Anarchists sabotage railway signalling in Bristol

[cesare]

Yeah cos direct action is always fully advertised on public bulletin boards infested with OB

 

[kittyP]

I've been posting here for eleven years. I've read the threads. In terms of 'fight the system!' type activity, the most that gets mustered, for most of the people who do such things [and that's a minority], taking part in a few protest marches, is about it.

Hang on, I didn't say that. VP did

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I suppose, to be fair, I should acknowledge that some people do attend the Marxist Book Fair.

 

[cesare]

Oh, a new event too.

 

[DotCommunist]

couldn't even get that one right

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Oh shut up.

If you do this enough times, you might sway the crowd into a personal attack, as opposed to considering what I've asked. So... keep it up.

Makes for more of a 'fun' thread.

 

[butchersapron]

I suppose, to be fair, I should acknowledge that some people do attend the Marxist Book Fair.

Is that like the american football hockey final?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

oh spare me st jon the revelator telling us all how to be propah revo's ffs

I'm not telling anything. I'm asking a question.

 

[butchersapron]

If you do this enough times, you might sway the crowd into a personal attack, as opposed to considering what I've asked. So... keep it up.

Makes for more of a 'fun' thread.

Making the considerations you are whining about are the basis of the criticisms of the actions that this thread is about.

You blundering oaf.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Is that like the american football hockey final?

I've never been. Given the constant bickering on the boards by different 'marxist factions', it may well be like some sort of sporting match.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

You blundering oaf.

Keep it up: the worm is turning. I can feel it.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

couldn't even get that one right

Does knowing the exact name help you to fight The System?

 

[DotCommunist]

Does knowing the exact name help you to fight The System?

it'd help you look a bit less like the blindfolded man in blind mans bluff

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

knocking over a few tele masts is not going to ake up the masses and se them throw aside their chains. Its just going to annoy people a lot. Like its the fucking tele that enslaves anyway.

I can tell that I've hit a nerve. All the armchair radicals are squawking their heads off.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

it'd help you look a bit less like the blindfolded man in blind mans bluff

You should thank me. It allows you to ignore the questions I'm asking, and focus on trivia like whether or not I know the correct name for some local event. It allows you to chuckle yourself back into a comfortable sleep.

 

[DotCommunist]

you've got not a clue about what you are on about- carry on though, is very funny

 

[fractionMan]

You should thank me. It allows you to ignore the questions I'm asking, and focus on trivia like whether or not I know the correct name for some local event. It allows you to chuckle yourself back into a comfortable sleep.

you just look like a prick tbh

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Elspeth Symrivi

' Elizabeth Shymrivi'

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

you've got not a clue about what you are on about- carry on though, is very funny

You haven't said one thing that isn't a personal attack, though,

Cat got your brain?

 

[butchersapron]

Hard questions. Disturbing questions.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Too hard to get an intelligible answer out of you, apparently.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Do you believe that radical change is possible without people being endangered, somewhere along the way?

Without "innocents" being wittingly endangered? Sure. Insurgencies can be and are often based around action that injures the apparatus of the state, not the citizenry.

Do you think 'The System' will give up without a fight?

Of course not. No-one is pretending otherwise. There's a big difference, though, between insurgents and the state fighting, and endangering people who aren't part of your argument. I can't direct the state to behave properly, but I can ask people who claim to be anarchists to bear in mind that "collateral damage" isn't hazard-free for one's principles, even if you don't give a sod about innocents dying per se.

 

[chilango]

Are you bored today or something JC?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Without "innocents" being wittingly endangered? Sure. Insurgencies can be and are often based around action that injures the apparatus of the state, not the citizenry.


Of course not. No-one is pretending otherwise. There's a big difference, though, between insurgents and the state fighting, and endangering people who aren't part of your argument. I can't direct the state to behave properly, but I can ask people who claim to be anarchists to bear in mind that "collateral damage" isn't hazard-free for one's principles, even if you don't give a sod about innocents dying per se.

How many successful revolutions have occurred without at least some innocents being injured?

 

[ViolentPanda]

If you do this enough times, you might sway the crowd into a personal attack, as opposed to considering what I've asked. So... keep it up.

Makes for more of a 'fun' thread.

He's doing you a favour, asking you to shut up about something you've very obviously not much of a clue about. Possibly he's even concerned that you're making yourself look more stupid than is usual (which, obviously, takes a fair bit of achieving).

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Are you bored today or something JC?

I've spent the last half hour answering posts made in reply, while I eat my breakfast.

 

[chilango]

...just seems to me you on a bit of a wind-up mission. Nothing like an Internet bicker to fill up a dull day, eh?

 

[DotCommunist]

You haven't said one thing that isn't a personal attack, though,

Cat got your brain?

oh stop crying, you're spouting off a load of toss and making yourself look an idiot. If you want to examine the state of the british left and make a valid critique of it feel fucking free but when you don't even have the basic grammar down then you're going to have to try harder.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

He's doing you a favour, asking you to shut up about something you've very obviously not much of a clue about. Possibly he's even concerned that you're making yourself look more stupid than is usual (which, obviously, takes a fair bit of achieving).

Are you talking about butchersapron?

I'm sure everything you've said is his exact motivation.

And no matter how many times you or butchers direct me to shut up, it won't change my opinion that the most 'radical activity' carried out by the majority of the people who do anything at all, involves going on marches or listening to speeches.

 

[ViolentPanda]

How many successful revolutions have occurred without at least some innocents being injured?

It's all going right over your pointy little head, isn't it?

If you aim for no "collateral damage", then the effect is usually to minimise any such damage. If your strategy begins and ends with destroying infrastructure in a way that causes or has the marked potential to cause "collateral damage", then you'll have far more casualties, because you won't be acting with the minimisation of "collateral damage" in mind. Yes, people will undoubtedly get hurt. That doesn't mean you can't actively minimise the volume.