So the insurgency in Iraq dismantled the US Military? I don't remember reading that anywhere. You don't honestly believe we don't have a military anymore, do you? Last I checked, we're still fully operational. Where do you get this information from? You're just making stuff up. But, whatever makes you feel good, man.
@guatahala You're against all businesses? You have a youtube account. What "rights" are you fighting for again? Or are you just fighting for the sake of fighting? Which, according to this video, is more just getting beat up by cops cause they didn't stay on the sidewalk. Do you have any solutions to these problems you speak of, or just a long list of complaints? It would be awesome if you posed any. Apparently, the world wants "the system", or your cause would have won already.
@guatahala The world you live in (as opposed to the real one) is small and simple. The real world is large and complex. Your rash generalizations are a summarization of why any movement people who think like you dream up ultimately fail. However, I'd love to see your passion for revolution shifted towards homosexual rights, a far more pressing issue...but that's too hard isn't it? It's way easier to just say, "Fuck McDonald's."
What rash generalisations have I written? Why are the legal rights of gay people a more pressing issue than the practical rights of everyone, which I want to expand by destroying domination? What makes one type of right more important than another, except subjectively? What about the difficulty of something make it a better or worse course of action? And I haven't written anything about McDonald's here. I'm against all businesses, not just multinationals.
@guatahala Again, source? A dictator was removed and citizens vote now. But, to you I guess that's not a success? The Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police had to be able to rebuild their forces and receive training (by us) to be able to hold their own against insurgents that continue to attempt to tear down the new government we helped build. Obama pulled troops out when the Generals felt the IA and IP could support themselves, which they now can. We could have easily stayed another 8 years.
My point was that the US military can be defeated by an insurgency, as is clear from its defeat in Iraq. This issue of whether the form of government left behind by the occupiers continues is irrelevant to our original topic of debate which is whether the US military, and (militaries more generally) can be defeated. Also, who is this 'we'? I doubt that you've ever trained any soldiers or police or been to Iraq. It's a purely mythical 'we' of nationalism.
@guatahala You're delusional. I guess in your world, a dictator wasn't toppled and they don't vote in Iraq now? You've obviously never been to Iraq, or done the minimal amount of research to understand any aspect of what was/is going on there. There was no defeat by insurgents that caused the troops to come home. I would love to see your (credible) source for that information.
The insurgents piled up enough bodies that American voters wouldn't accept it anymore, and disrupted the economy and the Iraqi state enough that the national government lost control of large sections of the country intermittently throughout the war. Therefore, the military pulled out. Just like in 'Nam, where the American state was defeated in a similar war. If not defeat, then what pushed them back? If not victory, then what did the insurgents get?
@guatahala Again, good luck with that. You'll never defeat a system that has a military behind it. You have more faith than most religious people I know. For that, I applaud you. I remember my first beer.
It's not a matter of me having faith in revolution and anarchy. It's just that I have no faith in capitalism specifically and domination generally.
The military is clearly not invincible. The US just quit Iraq because of a military defeat by insurgents.
Capitalism hasn't been here forever. There's no reason to assume it will last forever. The more it grows, the more it dispossesses, impoverishes and alienates, and the more merciless rage rises to end it.
@guatahala Your grammar is terrible. But for the sake of argument, I would love to hear your illiterate response when someone asks you what your alternative to capitalism is.
I have no alternative other than freedom. I have no interest in advocating anything more specific than that. To propose the specific form of an alternative would be to miss the point that freedom means letting people choose how to organise themselves, not imposing any form of social organisation on top of them. All I know is that capitalism exploits, dominates, and alienates myself and those I care about and that I therefore have to destroy it to be free.
All I see is a bunch of people getting beat up by cops. Did anything get accomplished? Nike is still one of the largest shoe companies in the world. McDonalds, GAP...they're all still there. Way to take a beating. Next time try fighting back.
