With that being said, anyone can use the term anarchist. However, a person who calls themselves an anarchist should understand that anarchism and libertarianism weren’t concepts that were cooked up in some post World War II lab by Rothbard, Mises or David Friedman. The first people who called themselves libertarians were socialists. The first person who called himself an anarchist was P.J. Proudhon. Proudhon (who is connected to Mutualist economic theory) was explicitly anti-capitalist and asked the question “what is property.” His answer: “property is theft.” The American anarchist Benjamin Tucker called his ideas “anarchistic socialism.” So if you are trying to infer that my ideas aren’t aligned with the cool kids, then you need to review your anarchist history.

But back to property. If you have only read Rothbard, Hayek, Friedman (David or Milton) Hazlitt or Rand (god help you), then I can understand why my comments have confused you. So I would suggest that you look further back in history. Google “the enclosure movement” to get a feel for why some people believe the current form of private property accumulation is unjust. Also, read about the concept of “wage slavery.”

Private property as we now know it could not exist without the assistance and the coercive force of the state that right-libertarians claim to fear. In the absence of the state, I believe that capitalists would have to rely on extreme violence to keep “their piece of the pie.” In pointing this out, I am not objecting to personal possession and I am damn sure not advocating state socialism.

If you want to be an “an-cap,” that is your right. In the anarchist society that I envision, no one would interfere if you wanted to set up an “an-cap” community (some floating man made island or gated community, no doubt). But I would not allow you to employ me and I would also reserve the right to boycott your goods and try to persuade your workers (“wage slaves”) to organize. If you responded with repression of those workers, you would prove my point that “anarcho” capitalism would just lead to the formation of a private state composed of a few wealthy capitalists, a repressive private security force (to keep the wage slaves in line) and a lot of downtrodden workers. I think that the “company towns” of old, unfortunately, are examples of what would happen in an “an-cap” community. And when the “an-caps” showed their true colors, they would sow the seeds of their own destruction. No commie coercion required.

Or perhaps the an-caps and agorists and every other breed of anarchist who respect the reality of territoriality and property rights just aren’t true enough Scotsmen for your tastes.

Oh dear. Another devastating attack on a Starbucks? Oh how will this downtrodden multinational recover?

Look roadgeek, I generally don’t endorse property destruction, but let me introduce you to an anarchist concept: there is a difference between private (capitalist) property and possession (as in personal possessions). As far as I know, the businesses targeted during these uprisings would fall under the category of capitalist private property. Furthermore, the property damaged generally belongs to a very large corporation, not a small, locally owned coffee shop. When this tactic is used, it is usually done for symbolic reasons, though I’m sure a few looters get into the mix from time to time. The message behind this tactic is that the private property in question is illegitimate, because it is a product of an illegitimate state capitalist system.

Delicateorc (#7) suggests that the owners of the businesses should defend their property. Well, he’s on the right track, but this doesn’t happen. Capitalist firms will always fall back on the coercive apparatus of the state to defend their property rights against the rabble. Just like they would call in the police if you or I decided to start a sit down strike inside our workplaces to fight for better conditions. Again, the property being attacked is, to the best of my knowledge, not owned by individual owners or workers. If this was the case, I would share your anger. The owners of the property being attacked by “black block” practitioners is owned by the state-created, state-supported, legal fictions we know as corporations. Sometimes when you benefit mightily from a system of exploitation, people aren’t going to like you that much.

The way our home town police departments gear up for crowd control only serves to expose the polictians and their benefactors as the frightened little people they truly are.

If enough peaceful people pressure is applied in just the right spots these criminals operating under the guise of law (our government) will fold like cheap lawn furniture.

Accountability is the word of the day at the federal, state and local levels of government.

“There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part; you can’t even passively take part, and you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop. And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!” ~ Mario Savio

I had thought it was against the law to deploy soldiers for internal police work but surely at some point the police become another branch of the military.

Seems like the police are trying to impersonate elite military personnel……

The famous law prof “Never talk to the police” video was the key. There are so many laws that nobody has a hope in hell of knowing even 30% of them. In court, anything you tell a cop that helps *your* case cannot be used – hearsay – but anything you tell a cop that might hurt you MUST be used. Even telling a cop a “truthful response of an innocent witness” could end up with “providing [the prosecution] with incriminating evidence from the speaker’s own mouth.” (USSC Ohio v. Reiner, 2001).

In this stupid-ass society conceived and ruined by the fucking lawyers, EVERYthing you do or say can end up with you being charged/prosecuted for one ‘crime’ or another. Thus, like it or not, you’re _ALWAYS_ on trial. Thus, you’re *always* testifying any time you talk to any cop, or worse, a federal agent. (It’s a felony to tell a lie to a govt agent. ANY govt agent: park ranger, IRS asshole, mailman…)(And they get to define the lie. So if they grab you and say “You sold stock via inside information!” and you protest “Did not!!” and a jury decides you did, you’re also guilty of “lying to a federal agent”. Ask Martha Stewart.) So if you’re always on trial, always testifying, your best – only, really – defense is to…not say anything, because literally anything can incriminate you. 5th amendment, baby. All day every day.

And the beautiful thing is YOU get to decide if something “might” “possibly” incriminate you, so YOU get to just go with the assumption that ‘anything might’, and never ever ever talk to law enforcement w/out a lawyer. Cops are scum, but they’re still _American_ scum, so this applies to them too, more’s the pity. Being in the business, they damn well know that. So until the law and/or Constitution changes, (and it will: police states have no use for a 5th amendment), do what the pros do: keep your mouth shut any time you even *suspect* an LEO might be anywhere nearby. They won’t like it. Too bad. They’ll lie and tell you….anything they think might convince you. Ignore ‘em: if their mouths are moving, odds are they’re lying. They’ll threaten to charge you with “obstruction”. They won’t, anymore than they’ll ever fire their tanks or open up with their .50′s.

They’re using the system as cover, because the Constitution says they can. So should you.

I’d also add the same question to roadgeek, but with qualification: show me the rampage then can you show where all the protesters were on a rampage? That was a dodge used by Bull Connor, as well those cops that nailed the dancing kid (the horse kicker) because, well, you know, other college students were doing bad things somewhere else at the same time so…. Oddly, the video didn’t support their case even after their management did the “other college students” crap.

Bob: I share your outrage except when it’s a violation of “policy and procedure” because by contract that starts administratively, a job issue, rather than criminally. Otherwise, yeah, the LEOs accused of X crime, for which we get locked up as soon as they think they have a modicum of proof, but LEO gets to stay home with pay or no pay and 2,3, even 6 months later they finally lock him up is disgusting. However, they had to make absolutely sure for the LEO don’t you know. For you or me, not so much.

(Police Chief) Welter would not say what led the officer to shoot Diaz, citing an independent investigation by the county’s district attorney office. Police said Diaz was a known gang member.

Mayor Tom Tait said he will ask the state attorney general to assist in the probe.

“Transparency is essential. Whatever the truth is, we will own it,” Tait said.

Really? Perhaps you should tell your Police Chief that “Transparency is essential”… because he obviously doesn’t think so.

If you or I chased someone, possible gang member or not, down an alley and shot him to death… I’m PRETTY SURE that we would be questioned without mercy until we invoked the lawyer.

The police, on the other hand… should NOT have this ‘protection’ while on duty. This whole “Well, we’re investigating it” dodge is crap!

If your JOB is to carry a gun and investigate crimes, then you shouldn’t be able to say “Wait! I have miranda rights! I want my lawyer!” when you claim to be executing those duties. You get a lawyer AFTER you’re arrested just like the rest us, bitch! Before then, you need to explain yourself.