159.-the-making-of-outside-agitators.pdf
Web PDF • Imposed PDF • Raw TXT (OCR)
What They Mean
When They Say Peace
&
The Making of
“Outside Agitators”
mn |
Two Essays on the Rebellion in Ferguson
WHAT THEY MEAN
when they say peace
“PM COMMITTED TO MAKING SURE the forces of peace and justice
prevail,” Missouri Governor Jay Nixon said in Ferguson on Saturday,
August 16, after a week of conflicts sparked by the police murder of
teenager Michael Brown. “If we're going to achieve justice, we first
must have and maintain peace”
Is that how it works—first you impose peace, then you
achieve justice? And what does that mean, the forces of peace and
justice? What kind of peace and justice are we talking about here?
As everyone knows, if it weren't for the riots in Ferguson,
most people would never have heard about the murder of Michael
Brown. White police officers kill over a hundred black men every
year without most of us hearing anything about it. That silence—
the absence of protest and disruption—is the peace which Governor
Nixon wants us to believe will produce justice.
This is the same narrative we always hear from the authori-
ties, First, we must submit to their control; then they will address
our concerns. All the problems we face, they insist, are caused by our
refusal to cooperate. This argument sounds most persuasive when it
is dressed up in the rhetoric of democracy: those are “our” laws we
should shut up and obey—“our” cops who are shooting and gassing
us—“our” politicians and leaders begging us to return to business as,
usual, But to return to business as usual is to step daintily over the
bodies of countless Michael Browns, consigning them to the cem-
etery and oblivion.
Governor Nixon's peace is what happens after people have
been forcefully pacified. His justice is whatever it takes to hoodwink
us into accepting peace on those terms—petitions that go directly
into the recycle bin, lawsuits that never produce more than a slap
2|What They Mean When They Say Peace
on the wrist for the killers in uniform, campaigns that may advance
the career of an activist or politician but will never put an end to the
killing of unarmed black men.
Keeping the Peace in Ferguson
PERMIT US TO PROPOSE ANOTHER IDEA about how to address con-
flicts—what we might call the anarchist approach. The basic idea is
straightforward enough. Real peace cannot be imposed it can only
emerge as a consequence of the resolution of conflict. Hence the
classic chant: no justice, no peace.
Left to itself, a state of imbalance tends to return to equilib-
rium. To maintain imbalances, you have to introduce force into the
situation. The greater the disparities, the more force it takes to pre-
serve them. This is as true in society as it is in physics.
‘That means you can't have rich people and poor people with-
out police to impose that unequal relation to resources. You can't
have whiteness, which inflects and stabilizes that class divide, with-
out a vast infrastructure of racist courts and prisons. You can't keep
two anda half million people—nearly a million of them black men—
behind bars without the constant exertion of potentially lethal vio-
lence. You can't enforce the laws that protect the wealth of good
liberals like Governor Nixon without officers like Darren Wilson
killing black men by the hundred.
‘The militarization of the police is not an aberration—itis the
necessary condition ofa society based on hierarchy and domination.
It is not just the police that have been militarized, but our entire way
oflife. Anyone who does not see this is not living on the business end
of the guns. These are the forces of peace and justice, the mechanisms
that “keep the peace” in a dramatically imbalanced social order.
Sometimes they appear as surveillance cameras, security
guards, police stopping and searching or shooting us. Other times,
when that becomes too controversial, the forces of peace and justice
reappear as the good cops who really seem to care about us, the ear-
nest politicians who want to make everything better—whatever it
What They Mean When They Say Peace | 3
“All _sides root eré are a select
number of pi e—distinct from
pret SEN (etna a seer ccri Si ean MED
takes to get public opinion back on the side of the ones who shoot
the tear gas. Still other times, the forces of peace and justice are com-
munity leaders begging us to leave the streets, accusing us of being
“outside agitators,” or promising some more effective outlet for our
rage if only we will cooperate—anything to thwart, discredit, or defer
immediate concrete struggle against injustice. In every case, its the
same swindle: peace now, justice later.
But real peace is impossible until we put an end to the violent
imposition of inequalities. All the conflicts that are currently sup-
pressed by the forces of order—between developers and residents,
between rich and poor, between the racially privileged and everyone
else—must be permitted to rise to the surface. Make it impossible for
anyone to coerce anyone else into accepting a relationship that is not
in her best interest: then, and only then, there will be an incentive for
everyone to address conflicts and reach accord.
This is the only way forward, but it’s a daunting prospect. Itis
not surprising that people often blame those who stand up for them-
selves rather than coming to terms with how deep the divisions in
our society run. This explains why so many apparently well-meaning
4| What They Mean When They Say Peace
pundits have pretended not to understand why people would engage
in looting as a form of protest against the murder of Michael Brown,
‘The same constant imposition of force that took Michael Brown's life
separates millions like him from the resources they need on a daily
basis. In this light, looting makes perfect sense—as a way of solving
the immediate problems of poverty, of rebelling against the violence
of the authorities, and of emphasizing that change has to be more
thoroughgoing than mere police reform.