They had to hold the next talk in Qatar and black bloc and property dammage gained legitimacy as tactics. Also, it led to more people becoming anarchists, myself included after I watched this documentary the first time.
But yeah, those companies are still around and so is the capitalist system which produced them, and less pacifist tactics will have to be used. But we're entering into a crisis of capitalism right now, and we have a chance to tear it down.
@972someguy it's a bit sexist focusing on a woman pig - she just had a face that looked remorseful - in reality women pigs don't give a fuck about us. they are the same. stop being so sentimental about it. americans can buy guns yet choose to protest like this? why just one place on one day? you could have shot those cunts if you really believed in revolution.
Eh. Yeah i agree. I', very dissapointed with anarchism in the US. Anarchists here are not creating alternatives and then when they do fight, they only break a few windows. CRAP!
I remember these shitheads. WAH WAH! where are they now? Still kicking around the whitaker neighborhood talking about revolution? Or sitting on a barstool at sam bond's. "Man, the WTO, we stopped a-gulp- city, man. Those pigs-gulp- knew who was boss that day-gulp."
BWAHAHAHAHA! Please, DO keep talking! I love laughing my ass off at your stupid ignorance. I'll bet your screen name is a phone number. What area code is it?
You sound very ignorant. Although I don't agree with the destruction of others' property, I also don't agree with massive corporations having meetings with out policy makers. This country has strayed so far from that which it's "founding fathers" intended.
I hope you try to open your own small business, and realize how difficult it is to make a profit because of someone elses decision
What I find really amusing is that these Marxists haven't even read Marx. Even he recognized that colonization provides a relative reduction in exploitation for the colonized. It's certainly exploitative, but less so than what they already suffer under. States thrive by plunder, and freer markets/people provide greater wealth for them to do so, which is why the most powerful states are state capitalist. It is the state, and colluding big business, not the market which is the problem.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Because real anarchists, unlike Marxists, wouldn't make light of destroying the labor products of others. The view that the laborer has a right to his or her own produce is entirely incompatible with compulsory "to each according to their need".
Bakunin held to the same view as Proudhon as regards the right of the laborer to his/her own produce. Proudhon wasn't the only one. All of the individualist anarchists held (and still hold) to that view, as did the original collectivist anarchists. Only the communist anarchists differed, and to the extent that they did differ, they promoted the exploitation of labor, the enslavement of others, and were thus not fully anarchists.
Where did you read that the insurgency defeated the US Military? Again. Just one credible source, I'd love to read it.
TheSlowProgression 1 month ago
So the insurgency in Iraq dismantled the US Military? I don't remember reading that anywhere. You don't honestly believe we don't have a military anymore, do you? Last I checked, we're still fully operational. Where do you get this information from? You're just making stuff up. But, whatever makes you feel good, man.
TheSlowProgression 1 month ago
@guatahala You're against all businesses? You have a youtube account. What "rights" are you fighting for again? Or are you just fighting for the sake of fighting? Which, according to this video, is more just getting beat up by cops cause they didn't stay on the sidewalk. Do you have any solutions to these problems you speak of, or just a long list of complaints? It would be awesome if you posed any. Apparently, the world wants "the system", or your cause would have won already.
TheSlowProgression 1 month ago
@guatahala The world you live in (as opposed to the real one) is small and simple. The real world is large and complex. Your rash generalizations are a summarization of why any movement people who think like you dream up ultimately fail. However, I'd love to see your passion for revolution shifted towards homosexual rights, a far more pressing issue...but that's too hard isn't it? It's way easier to just say, "Fuck McDonald's."
