an american who pays his taxes is telling people to be nonviolent. 50 cents of every dollar you pay every goddamn year funds the biggest fucking war machine the human race has ever SEEN, you fucking hypocrite. Or is that not violence? what the fuck IS violence then? you sure didnt tell me, and I doubt you could. SO what we have here is some cracker ass student from fucking berkley not only JUDGING the struggle of people so far removed..
Well said for the most part, I wholeheartedly agree that peaceful non-compliance is the best strategy.
But in response to your claim that we've not given democracy a chance, voting has been mandatory down here in Australia since 1911, meaning that close to 100% of the population vote (yeah, a handful of us would rather eat the fine than vote), and guess what... we STILL elect crooks, liars and whores of the corporate machine.
I'm surprised you bring up those color revolutions like in the Ukraine, where the Ukrainian intelligence agencies and US funded agencies were heavily involved in it, that and after all that, people ended up voting for the person they originally revolted against :p
Well saying violence wouldn't work in these protest is a little silly. You can think it's not desirable, I'd probably agree, but tell the violent protestors at the Poll Tax Riots in the UK who brought down Margaret Thatcher that violence and rioting wouldn't work.
I think we need a better idea of what violence *is*. Are we talking about self-defense? Is that in the same category as building a bomb? Is that bomb the same no matter if it's aimed at a person or a building?
I just think working that out is absolutely necessary before we can talk seriously and not just theoretically. I'm not pro-violence, but I'm not a pacifist either. I have never done anything seriously violent to anyone or anything but I've also never been physically attacked.
I have seen many nonviolent protests. The majority of them have ended up with authority abusing their power and using brutal forces against protesters that have done nothing wrong. So in my opinion, the majority of police are not peaceful.
Make sure you take your camera to the protest. If the media covers it, they will only show what happens after the police have incited you. You'll need your own evidence of the incitement.
Thanks for sharing the truth. George Carlin always spoke the truth that people can listen here on YouTube. On the search box type George Carlin to you the title you like.
Law enforcement, the military, people and organizations have histories of good and evil.
the government does know how to deal with non-violent protesters: the police pen them up, restrict and control their location, movement, access to outsiders, etc, illegally or legally arrest them, and one way or another shuts them up & shuts them down. many people who participated in anti-iraq war protests know all about that and about how the government no longer respects the constitutional right to freedom of assembly when they don't feel like it...
i agree with non violent tactics. anyone can see that historically violent revolutions lead to police states and dictatorships, because people who take control of their world though violence will continue to use violence to control their world. when you internalize violence you corrupt yourself. but, your idea that the system will be pierced in the heart and roll over in the face of love seems, sorry bro, ridiculously naive. bullies couldn't care less about the sensitivity of others. (con't)
any act of rebelion against the state is a direct threat against their monopoly of power, and therfore considered by the state itself has an act of violence and will be met by violence. if you do an unschduled parade or decide to occupy a public building, the state will eventually use his muscles at various degree to regain control of the situation. Anything that isnt part of their plan or challenge them is an act of violence against their political structure.
i am frustrated at not being able to "like" this more than once! this is brilliant! and wow! this is my new "favorite rant ever!" i want this guy to run for president.
Also watch my recent video on the economy as a whole, I discuss how corporations are structured democratically like government and both institution suffer the same short term political mismanagement that causes them destroy the long term growth and sustainability of humanity. I'm not saying people should never vote, but how should they vote (which you've discusses when your brought up rank order), and what power should those who win popularity contests or are connected should have?
@AlexMerced Corporations are not structured democratically. In democracy, you get one man, one vote. In a corporation, you can literally buy your votes. So the rich have the power, the poor do not.
@ThePunkPatriot one share one vote is the same concept and works just the same. You think you can't buy votes in a one man one vote system? Instead of money you buy votes with influence, and you build influence with money or by granting favors. Not all democratic countries do the one man one vote, democracy is just majority rule, and board of directors and the CEO or a corporation are subject to that same majority rule.
