So-Called Australia: More Information On A May Day Call-Out

From the 1m Collective:

As part of our call-out for an Anti-Capitalist May Day we would like to provide some information about an event we will be holding, as well as some general information and ideas surrounding the initial call-out.

We are an initiative made up of various individuals who are working towards organising an Anti-Capitalist themed May Day event in Armidale, which is situated on Anaiwan land (an area in so-called Australia). The aim of the event will be to bring people together to hold discussions on our conditions and experiences as workers; to devise strategies for improving our lives; and to build support for all sectors in struggle, whether worker, unemployed, local or refugee.

Our initial call-out was a general call to action, and for those who would wish to, or are interested in, an encouragement to organise their own events wherever they are. Here, in so-called Australia, yearly we see a sombre march made up of political parties, bureaucratic trade-unions walking the same set-out route with no feeling, inspiration, or general opposition to the status-quo. What is worse, is that at the end, it usually culminates in a speech from a labor party leader.

Continue reading

Cameras Everywhere, Safety Nowhere: Why Police Body Cameras Won’t Make Us Safer

From crimethinc:

We know that police violence is a real problem in the US, and it makes sense that people are strategizing ways to protect themselves and their loved ones from being assaulted or murdered by the police. Many who are concerned about this issue have begun advocating for police to wear video cameras on their uniforms. The idea is that cameras will prevent police violence, or at least hold officers accountable after the fact. Groups like Campaign Zero (a reformist Black Lives Matter offshoot) and the American Civil Liberties Union are advocating this measure, and even police departments themselves, after initial resistance, have signed on. But the idea that more cameras translates to better accountability (however we define this) relies on a faulty premise. Police get away with murder not because we don’t see it, but because they’re part of a larger system that tells them it’s reasonable to kill people. From lawmakers, judges, and prosecutors to juries, citizens, and the media, every level of society uncritically supports and transmits the police point of view. In this atmosphere, police can murder with no fear of repercussions.

Advocates of police-worn body cameras, as well as advocates of bystanders filming the police, constantly claim that cameras act as equalizers between police and people, that they are tools for accountability. But there is very little evidence to support this. Many assume visibility will bring accountability—but what does accountability even look like when it comes to police violence? If charges are all that police reformers would demand, where do they go when those charges end in verdicts of innocence or mistrial, as they almost inevitably do? Do they just go home and revel in the process of the justice system? Or are there other options situated outside official channels? The reality is that we don’t have a visibility problem but a political problem. The only “accountability” we see seems to be in occasional monetary settlements (paid by taxpayers). These settlements don’t hold officers accountable, or prevent future assaults and murders.

Though initially hesitant to adopt body cameras, police departments and officers quickly changed their tune as they realized that cameras benefit them far more than they benefit the general public under surveillance. We now have 4000 police departments in the US that employ body cameras, including the two largest, Chicago PD and NYPD, no strangers to inflicting violence on people and getting away with it. The largest marketer of officer-worn body cams, the leader in a $1 billion per year industry, is Taser Inc. After creating their namesake product, which was used to kill at least 500 people between 2001 and 2012, Taser started adding cameras to their stun guns in 2006, and introduced the body-worn camera in 2008. Since this introduction, their stock value has risen ten times higher. This was in no small part helped by grants from Obama’s Justice Department, which spent $19.3 million to purchase 50,000 body cameras for law enforcement agencies. Taser has since introduced a cloud storage service marketed to police forces (yes, a privately owned evidence storage service), proposed manufacturing drones with stun guns (and of course, cameras) attached to them, and recently bought the company Dextro, which has developed software to identify and index faces and specific objects.

Continue reading

Chile: Pacification And Revolt Concerning ‘International Women’s Day’- An Anarchic Reflection

From Insurrection New Worldwide:

When we realize the authoritarian and patriarchal nature of present-day society, we understand genders as impositions through which individuals are forced to play certain roles within the network of domination.

Certainly, this society continues to impose on those who are born as ‘women’ an inferior position to those born as ‘men’. This is why every March 8, when the ‘International Women’s Day’ is commemorated, many people, mostly women, take to the streets to express their discontent at this situation of inequality.

