How would a anarchistic nation defend itself against a foreign invasion? 2


If a resource-rich nation such as America or Canada reverted to a pacifistic anarchistic state, how would it defend itself against an organized invasion by a foreign authoritarian state. A likely scenario being that China or Russia would, having depleted their own resources by the late century, make a play to cease North America’s rich resources. How would informal anarchistic militias defend against a disciplined and technologically advanced land/air/sea/space army of millions of men with access to satellites, drones, and nuclear/chemical/biological weaponry?
There are so many assumptions in this question that need to be unpacked before we could give you proper anarchist answers. You might find something like what you’re looking for here:

Defense and Law Enforcement in an Anarchist Society Reply

By Josh Wiley

Cop Block

This article is for the irate minority who, like myself, have come to the realization that government, by its nature, constitutes a monopoly on force.

Sadly, we live in a world in which there exists at least two classes of citizens: The average public Joe and the enforcement arm of the state. Unlike a “normal” citizen whose right to self-defense is severely limited by law, law enforcement and military do not have such restrictions. In fact, they are virtually void of restrictions at all, having the legal authority to incarcerate, attack, and even murder other individuals who lack their uniform and shiny badge.

Historical examples of such abuse of power are countless – the Kent State massacre; numerous undeclared wars, facilitated in our modern age by armed drones; the murder of Amadou Diallo; the illegal and racist stop-and-frisk policy of the NYPD, etc. Recently, the Occupy Wall Street protests (regardless of any  opinion one may hold of the protesters) have put the issue of police brutality back into the public discourse:


NYPD Punishes City by Not Citing, Arresting Citizens as Much. Oh, No! Reply

By Scott Shackford


Right now in New York City, guys selling black market cigarettes are much, much less likely to be harassed and arrested (or worse) by the New York Police Department. Apparently, or at least in the eyes of the New York Post, we’re supposed to see this as a bad thing (people not getting arrested is certainly a bad thing for the New York Post‘s reporting, anyway):

It’s not a slowdown — it’s a virtual work stoppage.

NYPD traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent following the execution of two cops — as officers feel betrayed by the mayor and fear for their safety, The Post has learned.

The dramatic drop comes as Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and Mayor Bill de Blasio plan to hold an emergency summit on Tuesday with the heads of the five police unions to try to close the widening rift between cops and the administration.

They provide an info box showing, in addition to the huge drop in minor offense summonses, a 94 percent drop in citations for traffic violations, a 92 percent drop in parking violation citations, and a 66 percent drop in overall arrests.

And there’s this paragraph:

The Post obtained the numbers hours after revealing that cops were turning a blind eye to some minor crimes and making arrests only “when they have to” since the execution-style shootings of Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu.


NYC arrests tumble 66% with NYPD in virtual work stoppage 3

Is this how we defeat the police state? Engage in massive protests against police brutality, and elect anti-police local officials who will inspire the cops to stand down? These events lend support for the credibility of ATS’s adoption of the “Mailer model” for building localized resistance.

D.C. Beacon

It’s not a slowdown — it’s a virtual work stoppage.

The New York Post reports:

NYPD traffic tickets and summonses for minor offenses have dropped off by a staggering 94 percent following the execution of two cops — as officers feel betrayed by the mayor and fear for their safety, The Post has learned.

The dramatic drop comes as Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and Mayor Bill de Blasio plan to hold an emergency summit on Tuesday with the heads of the five police unions to try to close the widening rift between cops and the administration.

The unprecedented meeting is being held at the new Police Academy in Queens at 2 p.m., sources said.

Angry union leaders have ordered drastic measures for their members since the Dec. 20 assassination of two NYPD cops in a patrol car, including that two units respond to every call.


Overcriminalization Reply

The Heritage Foundation

Overcriminalization describes the trend to use the criminal law rather than the civil law to solve every problem, to punish every mistake, and to compel compliance with regulatory objectives.  Criminal law should be used only if a person intentionally flouts the law or engages in conduct that is morally blameworthy or dangerous.

Too Many Laws, Too Little Oversight

  • Too Many New Laws: Federal criminal law has exploded in size and scope and deteriorated in quality. It used to focus on inherently wrongful conduct: treason, murder, counterfeiting, and the like. Today, an unimaginably broad range of socially and economically beneficial conduct is criminalized.
  • Unjust Punishment: More and more Americans who have worked diligently to abide by the law are being trapped and unjustly punished due to vague, overly broad criminal offenses. Congress must halt its overcriminalization rampage.

