The Border Patrol 6 prepare for trial and call for resistance, as the Arpaio 5 cases come to an end

The six people who locked down at the Tucson sector Border Patrol headquarters last May, demanding the end of border militarization amongst many other anti-border demands, are fighting their charges and calling for additional action. While their trial kicks off in Tucson tomorrow, there will be a concert benefiting the Border Patrol 6 (BP6) organized by the comrades from the Border Opposition Action Fund to be held at the Dry River Radical Resource Center tonight featuring bands and speakers.

The BP6 are also asking for people to join them this week at the opening of their trial at 2PM on Wednesday, February 23 at the Tucson City Court, located at 103 E. Alameda St. Tucson, AZ. Their will be a solidarity presence that will be meeting up at the Joel D. Valdez Pima County Public Library (101 North Stone Avenue, Tucson, AZ) at 1:30 PM for a rally and march to the city court. The event organizers are requesting that people interested in attending the rally bring signs and banners, instruments and other noise-makers, and comfortable walking shoes.

In addition to the calls for solidarity at the trial, the BP6 issued a statement earlier this month in which they announced their decision to take their trespassing cases to trial. Along with this information they included a series of demands so vast that they aren't so much demands to be answered by the federal government, but rather giving direction to those struggling against border militarization, as if to say "these are the steps to take for the dissolution of the national territorial boundary along the southwestern United States." Thoroughly anti-colonial, it addresses the necessity of free movement for O'odham people, the original inhabitants of this occupied territory, but it doesn't end there.

Yes, the border wall suffocates the O'odham communities on the other side of the border line, but O'odham people also suffer through the manned checkpoints, the camera eyes of the aerial drones, and the disturbance of cultural practices and sacred sites caused by the Border Patrol and its agents. However, the O'odham do not suffer alone, nor do they resist alone. Hundreds of miles east of the southern Arizona borderlands, there are Lipan Apache grassroots efforts resisting the same imposition of the border wall and subsequent militarization in their own traditional lands.

The authors of the BP6 trial statement didn't have a narrow definition of solidarity in mind when they wrote this document. Instead of calling for a single solidarity rally to correspond with their trial, the BP6 are saying that the best way to show solidarity with them is to take action against the systems of control and domination behind the border apparatus. One of the things I really liked about the call for solidarity is that it links the state's attacks on migrants through legislation and criminalization, the federally granted police powers for cops to terrorize and racially profile communities of color, and the militarization of indigenous lands by the military and federal police agencies as equal parts of the ongoing colonial attack on non-white people in the southwest.

The occupation of the border patrol lobby placed the struggle against borders not as a component of the mainstream immigrant movement and the fight against SB 1070, but rather that the movement in defense of immigrants is situated within the centuries old resistance to colonialism from the indigenous peoples of Arizona. Similarly, as it was pointed out in the DOA statement last year:

We recognize what appears to be an unending historical condition of forced removal here in the Southwestern so-called US. From the murdering of O'odham Peoples and stealing of their lands for the development of what is now known as the metropolitan Phoenix area, to the ongoing forced relocation of more than 14,000 Diné who have been uprooted for the extraction of natural resources just hours north of here, we recognize that this is not a condition that we must accept, it is a system that will continue to attack us unless we act.

Whether we are migrants deported for seeking to organize our own lives (first forced to migrate to a hostile country for work) or working class families foreclosed from our houses, we see the same forces at work. Indeed, in many cases the agents of these injustices are one and the same.

We wish our friends and comrades luck this week as they travel to Tucson to face these charges. Drop all charges against the BP6, free movement for all!


A final update on the Arpaio 5

As another resistance trial begins, the final two cases of the five valley anti-authoritarians and anarchists who were arrested at last year's anti-Arpaio march have finally come to an end. Both Claire and Garyn chose to take their cases to trial, they were tried in a bench trial (no sitting jury, just the judge), and were correct to be confident in their ability to walk away with a "not guilty" decision from the judge. We at PCWC were very happy to hear that our comrades left the courtroom victorious, over a year after their arrests, the state's flimsy case against Claire and Garyn fell apart in under two days of testimony.

As any witness to the police attack at last year's January 16 demonstration can attest, the undercover cops and uniformed snatch squads made arbitrary arrests as they moved through the clouds of pepper spray grabbing who they could. Through the heavy doses of pepper spray it was just as clear that the police had a political motivation in attacking and isolating the militant section of the march, creating a lasting rift between sections of the mainstream movement and those critical of the movement's leadership and strategy.

Perhaps one of the biggest disappointments to come out of the events on January 16 was the manner with which Phoenix New Times columnist Stephen Lemons portrayed the police attack. As I recall, Lemons penned three separate blog entries on the attack, in the first two posts he attempts out the details from a few protesters interviewed and puts some video up, but in the third post he claimed to have seen video footage that conclusively showed an anarchist attack one of the mounted officer who rode into the march. In two of the screen shots posted he specifically noted a demonstrator with a green hoodie who Lemons claimed was attacking the horse. What's interesting is that the video in which Lemons grabbed the screen shot, and claimed to see a person wearing a green hoodie attack the police horse is the very same video that got the person in the green hoodie's case dismissed. It only looks like he's shoving the horse because he was being tackled by a Phoenix cop from behind, something that a single screen shot doesn't show. Where was the screen shot half a second later that showed the Phoenix cop behind him? Why did Lemons want to paint a picture that said anarchists are at fault, whether or not some were acting in self-defense to a coordinated police attack. In addition, where's the follow up article(s) on the not guilty/case dismissal of three of the five arrested?

