Get beaten by nazis, lose your kids

187 posts / 0 new
Last post
N.R.KISSED

Le T wrote:

So, once upon a time I used to post on this internet msg board that took the existance of structual opression as a precondition for conversation. Since that's obviously not the case here, just humour me for a second and assume that CAS, the police, the media and politicians don't just have the best interest of the children at heart but are in fact part of a complex system of oppression.

What this story illustrates is the privilege of choice. These white folks are choosing to join the fight against racism and are being treated the same way as POC and Indigenous Peoples in a racist, colonial society. They are being physically attacked by nazis, they are having their children taken away (or threat of) by CAS, the police are not investigating crimes against them, the politicians are silent, and the media blame them for the obvious action of other people.

The interesting thing is that people (the media, Snert, ect.) suggest that these folks just stop doing what they are doing. And the truth is is that they could choose to stop and all of this would go away. The same is obviously not true for POC and I.Ps. So when we ask these parents to just stop what they are doing for the saftey of their children what we are really saying is "Hey stupid white people, why aren't you taking advantage of your white privilege, like me?!"

So--and I know this is going to be a bit confusing for some--to blame these folks for their situation is an inherently racist arguement.

 

precisely

Maysie Maysie's picture

What Le T said.

 

Le T wrote:
 So, once upon a time I used to post on this internet msg board that took the existance of structual opression as a precondition for conversation. Since that's obviously not the case here, just humour me for a second  

This made me unbearably sad with its truth. Please keep posting, Le T. babble need you.

N.R.KISSED

Wilf Day wrote:

Maysie wrote:
Snert, yes, social control. That's what our institutions do. Anyone who falls out of line (and this is very broadly defined and enforced, onto the communities that NRK mentioned) gets a kick. That's what this is.

I know what you mean, However, you might also keep two points in mind:

1.  Any CAS I have heard of is short-staffed and struggling with their budget. They do not usually go looking for trouble; they have enough on their plate already. Although a few staffers seem to be unusually worried, to my mind, about second-hand smoke.

2.  Most teachers are left-of-centre. Most social workers are too.

Only if you consider liberal apologists and defenders of the status quo as "left of centre"

Historically and traditionally social work has been liberal interventionist approach to social problems i.e. the well meaning liberal social worker determines what a person or communities problem is and they decide what is best for or what is needed by the group that is on the receiving end of the intervention. This is inherently partriarchal and oppressive and rarely acknowledges the broader systemic issues people face. Despite some critique of this narrative within some social work schools this remains the dominant paradigm and method of operating. These beliefs are represented and upheld within most social work agencies. One should always be aware of people whose identies are strongly tied up with being a "helper" or a "good person" they will frequently be blind to their own ability to harm others whom they have power over. Never underestimate the damage that can be done by well meaning liberals.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
What if they went after a Family of Colour who moved into their neighbourhood?  Should those parents have their children taken away because they moved into a mainly white neighbourhood and should expect retribution because they are POC?

 

Is being POC a decision for them? Are they basically picking a fight by being born with darker skin? Because the Devines seem to believe that the attack on them and their home was a direct response to their choice to try and "out" racists. It's not just for existing.

 

As I noted above, the new Drug Czar in Mexico is trying to clean up the organized crime cartels that are plaguing the country and he's bringing the fight to them in a huge way. That's a choice he's making. He's also making a choice to keep his family well away from that. I guess that just seems reasonable to me. He's gambling with his life, but he's not gambling with his kids' life.

Pogo Pogo's picture

If you listened to Martin Luther King's speaches you will note that he was subject to numerous threats to himself and his family.  I think there needs to be a distinction over a danger that would go away if the police were able to prevent lawless behaviour.  There is something wrong about having families broken up because we cannot prevent thugs from being thugs.

Yes the Mexican drug czar is able to shield his family at government expense and at his call.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Snert wrote:

Quote:

If I made a stink about mafiosos running amok in Toronto, and they send a hit squad over to intimidate me, this is my fault?

 

No. But if you choose to expose your kids to that, you share a bit of the blame for a negative outcome.