TheSlowProgression 1 month ago
@TheSlowProgression
What rash generalisations have I written? Why are the legal rights of gay people a more pressing issue than the practical rights of everyone, which I want to expand by destroying domination? What makes one type of right more important than another, except subjectively? What about the difficulty of something make it a better or worse course of action? And I haven't written anything about McDonald's here. I'm against all businesses, not just multinationals.
guatahala 1 month ago
@guatahala Again, source? A dictator was removed and citizens vote now. But, to you I guess that's not a success? The Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police had to be able to rebuild their forces and receive training (by us) to be able to hold their own against insurgents that continue to attempt to tear down the new government we helped build. Obama pulled troops out when the Generals felt the IA and IP could support themselves, which they now can. We could have easily stayed another 8 years.
TheSlowProgression 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheSlowProgression
My point was that the US military can be defeated by an insurgency, as is clear from its defeat in Iraq. This issue of whether the form of government left behind by the occupiers continues is irrelevant to our original topic of debate which is whether the US military, and (militaries more generally) can be defeated. Also, who is this 'we'? I doubt that you've ever trained any soldiers or police or been to Iraq. It's a purely mythical 'we' of nationalism.
guatahala 1 month ago
@guatahala You're delusional. I guess in your world, a dictator wasn't toppled and they don't vote in Iraq now? You've obviously never been to Iraq, or done the minimal amount of research to understand any aspect of what was/is going on there. There was no defeat by insurgents that caused the troops to come home. I would love to see your (credible) source for that information.
TheSlowProgression 2 months ago
@TheSlowProgression
The insurgents piled up enough bodies that American voters wouldn't accept it anymore, and disrupted the economy and the Iraqi state enough that the national government lost control of large sections of the country intermittently throughout the war. Therefore, the military pulled out. Just like in 'Nam, where the American state was defeated in a similar war. If not defeat, then what pushed them back? If not victory, then what did the insurgents get?
guatahala 2 months ago
@guatahala Again, good luck with that. You'll never defeat a system that has a military behind it. You have more faith than most religious people I know. For that, I applaud you. I remember my first beer.
TheSlowProgression 2 months ago
@TheSlowProgression
It's not a matter of me having faith in revolution and anarchy. It's just that I have no faith in capitalism specifically and domination generally.
The military is clearly not invincible. The US just quit Iraq because of a military defeat by insurgents.
Capitalism hasn't been here forever. There's no reason to assume it will last forever. The more it grows, the more it dispossesses, impoverishes and alienates, and the more merciless rage rises to end it.
guatahala 2 months ago
@guatahala Your grammar is terrible. But for the sake of argument, I would love to hear your illiterate response when someone asks you what your alternative to capitalism is.
TheSlowProgression 2 months ago
@TheSlowProgression
I have no alternative other than freedom. I have no interest in advocating anything more specific than that. To propose the specific form of an alternative would be to miss the point that freedom means letting people choose how to organise themselves, not imposing any form of social organisation on top of them. All I know is that capitalism exploits, dominates, and alienates myself and those I care about and that I therefore have to destroy it to be free.
guatahala 2 months ago
Good luck with that. Did you use a Mac or PC to watch this? Have fun eating out of my dumpster.
TheSlowProgression 2 months ago
All I see is a bunch of people getting beat up by cops. Did anything get accomplished? Nike is still one of the largest shoe companies in the world. McDonalds, GAP...they're all still there. Way to take a beating. Next time try fighting back.
TheSlowProgression 9 months ago
@TheSlowProgression
They had to hold the next talk in Qatar and black bloc and property dammage gained legitimacy as tactics. Also, it led to more people becoming anarchists, myself included after I watched this documentary the first time.
But yeah, those companies are still around and so is the capitalist system which produced them, and less pacifist tactics will have to be used. But we're entering into a crisis of capitalism right now, and we have a chance to tear it down.
guatahala 2 months ago in playlist More videos from bijitaq
blond cop lady got some pepper spray in her eyes
tobabr 10 months ago
this is my favorite part of Breaking the Spell. she's obviously conflicted. it really gets to me.
deadpanrookie 1 year ago
its time to fight fire with fire
xxxDEATHCORExxx 1 year ago
I think that's Leo Gerrard at 6:29
buckeyefan05 1 year ago
My heart breaks seeing the pain in the policewoman's eyes.