Let us not resent those who get out of hand for reminding us
of the conflicts that remain unresolved in our society. On the con-
trary, we should be grateful. They are not disturbing the peace; they
are simply bringing to light that there never was any peace, there
never was any justice in the first place. At tremendous risk to them-
selves, they are giving us a gift: a chance to recognize the suffering
around us and to rediscover our capacity to identify and sympathize
with those who experience it.
For we can only experience tragedies such as the death of
Michael Brown for what they are when we see other people respond-
ing to them as tragedies. Otherwise, unless the events touch us
directly, we remain numb, If you want people to register an injustice,
you have to react to it immediately, the way people did in Ferguson.
You must not wait for some better moment, not plead with the
authorities, not formulate a sound bite for some imagined audi-
ence representing public opinion. You must immediately proceed to
action, showing that the situation is serious enough to warrant it.
Ferguson is not unique—there are countless such towns
across the United States, in which the same dynamics play out
between police and people. ‘The rebellion in Ferguson will surely
not be the last of its kind. Those of us who don’t buy into Governor
Nixon's program of peace now, justice later must prepare ourselves
for the struggles that are soon to unfold. May we meet one day in a
world without tear gas, in which skin color is not a weapon.
THE MAKING OF
O) Agitators"
"Outside Agi
On Avaust 19, TEN DAYS AFTER police murdered Michael Brown
in Ferguson, Missouri, a slew of corporate media stories appeared
charging that “criminals” and “outside agitators” were responsible
for clashes during the protests. CNN alleged that “all sides agree
there are a select number of people—distinct from the majority of
protesters—who are fomenting violence” quoting a State Highway
Patrol Captain, a State Senator, and a former FBI assistant director
to confirm this.
‘Today's militarized police understand that they are oper-
ating on two different battlefields at once: not only the battlefield
of the streets, but also the battlefield of discourse. So long as most
people remain passive, the police can harass, beat, arrest, and even
kill people with impunity—certain people, anyway. But sometimes
protests get “out of hand,” which is to say, they actually impact the
authorities’ ability to keep the population under control. Then, with-
out fail, police and politicians proceed to the second strategy in their
playbook: they declare that they support the protesters and are there
to defend their rights, but a few bad apples are spoiling the bunch.
In this new narrative, the enemies of the protesters are not the police
who are gassing and shooting people, but those who resist the police
and their violence, When this strategy works, it enables the police
to go back to harassing, beating, arresting, and killing people with
impunity—certain people, anyway.
Sure enough, a few hours after these articles about “criminals”
and “outside agitators” appeared, the St. Louis police killed another
man less than three miles from Ferguson. Here we see how defining
people as “criminals” and “outsiders” is itself an act of violence, set-
ting the stage for further violence. You can predict police behavior
at protests with a fair degree of accuracy based on the thetoric they
deploy in advance to prepare the terrain.
6 | The Making of “Outside Agitators”
So when we hear them say “outside agitators,” we know the
authorities are getting ready to spill blood, All the better, from their
perspective, if people buy into this rhetoric and police themselves
so no officer has to get his hands dirty. This is often called for in the
name of avoiding violence, but self-policing returns us to the same
passivity that enables police violence to occur in the first place. How
many people would have even heard about Michael Brown if not for
the “criminals” and “agitators” who brought his death to our atten-
tion? Self-policing also preserves the impression that we all choose
The Making of “Outside Agitators” | 7
this state of affairs of our own free will, reinforcing the impression
that anyone who does not is an outsider.
What isan “outside agitator” anyway? Deploying the National
Guard to a town of 21,000 people—isnt that outside agitation? When
Occupy Oakland was in the news in 2011, there was a lot of rheto-
ric about “outside agitators” coming to the city to start trouble with
police, until it came to light that over 90% of Oakland cops lived
outside of Oakland. Surely if anyone deserves to be labeled outside
agitators—in Ferguson, Oakland, or any other community around
8| The Making of “Outside Agitators”
the US—it is the authorities.
But what about people who come from out of town to par-
ticipate in protests? ‘The CNN article claimed that “among those
arrested are residents of Chicago, Brooklyn, Washington, San
Francisco, Austin, Des Moines, and Huntsville, Alabama, according
to jail records.”
This might sound like convincing evidence to middle class
readers, But anyone who has been poor and precarious knows that
the permanent address you give when you are arrested may not
be the same as the place you actually live. You might give a differ-
ent address because you aren't sure your current housing will last,
because the landlord doesn’t know your place has more people in it
than are named on the lease, or simply because you don't want local
vigilantes to know where to find you, Instead, you might give a more
reliable long-term address, perhaps from another state.