I see so people who stand up to local drug lords and crack houses in their neighborhood are responsible for the outcome, and the CAS can be expected to punish them further. If the local drug pushers come and fuck them up, it's their fault. I guess that is what you mean by being a small "l" libertarians. Hiding in your basements and hoping someone else calls the police. Good on yah, bud.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
I see so people who stand up to local drug lords and crack houses in their neighborhood are responsible for the outcome

 

To some degree, yes.

 

Um, don't we have police and a justice system for this? Is there some really good reason why I should be knocking on the door and getting in their face?

 

Quote:
Hiding in your basements and hoping someone else calls the police.

 

Nothing wrong with calling the police. Any reason the Devines couldn't do that?

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

@Snert

This is not intended personally, but I do question your knowledge of the scene on the ground in Calgary. Calgary Police Service (CPS) has what I would consider a pretty clear history of not taking these kind of things seriously - they actively deny that there is a problem with Nazi goons, much in the same way they went for years denying the existence of gang problems in the city. When some of these neo-Nazis were bombing each other a year or so back (some intercine feud) it was all downplayed, charges were reduced and/or dropped. If you want to research it a bit first, google some information on Aryan Guard and Kyle McKee... other keywords that will be of use are bombing, attempted murder, probation.

 

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

People who rat out the mob are asking for the bullet coming their way. You are a really sad and pathetic little internet Gollum, aren't you.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

What I don't understand about these fuckers is that we kicked their ass the last time, and we will kick their ass again. Bunch of losers.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

I love it! Internet gollums. Keep up the good work, C.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Le T wrote:

So, once upon a time I used to post on this internet msg board that took the existance of structual opression as a precondition for conversation. Since that's obviously not the case here, just humour me for a second and assume that CAS, the police, the media and politicians don't just have the best interest of the children at heart but are in fact part of a complex system of oppression.

What this story illustrates is the privilege of choice. These white folks are choosing to join the fight against racism and are being treated the same way as POC and Indigenous Peoples in a racist, colonial society. They are being physically attacked by nazis, they are having their children taken away (or threat of) by CAS, the police are not investigating crimes against them, the politicians are silent, and the media blame them for the obvious action of other people.

The interesting thing is that people (the media, Snert, ect.) suggest that these folks just stop doing what they are doing. And the truth is is that they could choose to stop and all of this would go away. The same is obviously not true for POC and I.Ps. So when we ask these parents to just stop what they are doing for the saftey of their children what we are really saying is "Hey stupid white people, why aren't you taking advantage of your white privilege, like me?!"

So--and I know this is going to be a bit confusing for some--to blame these folks for their situation is an inherently racist arguement.

 

Thank you

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

clap clap

Refuge Refuge's picture

Snert wrote:

Quote:
What if they went after a Family of Colour who moved into their neighbourhood?  Should those parents have their children taken away because they moved into a mainly white neighbourhood and should expect retribution because they are POC?

 

Is being POC a decision for them? Are they basically picking a fight by being born with darker skin? Because the Devines seem to believe that the attack on them and their home was a direct response to their choice to try and "out" racists. It's not just for existing.

It was a choice of mine to bring my child into this world and it is a choice of mine for him to be  involved in FN activities.  So if I were to be targeted by neo nazis I should just stop it so that my child isn't in danger? It is a "choice" for my child to be known as FN, that may change in the future but right now no one would know he was FN except for the activities we are involved with and the people we associate with.  If he were to be in danger from neo nazis because it is a decision and if not for that decision we would not be targets for neo nazis.  So if we became targets are you saying we should stop it because if it is a decision you are making that makes you a target versus just the way you look when you are born you should stop it for the sake of the child.

My child is also going to be exposed to the land claims issue, which has two sides - racists and FN, you are allied with one or the other, and all the people involved, which includes neo nazis.  Are you saying that I should shield him from his history, his  present and his future as well as a big part of his culture by not allowing him to be exposed to this, hide him away? Teach him about it from a book in a very european teaching manner rather than his natural cultural way of being taught of being there for discussions, protests and cultural events that go on in conjunction with these gatherings?  So that when the neo nazis show up and pick a target I can be assured it will be a family that looks native or has decided to bring them up more traditionally than me. But we will be safe because I chose to do something that didn't antagonize the neo nazis.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
People who rat out the mob are asking for the bullet coming their way.

 

And the people who run with the bulls in Pamplona are asking to be gored.

 

Aren't they??

 

I'm NOT saying that they deserve it. I'm not saying that they're moral sinners and should be punished. But seriously... they're NOT asking for it??

 

"Gee, I'll just get a li'l drunk and run around with some 2,000 pound enraged cattle, and if I get hurt it's 100% the bull's fault. That bull has NO RIGHT to harm me!"

Refuge Refuge's picture

Snert wrote:

Quote:
People who rat out the mob are asking for the bullet coming their way.

 

And the people who run with the bulls in Pamplona are asking to be gored.

 

Aren't they??

 

I'm NOT saying that they deserve it. I'm not saying that they're moral sinners and should be punished. But seriously... they're NOT asking for it??

Aren't POC asing for it by moving into a neighbourhood of mainly white people?  Why don't they just stay where they are suppose to be.

Aren't I just asking for it by involving my son in FN activities and associating with FN?If it were not for that no one would know.

That argument is old and offensive.

Pogo Pogo's picture

Snert, part of the equation is why are they standing up to the neo-nazis.  To me neo-nazi are by definition a community evil and people should be expected to stand up to them and government resources should be used to support them, not discourage them.

I know of someone who bought a house and with considerable work made into their home.  One day the Hell's Angels bought the house next door.  Vicious dogs, loud parties, late hours and all that entails.  Their lovely home was basically destroyed and I think they moved at considerable cost to themselves.  If instead they had stayed and stood their ground should child services come and take their kids for protecting their property?  Is there a difference between protecting your property and standing up for your community?

Maysie Maysie's picture

Snert wrote:
 I'm NOT saying that they deserve it. I'm not saying that they're moral sinners and should be punished. But seriously... they're NOT asking for it??

Snert, you've not been a positive voice in this thread, at all. This post is over the line. Stay out of this thread.

Maysie Maysie's picture

And Cueball, no name calling.

Bacchus

I would think it would depend entirely on what the 'neo-nazis' did in their neighbourhood. If they were doing nothing but living there (no scenes such as the hells angels ones described above) then yeah the devines were stupid and possibly wrong about who they outed.

 

If they were active in their neo nazis activities in their neighbourhood then Im less worried about the devines actions, although everyone prob already knew what they were then

Refuge Refuge's picture

Bacchus wrote:

I would think it would depend entirely on what the 'neo-nazis' did in their neighbourhood. If they were doing nothing but living there (no scenes such as the hells angels ones described above) then yeah the devines were stupid and possibly wrong about who they outed.

 

If they were active in their neo nazis activities in their neighbourhood then Im less worried about the devines actions, although everyone prob already knew what they were then

From said break in and beating up they were active in their neigbourhood, if they were wrong or not active they would nit have resorted to the violent tactics neo nazis are known for.

Bacchus

Hmm they could just be people who tend to react violently to criticism (I hesitate to just say rednecks).  Ive seen the same reactions to people being asked (or falsely exposed) as child molesters, frauds, rapists and drug addicts/dealers.

 

Indeed, in the maritimes (NF I think) a whole house was torched and burnt to the ground ebcause the people living inside were 'suspected' drug dealers (have an article about it in my 'best crime writing anthology I regularly get every year)

Refuge Refuge's picture

Bacchus wrote:

Refuge wrote:

Bacchus wrote:

I would think it would depend entirely on what the 'neo-nazis' did in their neighbourhood. If they were doing nothing but living there (no scenes such as the hells angels ones described above) then yeah the devines were stupid and possibly wrong about who they outed.

 

If they were active in their neo nazis activities in their neighbourhood then Im less worried about the devines actions, although everyone prob already knew what they were then

From said break in and beating up they were active in their neigbourhood, if they were wrong or not active they would nit have resorted to the violent tactics neo nazis are known for.

Hmm they could just be people who tend to react violently to criticism (I hesitate to just say rednecks). Ive seen the same reactions to people being asked (or falsely exposed) as child molesters, frauds, rapists and drug addicts/dealers.

Either way they were obviously doing more than just "living there" if they broke into and beat up someone who lived in their neighbourhood. Either way the family should not have had their children kept from them for that.

In Calidonia some some of the major organizers were or were involved with neo nazies and some of the residents did not know that.  When it was exposed a lot of them put two and two together (that's why they talked about how the FN live off their tax dollars, that is why they talked about two tiered justice) and they lost a lot of their support.  They don't always come right out and say white power and kill all the non whites but they do peddle a lot of propoganda, which if you are not aware they are connected with neo nazis you might not recognize as hate speech because it is hidden, that is why they call it propoganda.

People who understand these issues or think about them may be able to spot it at ten yards but some who just get up and go to work don't always connect the dots until it is exposed.

absentia

So... the bottom line is:

An activist in a just cause is, by definition, innocent of any consequences from hir activism, even if s/he knows exactly what to expect and goes ahead anyway. An activist in a just cause has the right to sacrifice hir children's safety to that cause. Nobody else has the right to try to remove those children from harm's way, or criticize the parents for putting those children in harm's way. Got it.

But i still wonder where the Calgary police are.

nope

walk down the street and get mugged, not your fault

walk down the street and attempt to break up a random fight and get punched in the head? Well you didn't punch yourself but you did put yourself into a risky position.

now do the same thing while holding your childs hand, i bet that the vast majority of people who might consider breaking up a fight would not do so if they had their child in hand.  nor would most antagonize violent people and put their children at risk, but hey they have an important point to make so lets not worry about reality.

But it can't be as simple as that, it has to be racism.

Cueball Cueball's picture

We are not talking about someone walking down the street. We are talking about a home invasion. Who mentioned racism? That was you pal.  No one said that attack on the Devine home was because they were not white. Why? Cause they are white!

Got an axe to grind maybe? People call you racist or something?

jrootham

To be fair, part of the analysis is about how the people involved were not taking advantage of white privilege, so racism is part of the discussion.

The children were voluntarily sent to their grandparents, so the activists are taking steps to protect their children.  The question is about the enforced separation.

Snert's analysis says that the neo nazis have the same moral agency as a bull.  They have no control over their actions and no responsibility for the consequences.

If he wants to complain about that interpretation he can PM me.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

You mean, "to be deliberately obtuse", don't you?

Ok let's take a look at some of Bagkitty's photos and look for some clues.

Possible Fascist:

Yes or no?

VanGoghs Ear

It's vigilantism and other than trying to antagonize the people who they say are neo-nazis, what is the point of putting up the posters?  We're they hoping someone would take some action against the accused?

At least the guy who caught the flower thief and put him in a van had some video evidence of the crime (I still think it was dangerous and pushing the boundaries of an acceptable citizens arrest) where in this case they are doing this outing, shaming, call for action entirely on their own for their own purposes - of course I understand they believe they are doing this for the good of everyone but really it's a only feud between the Devines and the people who they named in the posters.

Can I put up a poster on a telephone pole with a picture of a neighbour that says - This guy fucks children!  What kind of reaction would I expect from the person named and his neighbours who see my poster and do I bear no responsibility for the reaction my poster generates?

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

I see, so beating up and kidnapping poor black men who steal is aok, but people who think gassing Jews is ok deserve what they get. I get it.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

VGE: do you have photos of this neighbour, as you put it, fucking children? Does he attend rallies calling on people to fuck children? Does this neighbour adorn himself with symbolism praising the fucking of children. Do you have first hand experience of this individual recruiting children (I guess in the scenario you propose, it would be for the purposes of fucking them).

If you answer yes to these questions, then your case is analogous to the case of outing the neo-Nazi scum. If the answer is no, then the case is not analogous.

VanGoghs Ear

Cueball

wtf are you talking about?   I said it was pushing the boundaries of an acceptable citizens arrest and despite yr race baiting, a shopkeeper catching and holding a thief is what happened in that case. Of course you said nothing else about what I wrote and attacked your own strawman argument instead. 

Stealing is a criminal offense in Canada while having vile, hateful, ignorant opinions isn't against the law, nor is dressing up in costumes or making salutes or gathering with like minded idots.  If people witness a crime or have evidence of a crime than call the police.

 

VanGoghs Ear

Bagkitty

Anti-racist activists do alot of good but being some kind of neighbourhood vigilanties is not one - I don't care what the person is accused of doing.  Call the police if you have evidence of a crime

I have no doubt the same nazi fucks would consider a slow death for me to be too good if they knew anything about me but my emotions play no role in my view on this subject.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Ok. So its fine for me to say that Warren Kinsella is a Liberal, but to say that John Doe Skinhead is a racist Nazi, is overstepping the bounds John Doe's privacy. Gee, what don't you get about Nazi tatoos, showing up to Nazi rallies and so on and so forth?

Bacchus

Because they are legal activities cue. And in fact they should have had the devines charged with harassment or even stalking. But of course they are cowardly so thats not going to happen.

 

But that doesnt make the devines right though getting back to the original thread, it also should not mean their kids are taken away

VanGoghs Ear

At least your sort of trying to talk to me?  Because of the very thing that happened - their house got attacked and their kids removed to a relative.  I just don't understand what good thing they thought would happen or could happen as a result of putting up these posters around their neighbourhood?

 this is a repy to Cueball

Cueball Cueball's picture

Why fucking not? its called a right to free speach. If people dont like it they can sue. Not in your world though. Its ok for people who out Nazi gangs to be beaten up and have their kids taken away by the government, but not ok for Nazi's to sue for defamation. In your world they get to put the boot in whenever they want. They aren't limited by Liberal niceness, doncha see?

Why aren't you asking why these defamed people are not suing? They are not suing it seems. Why? Because nothing said about them was untrue. Instead, they use violence and intimidation. Just what kind of people do you think we are talking about here?

What is really scary here is how many so called progressive people are coming on to this board and finding ways of blaming anti-racist activists and siding with the punks.

Bacchus

Nope its just that anyone into 'shaming' , 'outing' or taking the law into their own hands has no place on a progressive board, they belong on FD

Refuge Refuge's picture

absentia wrote:

So... the bottom line is:

An activist in a just cause is, by definition, innocent of any consequences from hir activism, even if s/he knows exactly what to expect and goes ahead anyway. An activist in a just cause has the right to sacrifice hir children's safety to that cause. Nobody else has the right to try to remove those children from harm's way, or criticize the parents for putting those children in harm's way. Got it.

But i still wonder where the Calgary police are.

This sounds very close to the they are asking for it comment.

Just so that I am clear - when you are being an activist you are not expecting to have your house broken into and you are not expecting to be beaten.  Just because a person doesn't invoke their white privilege so that they don't have to face the same consequences that a Family of Colour would face does not mean they are sacrificing their safety, it means they are trying to make the world a safer place for everyone else.

We are not talking about a family who laid their child down in front of a tank.  We are not talking about a family that chained their child to a tree during logging operations.  We are talking about a family that is trying to confront racism in their neighbourhood so that it can be a safe place for anyone to move into, not just white people.  They did not do anything illegal.  They had proof of the persons ties to racism and let others know of this.  The key to neo nazis and racism is silence and secrecy and they were willing to expose that to make their neighbourhood a safer place, a place that has a stance against racism.  Or should they have waited until a Family of Colour moved into the neighbourhood and the neo nazis started attacking either legally or illegally before they exposed these guys as neo nazis.  Racism is not an issue you say, well we will just wait until someone comes along to provoke the racism, it is an issue that needs to be dealt with when the seeds are beginning and having a neo nazi in your neighbourhood is a pretty big seed.

 

Van Goghs Ear wrote:

I just don't understand what good thing they thought would happen or could happen as a result of putting up these posters around their neighbourhood?

See above for the stamping out the seeds of racism before they start to spread.

VanGoghs Ear

thanks for your thoughtful and positive response, Refuge.  It's made me think.Smile

Refuge Refuge's picture

Bacchus wrote:

Nope its just that anyone into 'shaming' , 'outing' or taking the law into their own hands has no place on a progressive board, they belong on FD

I am pretty sure that the neo nazis felt no shame about their ties.  I am pretty sure they were angry they were outed because one of the ways that they can spread racism, doubt and misunderstanding is through subterfuge and propaganda where they distance themselves from what is perceived to be racism (things like two teared justice and oppression by- fill in the non white group here) and they did nothing illegal by putting up posters in the neighbourhood.

Bacchus

Sorry its vigilantism, exactly the same sort as was practised on them.  They espouse violent confrontation, and so do the nazis who also put up posters denouncing people.

 

I find them exactly the same

VanGoghs Ear

I support your stand Bacchus but I also understand Refuge's point about kids in the neighbourhood being recruited into the movement by nazis blending in with everyone.

absentia

Refuge wrote:

absentia wrote:

So... the bottom line is:

An activist in a just cause is, by definition, innocent of any consequences from hir activism, even if s/he knows exactly what to expect and goes ahead anyway. An activist in a just cause has the right to sacrifice hir children's safety to that cause. Nobody else has the right to try to remove those children from harm's way, or criticize the parents for putting those children in harm's way. Got it.

But i still wonder where the Calgary police are.

This sounds very close to the they are asking for it comment.

Does it? How? I'm just restating what's been said over and over again. Not blamming the Devines for anything. Might wonder about the wisdom of choosing activism and parenthood, but i understand that would be wrong.

Not blaming the child service authorities, either, because i don't have the least idea what their political affiliations are, what they were thinking, what they saw upon arrival, what their investigation concluded or what was in their report. My suspicion is that nobody else here knows either, but that doesn't stop them judging. All i've done is question both and judge neither, rather than applauding one and condemning the other.

And yet again, asking about the police, their part in all this.

 

 

Refuge Refuge's picture

Bacchus wrote:

Sorry its vigilantism, exactly the same sort as was practised on them.  They espouse violent confrontation, and so do the nazis who also put up posters denouncing people.

 

I find them exactly the same

I see them espousing confrontation of racism not violent confrontation.  Here is the group they are a part of several times on the site they list that there will be confrontation of racism but they will be non violent.  The outing of the racists are dealing with their behaviour and do not even hint at any form of retaliation - just an awareness of what people are believing.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Bacchus wrote:

Sorry its vigilantism, exactly the same sort as was practised on them.  They espouse violent confrontation, and so do the nazis who also put up posters denouncing people.

 

I find them exactly the same

 

I think that Ward Churchill has some good points about the pathology of pacifism that seems to relegate the "well intentioned" white Liberal left to the garbage can of historical irrelvance. Not being victims of racism, they really ever find time to confront it, with a few exceptions, such as the Devines. But love to moralize like neo-Gandhian sages whenever they get the chance.

"Cycle of violence yadda yadda..."

That said, the thing they don't understand about Gandhi, was that he was all about confronting power and injustice directly, and without fear.

Refuge Refuge's picture

absentia wrote:

Refuge wrote:

absentia wrote:

So... the bottom line is:

An activist in a just cause is, by definition, innocent of any consequences from hir activism, even if s/he knows exactly what to expect and goes ahead anyway. An activist in a just cause has the right to sacrifice hir children's safety to that cause. Nobody else has the right to try to remove those children from harm's way, or criticize the parents for putting those children in harm's way. Got it.

But i still wonder where the Calgary police are.

This sounds very close to the they are asking for it comment.

Does it? How? I'm just restating what's been said over and over again. Not blamming the Devines for anything. Might wonder about the wisdom of choosing activism and parenthood, but i understand that would be wrong.

You answered your own question it is wrong to wonder about the wisdom of choosing activism and parenthood, that is very close to they are asking for it comment.

absentia wrote:

And yet again, asking about the police, their part in all this.

From what the article states they were not there for the posters, as this is not an illegal act.  They are there to investigate the home invasion and the assault, as this is an illegal act.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Parenthood is activism. Ridiculous that anyone should assert that parents should not espouse the values of the world they want their children to live in. What kind of line of reasoning is this?

Refuge Refuge's picture

Cueball wrote:

Parenthood is activism. Ridiculous that anyone should assert that parents should not espouse the values of the world they want their children to live in. What kind of line of reasoning is this?

Wish they had a thumbs up smiley.

Unionist

Pages

Topic locked