Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 19:25:29 -0700
Subject: Re: Protest Groups Breach Security at Quebec Summit


Madalynn Bohm wrote:

> >As for economic factors... If it wasn't for the State and it's habit of
> >proping up the excesses of Capitalism, people would not be
> >revolting for economic reasons. Therefor, we can lay the blame for
> >starting economically based revolutions in the hands of the State
> >again.
> >
> >Ultimately, revolutions are a simple case of the people exercising
> >their right to defend themselves from oppression.
> >
> >The State inflicts oppression on us, and we are forced to revolt. All
> >responsiblity for starting revolutions, and the violence that happens,
> >is the fault of the State.
> 
> But you can't have it both ways.  We've got to take full responsibility for
> our own actions.  If the state is to be declared responsible for all of the
> bad things that result from a revolution, then it would also be responsible

Where did I make that statement? No where have I abdicated self-responsibility.
We are all responsible for our own actions.

No one else is.

My point was that all revolutions are a response to unbearable oppression.
When Statists attempt to blame their victims for revolting, they need to be
reminded that their actions caused revolution to be necessary. 

> for all of the good that follows.  Blaming some of the negative
> revolutionary fallout on the state not only smacks of the same twisted
> thinking of national governments (think war reparations), but also

So we should accept responsibility for committing the crime of self-defense?

> self-deprecates.  Laying the responsibility for a revolution at the feet of
> "the state" is equivalent to acknowledging its power and superiority over
> oneself.

I disagree. Statists have only themselves to blame for getting hurt as a result
of initiating force against all of us. The notion that acting in self defense
is an acknowledgment of your attacker's power over you is an example of pacifism.

I am *not* a pacifist.