"It is the obligation of every person who claims to oppose oppression to resist the oppressor by every means at his or her disposal. Not to engage in physical resistance, armed resistance to oppression, is to serve the interests of the oppressor; no more, no less. There are no exceptions to the rule, no easy out..." Assata Shakur(BLA, former BPP member)

This book is one of the most amazing books I have ever read on the subject of non-violence vs "violence". I used to see the two as such an either or, black and white, sort of a paradigm. But as I have grown older and come into contact with more people and situations, not to mention read books written by great minds the likes of Ward Churchill, I have realized how "violence" is sometimes necessary when fighting for freedom. For all those haters and doubters out there who are currently thinking that Carlos brought it on himself...Let me just relate to you a few things and then conclude with a few quotes from some of the most well known historical proponets of non-violence.

First off I too found myself throwing a similar "weapon" at the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle on N30. It was in the heat of the moment in some ways, after watching the cops beat people up all day and getting frustrated with our collective inability to defend ourselves. The Seattle police once again came at a line of people who were doing nothing other than blocking off the meeting and being as non-violent as can be...I responded by heaving something at one of the cops(who was in the front)...Now I am sure that he very easily could have made a split second decision to pull his gun and shot, but instead he pulled out a fire extinguisher sized pepper spray shooter and sprayed everyone in range. I, along with many others, could have very easily become another Carlos...Would I do it again, probably..only I might be more intelligent next time in choosing my weapon.

Second, people die everyday at the hands of capitalism and cops(military, or people)who feel threatened by someone cause of the color of their skin or their way of life. In the United States of AmeriKKKa one doesn't need to look hard to find examples of this...whether it be Amadou Diallo who was shot dead in NY for being black and brandishing his wallet, Native Americans for resisting colonialism, the Move organization and Mumia in Philly, homeless people on the streets everyday. To not resist in any way possible is insane.

I can't get into this that much more...but let me say that in my years I have gone back and forth...I have seen both sides and everywhere in between in the argument for non-violence or against resistance. And I understand that at times there are people in black block or white overalls that are not acting in the best interests of everyone around them...Sometimes there are even infiltrators in the block who cause trouble, like in Spain recently...But despite all this we must work through these troubles and stay unified, for if not the fascists will win and we will all be slaving away for them in a work camp or dead for trying to resist.

Finally here are those quotes:

Dr Martin Luther King Jr:
"Every man[sic]of humane convictions must decide on the protest that best suits[his]convictions but we must all protest" - Conscience and the Vietnam War, 1967

"But across the spectrum of attitudes towards violence that can be found among radicals is there a unifying thread? Whether they read Gandhi or Frantz Fanon, all radicals understand the need for action - direct, self-transforming and structural-transforming action. This may be their most creative, most collective insight."

and finally concerning the riots of 1967 in the US of A -
"This bloodlust interpretation ignores the most striking features of the city riots. Violent they certainly were. But the violence, to a startling degree, was focused against property rather than people. There were very few cases of injury to persons, and the vast majority of rioters were not involved at all in attacking people...From the facts, an unmistakable pattern emerges: a handful of Negroes used gunfire substantially to intimidate, not to kill; and all of the other participants had a different target - property....I am aware that there are many who wince at the distinction between property and persons, who hold both sacrosanct. My views are not so rigid. A life is sacred. Property is intended to serve life, and no matter how much we surround it with rights and respect, it has no personal being. It is part of the earth man[sic]walks on;it is not[human]."

Henry David Thoreau:
"The question is not about the weapon but the spirit in which you use it"

before you say more take a deep breath and really think about this stuff...don't go around trying to use Gandhi, MLK Jr or principles of nonviolence to exclude people...study up and don't let them divide the movement, and most of all keep your eyes open. For if we let a rift develop to wide, they will just start killing certain people or locking them up, and then there goes our freedom.

Zapata Vive!! La Lucha Sigue!!

From Berkeley - ChuckE