Scales How We Got Here


Wary NYPD cops letting minor crimes slide Reply

The people get militant, and the pigs back off. It looks like the protests are working. Lesson learned. 


Keith Preston on the Left and the State 5

Attack the System

Keith Preston on the Left and the State

December 29, 2014

Keith Preston discusses the relationship between the Left and the State in a lecture to the H.L. Mencken Club.

Topics include:

-The Left as a form of moralistic zealotry.

-The similarities between the authoritarianism leftism and theocracy.

-The defining characteristics of the leftist mindset.


Police turn their backs on Mayor de Blasio during funeral for fallen NYPD cop Reply

Wonderful! This is indicative of a deep rift between the political class and law enforcement. Severe disunity between the state and its enforcer arm is always welcome to revolutionaries.

FOX News

Associated Press


Hundreds of police officers outside the Queens, N.Y. church Saturday where the funeral of Officer Rafael Ramos was being held turned their backs on Mayor Bill de Blasio as he eulogized the fallen officer who was ambushed last week along with his partner.

De Blasio’s remarks were being shown on large TV monitors outside the Christ Tabernacle Church. Police union officials have accused the mayor of fostering a climate of mistrust that contributed to the killings of Officer Ramos and his partner.

More than 25,000 police officers from across the country assembled in winter sunshine to pay final respects to Ramos, a seven-year veteran of the NYPD. The long sea of blue stretched more than six city blocks.

In his eulogy, de Blasio offered the city’s condolences to the Ramos family.

“All of this city is grieving and grieving for so many reasons,” he said. “But the most personal is that we lost such a good man.”

Vice President Joe Biden expressed condolences directly to Ramos’ two sons.

“You’ve shown tremendous courage these past days,” he said.

He said Ramos and his partner Wenjian Liu were officers who were committed, passionate and vigilant.


Obama Support among Military Plummets to 15 Percent Reply

Excellent! The military predictably tends to be one of the more conservative sectors of U.S. society. The more liberal the political class and the state become, the more disaffection there will likely be within the ranks of the military. An added factor is that the military will be increasingly called upon to fight needless wars for the sake of dubious slogans like “Democracy and Human Rights” as time progresses.

By John Fund

National Review

For the last nine years, the Military Times newspaper has surveyed an average of 2,300 active-duty service members. Their latest poll has just been released and concludes that “Obama’s popularity — never high to begin with — has crumbled, falling from 35 percent in 2009 to just 15 percent this year, while his disapproval ratings have increased to 55 percent from 40 percent over that time.”

Much of the opposition to Obama has come from military members who believe he has been an inconsistent and flawed leader in foreign policy — for example, his 2011 removal of all troops in Iraq helped lead to the rise of the Islamic State, which then required a new U.S. intervention in the region. But some of the resistance comes from those who see his moves to change the military’s culture as “heavy-handed social engineering that erode deep-seated traditions and potentially undermine good order and discipline.”

That said, the Military Times poll shows “quiet acceptance” of some changes in the armed forces. For example, in 2009, the poll “found that 49 percent of troops felt gays, lesbians, and bisexuals should not be allowed to serve. In 2014, such disapproval fell to just 19 percent.”


In a Military Embracing Social Change, Troops Increasingly Identify as Independent and Libertarian Reply

This is welcome news. Building dissent within the ranks of the military is crucial because, well, the bottom line is that we can’t have a revolution without substantial support from rank and file military and lower level officers.

By J.D. Tuccille


Shifts in social attitudes, politics, and attitudes toward government are seeping from the civilian world into the U.S. military. The military is quickly adapting to increased tolerance toward gays and lesbians in American life, expanding roles for women, and growing distaste for the established political parties and the performance of the U.S. government. And, like many Americans, soldiers, sailors, and marines are drifting away from the major parties, increasingly identifying themseves as independents and libertarians.

A survey of active-duty armed forces personnel among the readership of Military Times finds that support for gays and lesbians openly serving in the military rose from 35 percent in 2009 to 60 percent in 2014. Overt disapproval fell from 49 percent to 19 percent in the same time.

Support for opening at least some combat-arms jobs to women rose from 34 percent in 2011 to 41 percent in 2014, with opposition falling from 43 percent to 28 percent.

So military personnel match civilians in their increasing social tolerance and embrace of expanding opportunities for everybody. Honestly, why wouldn’t they when they’re recruited from the same population?


