The media is reporting that the Internet planed violent riot called October Revolution was a “protest” in which one woman was hurt. Newscasters are implying that the woman was accidentally hit in the head with a brick when some of the rich white kids whose neglectful, permissive parents turned them into self entitled violence junkies was innocently throwing a brick at a store window and missed.
I call bullshit. The anarchist movement has increasingly rejected non-violence as a form of protest and is actively groomed for the role of revolutionary stormtroopers by the Stalinist and Maoist groups that organize the “protests” Anarchists frequent.
Anarchists have embraced Peter Geldeloos call for protest groups to engage in violence key to the “revolution” and openly advocated violence against the police and other individuals. Just check out this comment left on this anti-cop screed at the Phoenix Insurgent blog by this Ron Paul supporter:
Now if only more cops were shot at, shot or killed for failing to mind their own business or just feeling like exercising one’s authoritay, what more respectful cops they would be.
Now I do not wish to paint all cops with the label bad, or downright evil. But more than two-thirds fall into that category. And being a bunch of cowards, they often pick on someone going about their business rather than search out those who initiate force on others. That would be dangerous. So much easier to bully John Q. Public. And it only stops when John Q. Public starts inflicting a price for their indignity.
Sadly, this is why good cops end up eating the barrel of their own gun…they joined to preserve the peace; they found out they were pawns in a den of thieves.
This hateful and nihilistic rhetoric is not the exception but the rule for those who follow the path of Anarchism, usually as a way to fullfill their selfish anti-social desires. The philosophical underpinings of the movement give ample justification for any crime the struggling revolutionary can commit in the name of “freedom.” From Anarchy.net’s Anarchy Manifesto:
The moral construct of “good” and “evil” by which society lives is a materialist notion: it is designed to protect life and property, and does not consider the intent behind or results from an action, for example the necessity of driving away destructive people or confiscating property used to pollute rivers, as in the case of a dirty factory. Morality says simply yes or no depending on whether someone dies, or had their “rights” violated, or their property was taken away. Only secondarily do moral societies pass judgment over life and property, but by the very nature of morality, they are unwilling to do so on a large enough scale to have an impact. The death penalty is futile because a murderer stands good odds of beating it, and fining large corporations for their pollution is pointless because they will almost never pay anything commensurate to the actual damage done. Morality protects life and property, including of those who by virtue of possessing both will do untold damage to the citizens, the environment, and the public goodwill.
Anarchist morality is simple: do what you will. Those who are of like minds will congregate and form their own allegiances without formalizing them and thus detaching themselves from the task of building trust, and those who act in conflict with others will eventually find their will driven away or terminated by those who have a different agenda. This means that local communities will form according to the shared values of the individual wills involved; some communities will be dedicated to crime and drug use, and other communities will be intolerant of such choices and will defend against them. It is worth noting that no central government has ever solved the problem of crime, which is almost completely eliminated in local communities where everyone knows each other and have established a communal trust and values system, against which any transgression is clear and unwanted, whether it is “legal” or “moral” – or not. You cannot make enough rules to identify every destructive act, and those acts will differ from community to community.
The truth is that some people will always do that, and while they are protected under centralized authority, they are not in anarchies and therefore cannot get away with their legal and moral but unethical and destructive acts. Anarchy is not a revolt against morality, but as with government, a decentralization of it.
The “decentralization” of morality has a name: Antinomianism. The above philosophy illustrates the worst aspects of antinomian thought, it’s at best a secularized left hand path hindered by the adherents juvenile understanding of Crowleyan Thelemic law (do what thou wilt) as spelled out in The Book of the Law and their fundamental misunderstanding of how power vacuums are filled.
At worst anarchism is the political justification for criminality. The anarchist vision of justice is one in which criminality is checked by violent retaliation by random people. The Anarchist is encouraged by inaction, which in their childish philosophy is tantamount to approval. This is why after the assault on that poor woman the anarchist themselves issued this glib statement:
We appreciate that the fear generated by the Metropolitan Police Department forced many large, corporate, exclusive stores in Georgetown to close, but recognize that the World Bank and IMF continue to force poverty on millions around the world, all the while continuing to not pay a penny in taxes to DC.
