cover photo

Manuel

manuel-jf@hub.zilla.tech

Sine ira et studio

 Zotlandia last edited: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 08:05:46 +0200  
Stephan MausStephan Maus wrote the following post Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:28:54 +0200
"Vive la ZAD!"
ZADistes of All Countries, Unite!
Solidarity from Hambourg, Germany.
Image/photo
#zad

 Zotlandia last edited: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 14:25:40 +0200  
A very intresting reading.

What is violence? Who gets to define it? Does it have a place in the pursuit of liberation? This discussion never takes place on a level playing field.


The Illegitimacy of Violence,  the Violence of Legitimacy

Image/photo

What is violence? Who gets to define it? Does it have a place in the pursuit of liberation? These age-old questions have returned to the fore during the Occupy movement. But this discussion never takes place on a level playing field; while some delegitimize violence, the language of legitimacy itself paves the way for the authorities to employ it. [You can listen to an audio version of this text here.]

    “Though lines of police on horses, and with dogs, charged the main street outside the police station to push rioters back, there were significant pockets of violence which they could not reach.”

    – The New York Times, on the UK riots of August 2011


During the 2001 FTAA summit in Quebec City, one newspaper famously reported that violence erupted when protesters began throwing tear gas canisters back at the lines of riot police. When the authorities are perceived to have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, “violence” is often used to denote illegitimate use of force—anything that interrupts or escapes their control. This makes the term something of a floating signifier, since it is also understood to mean “harm or threat that violates consent.”
  
Buenísimo, @Manuel , si hasta lo he tenido que ir traduciendo en el DeepL sin parar de leer :laughing: . Tengo mis reticencias a algunos conceptos que plantea (y que explico un poco abajo, pero no le doy demasiada trascendencia), pero las ideas de las que parte y el enfrentamiento absurdo casi siempre entre dos formas de entender la lucha lo que favorece es al poder establecido. Gracias por compartir, aunque lo mismo me echan del curro por dedicarme a traducir articulitos :-).

Creo que es un poco confuso al referirse a conceptos imposibles de definir de manera global. De hecho, en movimientos en los que he militado de toda la vida y dentro de colectivos concretos antimilitaristas la mayoría de los actos que se nombran en el artículo como violentos nunca los consideramos tales, como protegerse, no dejarse arrestar, taparse la cara, gritar, hacer escudos o encadenamientos... Lo mismo al hablar de legítimo e ilegítimo o emplear el término libertad, por mucho que se trate de explicar el contexto. Se sigue asociando noviolencia con pasividad, algo común en muchos círculos, de manera particular, en las artículos y ensayos críticos que he leído de autores estadounidenses.

Pero isisto, el artículo me parece buenísimo y creo que todos los movimientos sociales que luchan de la manera que consideran mejor por derrocar el capitalismo, deberían leerlo con cariño y actitud autocrítica :-).
  
Related to the latest eviction effords by france against la #ZAD

"#ZAD would never be possible without defence. If you're stimatizing militant actions, pls keep in mind, that 'your' #pacifism is propably based on a unconsistend phillosophy of privilidged people externalizing the use of violence through instututions that are in power - creating for them the legitimacy of violence and for others violence of illegetimacy.

pacifism is mostly nothing but a unreflected lie. Supporting structural violent opression can't be pacifsm."

*note I'm all for disruptive creative protest that avoids violence against beings. But not by any means as pacifists claim of doing. If someone is an opressor I prefer to stop them. Like imagine there's a dog biting a children. I'm not going into the situation asking if the dog could pls stop, I'll take direct action and try to stop it, with less violence as possible.