Historical Paradigms, Partisan Cycles and the Future of the Anarchist Movement 5

By Keith Preston

Some historians make the credible argument that major historical cycles tend to turn every seventy years or so. For an example of this kind of analysis, see this piece that was written by Steven Yates after the events of September 11, 2001. What this particular model of historical interpretation argues is that every seven decades an older political, economic, cultural, or social paradigm will yield to a new paradigm.

Applied to American history, this method of interpretation might go something like this:


The Fate of Empires 2

By Professor Steven Yates

“Frannie,” he said, and turned her around so he could look into her eyes.

“What, Stuart?”

“Do you think… do you think people ever learn anything?”

She opened her mouth to speak, hesitated, fell silent. The kerosene lamp flickered.

Her eyes seemed very blue.

“I don’t know,” she said at last. She seemed unpleased with her answer; she struggled to say something more; to illuminate her first response; and could only say it again:

I don’t know.

~~Stephen King, The Stand (uncut version, 1990)

We know the old saw: the one thing we learn from history is that no one ever learns anything from history. If true, this would be unfortunate, because history offers gold mines of learning opportunities for those willing to study it.

Most people probably haven’t heard of Sir John Bagot Glubb (1897 – 1986). He was a British soldier who rose in the ranks until he was able to create and, as General, command the Arab Legion military force in Jordan from 1939 to 1956 (it was Transjordan until 1949). He had largely assimilated into Arab culture where he was known as Glubb Pasha. His fortunes dropped along with those of his native Great Britain in 1956. Back home and knighted that year, and with two books about Arab history and culture already behind him, he turned to full-time historical research and writing, producing several more volumes on the Arab world, a world he’d found extremely interesting—and which he’d passionately cared about. He’d noticed some curious parallels between past phases of the Arab world and present phases of his native Great Britain. More study of other cultures and their trajectories led him towards original work on the nature of civilization—in particular, observing the rise and decline of empires. Among these was a Spenglerian essay, “The Fate of Empires” (1976).

It is this essay we are concerned with here. It provides very good reasons for thinking the fate of Anglo-European civilization, including the U.S., is already decided.


Pretty Much Every U.S. Demographic Group Believes Torture Is Justified Reply

It looks like mass democracy is working.

By Mark Strauss

Pretty Much Every U.S. Demographic Group Believes Torture Is JustifiedExpand

The good news: For those who are worried that the nation is more divided than ever, there’s finally one contentious issue that a majority of Americans agree upon. The bad news: Most people are okay with the CIA torturing suspected terrorists.

According to a new poll conducted by the Washington Post and ABC News, 58% said the torture of suspected terrorists could be justified “often” and “sometimes.” But what’s most striking about the survey is that there’s a consensus among demographic groups who typically have dramatically divergent views on social and political issues.

As the Washington Post comments:

Those ideological poles at opposite ends of public opinion aren’t that surprising. But the distribution of demographic groups between them is. A majority of nearly every group — blacks, whites, women, young adults, the elderly, Midwesterners, suburbanites, Catholics, moderates, the wealthy — said that torture of suspected terrorists can be often or sometimes justified.

For instance, traditionally “blue” states in the Northeast and “red” states in the South had identical responses: 43% saying torture was “sometimes” justified, 19% saying “often” justified—a total of 62% in each demographic.

Among those with a high school education or less, a college degree and a post-graduate education, the total responses, respectively, were 59%, 48% and 57%.


Eyewitness claims ‘people were CLAPPING AND LAUGHING’ at the scene where two cops were killed Reply

I don’t agree with the random murders of anyone, not cops or anyone else, but if this is true it really is an example of fourth generation warfare within the domestic U.S. A Muslim terrorist takes out a couple of the king’s knights and wins the admiration of occupied peoples in whose eyes the existing authorities are illegitimate.

Daily Mail

Associated Press

  • Mayor Bill de Blasio and police commissioner William Bratton gave a joint news conference following the murder of two police officers Saturday
  • Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley, 28, shot his girlfriend in Baltimore then traveled to Brooklyn to kill police officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos
  • Bratton said the two officers were ‘quote simply assassinated’
  • Mayor de Blasio stated that this murder was an attack on all of New York as he said this is ‘not a time for politics’ 
  • Hundreds of officers lined the street at the Woodhull medical Center and silently saluted as the bodies of the two police officers were driven away Saturday evening  

Mayor Bill de Blasio said this is ‘not the time for politics’ following the murder of two police officers in Brooklyn on Saturday.

