Saturday, August 05, 2006

Anti-War Protest Attacked by Cowardly Soldier. Peaceniks Defended by Revolutionary Marxist


A personal post on activism. I would like to apologize ahead of time if this post is too personal or sounds too self aggrandizing, that is not the intention.


In a day filled with strange happenings, including the loss of my new job, the strangest event was an aggressive attack on a peaceful weekly public protest by a young soldier returned from Iraq and son of a state representative. The protests are small and comprised mainly of religiously oriented peaceniks, “anti-war Democrats” and other liberals. I attend in an attempt to raise a revolutionary opposition to imperialism in the small town where I live and to try to bring a class-struggle perspective to this small group.

On this day as the hour long march was coming to an end a young man walked passed us and proceeded down the street to where our large sign rests on the lawn of a church and proceeded to destroy it. The sign reads something like: “2,571 US dead 30,000> estimated Iraqi dead, the toll of war” these are both underestimates; especially for the Iraqi’s whose deaths probably exceed 100,000. As I saw him do this, I raced to him yelling. I think I said what the hell or fuck are you doing? Standing right in his face I berated him for destroying our sign, and infringing on our free expression and assemblage. The others in the group were all older people well over sixty (I’m thirty). The youth revealed that he was a soldier who had been in Iraq for the past year. He revealed his essentialist contempt for Semitic people has barbarous citing the bible as proof that “they have been fighting over there for ever.” I continued to confront and challenge him on his destruction of our sign t which he replied that we were dishonoring the soldiers over there, and the we should not be running our mouths over here. He said the soldiers, US soldiers, were dying for our freedom. I said they were killing Iraqi’s and oppressing them, to which he replied with a physical threat, “you’re going to get punched in a minute.” I was still inches from his face. No further violence occurred.

I continued to confront him for over half an hour, discovering that he was totally deluded about all of American history. When I said US imperialism massacred two million Vietnamese he replied but we prevented the spread of Communism, to which I responded we were continuing racist French colonial domination of oppressed people. Etc, Etc. I tld him repeatedly that he was wrong, infringing upon free speech, destroying out personal property, and supporting imperialist terror and the murder of innocent people including children.

Finally, the peace activists broke us up and we left.

He confessed that he is the son of a Michigan state representative from Midland. I now know who it is. What made his act cowardly, as I assert in the title, is that if this was a large protest, or there were a bunch of workers, construction workers, steel workers, or even local grocery workers, black, white, Latino, in other words the social strength of the multiracial working class and not just aging but dedicated peaceniks, this coward would have turned his tail and run!

The peace activists there said hey were glad I was there because they would have done nothing. This is the philosophy of the religious anti-war activists, to bear witness and to turn the other cheek. While I probably should have done more, I actively confronted this bandit for the ruling class. He felt entitled to act because of the super–patriotism and chauvinism taught to him by his reactionary family (they are religious Republicans) the reactionary churches, and the reactionary social institutions prevalent here in rural America.

I am however, proud that I defended, in front of this bigoted thug, a proletarian internationalist perspective that the main enemy was at home, that US imperialism is the greatest enemy and oppressor of the world working class, and that I support war waged by the working class against the capitalist class!

I am considering pressing formal charges but am weary of using the capitalist injustice system.

21 comments:

Renegade Eye said...

You did the right thing by confronting him, and letting the issue go this time.

James Nease said...

I don't know why you confronted him he was expressing his right to "freedom of expression" then apparently you got in some petty argument about history that was obviously polarized. "OMGZ Communism!" "NO French colonialism!"

I personally think all protests are redundant, you want something done bribe a politician, far more effective. People protest the war everyday and I always see counter protestors and I think to myself "deluded assholes"

Neither side changes any policy, infact I think I could lobe Sarin gas and for the most part it wouldn't send the masses up on some tirade against whatever ideology they are campaigning against.

I'm sorry if I'm being pessimistic, but I love war for it's economical benefits, it allows industrial capacity to flourish. I could really care less what the politics are I only care about the economics.

James Nease said...

Really, this is the only reason why I dislike the U.S, not because free speech, I personally love it. It's the bullshit partisan politics, and the ever ending struggle of Left v. Right. We either need a parliamentary system with 3rd party represenation, or perhaps one party to stop this?

