• zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Yes. But according to this community, if someone farts in church the FBI/CIA is behind it.

    Direct Action isn't real, it doesn't exist, and any evidence to the contrary is manufactured.

    • mr_world [they/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      Revolutionary violence is cool and good but you have to have an actual organized left and not just random groups with different goals acting out. Either it's very ignorant or an OP. Sicko posting is fun but don't confuse it for actual politics.

      Edit: to elaborate on my point now that I'm at an actual keyboard.

      For one, we need an organized left before we can carry out revolutionary violence. It has to be agreed upon and there has to be an actual strategy with political power to back it up. Otherwise it's just adventurism or vigilantism. Burning down an anti-abortion group's office will not accomplish anything because the state is on their side. Republicans will be in charge again soon and they will use the state to protect anti-abortion groups. Democrats want pro-lifers as part of the party and they will not do anything to protect abortion rights. There is no political power (or very little) behind abortion rights. Therefore any violence is not a real threat. The police state can easily swat it down and move on while using it as propaganda. If leftists were in charge, or had leverage to use in addition to violence, then we'd be in a better spot. But we don't. Most of us don't even know who this group is or what they really want.

      Sure, reading about this kind of action gives us a warm, fuzzy feeling. It makes us feel like something is happening, that people are fighting back. But that's very different from something actually being accomplished. We can't confuse the feeling of progress for actual progress. We can't be so poster-brained that cheer-leading news stories feels like the left is doing something.

      Finally, Roe is enshrined in liberalism anyways. Yes having liberal rights to abortion is better than nothing. But we must also not confuse it with the end-all on abortion rights. The ruling, if I am not mistaken, frames the issue as limiting federal power to interfere with the individual. It's not an argument about abortion being good or helpful in itself. Arguments about what the constitution allows is silly anyways because we all recognize how flimsy that shit is. I'm not saying we shouldn't protect Roe or be upset it's going away. Just that we shouldn't confuse some sort of liberal judicial ruling as the basis for abortion rights.

      • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Revolutionary violence is cool and good but you have to have an actual organized left and not just random groups with different goals acting out. Either it’s very ignorant or an OP.

        I agree. I just think its lazy to write off every act of vandalism and spat of violence as federally orchestrated, particularly when we know next to nothing about who is involved or who was targeted. It just feeds leftist paranoia - the kind of paranoia that has people convinced TrueAnon and WTYP Podcast are CIA/MI6 operations - in an ultimately unproductive manner.

        I definitely get the call to organize first and foremost. The Black Panthers doing food aid and study halls for local communities revolutionized far more working class New Yorkers than Black Blockers lobbing bricks. Reshaping material conditions is the goal, not simply lashing out in anger.

        That said, literally all we know about this incident is that it happened. We don't know who was involved, how many of them there were, what they were doing beforehand, why they decided this was necessary, or how it will affect attitudes in the community. All this is speculation. And going straight to "Feds Did This" - even if they did do it - short-circuits people's brains in a way that's damaging to any future effort of organized resistance.

        Finally, Roe is enshrined in liberalism anyways.

        Roe was pure legalism. You have the "right" to health care, without any actual physical care being provided. Meanwhile, the conservative response was to strip services out of the public space inch by agonizing inch. From the Hyde Amendment to freak outs over contraception available in schools to terrorism aimed at clinics, the goal on the right was to shrink access to care at every opportunity.

        While Roe itself was Liberal AF, the aftermath was all about the material needs of women being deliberately obstructed. The fight in the last decade has revolved almost entirely around keeping an shrinking number of physicians and clinics in business. And so this fight has taken on a very leftist slant, whether liberals intended it to or not.

        Arguments about what the constitution allows is silly anyways because we all recognize how flimsy that shit is. I’m not saying we shouldn’t protect Roe or be upset it’s going away. Just that we shouldn’t confuse some sort of liberal judicial ruling as the basis for abortion rights.

        The judicial ruling isn't just about the legality of contraception and abortion. It is about who has access to and ownership of health care institutions. Whatever you might think of Planned Parenthood, they do a ton of mutual aid work. I can speak to that from personal experience, as their walk-in clinics are consistently some of the most accessible and affordable in the nation.

        This is about a national model for health care. And the decision to end Roe is as much about stomping out these last vestiges of independent medicine in the country as it is about access to abortion.

        • FidelCashflow [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Are you asking for the numbers of successful leftist projects vs the numbers of intelegence operations? Cause, they used to run the comunist party here and did it poorly on purpose to make sure it never accomplished anything. So we are conparing that to what, executed BLM activists?