This as New York City’s police commissioner said the gunman who ambushed and killed two police officers had made online posts that were ‘very anti-police.’

Police Commissioner William Bratton choked up at a news conference at the Woodhull medical Center on Saturday afternoon as he talked about the fatal shootings of two officers in Brooklyn’s Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood.

Meanwhile, an eyewitness who spoke to The Daily Beast said that ‘a lot of people were clapping and laughing’ following the murder of the two police officers.

‘Some were saying, “They deserved it,” and another was shouting at the cops, “Serves them right because you mistreat people!”’said the man, identified as Carlos.


Militarized Humanitarianism Meets Carceral Feminism: The Politics of Sex, Rights, and Freedom in Contemporary Antitrafficking Campaigns Reply

The religious right and the PC left united against sex worker rights.

By Elizabeth Berstein

During a blustery New York City winter in the final weeks of 2008,two very different cinematic events focused on the politics of gender,sexuality, and human rights stood out for their symmetry. The first event, a benefit screening of Call and Response (2008), a just-released “rockumentary” about human trafficking made by the Christian rock-musician-cum-filmmaker Justin Dillon, showed at a hip downtown cinema to a packed and enthusiastic mixed-gender audience of young, predominantly white and Korean evangelical Christians. The second event, a public screening of the film
Very Young Girls (2008), a sober documentary about feminist activist Rachel Lloyd and her Harlem-based nonprofit organization for teenaged girls in street prostitution, was populated primarily by secular, middle-aged professional women with a long-standing commitment to the abolition of the sex trade. Despite the obvious demographic contrasts between the participants and the different constellations of secular and religious values that they harbor, more striking still was the
common political foundation that the two groups have come to share. Over the past decade, mounting public and political attention has been directed toward the “traffic in women” as a dangerous manifestation of global gender inequalities. Media accounts have similarly rehearsed stories of the abduction, transport, and forced sexual labor of women and girls
whose poverty and desperation render them amenable to easy victimization in first- and third-world cities (see, e.g., Kristof 2004; Landesman2004; Lopez 2006). Meanwhile, a remarkably diverse group of social activists and policy makers—a coalition composed of abolitionist feminists,evangelical Christians, and both conservative and liberal government of-
ficials—have put forth an array of new legislation at the local, national,and transnational levels.

Why Have Americans Stopped Resisting Economic Privilege? Reply

By Steve Fraser


Moyers has a very good interview with the author of this book here.

The following excerpt is from the introduction to Steve Fraser’s new book, The Age of Acquiescence.

Marx once described high finance as “the Vatican of capitalism,” its diktat to be obeyed without question. Several decades have come and gone during which we’ve learned not to mention Marx in polite company. Our vocabulary went through a kind of linguistic cleansing, exiling suspect and nasty phrases like “class warfare” or “the reserve army of labor” or even something as apparently innocuous as “working class.”

In times past, however, such language and the ideas they conjured up struck our forebears as useful, even sometimes as accurate depictions of reality. They used them regularly along with words and phrases like “plutocracy,” “robber baron,” and “ruling class” to identify the sources of economic exploitation and inequality that oppressed them, as well as to describe the political disenfranchisement they suffered and the subversion of democracy they experienced. Never before, however, has the Vatican of capitalism captured quite so perfectly the specific nature of the oligarchy that recently ran the country for a long generation and ended up running it into the ground. Even political consultant and pundit James Carville (no Marxist he), confessed as much during the Clinton years, when he said the bond market “intimidates everybody.”

Southern Labor Archives at Georgia State University

Occupy Wall Street, even bereft of strategy, program, and specific demands as many lamented when it was a newborn, nonetheless opened up space again for our political imagination by confronting this elemental, determining feature of our society’s predicament. It rediscovered something that, beneath thickets of political verbiage about tax this and cut that, about end‑of‑the ­world deficits and ­missionary-​minded “job creators,” had been hiding in plain sight: namely, what our ancestors once called “the street of torments.” It achieved a giant leap backward, so to speak, summoning up a history of opposition that had mysteriously withered away.


Eric Garner, American Occupation, and the Decline of Empire Reply

By Danny Haiphong


The nascent movement against racist police brutality in the US received a boost of energy from the non-indictment of Eric Garner’s murderers in blue. Thousands filled the streets from New York City to Berkeley, California to protest racist injustice and declare #BlackLivesMatter.