Gunfulker27 1 year ago 11
@Gunfulker27 dont feel no pain for the policewoman shes choosen her side,if shes thaqt upset she can hand her badge in
sharkeys7 1 year ago
@Gunfulker27
Mine doesn't. She might be conflicted, but until she stops wearing that uniform, she's still a cop.
guatahala 2 months ago in playlist More videos from bijitaq
assault by police. typical
ianspitzig 2 years ago
that blond cop lady ...you saw her face......she knew
972someguy 2 years ago 29
@972someguy it's a bit sexist focusing on a woman pig - she just had a face that looked remorseful - in reality women pigs don't give a fuck about us. they are the same. stop being so sentimental about it. americans can buy guns yet choose to protest like this? why just one place on one day? you could have shot those cunts if you really believed in revolution.
benthehoose 1 year ago
around 8:30 what was with the south vietnamese flag?
Zao125 2 years ago
@Zao125 Yeah it is... seems like someone is confused as to which flag belonged to the Viet Cong?
destructicon500 1 year ago
@destructicon500 lol total fail.
Zao125 1 year ago
Eh. Yeah i agree. I', very dissapointed with anarchism in the US. Anarchists here are not creating alternatives and then when they do fight, they only break a few windows. CRAP!
newmoongathering 3 years ago
i would of brought some molotov gifts for the police....
972someguy 2 years ago
@newmoongathering I think anarchists tend to fight *with each other* too much. We need to unify to defeat the forces of government and capital
dubified89 1 year ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
this is just a 7 part music video. like trapped in the closet. but with less of a story
charlieonehorse 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I remember these shitheads. WAH WAH! where are they now? Still kicking around the whitaker neighborhood talking about revolution? Or sitting on a barstool at sam bond's. "Man, the WTO, we stopped a-gulp- city, man. Those pigs-gulp- knew who was boss that day-gulp."
6458522 3 years ago
BWAHAHAHAHA! Please, DO keep talking! I love laughing my ass off at your stupid ignorance. I'll bet your screen name is a phone number. What area code is it?
SupremeMaggot 3 years ago 3
You sound very ignorant. Although I don't agree with the destruction of others' property, I also don't agree with massive corporations having meetings with out policy makers. This country has strayed so far from that which it's "founding fathers" intended.
I hope you try to open your own small business, and realize how difficult it is to make a profit because of someone elses decision
acohenlb 3 years ago 4
@acohenlb it really hasn't strayed that far. Madison said that the primary goal of government should be to protect the property of the rich
dubified89 1 year ago
You're silly.
Learn to mutual aid.
Gabb0123 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What I find really amusing is that these Marxists haven't even read Marx. Even he recognized that colonization provides a relative reduction in exploitation for the colonized. It's certainly exploitative, but less so than what they already suffer under. States thrive by plunder, and freer markets/people provide greater wealth for them to do so, which is why the most powerful states are state capitalist. It is the state, and colluding big business, not the market which is the problem.
Libertarian333 3 years ago
why do you assume they're marxist?
everything4every1 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Because real anarchists, unlike Marxists, wouldn't make light of destroying the labor products of others. The view that the laborer has a right to his or her own produce is entirely incompatible with compulsory "to each according to their need".
Libertarian333 3 years ago
Ha. Wow Proudhon was one anarchist. Try Bakunin or Kropotkin. lol.
WeWillWinAnarchy 3 years ago
Bakunin held to the same view as Proudhon as regards the right of the laborer to his/her own produce. Proudhon wasn't the only one. All of the individualist anarchists held (and still hold) to that view, as did the original collectivist anarchists. Only the communist anarchists differed, and to the extent that they did differ, they promoted the exploitation of labor, the enslavement of others, and were thus not fully anarchists.
Libertarian333 3 years ago