But I don't suppose it's the actual country as it is people. They complain too much, make things rather difficult to get done, and over all unproductive. I suppose it's cause we as people are foolish and will get dragged into whatever promiss us glory, or against whatever we fear.

In reality we as people should be hedonists, nihilists, and utilitarians. We should do what we feel is right, what gives us pleasure embrace, and what we enjoy do not stop. We should avoid any type of "herd" mentality, there exists indviduals, and only individuals. Man should not rely on a God, a government, or a group, but should carve out what he wants and only what he wants.

What a great nation we'd be if we we're self-governing, godless, and released from "group ethics"

James Nease said...

By the way check out my new blog post:

http://capitalism-excel.blogspot.com/2006/08/sexx-laws-i-dont-mean-beck_05.html

I might be a pretentious little bastard, that visciously hounds your journal but you're okay in my book. But seriously leave me some opinions on my stance regarding "Marriage and Sex"

Nicholas said...

James sometimes I think I would rather have no posts than some of your stuff. However thanks for everybody's efforts.

James Nease said...

C'mon feel the hate! :)

cadpig said...

bravo nicoli you did the right thing even if you cant drive a bus..

cadpig said...

bravo nicoli you did the right thing even if you cant drive a bus

Nicholas said...

James if you love war for its economical benefits, have you signed up yet? Remember you need to bring your own ammo and flack jackets if you want to play.

Actually the "deluded assholes" you refer to are the brave few, especially in a small conservative town like the one I'm in, that as Trotsky says are pushing against the backward current of reaction. Yes, simple peaceful protest does little but it is a demonstration to the masses that there is opposition in this time of "the end of politics" and the vacuous imperialist policies of Dems and Reps.

What is needed and has not surfaced is of course mass protest that harnesses the power of labor, the oppressed, and even the students. If organized labor would strike against the war this would send a powerful message to the capitalist class. We are far from that happening however. The possibility for change lies in the quickly changing relations in the international system. In 1963 there were nearly no protests against the Vietnam war, three years later there were massive protests and a vibrant movement. However this movement lacked the crucial support form labor. In 1914 only two socialist parties opposed going to war. Three years later one of those parties, the Bolsheviks, were leading a revolution to end the war and imperialist capitalism. The point is in the modern epoch things can change very quickly. Do not underestimate your fellow citizens. They complain too little about the wrong things. But this situation can change very quickly

Finally I’m really shocked that you support the guy who destroyed our personal property and infringed upon our free expression, as well as made a physical threat upon me. Your stance totally violates libertarianism and indicates to me that you are simply an arch conservative and not interested in libertarianism at all. Or you just you just sat what you want and ignore your supposed philosophical commitments. You could try and give me a libertarian justification for your opposition to my liberties?

James Nease said...

He violated your property, but didn't violate your freedom. If you want to be correct the whole bill of rights only pertains to a government protecting you from being oppressed not individual citizens.

Private citizens may do as they wish as long as they don't physically harm another. Do you feel as though you we're wronged? Take him to court then in a civil case, but I'm telling you, even though he'll have to repay that $2.00 for destroying his sign, your liberty was far from being infringed.

The thing that seperates us from WWI Russia, and vietnam war is of course ideological differences. During WWI Russia was piss poor, literally they'd make nails to melt down into iron to make more nails, they we're in shambles and couldn't even afford to equip soldiers, and feed their citizens bread. Revolution occured there because there was no leadership and the country was horribly mismanaged.

Vietnam escalated with protests because the media brought it home to us. When you watch the evening news and see burn victims and a guy who's face has been shot off your opiion and praise of war changes drastically. Because the media fed to you the "ills" of war the left became organized. Just a simple case of irrate emotions is all. The war didn't end because of the protests, it ended because Nixon decided to end it for other purposes (Third world operations, a Republican victory, etc)

I severly doubt any class revolution would occur anytime soon, the lower class citizens are too spoon fed to even bother. I'll tell you something in this society if my dad made just $10,000 a year he could get the following:

- Welfare checks and food stamps
- Drastic cuts in taxes
- Free or severly reduced healthcare
- Educational benefits
- Housing favourtism and rent cuts

All these things make it incredibly easy to get by on, not only does my dad get his paycheck but he gets an extra $600 a month from the tax payer and $400 for food! Not to mention he will pay little to no tax, and all his medical bills covered by the tax payer.

