Live-tweeting thread of a talk by Vicky Osterweil, author of In Defense of Looting
https://twitter.com/reproutopia/status/1361815511164719106
That is @vicky_ACAB ...
A commitment to a diversity of tactics doesn't mean that "anything goes." That is a slur of reactionary non-violence.
Commitment to nonviolence doesn't actually tell you much about the person's other political commitments. Gandhi's nonviolence was associated with misogyny and racism.
Contrasted with the nonviolence of MLK. Nonviolence proved an effective tactic within very specific, complex historical conditions. The nonviolence label is also sometimes an exaggeration, e.g. MLK's armed guards were an obvious pragmatic necessity.
From Charles E. Cobb Jr.'s This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed 
"Until we commit ourselves to ensuring that the underclass is given justice and opportunity, we will continue to perpetuate the anger and violence that tears the soul of this nation. I fear I am integrating my people into a burning house." MLK
Challenging the narrative that the violent turn was what took the wind out of the movement in the late 60s. All but most radical of white middle-class antiwar movement failed to see anti-Vietnam dimension of Watts the riots, and failed to form unity. Watts seen as a “race thing.”
Vicky pointing out the significance of violent resistance of US soldiers (killing officers). But also emphasises that military-style conflict must not be fetishized (as it disastrously often has) as the most or only serious revolutionary activity
& a lot going on in the Q&A, but one important point is to understand that "not nonviolence" does not have to mean a militarised vanguard seizing the state apparatus. To conflate these two things severely restricts the scope of tactics and possibilities
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