@ThePunkPatriot If you wanted to effect change much more expediently, think of the most aggregious public company, organize you and your listen to buy one or two shares a month, eventually while you may not individually have control of the company as an organized voting block you will have control.
I agree you can't end violence with violence, violence only yields short term results cause all you've done is coerced people not change them. Although, my problem is some of the change you at end hope as a result involves using violence against those who used violence against you (redistribution of wealth). If you don't think it's violence, ask yourself what happen if people refuse to follow the rules laid out by these changes, what happens if they continue to refuse. Thus I'm a Voluntarist
@ThePunkPatriot Services that you can in no way decline and that if you fail to pay for them, you will be kidnapped and thrown into a cage.
Certainly no violence there.
In all seriousness, though, government is violence. that's not really the question here; the question is how much violence is necessary to maintain a healthy, civilized society. everything the government does is (or at least should be) a "necessary evil" in the eyes of the majority.
@ThePunkPatriot Violently. If you don't pay your taxes you go to jail. I'm not even a capitalist and I understand that. And to further separate myself from capitalist. Property damage is not violence. And if you follow Max Stirner, property is violence.
Firstly, you make a bad assumption. You assume that the riot police/pigs understand what non-violence and love are. I point you towards to the Toronto G20 scull fucking that occurred towards the protestors. Violence and/or non-violence are a language. If you are violent, then more than likely you only understand violence. And vice versa for non-violence. It is the person who knows when to use violence and non-violence whom will be the successor.
You are so so right. And even in the case of christians persecuted by the Roman empire which actually spread their ideas further and deeper till it became the empire. Although you know along the way many were martyred, so a love and peace offensive is not without risk.
i like you man, but i think you might be off the track. most of the exemple you gave at the end of the video where revolution with a certain degree of violence. there are degree of acceptable violence according to the appropriate situation. the occupation of a public building or organizing a parade without proper authorisations or ransaking a public building are all forms of violence. Violence is good and necessary, its all about finding the right proportions and situations to use it.
the organizers of this action also state that they will not engage in "verbal violence" i think that is a lofty goal and a concept worth consideration, but not realistic & will also alienate & shut down ethnic & racial groups who are emotionally expressive. however i am opposed to physical violence whenever possible. violence corrupts and violent revolutions lead to police states and dictatorships because that's all that people moved to behave violently know how to do...
"I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence...I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour."
- Mahatma Gandhi
"There would be peace, if people were not only against war, but also against winning.”
also you mentioned a lot of protests but not their outcome. All this is not to disagree with your points, especially concerning the lack of votes (though you don't have much choice there, as we know, the vote by itself is a very small part of the democratic process.), but we really have to act in a violent way towards the elite and that can mean just direct action such as strikes and occupations...
@ThePunkPatriot yes, so if I get mugged and the money is used to pay for services it's not theft, it's involuntary and if compliance is not met then violence is enacted (try resisting arrest). Also you guilty until proven innocent (how many innocent people have had their assets frozen and sold before a chance to prove their innocence). While I'm all for paying for services, there is a non-voluntary aspect to it, plus taxes are used to gather information and intimidate.
@ThePunkPatriot for example, if you are middle class or higher and gain traction against the esablishment, do be surprised to get audited, taxes are tool of the powerful like anything else.
are the middle east protests successful revolutions? have we seen democratic & egalitarian states put into place? that didn't happen in south africa or india either. they're phony democracies rife with disparity & injustice. i'm not advocating violence, mind you. i can't speak to all of the movements you've mentioned but the ones i'm aware of haven't ultimately succeeded in their goals. establishing political & economic democracy is a very complex endeavor...
i don't think violence is in any way good when we're talking about riots and smashing random windows or pillaging. But I think we should remember Egypt was not a peaceful revolution, it was really conducted by the military (in fact people are still, or at least were protesting months ago against them), and Gandhi and MLK were just lesser evils for those in power.
Random peaceful protests lead nowhere too nowadays. Specific demands and direct actions, strikes etc are needed too.