So in esscence because he makes just a little less, something that I KNOW we can live off of he gets to take a huge chunk of upper America's revenue. Now you tell me how this is fair to some Doctor who worked hard for his education only to be audited every year by the IRS and hbas to sell his new car to pay for his housing mortgage?

It's not fair at all! It doesn't just effect the rich, this rolls down to the middle class, because the taxes are so strenuous the middle class feels the economic impact through unemployment (which you get checks for later, further hurting the chances of higher America) and increase in goods.

So in esscence it's poor people who are causing economic stress not the "upper class" this is why a workers revolution will not occur. BEcause worker's are not considered poor and if they we're they'd make more being on a welfare system than actually working...

Welcome to a Keynesian Democracy!

James Nease said...

As for the "James if you love war for its economical benefits, have you signed up yet?" I will be attending OCS sometime after my law education. To serve in the U.S Navy for a short time before moving on to my own business. The Navy would give me experience for legal proceedings and how to manage people to better suit me later on.

So infact I will be signing up in the future.

Nicholas said...

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/social-welfare-spending04/summary.htm

Sorry to burst your delusional anti-poor tirade bubble, but if you look at real evidence then one will clearly see that direct assistance to the poor is no more that about 20.7 billion a year (as of 2000) including the already greatly slashed programs SSI and AFDC. The vast majority of spending goes to paying for public hospitals (and Doctors and Nurses salaries) the welfare institutional support structure, and Medicaid. Furthermore one might mention that as a result of the overall net negative effect of poverty on a persons health including things such as asbestos exposure, lead paint, lead pipes, poor nutrition, malnutrition, reduced access to quality medical care etc. that the numbers spent on Medicaid for the poor are probably unnaturally high given the worse conditions for the poor.

Not a whole lot of casualties coming out of the Navy I hear. Nice to hear you use people for your own self-interest.

Kai! said...

Don't mind James, he just likes to disagree.

Nice article. I wouldn't bother pressing charges. You'll lose. He's the son of a rep., so the law is on his side.

James Nease said...

Your trusting the governments word on the actual usages of spending? I guarentee private firms would have a differing opinion. For one the governments going to sugar coat it going "Hey look we did this!" despite it's failing.

Government has done that for years to tell you the truth.

I'm not "anti-poor" I'm anti-tax, anti-welfare, and anti-state. Welfare welcomes all three of those and makes their influence grow. It makes a very statist type of economy which is ideal for your social beliefs.

But seriusly can we just debate the mathematics of economics without going into a political and social battle. I want to debate aggregate demand and utility without someone going "But the poor..." or "Rich people have..." I could care less about social and political things.

Don't socialists exploit people too? Oh wait the rich arn't people "They're monsters who suck the life out of children!" I'm sorry I thought you exploited the tax system!

Nicholas said...

This is childish. I give you reputable, non-socialist leaning evidence then you say “oh you can’t trust that.” You cannot have it both ways. No we can’t just debate the mathematics of economics because first, that not what this post was about, and second you have no mathematics, and don’t go running to your book to find some equation and try to start a debate on it, that would really get ridiculous.

I think I said it somewhere that politics and economics are nearly inseparable. The cool calculation of Malthus’s economics was done while people died of dysentery outside in the street (colorful illustration).

No one should be exploited under socialism, even the rich. The Manifesto, which you love, clearly states that the rich should be taxed out of existence.

James Nease said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
James Nease said...

The Manifesto also states the abridgement to liberty! Last time I checked Marx wasn't exactly a poster boy for liberalism. Like I told Kai, if he we're alive today somehow we brought him back he'd be on the far right. He would have been anti-same sex marriage, anti-stem cell research, anti-alternative fuel, anti-abortion the list goes on!

