An Open Letter to Oakland’s Violent November 2nd “Anarchists”

Categories: Open Mic

“Anarchism does not mean bloodshed; it does not mean robbery, arson, etc. These monstrosities are, on the contrary, the characteristic features of capitalism. Anarchism means peace and tranquility to all.” –August Spies, Haymarket anarchist

As an anarchist, I am deeply disappointed in you. I am angry at you. I am saddened by you. I feel let down by you. I feel nearly irreparably misrepresented by you.

You had a chance. You had an opportunity of historic proportions – HISTORIC PROPORTIONS. An opportunity to step up and voice your ideas – IDEAS. An opportunity to contribute, as anarchists, to the fresh and evolving reorganization of society from the ground up. This is it. This is what, presumably, anarchists have always fought for – organization from the ground up. This was your chance to organize and build something new. This was your chance to show the world that anarchism is a valuable perspective through which to view society, through which to change society, and through which to promote intelligent solutions to the problems of society. This was your chance to represent the constructive ideas behind anarchism and contribute to the clarification and reevaluation of what it means to be an anarchist as understood by the vast majority of the population. This was your chance.

And you fucking blew it.

Thousands of citizens took to the streets and shut down the 5th largest port in America. You burned some garbage and broke some glass. Thousands of people took to the streets and marched on banks to shut them down. You painted some walls. Thousands of people made headlines by organizing successfully a massive general strike that drew attention from the entire world. You made headlines by throwing rocks at the police, who incidentally didn’t show any use of force, who were in fact not even a significant presence, until your actions. In other words, you brought in the police. Thanks for nothing.

And you did all these things from behind a mask. Cowards, all of you. Show your face. Walk right up to the camera and pronounce: I am an anarchist. You believe so strongly in your methods? In your philosophy? Then stand and be identified. I saw your faces on Telegraph and Broadway right before you tied on the handkerchief. You’re not Subcomandante Marcos. You’re children, in action and thought.

When you hurled those chairs at the windows of Whole Foods, were you aware that there were human beings standing on the other side of that glass? Human beings. Let me say that another way: were you aware that there were POTENTIAL SYMPATHIZERS on the other side of that glass? Not to mention the thousands of potential sympathizers gathered in the streets around you. If I had been on the other side of that glass, even considering myself an anarchist as I do today, I would not see you as liberators and freedom fighters. I would see you as oppressors – OPPRESSORS! Violence is an oppressive force. OPPRESSORS! OPPRESSORS!

Your numbers represented roughly 1% of the total number gathered. Ring any bells?

My disappointment and frustration with your incredibly unintelligent, cowardly, arrogant, and divisive actions are tempered somewhat by media descriptions of you as a “splinter group”. Even some mainstream media outlets recognized (to their credit) that the crowd was successfully self-policing and that you all were an extreme minority. Are you satisfied with remaining a “splinter group”? You have an opportunity and responsibility every day to educate people on, and promote, healthy understandings of anarchism as a useful analytical and organizational tool. Instead, you play ignorantly and stupidly in to the hands of the establishment’s promotion of anarchism as a violent and chaotic mess.

Where are these headlines?

ANARCHIST GROUP SOLVES CLASSROOM OVERCROWDING PROBLEM BY OPENING FREE SCHOOLS

ANARCHIST GROUP STARTS NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN PROJECT

ANARCHIST GROUP JOINS NURSES AND DOCTORS TO ORGANIZE FREE HEALTH CLINICS FOR THE POOR

ANARCHIST GROUP FEEDS THE HOMELESS

ANARCHIST GROUP ORGANIZES TO REVERSE LIBRARY CLOSURES

ANARCHIST GROUP DOES ANY NUMBER OF POSITIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE THINGS TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS

You know why we don’t see those headlines? Because your energy goes into actions that spawn these headlines:

ANARCHISTS SMASH WINDOWS

ANARCHISTS CLASH WITH POLICE

ANARCHISTS DESTROY BUILDING

ANARCHISTS TURN PEACEFUL PROTEST INTO VIOLENCE AND CHAOS

Forget about advancing the 99% agenda, you’re not even helping the advancement of the philosophy to which you claim to adhere. You’re effectively fucking yourselves while you fuck the rest of us. Stupid.

You know what you’re really doing? Helping to galvanize society’s opinion that anarchists are only interested in violent disruption at all costs. That anarchists don’t have any real ideas beyond spray paint and rocks. That no matter what popular movement emerges spontaneously in the streets, a movement from which you very well may benefit, you are going to be agents of disruption and violence within that movement. You can’t see the forest for the trees.

This is the best you can do? This is your best? These are the ideas you have to contribute? This is the image you want to portray? This is the extent of your ideas? Because if that’s true, your ideas are stupid and sad and astronomically short-sighted.