Still, let’s imagine that some of these arrestees who gave out-
of-town addresses are in Ferguson for the very first time, Wouldn't
that make them outside agitators? Perhaps it would, if the issue
was specific to Ferguson alone and they had no stake in it, But in
“Chicago, Brooklyn, Washington, San Francisco, Austin, Des Moines,
and Huntsville, Alabama” the police have killed black men under
identical circumstances. The militarization, brutality, and systematic
racism of the police are in effect all around the country, not just in
Ferguson. When people are suffering the same forms of oppression
everywhere, it makes sense for us to come to each other's assistance,
to make common cause.
This is not outside agitation. It is solidarity.
So long as we understand the problems we face individualis-
tically, we will be powerless against them. Solidarity has always been
the most important tool of the oppressed. This is why the authori-
ties go to such lengths to demonize anyone who has the courage to
take risks to support others. Throughout the civil rights struggles
of the 20th century, participants who are celebrated as heroes today
were tarred as “outside agitators.” The term has a long history on the
tongues of racists and reactionaries.
The Making of “Outside Agitators” | 9
In this light, it is ironic, if not unexpected, that one of the
corporate media stereotypes of the “outside agitator” is the “white
anarchist”—as if all anarchists were white. It’s no longer considered
decorous to call people race traitors, so the allegation is inverted:
white people who fight alongside black and brown people must not
have their best interests at heart, certainly not as much as the police
and corporate media do. Although declaring oneself an anarchist
does not magically free a white person of the racism that pervades
our society, it is racist indeed to attribute all the unrest in Ferguson
to “white anarchists,” denying the existence or agency of black and
brown participants.
‘This is the corporate media attempting to play a race card
of its own, in order to create divisions between those who struggle
against police brutality. It’s not surprising that the authorities would
seek to create discord along racial lines—one of the chief reasons
race was invented was to divide those who would otherwise have a
common interest in overturning hierarchy.
‘To emphasize this once more, we have to understand the
deployment of rhetoric about “outside agitators” as a military opera-
tion intended to isolate and target an enemy: divide and conquer.
‘The enemy that the authorities are aiming at is predominantly black
and brown, but itis not just a specific social body; it is also an aspect
of our humanity, a part of all of us. ‘The ultimate goal of the police
is not so much to brutalize and pacify specific individuals as it is to
extract rebelliousness itself from the social fabric. They seek to exter-
nalize agitation, so anyone who stands up for herself will be seen as
an outsider, as deviant and antisocial.
‘This would be more likely to succeed if most people were
integrated into comfortable places in their power structure. But the
problem with their strategy, at this particular historical juncture, is
that more and more of us are finding ourselves outside: outside a
steady workplace, outside a recognized position of political legiti-
macy, outside the incentives that reward people for keeping quiet.
We are finding ourselves outside, and finding each other. We are
finding that it doesn't make sense to go on being docile, that our only
hope is to stake everything on fighting together for our collective
10 | The Making of “Outside Agitator”
survival rather than contending amongst ourselves for a place in the
hierarchy.
Next time, the authorities will be lucky if the disturbances
are confined to a single town, so they can accuse those who go there
of being outside agitators. The racism and police brutality for which
Ferguson is now infamous are widespread. The next conflagration
could spread everywhere, like Occupy did. Stop killing us, or else.
Appendix:
Struggles against the Police—A Reading List
‘The conflict in Ferguson over the murder of Michael Brown is only
the most recent of many such uprisings around the US. This is an
incomplete review of firsthand accounts and analyses of the previous
precedents for struggles against policing.
Los Angeles, CA (April 1992) No We Car't All Just Get Along: Hip
Hop, Gang Unity and the LA Rebellion & From Passive to Active
Spectacle: Afterimages of the LA Riots
Cincinnati, OH (April 2001) How Fast It All Blows Up
Oakland, CA (January 2009) Unfinished Acts: The Context, Conflicts,
and Consequences of the 2009 Oakland Rebellions
Seattle, WA (January to March 2011) Burning the Bridges They Are
Building: Anarchist Strategies Against the Police in the Puget Sound,
Winter 2011
Atlanta, GA (October 2011 to March 2012) Don't Die Wondering:
Atlanta Against the Police Winter 2011-2012
Anaheim, CA (July 2012) The Anaheim Anti-Police Riot, A Love
Story
The Making of “Outside Agitators” | 11
Brooklyn, NY (March 2013) The Flatbush Rebellion
Durham, NC (November 2013 to January 2014) Unforgiving and
Inconsolable: Durham Against the Police
..Finally, from participants in the events in Ferguson, we recom-
mend An Eye for an Eye Makes Our Masters Blind: One Account of
Last Night’s Anti-Police Riot and Let Us Not Become Police, Let Us Not
Become Sheep, both posted at antistatestl.noblogs.org
texts from crimethinc.com
layout by oplopanax publishing