In typical fashion, the militarized police and mass incarceration state responded by arresting, beating, and using dangerous weapons like the Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) on protesters. The LRAD is a powerful “sound cannon” capable of deafening and causing long term health complications for intended targets. This device has been used by numerous US-backed reactionary governments. During the 2009 Obama-backed coup in Honduras, LRADs were used against supporters of the legitimate party of President Zelaya. The LRAD is also used frequently by Zionist Israel to break the resistance of the Palestinian people.


Why Did They Torture? Reply

By Justin Raimondo


The Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on how the US government tortured detainees at Guantanamo and at secret “black sites” all over the world has focused on how they did it: rectal feeding, hanging detainees by their arms, “stress positions,” beatings, etc. The prurience of this focus is fairly obvious, and typical of decadent societies in general – which is not to say that the details of “how” are irrelevant. They underscore the moral bankruptcy of the regime that permitted these practices. Yet this preoccupation with the sordid details tends to overlook the “why” of it – the key to understanding what the neocons in control of the national security apparatus during the Bush years were really after.

They say they were after al-Qaeda’s alleged plans to carry out further strikes on the US homeland and American facilities abroad, but there is evidence in the report that their purpose was much more specific. Major Charles Burney, a psychiatrist who served at the Guantanamo Bay facility, told the committee that “a large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq.” That Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon posed a seemingly insoluble problem for the interrogators: however, the failure to produce results did not impress higher-ups in Washington. The torturers were told to get rougher: As Burney testified: “There was more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results.”


Russia and China’s Potential Economic Weapons Against the West Reply

By William S. Lind

Traditional Right

Just as Germany had its V weapons, the V-1 and V-2, so Washington now has its S weapon. If another country does something we don’t like, Washington hits it with economic sanctions.

As Iran’s economy shows, sanctions can do a country quite a bit of damage. The burden falls mainly on the middle class; just as in Washington, the elites know how to protect themselves. From Washington’s perspective, sanctions are an ideal weapon, in that they seem to cost us little or nothing.

In fact, they may end up costing us a great deal. All around the world, a state’s legitimacy now depends in no small part on ensuring a growing economy. A state that cannot do that may fail. Because Washington has no understanding of Fourth Generation war, it thinks the result will be merely a new government, one that will bend to Washington’s (and Globalism’s) will. In reality, in a 4GW world, the consequence may be another failed state and the effective conquest of another region by non-state elements.

More, whenever a state thinks it has discovered a new weapon to which there is no reply, its opponents surprise it by coming up with one or several. Other countries are growing tired of Washington dictating to them and threatening sanctions if they do not obey. At least two are not little countries Washington can easily step on. I refer to China and, especially, Russia.


The Road to Turkdom Reply

By John Robb

Global Guerrillas

It should be clear to everyone that the economic and political system that replaced feudal agriculture is starting to fall apart.

It’s also pretty clear we need a new system, one that can operate at a global scale and fully embrace the potential of new technologies without turning us all into slaves (or killing us).

What does that system look like?  Obviously, it’s very hard to see what is going to replace industrial capitalism and the nation-state while we are still inside of the system.

Despite that, it’s possible to get a sense of where it is going by looking at where technology is taking us.  I recently did some scifi writing on a short book I’m writing and this is some thinking that came out of it.


The Mafia with a Flag 1

The State is the mafia with a flag.

Why does the mafia exist?

To control territory, monopolize resources, enrich and protect an artificially privileged elite, exploit subjects, and expand its own realm of power and domination.

When a gang’s territory is threatened, it responds with extreme violence.

How is that different from what states do or have ever done?

Max Weber defined the state as an institution claiming an exclusive right to engage in violence (in other words, actions that would be considered criminal if anyone did them).

Criminal organizations have their own internal codes and ceremonies that are used to maintain cohesion and convey a sense of legitimacy and identity to the organization.

This is what States do as well. All states maintain some kind of self-legitimating ideology. An Egyptian pharaoh may claim to be descended from the sun-god. A medieval monarch may invoke the divine right of kings. A theocracy may claim religious legitimacy. A liberal democratic state’s legitimating ideology is a hybrid of Lockean property theory and the Rousseauan notion of the general will. A Communist regime claims to be a workers state. Other states may claim legitimacy by appealing to tradition, the glory of the fatherland, ethnic kinship, or racial or national superiority.

But ultimately, these abstractions are manipulated and bended into a shape that matches the interests of the existing power elite.

"The Worst (Still) Get on Top."