There's no doubt that Lemons has contributed some valuable reporting on the immigrant movement, and the battles against the rightwing populists of the Phoenix metro area. When the mainstream movement hacks totally ignored the BP6 lockdown and occupation, Lemons wrote glowing praise for those involved, and wrote that he hoped their acts would inspire others. He's written of a number of anarchist actions in solidarity with migrants, or opposing anti-immigrant racists, even though anarchists weren't mentioned by name. We know he likes it when anarchists and anti-racists gave the nazi hell! Hell, he even gave a shoutout on his New Times blog to a fundraising effort we initiated for the BP6.

So rather than enter into a debate with Lemons on the merits of writing an entry on supporting the "good anarchists" whose cases were thrown out, or why the I'd say the "bad anarchists" were never bad, I'd like to draw from an inspiring slogan I was introduced to at the last Beer & Revolution, along with one of my favorite photos from the January 16 DOA contingent. After the years of repression, frame ups, and state attacks from police, our Chilean anarchist comrades have managed to capture in one concise sentence the tension that exists when the actions of a movement in resistance brings imprisonment, and how this resistance is justified to the rest of society. Quite simply:

"We're not innocent, we're not guilty, we're your enemies"

Nazis patrol Pinal County, a history of the resistance so far, and the always looming question of why the Right suffers no hang up about non-violence.

Today I want to highlight three things that I see as related and I think some readers will, too. As the situation gets worse and worse here in Arizona, even as we chalk up some successes here and there, it's worth taking a moment to consider the circumstances of our revolt and ways to consider the ideas and movements that manifest around us and in which we participate.

As leftist organizers, movement hacks, non-profiteers, wannabe politicos, student dreamers and all the other assorted movement professionals pour into Arizona to celebrate their "Freedom Summer" at our expense, I find the need to reflect particularly pressing. And, believe me, I can feel these movement types pressing in from all sides these days. I wonder, do they know what they are in for? Not that ignorance would stop them from telling me what I ought to do while they're on vacation in the state I've lived in my entire life.

If I said in an earlier article that those people who move here bring their biases with them, for which we are collectively blamed, the same is true for activists from out of state. In an era of "Freedom Summer (redux)" and SDS (respawned), how could it be otherwise?

Force for liberation or recuperation? Or attack on radicals and those who have already made up their minds not to compromise? "Freedom summer" certainly begs the question. One thing for sure, those of us who live here almost certainly will be left to clean up the mess when the Fall semester comes and the boys and girls of Summer have gone back to their leftist ghettos to update their resumes.

THE NATIONAL SOCIALIST MOVEMENT PATROLS PINAL COUNTY

Check out, for instance, the always amusing (if still sometimes wrong) Feathered Bastard column over at the Phoenix New Times, where Stephen Lemons writes about the local NSM chapter (who we confronted last year). Lemons points out perennial tubby bear Nazi JT Ready's call out to his racist comrades to conduct armed patrols in Southern Arizona for migrants.

The article is interesting for a several reasons, but one of the things I picked up on was Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu's failure to denounce the Nazi composition of the patrols. Sure, he says that he doesn't think the patrols would be helpful, but it seems as if Babeu, like the local media (with the exception of Lemons), has opted to treat Ready's little Nazi crew as legitimate, giving him a pass on his white supremacist beliefs and his many violent threats. Consider the fact the two media headlines about the event identify the NSM in the title only as a "militia", not as Nazis or even a "Nazi militia". A more honest characterization would surely change the way people view the action.

Indeed, when asked by Lemons about what he thought about the patrols, Babeu said, "Local law enforcement can't handle this on our own, yet it will only complicate our concerns to have untrained and armed citizens, who are not from Pinal County - patrolling our desert areas." Well, sure, I suppose it might. But is there anything particularly remarkable about those armed patrols being conducted by the National Socialist Movement, Babeu? Not worthy of comment? This reflects the general climate here in Arizona these days.

For me it's particularly noteworthy because I pointed out in my analysis of the anti-speed camera movement last summer the inherent problems of the leaders of main anti-camera group allying with Sheriff Babeu precisely because it opened the door to the reinforcement of white supremacy, rather than taking the opportunity to challenge it that rejecting his support (and, later, that of Sheriff Joe) would have provided. Instead, ideologically unable to articulate a strictly "no-cameras" position, they chose an argument that offered more police as a substitute for cameras, which naturally brings with it the well-known racist enforcement Arizona police are known for. This weak-kneed comment from Babeu, either because he sympathizes or because the radicalism of the fascist NSM has mainstreamed enough that he worries about challenging it, seems to go towards further proving that point.