Riots may be ugly, but they can be necessary methods for many people whose own voice falls on deaf ears. No offence to pacifism, but its a game that only the middle classes choose to play. The last 4 decades, violence against the UK state has accomplished more than peaceful protest can. St Pauls, Bristol 1980 and Brixton 1981. The riots that occurred in these areas highlighted and challenged police racism and brutality. And the poll tax riots of 1990 helped to crush thatcher's reign over the UK
MoonstompingMike1985 1 week ago
Nice fucking hair! LOL
depro9 3 months ago
@thepunkpatriot
Part2
..from him they might as well be on another fucking PLANET, but actually telling them to act within guidelines he himself is INCAPABLE of even DEFINING. There is no such thing as nonviolence. You dont need eastern philosophy to figure out that spititng at the sky will get you a loogie to the face. I may be a little bit harsh here, but you have basically spewed out every cliche I have ever heard from priviledged white activists, EVER
I WILL be back.
Peace. you warmongerer
DJpopel 3 months ago
@thepunkpatriot
Part1/2
I find it absolutely hilarious that an american who pays his taxes is telling people to be nonviolent. 50 cents of every dollar you pay every goddamn year funds the biggest fucking war machine the human race has ever SEEN, you fucking hypocrite. Or is that not violence? what the fuck IS violence then? you sure didnt tell me, and I doubt you could. SO what we have here is some cracker ass student from fucking berkley not only JUDGING the struggle of people so far removed..
DJpopel 3 months ago
Well said for the most part, I wholeheartedly agree that peaceful non-compliance is the best strategy.
But in response to your claim that we've not given democracy a chance, voting has been mandatory down here in Australia since 1911, meaning that close to 100% of the population vote (yeah, a handful of us would rather eat the fine than vote), and guess what... we STILL elect crooks, liars and whores of the corporate machine.
Alastrian83 4 months ago
@Alastrian83 That's a problem of representational government not democracy.
thenoorys 3 months ago
You are a dreamer.
primoknoxville 4 months ago
I'm surprised you bring up those color revolutions like in the Ukraine, where the Ukrainian intelligence agencies and US funded agencies were heavily involved in it, that and after all that, people ended up voting for the person they originally revolted against :p
ProgressiveAudio 5 months ago
Well saying violence wouldn't work in these protest is a little silly. You can think it's not desirable, I'd probably agree, but tell the violent protestors at the Poll Tax Riots in the UK who brought down Margaret Thatcher that violence and rioting wouldn't work.
ProgressiveAudio 5 months ago 2
I think we need a better idea of what violence *is*. Are we talking about self-defense? Is that in the same category as building a bomb? Is that bomb the same no matter if it's aimed at a person or a building?
I just think working that out is absolutely necessary before we can talk seriously and not just theoretically. I'm not pro-violence, but I'm not a pacifist either. I have never done anything seriously violent to anyone or anything but I've also never been physically attacked.
jbrownil 5 months ago
This is really good, Punk Patriot. Thanks for putting this together and posting it!
MiddleMolly 5 months ago
"violence is easy to deal with, especially when your a riot police officer!"
d2techknow 5 months ago
This is a man who has read the words of Gandhi and Martin Luther King bravo.
Glambert27 5 months ago
NO WAR BUT THE CLASS WAR
MoonstompingMike1985 1 week ago
Colored revolutions in eastern europe & middle-east funded by C.I.A.
/watch?v=lpXbA6yZY-8
/watch?v=8tJXrxBBItQ
iknewitalready 5 months ago
American revolution was won through armed rebellion against the British empire.
/watch?v=HwWi0zdF7wk
iknewitalready 5 months ago
60 percent of American's don't care to vote because they know the United States is not a country, but a corporation.
Look up Act of 1871 in a search engine.
/watch?v=BpOHbma0_Mg&
iknewitalready 5 months ago
I have seen many nonviolent protests. The majority of them have ended up with authority abusing their power and using brutal forces against protesters that have done nothing wrong. So in my opinion, the majority of police are not peaceful.
austin99203 6 months ago
Make sure you take your camera to the protest. If the media covers it, they will only show what happens after the police have incited you. You'll need your own evidence of the incitement.
grungeface87 6 months ago
Thanks for sharing the truth. George Carlin always spoke the truth that people can listen here on YouTube. On the search box type George Carlin to you the title you like.
