Effective 'resistance' versus pointless rioting?

[billyriot]

The problem with "pointless rioting" is that people are trying to make a point and they want to show what they are demanding, but they go about it in all the wrong ways. Not to say I condemn senseless property damage nor do I openly advocate it, but if you're going to support Direct Action, make it clear to yourself and to the people who you are trying to help, that you are here (or there) for the benefit of the community.

coldsteelrail put it best, as far as I've read in this thread; to bring about change either in your community or elsewhere, provide ways to change the things around you. Food Not Bombs, Homes Not Jails, PPL, etc. Now, I'm not telling anyone that they have to support any organization to effectively resist the society we live in; but if you claim to practice an anarchistic school of thought, apply it! Instead of smashing windows and looting (worst tactic ever, mind you; we're intelligent, at least some of us, so act like it!), give them an opportunity to see that we're more than a bunch of hoodlums trying to dismantle things we can use to our advantage. Or better yet, to the advantage of our community.

 

[Benny]

Passive protesting doesn't change a much. Martin Luther Kings movement gave more civil rights to the blacks but they are still enslaved to the wealthy banks and corrupt government like the rest of us. Ghandi got more rights for the indians but they are still in utter poverty.

Until the Federal Reserve quits making us pay interest on there phony money, nothing will ever get better. What do banks do.....suck the money out of you.

The founders of this country didn't wave signs at the British and protest.

 

[3rdEyeVision]

I can't find the video clip of this specific part, but I think George Carlin has some pretty fuckin' flawless logic. This is the audio taken from his "Life is worth Losing" performance.

 

[wokofshame]

To the contrary, the founders of the country did hold protests. Like the tea party deal. They just eventually decided they needed to take more radical measures.

 

[Benny]

To the contrary, the founders of the country did hold protests. Like the tea party deal. They just eventually decided they needed to take more radical measures.

Yeah you're right, they did protest for a bit. My point was that they didn't wave signs for awhile and give up when they got bored. They got pissed off and attacked the British oppressors with their guns.

 

[travelin]

the actual spark that started the whole shooting match was a government attempt at gun control. the concord/lexington battle was centered around british troops marcing to sieze an arsenal.

the thing that made it noteworthy is that these british troops were not the best trained and disclipined and they were badly understrangth from their on-paper numbers. the fact that they held together well enough to actually march back to boston in some semblence of order is amazing.

they took heavy casualties from the minute men pulling hit and runs while they were marching. the officers commanding the british force did not know how to counter this type of tactic having only been trained in european style open field battle with large units facing each other.

the minutemen relied on individual initiative and in this battle they proved it could work.

later on just about every time american rebel forces faced the british in open field battle, they would break and run.

the winter at valley forge baron von steubon attempted to train the american forces to load and fire and stand in open field battle but he quickly realized that he could not bring the american up to anywhere close to the british levels.

the british could walk right up to you, stop, fire, load, fire and then fix bayonets and walk right into you. they could do this under fire without breaking and running.

it is a little known fact that the british bayonet charge was usually performed at a quick step which was 120 steps a minute. this is just about the pace of a brisk walk. there was no running charge, they would just walk right into you with muskets leveled and those long long bayonets would do their deathdealing.

a video of this is available from the movie "barry lyndon". it shows a british force just walking right into french infantry, taking casualties, closing ranks and they just keep on coming. unfortunatly it cuts away from the battle action to follow the commander just at the crucial moment where the british troops would have stopped and fired.

once again ive made a rambling post that really has nothing to do with the subject except in a vague way...

 

[3rdEyeVision]

the actual spark that started the whole shooting match was a government attempt at gun control. the concord/lexington battle was centered around british troops marcing to sieze an arsenal.

the thing that made it noteworthy is that these british troops were not the best trained and disclipined and they were badly understrangth from their on-paper numbers. the fact that they held together well enough to actually march back to boston in some semblence of order is amazing.

they took heavy casualties from the minute men pulling hit and runs while they were marching. the officers commanding the british force did not know how to counter this type of tactic having only been trained in european style open field battle with large units facing each other.

the minutemen relied on individual initiative and in this battle they proved it could work.

later on just about every time american rebel forces faced the british in open field battle, they would break and run.

the winter at valley forge baron von steubon attempted to train the american forces to load and fire and stand in open field battle but he quickly realized that he could not bring the american up to anywhere close to the british levels.

the british could walk right up to you, stop, fire, load, fire and then fix bayonets and walk right into you. they could do this under fire without breaking and running.

it is a little known fact that the british bayonet charge was usually performed at a quick step which was 120 steps a minute. this is just about the pace of a brisk walk. there was no running charge, they would just walk right into you with muskets leveled and those long long bayonets would do their deathdealing.

a video of this is available from the movie "barry lyndon". it shows a british force just walking right into french infantry, taking casualties, closing ranks and they just keep on coming. unfortunatly it cuts away from the battle action to follow the commander just at the crucial moment where the british troops would have stopped and fired.

once again ive made a rambling post that really has nothing to do with the subject except in a vague way...

I'll even go more off track to state my belief that these shootings like the movie theatre incident recently are all cia ops staged strategically for gun control and probably even more shit.