Anarchist Riot in Greece

Kakugo:

Back when I was studying at the university there was a strong Greek community there; I even shared my dorm with some of them at a time so I learnt a little about them and their country. What can I say? This "outburst" was just waiting to happen.

The country is pretty much bankrupt, ruined by poor (by any standards) economic choices and irresponsible (again by any standard) government spending. The still-ongoing armament race with Turkey and the 2004 Olympics are perceived by many as the final nails in the coffin. Young people have few choices: Athens is not London or Berlin, finding a job is not so easy. The brightest and the better educated either flee the country or have to line up after the "recommended" to get a decent job: not everybody wants to spend the rest of his life working in a kiosk, living on welfare or selling souvenirs in the Plakas. Ever since the Euro was introduced prices have soared while salaries have increased little; trying to appease the Euro-nutters in Bruxelles by force is draining the country of the precious little energies it has left.

In such conditions it's natural to expect that somebody will get so desperate and angry as to riot. It pretty much the same situation France has in her banlieus : desperation, hopelessness, misery... the State is able to keep things (barely) under control by using an admixture of strength and promises but when an extraordinary event happens the bomb will explode. Of course being very localized events it is easy for the State-run medias to blame everything on "vandals", "anarchists" etc, it's easy to scare the rest of the population into thinking that the protestors should be dealt with quickly and brutally since they are the "bad guys". Divide et impera: has something changed? 

 

Wow things sound pretty bad in Grecce. Just out of curiosity, is Grecce a social democracy? 

Good, I hope the riot spreads. mwaha

These are the people that some would suppose we should ally with.

Some people seem to have a very poor sense of cause and effect. The policemen aren't necessarily the problem. The state is, it's the state who arrogate themselves a monopoly on defence, not the police. The people are just filling a job for which there is demand, albeit by the state. We can't expect the ignorant to do better, they'll go wherever the wages are. (Exactly why we need to developing competitors with the state. However this isn't the place to discuss strategy.) Now, don't get me wrong, the police are generally savage brutes on a power trip who only too eager to get their guns and start shooting. But so are these leftist thugs. They're not anarchists by any means, what's worse is seeing people who adopt the name libertarian and spout what they clearly believe to be nonsense about the NAP. Or perhaps they're just adopting some silly anti authoritarian attitude.

Stop the apologetics, the government aren't the only ones who will coerce you.

The thing is, the state whilst it exists, should be encouraged by libertarians to do as much good (or as little harm, perhaps more appropriately) as possible. Right now this means upholding property rights, and going in there and dealing with these alleged anarchists (the violent ones only) with as much violence as necessary, much as a private provider of defence would do.If that means the police getting out their guns and teargas then so be it.

It's amusing and yet sad to see so many children egging thugs on to do what they would and could never. The libertarians support this stuff are probably the same people who cross the street and hold their wallet when they see a black man. Don't get me wrong, I've never been in a fight and not for any moral reasons but because I'd more than likely get knocked out by whoever I'm fighting. At least I admit it, drop the rhetoric guys.

(When are we going to drop the label anarchist?)

GilesStratton:

The policemen aren't necessarily the problem. The state is, it's the state who arrogate themselves a monopoly on defence, not the police.

This depends on what the police are doing at the time. When the police are arresting and jailing murderers, rapists and thieves they are our allies. When the police are enforcing laws against consensual actions they are our enemies. And the state would have no power without police.

GilesStratton:

The people are just filling a job for which there is demand, albeit by the state.

Some jobs, if they were filled in private industry, would be very beneficial ones. Firefighters are an example of what I mean. Firefighters do not have arresting powers (except in their very narrow field i.e. they can arrest in cases of arson). All they do put out fires, save lives and treat emergency victims. Once in a great while they might rescue a cat from a tree or help someone who was contemplating suicide down from a roof. Everything they do is benevolent. I have enormous respect for firefighters even when they are government employees. Not all government jobs are like that though. The job of the tax collector is ALL force - it has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. The job of the police officer is mixed. Police do sometimes help find lost children, help old ladies fix a flat tire on the side of the highway etc. Some police officers are focused on finding actual criminals. But police officers by virtue of their contract are tasked with enforcing the law, no matter what that law is - good or bad.

GilesStratton:

(When are we going to drop the label anarchist?)

I would support dropping the term.

GilesStratton:

The thing is, the state whilst it exists, should be encouraged by libertarians to do as much good (or as little harm, perhaps more appropriately) as possible. Right now this means upholding property rights, and going in there and dealing with these alleged anarchists (the violent ones only) with as much violence as necessary, much as a private provider of defence would do.If that means the police getting out their guns and teargas then so be it.

Yeah, but are you sure the capitalist shop owners are entitled to any protection?  I'm pretty sure our vandarchist buddies will be happy to point out that the police are the state, and the state exists to protect capitalist property as they exploit the proletariat by selling him stale potato chips and single ply toilet paper.

GilesStratton:

(When are we going to drop the label anarchist?)

Until 2 days ago, I wouldn't have considered it.  But seeing so many mindless and retarded people who call themselves anarchists, I'm now inclined to entertain the idea.

liberty student:

Until 2 days ago, I wouldn't have considered it.  But seeing so many mindless and retarded people who call themselves anarchists, I'm now inclined to entertain the idea.

I had thought about dropping the term before but I am now certain that we MUST. I am SICK of confused Marxists claiming the term.

ryanpatgray:

I had thought about dropping the term before but I am now certain that we MUST. I am SICK of confused Marxists claiming the term.

It's not even that they are confused.  A lot of them are down right ignorant and militant.

I like anarcho-capitalist, but I don't like that the anarcho bit indicates that it is related in any way to the communists or syndicalists.  I/we don't have a compatible understanding of economics (human action) or property with them, which I consider to be pretty fundamental.

ryanpatgray:

liberty student:

Until 2 days ago, I wouldn't have considered it.  But seeing so many mindless and retarded people who call themselves anarchists, I'm now inclined to entertain the idea.

 

I had thought about dropping the term before but I am now certain that we MUST. I am SICK of confused Marxists claiming the term.

 

I think we're going to have too. Besides most anarchists despise, why would we want to ally with people WHO hate us!

ugggh, these anarchists?

 

in another forum a communist, or anarcho-socialist was telling me to look into these anarchist rioters in Greece..he called these leftists "real anarchists" i guess these are the people this socialist was talking about. what a bunch of losers

I just started a thread proposing the term nonaggressionist. What do you think of this idea?

ryanpatgray:

I just started a thread proposing the term nonaggressionist. What do you think of this idea?

 

I prefer "Voluntaryist".

fezwhatley:

ugggh, these anarchists?

 

in another forum a communist, or anarcho-socialist was telling me to look into these anarchist rioters in Greece..he called these leftists "real anarchists" i guess these are the people this socialist was talking about. what a bunch of losers

 

Yeah I hear ya. I'm beginning to think that most leftist anarchists have a mental defficiency.

Nick. B:

Kakugo:

Back when I was studying at the university there was a strong Greek community there; I even shared my dorm with some of them at a time so I learnt a little about them and their country. What can I say? This "outburst" was just waiting to happen.

The country is pretty much bankrupt, ruined by poor (by any standards) economic choices and irresponsible (again by any standard) government spending. The still-ongoing armament race with Turkey and the 2004 Olympics are perceived by many as the final nails in the coffin. Young people have few choices: Athens is not London or Berlin, finding a job is not so easy. The brightest and the better educated either flee the country or have to line up after the "recommended" to get a decent job: not everybody wants to spend the rest of his life working in a kiosk, living on welfare or selling souvenirs in the Plakas. Ever since the Euro was introduced prices have soared while salaries have increased little; trying to appease the Euro-nutters in Bruxelles by force is draining the country of the precious little energies it has left.

In such conditions it's natural to expect that somebody will get so desperate and angry as to riot. It pretty much the same situation France has in her banlieus : desperation, hopelessness, misery... the State is able to keep things (barely) under control by using an admixture of strength and promises but when an extraordinary event happens the bomb will explode. Of course being very localized events it is easy for the State-run medias to blame everything on "vandals", "anarchists" etc, it's easy to scare the rest of the population into thinking that the protestors should be dealt with quickly and brutally since they are the "bad guys". Divide et impera: has something changed? 

 

 

Wow things sound pretty bad in Grecce. Just out of curiosity, is Grecce a social democracy? 

Well, which European country isn't? Up until 2000-2001 Greece had pretty bad inflation and an alarming public debt but tax rates were relatively low and, what's more important, life was very cheap: people could get along even with low wages. This all changed when EU parameters had to be met and Euro inflation kicked in. The desperate race for "modernization" which hit the government in the light of the 2004 Olympics was probably the straw which broke the camel's back.

It must also be understood that Greece has both very strong nationalist and socialist pushes inside. Greece has always had one of the strongest communist parties outside of the Soviet block (except when it was outlawed by the military junta of course) and despite claims to the contrary and big smiles on television tensions with the neighbours (mainly Turkey, but also Macedonia, Albania, Bulgaria etc) are still very strong. Most Greek youths are actually happy to be conscripted into the military: they have not the same "besieged stronghold" mindset of the Israelis but are quite close.

These are the people that some would suppose we should ally with.

No, you've erected a gigantic straw man by conflating this type of thing with the actual libertarian left. Stop it, it's highly disingenous. I never suggested allying with anything like this.

The thing is, the state whilst it exists, should be encouraged by libertarians to do as much good (or as little harm, perhaps more appropriately) as possible.

What is that supposed to mean though? That's so vague that for all intents and purposes, it functions as a minarchist position - I.E. the state's role should be limited to police, courts and defense and since we have the state control of those services it should fully be enforced.

Angry people rioting are not anarchists.  Anarchists, at least on this board, hold a high regard for private property (how these property rights are derived is another question), but  I can't foresee one of us turning over someone else's car for third party's action.

I think this is where anarcho-capitalism comes into conflict with anarch-syndicalism.  That car was never their property in the first place to flip over.

From what you're telling the only conclusion I can draw is that there no good things in Greeks political future.

Brainpolice:

What is that supposed to mean though? That's so vague that for all intents and purposes, it functions as a minarchist position - I.E. the state's role should be limited to police, courts and defense and since we have the state control of those services it should fully be enforced.

No, it means that we can hypothetically advocate the state doing certain things as a second best.

Brainpolice:

No, you've erected a gigantic straw man by conflating this type of thing with the actual libertarian left. Stop it, it's highly disingenous. I never suggested allying with anything like this.

Funny, I recall saying "some" not "Brainpolice".

Kakugo:

Well, which European country isn't?

Switzerland to some extent.

liberty student:

Until 2 days ago, I wouldn't have considered it.  But seeing so many mindless and retarded people who call themselves anarchists, I'm now inclined to entertain the idea.

The thing is, I'd actually go further than this and deny that we are anarchists at all:

Wikipedia:

The term anarchism derives from the Greek ἀναρχος, anarchos, meaning "without a leader, head or chief"

Now for some defintions,

Chief:

the head or leader of an organized body of people; the person highest in authority

the head or ruler of a tribe or clan: an Indian chief.

Head:

the position or place of leadership, greatest authority, or honor.

a person to whom others are subordinate, as the director of an institution or the manager of a department; leader or chief.

Leader:

a person or thing that leads.

a guiding or directing head, as of an army, movement, or political group.

Whatever word you adopt, heads, leader and chiefs are still clearly a part of any libertarian society.

 

Brainpolice:

No, you've erected a gigantic straw man by conflating this type of thing with the actual libertarian left. Stop it, it's highly disingenous. I never suggested allying with anything like this.

He never mentioned you, but it is interesting that you rush in to defend yourself regardless.

It's not a strawman.  Francois Tremblay was cheering it on, and he runs the market anarchist blog carnival, and identifies clearly and very publicly as left.

And it's not just Tremblay but the remainder of the anti-capitalists as well, who seem to think that destruction of property (regardless of it's ownership status) is "anarchism".