Law enforcement, the military, people and organizations have histories of good and evil.
lamourlupus 6 months ago
the government does know how to deal with non-violent protesters: the police pen them up, restrict and control their location, movement, access to outsiders, etc, illegally or legally arrest them, and one way or another shuts them up & shuts them down. many people who participated in anti-iraq war protests know all about that and about how the government no longer respects the constitutional right to freedom of assembly when they don't feel like it...
lamaddussa 6 months ago
i agree with non violent tactics. anyone can see that historically violent revolutions lead to police states and dictatorships, because people who take control of their world though violence will continue to use violence to control their world. when you internalize violence you corrupt yourself. but, your idea that the system will be pierced in the heart and roll over in the face of love seems, sorry bro, ridiculously naive. bullies couldn't care less about the sensitivity of others. (con't)
lamaddussa 6 months ago
@lamaddussa how about chiapas? which is zapatista homeland, no offence but i hardly see signs of dictatorship there....
MoonstompingMike1985 1 week ago
Democracy isn't granted, it is demanded.
etzel33 6 months ago 2
any act of rebelion against the state is a direct threat against their monopoly of power, and therfore considered by the state itself has an act of violence and will be met by violence. if you do an unschduled parade or decide to occupy a public building, the state will eventually use his muscles at various degree to regain control of the situation. Anything that isnt part of their plan or challenge them is an act of violence against their political structure.
psychokanuk 6 months ago
The london riots scared the shit outta them.
cmferguson73 6 months ago
i am frustrated at not being able to "like" this more than once! this is brilliant! and wow! this is my new "favorite rant ever!" i want this guy to run for president.
catayl 6 months ago
Also watch my recent video on the economy as a whole, I discuss how corporations are structured democratically like government and both institution suffer the same short term political mismanagement that causes them destroy the long term growth and sustainability of humanity. I'm not saying people should never vote, but how should they vote (which you've discusses when your brought up rank order), and what power should those who win popularity contests or are connected should have?
AlexMerced 6 months ago
@AlexMerced Corporations are not structured democratically. In democracy, you get one man, one vote. In a corporation, you can literally buy your votes. So the rich have the power, the poor do not.
One man, one vote is the great equalizer.
ThePunkPatriot 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot one share one vote is the same concept and works just the same. You think you can't buy votes in a one man one vote system? Instead of money you buy votes with influence, and you build influence with money or by granting favors. Not all democratic countries do the one man one vote, democracy is just majority rule, and board of directors and the CEO or a corporation are subject to that same majority rule.
AlexMerced 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot If you wanted to effect change much more expediently, think of the most aggregious public company, organize you and your listen to buy one or two shares a month, eventually while you may not individually have control of the company as an organized voting block you will have control.
AlexMerced 6 months ago
I agree you can't end violence with violence, violence only yields short term results cause all you've done is coerced people not change them. Although, my problem is some of the change you at end hope as a result involves using violence against those who used violence against you (redistribution of wealth). If you don't think it's violence, ask yourself what happen if people refuse to follow the rules laid out by these changes, what happens if they continue to refuse. Thus I'm a Voluntarist
AlexMerced 6 months ago
@AlexMerced Taxes are not violence. They are paying for services.
ThePunkPatriot 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot Absolutely right. Don't let these anarchists drag you down. They provide moral cover for plutocracy.
etzel33 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot Services that you can in no way decline and that if you fail to pay for them, you will be kidnapped and thrown into a cage.
Certainly no violence there.
In all seriousness, though, government is violence. that's not really the question here; the question is how much violence is necessary to maintain a healthy, civilized society. everything the government does is (or at least should be) a "necessary evil" in the eyes of the majority.
astrochiken 5 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot Violently. If you don't pay your taxes you go to jail. I'm not even a capitalist and I understand that. And to further separate myself from capitalist. Property damage is not violence. And if you follow Max Stirner, property is violence.
thenoorys 3 months ago
Firstly, you make a bad assumption. You assume that the riot police/pigs understand what non-violence and love are. I point you towards to the Toronto G20 scull fucking that occurred towards the protestors. Violence and/or non-violence are a language. If you are violent, then more than likely you only understand violence. And vice versa for non-violence. It is the person who knows when to use violence and non-violence whom will be the successor.
PropheciesofWar 6 months ago
the corporations and banks will not go quietly and they own the media
I see only one peaceful resolution - legal secession
marniespeaks 6 months ago
An important message, great vid.
oldtimefreedom 6 months ago
You are so so right. And even in the case of christians persecuted by the Roman empire which actually spread their ideas further and deeper till it became the empire. Although you know along the way many were martyred, so a love and peace offensive is not without risk.
tenagliac 6 months ago
i like you man, but i think you might be off the track. most of the exemple you gave at the end of the video where revolution with a certain degree of violence. there are degree of acceptable violence according to the appropriate situation. the occupation of a public building or organizing a parade without proper authorisations or ransaking a public building are all forms of violence. Violence is good and necessary, its all about finding the right proportions and situations to use it.
psychokanuk 6 months ago
@psychokanuk WHAT? A parade is violence? Occupying a building is violence? Bullshit.
ThePunkPatriot 6 months ago
@psychokanuk
the organizers of this action also state that they will not engage in "verbal violence" i think that is a lofty goal and a concept worth consideration, but not realistic & will also alienate & shut down ethnic & racial groups who are emotionally expressive. however i am opposed to physical violence whenever possible. violence corrupts and violent revolutions lead to police states and dictatorships because that's all that people moved to behave violently know how to do...
lamaddussa 6 months ago
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
-Thomas Jefferson
AnbusKi 6 months ago 2
@AnbusKi
"I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence...I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour."
- Mahatma Gandhi
"There would be peace, if people were not only against war, but also against winning.”
- Elazar Benyoëtz
Tressco 6 months ago 2
also you mentioned a lot of protests but not their outcome. All this is not to disagree with your points, especially concerning the lack of votes (though you don't have much choice there, as we know, the vote by itself is a very small part of the democratic process.), but we really have to act in a violent way towards the elite and that can mean just direct action such as strikes and occupations...
GuiMarquito 6 months ago
@GuiMarquito I didn't mention protests, I mentioned successful nonviolent revolutions.
ThePunkPatriot 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot yes, so if I get mugged and the money is used to pay for services it's not theft, it's involuntary and if compliance is not met then violence is enacted (try resisting arrest). Also you guilty until proven innocent (how many innocent people have had their assets frozen and sold before a chance to prove their innocence). While I'm all for paying for services, there is a non-voluntary aspect to it, plus taxes are used to gather information and intimidate.
AlexMerced 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot for example, if you are middle class or higher and gain traction against the esablishment, do be surprised to get audited, taxes are tool of the powerful like anything else.
AlexMerced 6 months ago
@ThePunkPatriot
are the middle east protests successful revolutions? have we seen democratic & egalitarian states put into place? that didn't happen in south africa or india either. they're phony democracies rife with disparity & injustice. i'm not advocating violence, mind you. i can't speak to all of the movements you've mentioned but the ones i'm aware of haven't ultimately succeeded in their goals. establishing political & economic democracy is a very complex endeavor...
lamaddussa 6 months ago
i don't think violence is in any way good when we're talking about riots and smashing random windows or pillaging. But I think we should remember Egypt was not a peaceful revolution, it was really conducted by the military (in fact people are still, or at least were protesting months ago against them), and Gandhi and MLK were just lesser evils for those in power.
Random peaceful protests lead nowhere too nowadays. Specific demands and direct actions, strikes etc are needed too.
GuiMarquito 6 months ago
You don't need to instigate violent riots - we have enough agent provocateurs already.
SuperSmashDolls 6 months ago
Excellent video man
LiberalJerseyman 6 months ago 2
Amen. Non-violence worked for MLK for a reason. If he was violent, he would have gotten nowhere. Great video, as always. Good luck in October.
RickyMcGinnis 6 months ago 2