One last point before I move on. The boldness of the NSM lately in carrying their firearms to rallies, to interviews, in displaying them to the media, in carrying them on patrols and in sporting them at counter-protests, ought to give everyone pause, not least of all any anarchists who are not currently able to defend themselves. Self-defense ought to be on everyone's mind these days. Never forget that Nazis like these aren't just the voice of white reaction against people of color and for the defense of the privileges of whiteness, they are also the sword tip of Capital's attack on those who would truly challenge the capitalist order, such as anarchists.

THE MONSOON STORM LOOMS IN ARIZONA

Next, I want to point out to readers the excellent article posted up yesterday by our comrades at Survival Solidarity out of Tucson. Just in time for the monsoons that alternately scorch and then drench Arizona day after day this time of year, they have provided for us a map of where we have been and where we may be going, at the same time they cleverly reveal the way the border imposes itself in relations far beyond those at la linea.

I like this analysis because it fits very well into the (not strictly) insurrectionist view of Capital reproducing itself everywhere at all times not just in our social relations but likewise even within the contradiction between Capital's demand for cheap, precarious labor and it's concomitant fear of the need to self-organize in defense of its every day and never-ending attacks. Of course, perhaps outside that, or at least parallel to it, lies the demand of American capitalism for a reactionary white working class that will lead the way in attacking its most exploited elements.

The piece does a really good job of making clear the violence, generally unspoken, that underlies and pervades the enforcement of these social relations and, naturally, which must at the same time be reflected in the fight to define ourselves against these illegitimate impositions. As Derek Jensen has, I think, quite usefully pointed out, violence that goes down the social hierarchy generally goes unremarked on while violence that with an upward trajectory, aimed at the exploiter, always elicits condemnation from the system and its defenders. Perhaps there's more than a little of this in the media's hysteria over the largely non-existent problem of migrant-caused violence versus the normalization afforded unmistakable violent threats to people of color represented by the NSM.

NON-VIOLENCE PROTECTS THE STATE AND THE COLONIAL MASTER

Lastly, I want to share an audio interview with Peter Gelderloos and Gord Hill. Gelderloos will be known to folks familiar with PCWC's "Beer & Revolution" social night. Traveling with the Greek anarchists, Gelderloos is perhaps best known for his book "How Non-Violence Protects the State" (PDF here) which, I'm happy to say, quotes a little pamphlet I wrote many years ago a couple times.

Hill, perhaps less familiar to people, is most recently the author of "500 Years of Indigenous Resistance, the Comic Book", in which Hill sets out to accomplish the admirable goal of demolishing the myth of the conquest of Indigenous peoples of North America: that on one hand they were felled by disease or that on the other defeated by the violence of an inherently superior settler state. In fact, he asserts, there was plenty of resistance, taking a variety of forms, and that that resistance often succeeded in dealing severe blows to the colonizer.

In the interview, with features both of them, the two do a wonderful job of breaking down the ideological underpinnings of non-violence/pacifism, in particular the class relations that infuse them. Hill takes a swipe at the non-profit industrial complex as a key element in maintaining the domination of the often a-historical assertions of the effectiveness of the strategies. It also tackles head on the tendency of the enforcers of non-violence/pacifism to act as the vanguard of state repression while claiming to be protecting the movement. This is accomplished by singling out those militants who deviate from the orthodoxy. I know we've seen this here in Arizona many times.

As the professional managers of revolt race to take their well-paid positions here in Arizona, these points are worth paying attention to. I think Gelderloos and Hill also successfully demolish some of the key mythologies that the defenders of non-violence/pacifism uphold, including exposing the false idea of the "public" as a construct of the media itself. The inherent authoritarianism of non-violence/pacifism likewise get a good working over.

WELCOMING THE CRISIS BY NAME

Overall, I think that regular readers of this blog will find the three pieces cited above to be quite complementary and well-worth your investigations. The fact is, as Survival Solidarity points out (and perhaps even the boneheads in the NSM understand), we stand today on the verge of social explosion. Perhaps we can feel the winds sucking in as the spark even now demands more and more oxygen. Or maybe that's us holding our breath in this blazing heat. It's hard to tell these days.

Who knows what's coming? The white supremacist system continues to descend into crisis, driven by the demands of its white working and middle class base for the respect of their petty privileges in an age of economic collapse. It's the bastard class politics of whiteness. We at PCWC continue organizing in our neighborhood, intervening in movements and working in close solidarity with our comrades in struggle both to defend against the attack but also to turn the crisis in another direction, one in which whiteness is not the means of capital's assault, but instead the collapse of which opens the door for a broad and much-needed house cleaning.

Still, the rising strength and boldness of the reactionary right combined with the complete and utterly predictable impotency of the liberal left give pause for careful thought. In a year that has already seen several small outbreaks of violence from the right, I would be surprised if there wasn't a violent and remarkable -- even by media standards -- explosion from them or those they inspire at some point before the summer's flame is finally extinguished. Clearly that is their goal.

I'm thinking today of a line from the song "This Gun Is Not a Gun" by the British songwriter, Chris T-T: "This cowardice is not cowardice/ We're just taking a breath before we do this."

Inhale and then into the fight!