Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
>
> [clip]
> At 9:04 PM -0500 12/31/02, Chuck0 wrote:
> >There is abundant proof that whenever a vanguard party puts itself
> >in front of dissent, that dissent is tamed.
>
> What would it have meant to "tame" the 1991 LA riot? What form would
> dissent have taken if "tamed" in the sense you mean? You mean fewer
> individuals would have been killed, deported, arrested, etc. because
> of the riot?
Yoshie has it correct. If I remember correctly, in the riots after the death of King, the sectors of Atlanta where SNCC had been organizing, of SF where the Panthers had been organizing, did not riot. Riots are, unfortunately, not only unavoidable but probably necessary; nevertheless they represent a very low level of political consciousness. They have about as much to do with serious mass politics (revolutionary or reformist) as an alarm clock has to do with the day's work.
A left faction that deliberately provokes a riot, however, or tries to riot on its own (the black blocs?) hasn't gotten out of nursery school.
Carrol
> --
> Yoshie
>
> * Calendar of Events in Columbus:
> <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html>
> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html>
> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/>
> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>