We are very pleased that many stores in the heart of Georgetown, long reviled by many longtime residents of the colony that is DC, including The GAP, American Eagle, Urban Outfitters, Banana Republic, and several cosmetics stores decided to close early Friday. Many of these stores rely on sweatshop labor, while at the same time denying their employees guaranteed rights, including the right to unionize and bargain collectively.
Georgetown has a long history, sadly not yet complete, of keeping out working class people of color. Once a separate city from Washington DC, Georgetown, at one point during the 19th century, was a haven of many recently freed slaves. However, much as low-income residents are now being pushed out of Washington, DC altogether through gentrification and the included increasing property values, poor people of color were also forced from Georgetown through “urban renewalâ€, even as early as the 1920’s.
We understand that much has been made of an unfortunate accident in which a young woman was hurt in Georgetown.
We would find it very puzzling, however, if people were more bothered by a woman unintentionally being hurt in an unfortunate accident, than by the intentional cold-blooded murder of 14 year old Deonte Rawlings, just a few shorts weeks ago, by members of the Metropolitan Police Department, right here in Washington, DC. Deonte Rawlings was shot in the back of the head, and despite police claims that he fired first at them, an autopsy revealed no gunshot residue on his entire body. Sadly, due to the color of his skin, and the fact that his murder took place in a working class community, the apparent murder of Deonte Rawlings by members of the Metropolitan Police Department has largely been ignored.
For a brief period, people in Georgetown, playing host to delegates from the IMF and World Bank, who force poverty on millions across the world, were hopefully forced to stop, if only for a second, and think about the suffering that they perpetrate, both abroad, and right here in Washington, DC, in their exclusive enclave.
The Rawlings case they mention above, the tragic death of a Black child that they use to divert attention from their own crime, involves an unsupervised 14 year old who stole a vehicle from some cops garage and later fired on the cop and his friend when they went looking for him.
As far as I have been able to discern, the woman who had her head bashed in with a brick wasn’t involved.
And tell me how likely it is that someone “accidentally” throws a brick at a window and hits a young woman with such force she needs to be hospitalized?
Again I call bullshit. One of the spoiled cretin in that protest decided to hit that woman with a brick in an attempt to injure her. Young, pretty and working in a retail store, the woman represented the “power structure” the Anarchists seek to smash, and better yet as a petite woman she was the perfect victim for the criminal element the anarchists movement attracts. Criminals seeking supportive groups that allow them to beat women, break windows and otherwise act out the violent impulses they never learned to controlled while their rich, liberal parents coddled them. They knew the woman wouldn’t be able to retaliate, so she was chosen as their victim.
But the media is buying the story that this was an “accident.” Watch this report, especially the end:
[youtube]evAmWEw4dEM[/youtube]
Protesters? Accident? No this was a terrorist attack. An act of violence disguised as politics, an urge to hurt others hidden in a Utopian message of freedom. They threatened violence prior to the march and they came through.
If these were a group of Black kids they’d be in jail now. But the police allowed the Anarchists to leave the scene of a vicious crime. This woman could have died. She still might die, brain injuries can be reamin hidden from doctors until it’s too late.
She is scarred for life, not just physically but emotionally. She’ll never feel safe at a protest of rally. And she shouldn’t. Anarchists, and the left in general are becoming more and more violent. By ignoring the enormity of this assault, this attempt to end that woman’s life with a brick, the media is complicit in encouraging further violence from the anarchists.
Because they’re of the left and of course the children of some of their rich white colleagues, the Anarchists involved in this incident will get a pass from the mainstream media who want a Democrat in the White house so bad they’ll do anything to insure that independent voters don’t get a whiff of how dangerous and evil the hard left is. That includes covering up an obvious violent crime perpetuated by these monsters on an innocent young woman by the rabble that will be campaigning for the Dem’s in 08.
I agree with Kevin Sullivan: I don’t like Anarchists.
More coverage by Jawa Report and Michelle Malkin
h/t Jawa for this telling video. Watch it and tell me you think it was an accident:
