I think it’s a good statement, short and to the point. The replies are absolute poison though, hasbara bots really honing in on them. Feds will try and make something stick but it doesn’t sound like he was even a member.
I have no criticism of this statement. This is a tactical statement and needs to be understood as such. However, i hope that the PSL leadership understands that they can only delay the inevitable. Gaining more time to prepare is valuable, of course, but sooner or later, any serious communist organization will be criminalized and forced underground as the country’s conditions approach a revolutionary situation. They will not be able to employ their current strategy forever. They should be prepared for that eventuality both mentally and organizationally. Every communist should. Especially since we cannot predict when and how fast the situation will accelerate.
Makes sense, PSL shouldnt risk their org over a based act of adventurism, especially since they dont really have the support and infraestructure to go underground
He had a brief association with one branch of the PSL that ended in 2017.
Not surprised. The sort of person who would do this kind of individualist adventurism doesn’t last long in the PSL.
Smart response since this isn’t a free speech issue but a state security issue that could create severe legal blowback for them
I initially thought otherwise but, nah, you know what, I already disagree with myself. This was a fine statement and didn’t really veer into any Zionist apologia. They’re still going to be targeted though, probably unavoidable.
Anyway, I hope they make it but it won’t be because this statement saved them.
Hope comrades here in the PSL stay safe.
Honestly with the responses I almost wonder if “He was not a member but we support his actions” would’ve been a better statement
Like, obviously I understand why they didn’t do that, but everyone’s acting like they did anyway, so why bother downplaying? At some point just say “Killing Zionists is good, end of sentence”
Edit: Sorry to be very clear I’m not saying they should have done this. This is just a comment about how even when they say the polite and proper thing people call them terrorists anyway
eh, no need to self-torch an org, especially over reply guys
They could have omitted the do not support part entirely from the statement
Meh, whatever. For based akzione there is unity of fields (which was nearly shattered over minor actions), and americans are largely passive, so it’s not like even direct call to
from psl would increase anything material, they are not bla with infrastructure to do that sort of stuff (and bla was not that effective due to chosen methods being extremely obvious, but same is true here so besides the point)Is Bla Red Army Faction?
black liberation army , of assata shakur fame wiki link
They didn’t say why they didn’t support it. If it was “we do not condemn ANY violence EVER” I’d agree with you. But the PSL does not support adventurism and they didn’t explicitly condemn it either.
PSL has nothing to gain by associating with this act, so why risk it at the moment?
Ehh, their lawyers probably said to put it in for good luck.
This is probably the right move. “Do not support” falls short of “condemn,” and now is absolutely not the time for them getting caught in the weeds explaining the nuances of how adventurism contradicts democratic centralism and posing hypotheticals like “this would be good if we decided to start doing assassinations in a committee.”
PSL leadership is probably afraid they’re going to be terminated the way Ferguson organizers were
Yeah like I said, I know why and I do think it’s the right decision but fuck seeing the responses makes me go “Why bother”
that would be a massive security liability, the state is already black bagging people just for op-eds.
And let’s be honest, with enough traction, they qill be branded a terrorist org by the us administration either way
Absolutely not. The risk of that outweighs the benefit.
the benefit.
Which, tbh, is none. Anyone saying they’d join this organization if they defended this guy or something is lying and if not is probably very immature anyways.
saying something like that would prevent many people from openly supporting the PSL out of fear of retribution, both from the past and in the future
One of the DSA chapters I was in had some things going down before I joined. I didn’t know what it was but learned a bit through my time there. In short, they were infiltrated and some members got put on some list. And that’s just DSA, way before the more visible Palestine movement.
I know of some people during the occupy movement who had their calls tapped and put on list.
Orgs/people in them will be targeted and hit regardless no matter how tame, minor, powerful etc. I think covering your ass is fine, especially because this person wasn’t an active member and it’s just libel, but being so scared of feds that you end up burying your head in the sand is turbo lib shit. We all knew feds were a thing before organizing, we should have been had opsec and failsafe plans for things like this. If everytime someone on our side, even if not in an org, does something like this and gets condemned for being tired of waiting. Then what movement are we building? I vaguely remember Aaron Bushnell getting condemned for his choice in resistance.
I think this event will change things, I’ve seem mostly positive takes personally, and maybe organizing can change for the better to be at least more secure when[it’s not if because if we’re serious then they’re coming] the fed fight comes.
Like I said, it’s good they covered their ass and the statement is relatively tame but this is something we all should’ve been thinking about decades ago.
Yeah I don’t think there’s a reason for an aboveground political org to put a target on its back to explicitly support this guy but you’re 100% correct. Anecdotally I’ve also heard of infiltration, in both anarchist direct action groups and more tame socialist groups. And with DSA in particular I constantly see people behaving like wreckers, though it’s hard to distinguish kids getting into petty drama and taking it too far from fed wreckers sometimes.
Opsec concerns… it’s going to be hard. Every other door has a goddamn ring camera on it. Almost everyone carries a smartphone everywhere. Traffic lights all have cameras. And you can’t erase the past, if you’re already on a list from being related to DSA or food not bombs or doing local mutual aid, are you just inviting further scrutiny on your org by being involved? I guess the idea is to blend in. But it’s hard to not end up on the radar of local cops if you’re doing anything remotely cool, and already being on their radar seems like a mighty fine way to get popped when doing any more serious actions. We need mass mobilization I guess, it can’t just be the same old activists doing everything.
I will say though, it’s at a point where its probably more important to do something than to not get caught (though both is ofc the goal)
Opsec is very hard these days. But it’s harder for them to find bodies to infiltrate people than it is for them to just login to a website and pull any info they need. Going offline or even off of public social media is one of the easiest ways but this should be org discussions
yeah I just don’t see going offline as a total solution at all (I assume you don’t either)
I mean yes it’s a good thing to do but you still exist in the built environment with all the things I mentioned and more all surveilling you, and you don’t even get to reap the benefits of modern communications. I think you need community buy in on some level to deal with some of these. mass shaming and defacing of cameras would go a long way. We are at a point where not having a phone or taking even mild precautions makes people think you’re a drug dealer. That level of penetration of society means cops can just look for anyone they can’t track rather than find a needle in a haystack. or at least I fear we’re there.
I vaguely remember Aaron Bushnell getting condemned for his choice in resistance.
people thought it wouldn’t be effective.
If anyone actually reads this and thinks “ah they should’ve praised the guy and said they supported him”, please don’t
I get why this is their statement and I agree that it’s the best they can say in this situation, but I wish the Western left was big enough and militant enough that they could add one more sentence like “those zionists nevertheless deserved it” to the end of it.
I’m already written too much in this thread, but I just made the mistake of reading CPUSA’s statement and it (as usual) makes PSL look like Ansar Allah by comparison. To hear CPUSA tell it, apartheid was apparently defeated in South Africa exclusively through legal nonviolent protest and violence has no place in the “fight” for Palestinian liberation. This probably is the best statement PSL could realistically make in this deeply evil settler colony.
Couldn’t be me disavowing support for armed resistance to genocide.
You don’t have public offices and staff for the state to kidnap or kill
Or family and friends. People need to remember that if you decide to come at them, they will come at you even harder and will not hesitate to kill everyone and everything you love for even having the pretense to challenge their monopoly on violence.
I don’t. No one needs to convince me that it’s scary, risky, and dangerous to be a target of the empire. It’s also something unavoidable to anyone who’s ever called themselves a communist. The state can kidnap or kill any of us at any time, and we’re watching them do it every day. No combination of magic words exists that will protect a party committed to the revolutionary overthrow of a state from being targeted with state violence.
I don’t demand that anyone throw away their lives because I say so, and no one should take me seriously if I did. What I won’t do is stand shoulder to shoulder with the empire and disavow anyone with the courage and integrity to risk their lives taking direct action to bring about the change we all spend every day hoping someone else will bring.
I’m not the leadership of PSL. I can only assume they believe they have a good faith reason to think there’s some tactical benefit to saying whatever they’re saying rather than just saying nothing. I don’t see it. I hope they’re right. I hope it’s not just useless capitulation, and I hope they’re getting whatever they think they need to out of it, but I don’t see it. I don’t need to look at the replies to their statement to know that not a single person believes that PSL members genuinely oppose violence in pursuit of liberation. What would be the point of them if they did? CPUSA already exists.
Edit: I recognize that “do not support” is different than “disavow” as another commenter pointed out. That’s true, and I’m sure it’s something they gave a lot of thought to. I’m still not convinced the audience reading it would interpret them differently or believe either.
It’s also something unavoidable to anyone who’s ever called themselves a communist.
Yeah I’ve been reading some history of leftist movements, and right now the relative lack of persecution we have in the west feels like the exception rather than the rule. Be prepared for the winds to blow from another direction. Though overall, I think the response was “smart”. The PSL has to consider things like their current resources, momentum, revolutionary environment, etc and I think in that context the response was correct.
Fair enough comrade, happy to have you in the fight
Aren’t they saying, “that’s not our guy” and “we don’t support adventurism”? Organized armed resistance is very different from an unaffiliated rando assassinating Israeli functionaries in this way. The action isn’t even unambiguously directed at the state of Israel or Zionism. What would be the benefit of supporting it at all?
Pretty much this. This guy wasn’t a Hamas fighter blowing up an IDF tank, he was a random person who targeted two other random people.
Eh, disagree. They contributed to the war machine, the world is a better place without them
That’s a slightly different conversation and I’m actually with you on that one.
one was a Christofascist German
they were not random people
I’m assuming the manifesto about the guy’s alleged motives circulating elsewhere on here is true. I have no objection with the facts that PSL is not currently affiliated with this guy, PSL did not plan or sanction this specific action, or that PSL does not encourage individual lawbreaking. I’m not expecting or encouraging PSL to put out a statement that says “this was good, and we like it!”, or whatever “support” would look like for an action they played no role in and had no prior knowledge of.
PSL chose to put out a statement, and I think it’s worth considering what they were trying to accomplish by doing so. I think a straightforward reading of the statement would conclude that it was done for PR rather than legal reasons. If there were any evidence tying PSL to the alleged crime, this statement would certainly do nothing to limit their liability. Edit: I’m not a lawyer. Maybe someone more qualified than me knows of some legal value to a statement like this. If done for PR reasons, I think a straightforward reading of the statement implies an intent to avoid negative attention from Zionists or the state.
Put plainly: it hasn’t and it won’t. The only statement that an antizionist revolutionary communist party might make that has a small chance of avoiding negative attention from Zionists or the state is “we’re not a party, we hate communists, we oppose revolution, and we love Israel”. Even then, I would expect the likely response to be something along the lines of “stop resisting and get in the van, scum”.
Negative attention from Zionists and the imperial state is the unavoidable cost of having a conscience during this ongoing genocide. It is a perquisite to any kind of success. Mahmoud Kalil, Rumeysa Ozturk, and Moshen Madawi are all proof that those who condemn terrorism, obey every law, and engage collectively in peaceful protest will get black bagged by the empire all the same. Until Palestine is free, I’m not personally going to spend my limited time on this earth announcing my criticism of Hamas’s optics or Hezbollah’s tactics, or accuse them of undermining the cause by being unpalatable to the people that already want them dead. “Collective action is more powerful than individual action”. Yes. Sure. Good. Individual action is still better than no action. The day I see any collective action from imperial citizens that materially changes the ratio of dead Palestinians to living settlers more than this guy allegedly did is the day I’ll say “this fool should have simply done that instead”. Until that day comes, I don’t have a word of condemnation for someone who sacrificed more than I ever have for Palestinian liberation whether I think he did it “the right way” or not.
How would claiming a guy who wasn’t acting on behalf of the party benefit the PSL? or advance their anti genocide agenda?
I’m not shedding any tears over the dead Israelis.
Individual action is better than no action
PSL doesn’t support adventurism, from their perspective individual action is specifically not effective. They’re interested in organizing a mass revolutionary movement, getting tangled in a random person’s mess doesn’t advance their agenda. You’re obviously free to disagree though!
How would claiming a guy who wasn’t acting on behalf of the party benefit the PSL?
They shouldn’t. I wouldn’t expect or want them to claim responsibility for the actions of an unaffiliated person who clearly acted without the benefit of collective organization or any expectation of personal survival. I’m just sad to see (in general) the same reflexive urge to proactively condemn people like this, or Luigi Mangioni, or Willem van Spronsen every time someone decides they’d rather risk their life alone doing something about the horrors than spend the rest of their lives watching them. The tragedy of these individual actions isn’t the actions, it’s that they didn’t have a hundred comrades at their side while they (allegedly) did them.
The tragedy of these individual actions isn’t the actions, it’s that they didn’t have a hundred comrades at their side while they (allegedly) did them.
That’s the difference between adventurism and organized armed resistance! When you’re organized and militant, the comrades are right there with you by design and the impact can be much greater.
Based.
Liz: don’t do it
Brace: but if you do…
Liz: we disavow
“do not support it” can also be they just dont support adventurism, which is in line for them.
Ngl though I badly want someone to drop a “the chickens are coming home to roost”
I’m sure this is somewhat the sentiment of most PSL members and leadership. They aren’t mourning two random Zionists. But publicly they have to keep distance from it and obviously this type of adventurism is not in line with their tactics
too late. the headline is already out there, which will allow the trump admin to crush the party completely with no pushback by the general public
rip
Libs will sigh a breath of relief that they don’t have to worry about those ‘tankies’ any more.
“Excellent, we got rid of the tankies! What’s next? …Wait, why are you calling me ‘commie’?”
The average lib might not push back, but I think attempting to dismantle the PSL by force would radicalize a lot of people, and might push us into the cool zone. A fire will be lit.
no it won’t lol
I think the “correct” statement would this is a negative externalities of genocide and that when you do evil people aren’t going to respond well to it. As that will get someone arrested I think the equilibrium statement is something to the effect of, " we have nothing to say because the government is not respecting first amendment rights at the moment" They chose the safest option and I am not mad about it.
