I don't think anyone on LBO was dismissing "radical" protesters as agents. Rather, they were pointing to those " who have no reservations about using violence and property destruction" as being self-gratifying and/or destructive to the movement.
> ... Undercover cops are normally reliable, quiet fake activists. A common
> misconception is that loudmouth activists are cops. Actually, they are
> just loudmouth activists.
some of them may well be cops, especially with people like Ashcroft and Gonzales in the AG seat.
me: > > BTW, what good does it do to break a window of some store (e.g.,
> > Starf*cks)? ...
Chuck:
> It's good for several reasons. On the one hand, you are taking action
> against a manifestation of capitalism. If you want a world without
> capitalism, you have to start taking it apart somewhere.
sounds like "thinking with your blood" more than with your brain.
> More
> importantly, destruction of a Starbucks shows people that their is
> resistance happening in say, the USA. ...
and it associates a serious issue (the opposition to corporate globalization) with infantile tactics.
>... The anti-capitalist and anarchist movements were gaining more members
> when they were engaged in militant actions at summits and elswhere.
> Contrary to what some people argued about the actions turning off
> people, they had the opposite effect. People flocked to the movements.
> Now that summit protests are less frequent, the growth of the movement
> has been much slower.
of course, lots of other things were going on that might have caused the alleged change in trends.
-- Jim Devine "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.