💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › crimethinc-the-making-of-outside-agitators.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 08:50:37. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: The Making of "Outside Agitators"
Author: Crimethinc
Language: en
Topics: insurrection, insurrectionary, CrimethInc., race, black bloc
Source: Retrieved 8 October from [[http://crimethinc.com/texts/r/agitators/index.html]]

Crimethinc

The Making of "Outside Agitators"

On August 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 operating 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, without 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, setting the

stage for further violence. You can predict police behavior at protests

with a fair degree of accuracy based on the rhetoric they deploy in

advance to prepare the terrain.

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 attention?

Self-policing also preserves the impression that we all choose this

state of affairs of our own free will, reinforcing the impression that

anyone who does not is an outsider.

What is an “outside agitator,” anyway? Deploying the National Guard to a

town of 21,000 people—isn’t that outside agitation? When Occupy Oakland

was in the news in 2011, there was a lot of rhetoric 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 the US—it is the authorities.

But what about people who come from out of town to participate in

protests? TheCNN 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 different 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 individualistically, we

will be powerless against them. Solidarity has always been the most

important tool of the oppressed. This is why the authorities 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.

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 operation intended to

isolate and target an enemy: divide and conquer. The enemy that the

authorities are aiming at is predominantly black and brown, but it is

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 externalize

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 legitimacy, 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 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.