I think it’s past time that other anarchist-leaning persons pronounce directly to your masked faces that we’ve had enough of your bullshit. I now begin to recommit myself to, not only distancing myself from your violently disruptive behavior, but to proactively helping to redefine and re-present anarchism in a more positive, constructive, intelligent, and useful light – a difficult job that has been made only more difficult because of you. I invite any and all self-identifying, intelligent, constructively minded, peaceful anarchists to do the same.

Don’t believe the hype. Read. Investigate. Dig. Educate yourself. Question the headlines. Not all anarchists are violent, just as not all Muslims are terrorists, just as not all Christians are gay-bashing bigots.

Very sincerely,

Jason Hoopes

 

3816

3 Responses to “An Open Letter to Oakland’s Violent November 2nd “Anarchists””

  1. jason hoopes

    maxr,

    I understand anarchists are among those out there working hard on positive organization. Yes, I am criticizing the tactic of property destruction. At the very least I am challenging the decision to employ these tactics considering the overall constructive and positive spirit of the Occupy movement. I think that in the context of what’s happening, and the incredible momentum of popular support, it’s counter-productive.

    What is the goal of employing property destruction, as exercised here in Oakland? I don’t want an abstract universal defense of the tactic or a wiki-entry on its history. I want you or anyone else in support of this tactic to come out and articulate a well thought out description of the positive and helpful results of these methods. How is it helping right now? Be specific.

    I believe violent, destructive tactics as those seen in Oakland to be an illegitimate use of force and as an anarchist I am challenging anyone to justify thoroughly this approach. Again, non-abstractly. Be specific. How is it helping the current local situation.

    Too many people are against it for it to be a useful tool. That doesn’t mean a tactic has to be popular before it’s effective. But let’s look at the results. It turns people off and negatively colors their already skeptical perception and thin trust of anarchists. It takes up valuable volunteer time helping to clean up the mess to send a more positive message out when these people could be helping in other more urgent areas. And it adds to the workload of people who now have to work to distance themselves from such tactics on top of the difficulty of just getting their voices heard. And according to you, if I understand you correctly, some anarchists are both organizing to address human needs like food, shelter, and medical attention AND participating in property destruction. If that is correct, they are undermining their own work. And that statement comes from this observation:

    It seems no one is advertising that “anarchists are part of the backbone of the occupy movement”. And fine. Who cares what people call themselves? But then how is it that when destruction manifests these people are essentially by default advertising themselves as “anarchist”? It should be obvious that that’s what people glean from spray painted “A”s and smashed windows combined with what they’ve been told by mainstream media about anarchists.

    Your challenge to my letter speaks to the underlying sense of pride some anarchists take in claiming these destructive acts. Why aren’t you just as readily advertising and publicly claiming “we’re anarchists and we’re organizing to feed / shelter / care for the people”? Why? Because nobody gives a shit what you’re called when you’re directly helping people with their human needs. You’re just helping. Violent property destruction is not directly helping people with human needs. It’s shallow. So the only thing you can do is break glass and paint slogans and symbols that at best are completely misunderstood by the majority of people who see them. So then…the media cares what you’re called, the police care what you’re called, the public cares what you’re called – all for different reasons, but they all say the same thing, “it was the anarchists”.

    It doesn’t matter that the truth is that anarchists are not solely responsible for these acts, or that anarchists are doing positive work behind the scenes, because the destruction is what is going to be focused on.

    There are not enough positives to outweigh the negatives. It’s a poor tactic in this situation. It creates division where there was once solidarity. It inspires fear among friendlies. It’s divisive. Because there isn’t a great understanding of what anarchism means, even by people who are actively participating in anarchic processes.

    Show John Q Public two pictures, one of a masked individual in all black smashing a window and one of an unmasked individual serving food or handing out information or bandaging a wound, and ask John Q Public to identify the anarchist. Which picture do you think will be chosen? And do you think for a second John Q Public is going to consider that the masked window smasher could very well be an undercover police instigator? I want to hear from anarchists who are interested in changing that perspective.

    We know why the established authority wants to invalidate anarchist perspectives – it works when it’s allowed to work. The General Assembly et al is showing us that. Anarchist perspectives can be tremendously useful, when they’re not being drowned in the established order’s propaganda, out of which comes popular opinion – namely, that anarchists are only destructive. We know (or should know) that anything resembling “chaos” and “violence” and “destruction” is going to be latched onto and amplified by the media.

    They’re not coming after your free school story, or that your helping gather food, or your holding down the Crisis Center. All of that is highly commendable work deserving of thanks and respect and recognition. But that’s likely not what’s going to be on the front page. Or, maybe it would have a better chance at being on the front page if the media were not given such easy snapshots and soundbites of destruction to run away with. A more intelligent tactic would be to not give media outlets or the established authority the material with which to debase something so many believe in so passionately and which has obviously inspired some of the most positive organizing witnessed in some time.