Because he essentially was a writer from the enlightenment period his views are very, very outdated. I'm a capitalist and we don't even use Adam Smith anymore no self-respecting person would. Yes it lays fundamentals but to make a whole movement over it would be like me wearing pantaloons, and arguing with the British over tax representation.

I will never submit to a Marxist doctrine because it's anti-liberty and frankly I don't like using rights, I don't like centralization, and I don't like to be told what do by a collective.

Name one part of social liberalization from Marx's writing? Name one great social change that leads to happiness and personal freedom of all people. It doesn't, it only talks about the removal of classes, the implementation of revolution, and the centralization of an economy. In all honesty the book only differs from Mein Kampf, in terms of economic ideology.

No man, woman, or child should be told what to do by a state, or any group of people. You should have sovereign rights over yourself and you should have the freedom to buy what you like. Your society doesn't provide that, your society would much rather have guards with guns in stores as to make sure I can't buy no more than X amount of groceries.

I can't question your form of government; despite it's in my individual rights any threat to the socialist state would be dealt with by my execution. In all truth the socialist state is neither, fair or just, it only is corrupted.

You can spout all this wonderful stuff helping the poor, feeding the hungry, making the world a better place. You know what? Mother Teresa did that by herself and was renowned across the world, she didn't need a government to cure injustice, one individual made a difference and you want to take away individualism?

The thing is socialism in full aspect is a guise, it promises everything in a truly utopian aspect but it cannot deliver. It begins in revolution (an act of force of an ideology) and that force becomes an autocratic state. It may not be headed by a dictator, but the mass abridgement in freedoms, socially and economically make it a very unpleasant system to live in. Unless of course your the socialist parties eye candy, the people it can show off to the rest of the world as "Hey, look at this!" when millions more are dying from failure to properly maintain agriculture.

Your party’s poster child will get all these benefits, all these wondrous government aids, yet the people who are not worker are left to be killed off by taxation or the bullet from a gun.

You as an individual can't stop it gun ownership is private so they therefore take that away. Why? Not because it's essentially private or it's harmful, the removal of ones arms stops them from a counter-revolution it keeps the socialist state alive, and by fear and force the socialist state can last years.

Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.
- Joseph Stalin


One man with a gun can control 100 without one.
- Vladimir Lenin

The theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
- Karl Marx

These quotes all sum up socialist mentality, it's not about freedom far from it, it's about control, and the spread of one's ideology. If a socialist came to power and he had control of the ENTIRE military and he destroyed the fundamentals of private ownership. He has full control over your society, you can't stop him god forbid you try and he runs a tank over you.

The decimation of individual rights, including the right to private ownership is not only anti-liberal but it's really foolish. Private ownership is the only thing that prevents a state from exerting full control over it's civilians, it's the only think that prevents a feudal like system, it's the only thing that allows people to lay their head in comfort without fear of the government watching them, kicking down their door and coming and going as they please.

And you want to eliminate this?

James Nease said...

It's Keynesian in all aspects so the data you gave me WAS socialist leaning. Secondly it's from the government, and one should never trust the government on anything. It's the emodiment of oppression and suffering.

Nicholas said...

Again, silly. I'll get back later, I'm so uninterested in what you said. Stop spamming me, one post, sum up all your thoughts.

James Nease said...

It's not spam I don't use the same material over and over. If that's the case your little "protest" is spam because your arguing case and point the same thing being argued else where.

Besides I have unlimited freedom to the tip of my nose, yeah you can probably block me, but wouldn't that be authority silencing the dissident? I cause no harm infact everything I say here is non-physical so I don't see how it's harming your blog.

I'd personally love for someone to spam the shit out of my blog, mostly because I love arguing. Doesn't matter what you believe in I'll try my damnest to defeat and one up you. It's like a sport!

Phillip Gioan said...

I'm just a random internet viewer. I've enjoyed your blog so far. I've bookmarked it, and I'm planning on reading the rest of it soon. It has been very interesting so far. Don't bother with James' diatribes. All of his hogwash has been torn apart years ago. His remarks about Marx are Ahistorical and baseless.

Anyway, I'm glad to see other Marxists who live in small towns out there engaging. It gives me hope. That guy who tore your sign is a macho prick.

All the best,
Phill Gioan
Phillipjosephgioan@gmail.com