The Tragic Dance with Violence

Many Anarchists I know are straight Pacifists, and more power to them. They would sooner "fight" the system by indulging in counter-economics, squatting, sabotage and a straight rejection of our Capitalist economy. Still, many other Anarchists I know are just as ready to respond to State violence with more extreme measures as they are to practicing these other forms of dissent. This leads me to the question--

--Can we humans ever escape from the adhesive web of violence pressed against us at all times?--


My answer is yes. Of course, given time, we human-beings can develop into a race of creatures able to avoid violence altogether. The second question is--How long is this gonna take?

To that question, I really don't have an answer. Theoretically, we could reach that utopian point of not needing physical violence (or the threat of violence) at all, but will we not nuke ourselves first? Can we avoid self-destruction due to our violent nature taught by our parents? Hopefully, yes.

What you can do now as an Anarchist to "fight" against violence is to not participate in it. Though I advocate police-confrontation and aggressive protest techniques, there is nothing more embarrassing to those minions of the State than to see their efforts to hurt us be reciprocated with acceptance. This is why non-violent protest tactics work all the time, and why violent protest tactics only work some of the time. It is a very dualistic topic for me--I see the good and bad in both methods, and I fully respect both. Let me dissect a bit.

Non-Violent Methodology and Tactics:

--This way of protesting and speaking out against the State most complies with our philosophy of peace and harmony. We can practice what we preach to the 'n'th degree this way.
--Non-Violence can, in most cases, direct more aggressive feelings towards authority figures than reciprocal violence can, especially when coupled with any sort of media attention. Think about it yourself--when I saw those Buddhist Monks being caned and brutalized by Chinese Police, the thoughts running through my mind were, "How can they do that?! They're not fighting back, they're peacefully protesting!"
--We can more concretely display our resolve to our cause this way. You would agree with me that it takes dedication to not respond to violence with violence, wouldn't you? To me, that would be a show of resolve and reliance upon our ideology, and this goes in tow with the above.
--Not everyone has the mindset to go on the attack. To assume that all Anarchists are chomping at the bit to toss molotovs and boot police in the head would be a broad over-generalization. Many Anarchists would be content to forget all about protests and sabotage and just go about living a different way. Don't forget about these people, warriors in their own right.

Violent (Aggressive) Protest Tactics:

--Anarchy is about loving yourself, and protecting yourself, your fellow humans, and your freedom. Responding with force is acceptable to me, in extreme circumstances, although not as a first choice.
--Private Property and the pawns of the State wreak unspeakable amounts of literal and technical violence against the people daily, and that goes for everyone enduring the ramifications of our economic policy overseas too. This reactionary violence we incur seems like a drop in the pan when compared to the havoc and anguish that our task-masters have inflicted on others before us.



I'm not trying to justify violence here. to be frank, I hate it, and it is reviled by Anarchists as a whole (if I may generalize). All I'm saying is that through a Diverse Array of Tactics we can more effectively dismantle the State, and that means using violence AND non-violence.


PEACE and love to all my brothers and sisters--

Wrench