CHAZ Memorial and Support Video 6

A Maoist memorializes CHAZ.

In some ways, I generally considered having supported CHAZ to be something of a litmus test that separates authentic anti-systemists from pro-systemists. Notice that CHAZ was suppressed by the city government of Seattle, arguably the furthest left of any local government in the US, with an actual member of a Trotyskyite party on their city council. Friends from Seattle have told me that progressivism is the Seattlers’ religion.

And the suppression of CHAZ was done with the support of professional-managerial class “woke” liberals, “anti-big government” conservatives, bourgie libertarians, middle-class minorities, etc. Meanwhile, support for CHAZ came from Maoists like Jason Unruhe, Alt-Right fascists like Richard Spencer, anarchists, radical an-caps like Walter Block,  Antifa, at least some “boogaloo” and/or sovereign citizen types, a range of lumpenproletarian and/or authentically countercultural types, etc.

Sorry, but if you didn’t support the modern American version of the Paris Commune, then you’re not even in the game.

 

6 comments

  1. How does the fact that the mayor was welcoming CHAZ with open arms in the beginning, offering toilet facilities, and garbage services? And that CNN and co. were running defense for them the whole time? How about all the blue check mark Twitterers and Hollywood hashtaging? Have they passed the litmus test?

    • But notice how quickly those sectors turned on CHAZ as they always do. That’s the standard totalitarian revolutionary model. Attempt to use a genuine popular insurrection to ride the wave of rebellion to state power, and then switch and purge when the rebels are no longer viable or useful, or when they become a liability. The suppression of CHAZ by the “progressive” Seattle municipal government was merely a minor league Kronstadt.

      I don’t have any problem with critiques of CHAZ from a sincere reformist, pacifist, or Burkean perspective. Those are all points of view that I respect. But that’s not what these bait-and-switch “woke progressives” are about.

      • I’m definitely do not have your experience or depth of knowledge, but there is one difference of between you and I that is becoming more apparent to me.

        I do not believe that these Maoist/Antifa types are acting in good faith from the start. It is too easy to raise the banner of leftest Revolution predicting what the second and third order reactions will be, with these results as the actual goals from outset.

        The interview posted here with the Russian expat claimed that Lenin was acting under the banner of populism, but his intent was the gulag. I find this argument very compelling.

        In the case of CHAZ, BLM(tm) and Antifa, is it not possible that the reactionary crackdown and consolidation of power is part of the goal?

        • Have you seen this post? https://attackthesystem.com/2020/07/01/will-the-neocons-bait-turn-switch-and-purge-the-antifa-sjws-while-suppressing-the-lumpenproletariat/

          It gets into what you’re talking about somewhat. The real danger of left-wing authoritarianism we face at the present time is from the professional-managerial class and the left-wing of the capitalist class and its program of totalitarian humanism, not from fringe tendencies like Maoism or the Antifa. The main danger of right-wing authoritarianism is that the TH sector will provoke a reaction that leads to an American Falangism. However, at present, it is still the neoliberal center that is the primary enemy. I certainly wouldn’t want to have a Maoist or Antifa regime, but that’s not going to happen. At most, the TH sectors will use and then discard them.

          • I did read that post! And with your help, I am starting see the neo-con/lib managerial coalition as the primary enemy.

            Also, I totally agree that the fringe tendencies will be discarded, as that is what always happens. Antifa’s purpose is not to seize power.

            It may seem kookie, but in the an-cap conspiracy sphere there is a lot of talk about how the media and politicians continue to argue that BLM protests do not spread Co-Vid, while every other action does.

            One may argue that BLM has been co-opted, which seems to be true at its very early stages, but it may be more accurate to say that it was CREATED for the purpose it is presently serving.

            People are getting antsy, and their energies must be correctly choreographed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s