I’m not denying anything. I’m challenging you to support your claim that black panther tactics were more effective with actual reasoning or evidence instead of mere assertions.
One could just as easily claim that their campaign was counterproductive—and people do claim this. But what reason is there to believe one claim over the other? I have no position in this debate because I’ve seen no compelling reason to adopt one. As such, I respect anyone who is genuinely working for liberation by any means that seem plausibly likely to push the needle by any amount.
And there are plenty of liberals involved in opposing ICE right now, if you want to focus on that specific issue. And there are some leftists who argue against combatting ICE for various reasons. So it’s not a simple ideological dichotomy like you and OP imply.
This is because leftism and liberalism are broad ideological categories, not homogeneous orthodoxies. There are enemies and allies that fall into both categories in my experience. And after all, we’re all individuals. While ideology and organizations do matter, they only matter insofar as they influence those individual actions.
PS: The article on MLK was interesting but it didn’t really say anything directly related to this topic of tactical effectiveness and its connection to ideological camp.
But how? That’s the key question. No one has succeeded in this yet.
On second thought, I guess it might not be safe for you to articulate your preferred strategy publicly. But if there’s anything you can say in general terms, I’d be interested.
Personally, I think the challenge of dismantling ICE is not a physical or military challenge but a political one. How do we destroy ICE’s popularity to the extent that people stop protecting it, and toppling it becomes feasible? Because today, it simply is not.
I’m not denying anything. I’m challenging you to support your claim that black panther tactics were more effective with actual reasoning or evidence instead of mere assertions.
One could just as easily claim that their campaign was counterproductive—and people do claim this. But what reason is there to believe one claim over the other? I have no position in this debate because I’ve seen no compelling reason to adopt one. As such, I respect anyone who is genuinely working for liberation by any means that seem plausibly likely to push the needle by any amount.
And there are plenty of liberals involved in opposing ICE right now, if you want to focus on that specific issue. And there are some leftists who argue against combatting ICE for various reasons. So it’s not a simple ideological dichotomy like you and OP imply.
This is because leftism and liberalism are broad ideological categories, not homogeneous orthodoxies. There are enemies and allies that fall into both categories in my experience. And after all, we’re all individuals. While ideology and organizations do matter, they only matter insofar as they influence those individual actions.
PS: The article on MLK was interesting but it didn’t really say anything directly related to this topic of tactical effectiveness and its connection to ideological camp.
And I am challenging to praxis liberation…
There are ICE facilities to topple, let’s go!
But how? That’s the key question. No one has succeeded in this yet.
On second thought, I guess it might not be safe for you to articulate your preferred strategy publicly. But if there’s anything you can say in general terms, I’d be interested.
Personally, I think the challenge of dismantling ICE is not a physical or military challenge but a political one. How do we destroy ICE’s popularity to the extent that people stop protecting it, and toppling it becomes feasible? Because today, it simply is not.
See point ¹