    As regards the masking of faces, I am speaking to masked individuals who participate in violent property damage. Show yourself if you’re so confident in your tactics. As I said in my letter, I wouldn’t say that to a Subcomandante Marcos, but then, none of the Oakland anarchists instigating violent disruption are a Subcomandante Marcos. I have plenty of friends who cover their faces in the crowd, so that doesn’t bother me. But if you’re going to be so bold as to physically destroy the city then be that bold all the way. And if you’re worried that being arrested for violent destructive actions will keep you from doing your constructive work behind the scenes, then why the fuck would you take that risk in the first place?! Helping organize the GA is far more important and necessary work than breaking windows. Why jeopardize your ability to assist with that? It’s stupid.

    If I fall prey to being dogmatic about anything in this life, I can hardly think of a better agenda then non-violence. So if the accusation of being dogmatically non-violent is accurate, so be it.

    Yes, I understand the institutions of capitalism are “magnitudes more violent then broken windows, or barricades on fire”. I’m not arguing which is more violent. You’re preaching to the choir. I’m addressing what I see as an irresponsible handling of the picture that is presented to the public.

    You must care about how anarchists are portrayed and seen, otherwise you wouldn’t have bothered to respond to my letter so defensively. So that concern that drove you to respond to my letter doesn’t extend to public opinion? It just stays in an internal debate backstage? If I hadn’t identified myself as anarchist would you still have responded? Or would you have written me off as just another uniformed critic?

    Your implication that I am being “anti-Oakland” or “even racist” is utter bullshit. I love graffiti art and I know where it comes from and what it is. I also love Oakland. I am a hard working, very active, and very pro-active, musician in the greater Bay Area music scene. I am part of a vibrant art community that busts our asses organizing concerts and performances and supporting local art for next-to-no pay. The person(s) who spray painted “A”s and “strike” etc I would hardly identify as “artists” nor would I identify their hastily scrawled tags as “art”. That’d be an insult if it wasn’t such a joke. And as a very active member of Oakland’s arts community I am very nearly offended by this accusation, except that it hints at some personal chip on your shoulder that has little to nothing to do with me.

    My opinion is that any anarchists participating in violent displays of property destruction during peaceful Occupy gatherings and actions are getting it wrong and harming the movement.

    Jason Hoopes

  2. Jetrauben

    I do not understand, maxr, why your group fails to understand a simple, pragmatic truth.

    Violence endangers -all- of us, anarchists and non-anarchists alike, and it achieves -nothing-.

    Yes, the banks have done terrible harm to our society. Yes, the modern capitalistic culture has been responsible for monstrous violations of human rights, the gradual degradation of working conditions, the entrenchment of economic and social privilege into our legal systems.

    How, precisely, does smashing the windows of banks staffed by common workers and people just trying to get by help to accomplish your goals? How does setting fire to dumpsters and actually attacking people who try to stop you strike a blow for humane treatment and liberty? What does it do? Did the dumpster foreclose your home?

    Objections to violence are largely based in pragmatism. Yes, the police may well attack us anyways regardless of the means we employ. However, we’re not trying to convince the police; we’re trying to convince the public that their interests are tied with ours. And like it as not, most of the public -likes- private property. Most of the public -likes- the idea of the law being upheld. Whether you believe that the banks struck the first blow or not, or that the cops were out to get you anyways, by attacking private property violently you portray an image of anarchism and indeed progressive politics as violent, aggressive, and dangerous. You cannot redefine self-defense to allow for this in the public mind.

    Yes, the cops might be aggressive against us. -Let them be-. When police and other authorities crack down on peaceful protests, it is a media victory, far greater than if we fight back or even play right into their hands by attacking private property and thus making a police reprisal legal. The public is shocked and horrified by unprovoked brutality. That’s just as true in reverse.

  3. maxr

    Jason, anarchists are part of the backbone of the occupy movement, especially in Oakland where anarchists have been participating in local struggles for years. You are complaining about the masks and the tactic of property destruction, but fail to consider that this is one tactic out of many used by anarchists during the day, and that it is only when they are putting themselves at risk that they decide to wear bandanas. Being at the general assembly last night several people made this information clear. I have been working on the free school, the politics of the camp, the defense during the raid, the marches that have happened, the food that has been procured, and during the general strike i marched to businesses and banks, i marched to the port, and i worked on trying to hold down the Crisis Center, and defend the camp. I ask you why you fail to consider that these people who wore masks that you condemn are actually some of the most passionate, enthusiastic, and brave participants in this struggle. I also ask you to re-frame your dogmatic principles on non-violence, acceptable anarchist tactics, and what makes a movement stronger. I will leave you with the idea that as you stated in your first paragraph the institutions of capitalism are the monster, the banks are magnitudes more violent then broken windows, or barricades on fire, and that graffiti is a vibrant form of resistance and creativity in Oakland and to condemn it or the artists is anti-Oakland and even racist.