The most well-known historical commemoration of March 8 are the events that occurred on that day in 1908, when 146 women workers at a cotton factory in New York were burned to death in a fire caused by the bosses after the workers refused to end their sit-in protest against low wages and the infamous work conditions that they were suffering under.

Continue reading

Montreal Counter-information is now a publication!

Below you will find some information regarding Montreal Counter-Information’s new publication:

From Montreal Counter-Info:

[For reading]
[For printing, 11”x17”]
[Poster center-fold, 11”x17” (optional)]

The first issue collects content from the last two years. Future issues will be released every several months, to keep the material timely. For those with free access to colour printers, we’ve included a center-fold of 24 posters that can be attached with an elastic.

You can get copies at La Deferle and L’Insoumise. If you’d like more copies for distribution, please get in touch! If you live outside Montreal and don’t have access to free printing, we’re down to print some for you if you can pay for shipping (and if you can’t afford shipping, still get in touch and we’ll try to figure something out).

Can’t stop, won’t stop
Montreal Counter-info

Don’t Compete, Resist!

The economic and political systems we are born into and forced to live under – government (the State) and capitalism – continues to function not because it is effective or efficient, or because it is a just and equal system, but because of the various tools at its disposal which it uses to keep us in various states of fear, confusion, insecurity, anxiety, isolation and competition.

Without choice or knowledge of other ways to organise life, as these possibilities are always slandered and painted as unrealistic, the vast majority of us become indoctrinated into life under State and capital at the earliest possible moment, and from then on become increasingly infected with its isolated, individualised outlook through a combination of both fear and competition. This is reinforced over and over again, for example in the misrepresented statement “survival of the fittest” as one where a human has to compete against a human for survival, rather than work together to ensure survival against the difficulties we all are posed with.

And so it continues: in countless ways we are divided and driven to compete with one another, whether through school, the job market, housing etc. We are all driven to compete in obvious and not so obvious ways.

By and large, we are all encouraged to compete with everybody else, whether to get “better” marks, “better” jobs, “better” pay. We are encouraged to disregard the fact that we are actually more or less social by nature; that we are equal and free, and should be able to freely work and live together and not be pitted against one another for survival; that a selection of people do not have the right to secure all the resources of survival for themselves while forcing others to work in order to be able to pay for those same resources; that a selection of people are not more equipped to control your life, than you are to control your own.

Continue reading

Left v Right… Nope, Freedom!

Everywhere and always, the possibility of combative autonomous self-organisation scares those in power, and those waiting to take power.

Whether it be the governments of Liberal or Labor; Greens or One Nation, the aim is always the same, even though the approach taken may differ slightly.

Ultimately the goal is to demonise collective acts of resistance and refusal by everyday people, allowing the government of the day to uphold the legitimacy of the State and attack those that fall -or begin to fall- outside of their control.

To achieve this, the pillars of government and the media make use of all the power and authority at their disposal to set about demonising not just ideas, groups or organisations, but moreover tactics – this is the real goal of the apparatuses of control. Because when it is possible to make evil and wrong the choice to resist, it means that the State can do anything.

So when the poor and workers begin to recognise all the tools at their disposal; just when people all across the world start to take seriously blockading, rioting, occupying and a diverse range of tactics of counter-attack and self-defence, there is predictably by the State, either of the Left or the Right; by the media and the union leaders; by the pacifiers and progressives, condemnation of these tactics.

Continue reading

Frequently Asked Questions about Anarchism

From crimethinc:

What about human nature? Don’t we need laws and police and other authoritarian institutions to protect us from people with ill intent?

If human beings are not good enough to do without authority, why should they be trusted with it?

Or, if human nature is changeable, why should we seek to make people obedient rather than responsible, servile rather than independent, craven rather than courageous?

Or, if the idea is that some people will always need to be ruled, how can we be sure that it will be the right ones ruling, since the best people are the most hesitant to hold power and the worst people are the most eager for it?

The existence of government and other hierarchies does not protect us; it enables those of ill intent to do more damage than they could otherwise. The question itself is ahistorical: hierarchies were not invented by egalitarian societies seeking to protect themselves against evildoers. Rather, hierarchies are the result of evildoers seizing power and formalizing it. (Where did you think kings came from?) Any generalization we could make about “human nature” in the resulting conditions is sure to be skewed.

Continue reading