Leftist youth groups conduct street battles with police in Copenhagen

[ZEE]

kid,

dont give up so easily im just getting started...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kidicious

This is serious to us. It's not just about this house. This is to be allowed to be different and allowed to be poor.

I dont see that. Being allowed to be different doesnt mean being allowed to squat. Be as different as you want, but why should everyone else have to subsidize it?

[laurentius]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



they can be unprofitable aritsts, hippoies, wahtever. They just dont have a right thereby to squat on someone elses property. (BTW, dont include handicapped, there are loads of handicapped people who work pay rent, etc -we have plenty of handicapped people here who lobby (with considerable success) for access to public facilities and to be able to work and support themselves like anyone else.)

Would it make sense for the state to subsidize them to make Copenhagen more interesting? Maybe. City of Baltimore did something like that for artists at one point. But if the council democratically and lawfully CHOOSE not to, theres no right to use violence to force them to. If you can use violence to overturn any democratic decision you happen not to like, just cause you think subsidies for group X are a neat idea, democracy is dead.

Maybe Baltimore wouldnt have so much violent crime if they had a place for the young people to go to and spend time, possibly even in some creative way. If the youth are active enough to invade an empty, neglected historical building to build that place themselves then kudos to them. It never hurt anybody, it bring peace to the streets and let young people express themselves in their own place, on their own terms. It helped to clear them off the streets, away from gangs or violence like fist brawls with the boys from the next block.

If the city was in 1983 wise enough to appreciate what the Ungdomshuset stood for, what it did to the kids, what impact it had in COpenhagen and made a deal with the youth, why should its cnahge in attitudes be accepted? Maybe the agreement at the time was oral or in some other way unofficial. For that the youth knew they wouldnt have stood a chance in court. Then the only chance the right minded people who oppose the arbitrary decisions like these is to get out ot the streets to demonstrate. If they are still ignored and met with police brutality the next step is stepping on the barricades and well, run amok.

So yes I'm an advocate of democracy. The politicians should give in for demosntrations, because that is a clear implication that they are loosing their mandate to represent the people. The people are then of course to be held accountable for the decisions they demand. Politicians should remember that they are there only because we allow them to represent us. In a sense they should be afraid of us instead of over ruling us with arrogance.

[laurentius]

Originally posted by AAHZ

by laurentius
was it ok to break law in the USSR. Or in the Thrid Reich? To be a dissident. And why isnt it ok anymore.

ALSO by laurentius
We just have to treat those 200 mps as our slaves and never let them forget who is their master.

ALSO by lauri
No, clearly there are NO alternatives.

THANKS again for proving my point lauri...

So that makes me an anarchist and a brute?

[laurentius]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



I dont see that. Being allowed to be different doesnt mean being allowed to squat. Be as different as you want, but why should everyone else have to subsidize it?

Yes because squatting is such a threat to our society!

In Europe, it is common for buildings to be squatted to be used as social centres. Cafés, bars, libraries, free shop[s], swaps shops and gyms have all been created, with many squats also holding parties and concerts. Social centres are often a combination of many things that happen in one space with the aim of creating a space for people to meet in a non-commercial setting, whether it be for a party, political workshop, to see a film, have a drink or have breakfast. There are many squatted social centres around the world but they exist mainly in countries where squatting is legal. Examples include Ernst Kirchweger Haus in Austria, the RampART Social Centre in England and OT301 in the Netherlands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squatting

UUUUUH PR334R! Squatters are spawns of satan!

Theres like a million squatted social centres in Italy alone. Good luck evicting all of them too.

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centro_sociale_occupato_autogestito

[lord of the mark]

1. Most of the folks who commit crimes in Baltimore are not artists or anarchists. And there are plenty of rec centers, youth centers, for the poor blacks in areas where crime is most a problem. Unfortunately there are other issues that cause crime. I was referring specifically to a program to give artists housing at a discount.

2. If you want a deal with a govt, its a good idea to get it in writing. If you dont stand a chance in court, you dont get an automatic appeal to the streets. Or if you do, than everyone does. And thats not good.

3. If this decision by the Copenhagen council is disapproved by the people of Copenhagen, that will hurt them in the next election. OTOH if it is not, then it will not.

Although Im wondering what you mean by the people will be held accountable for what they demand? Are you saying the people have no right to not side with the anarchists on this property?

[ZEE]

Originally posted by laurentius
So that makes me an anarchist and a brute?

well you are defending KNOWN anarchists and you seem to be in some sort of CULT that is allied with these nutballs. AND you keep saying "WE," and keep talking about slavery and the right is a bunch of nazis, and there will be NO alternatives, etc etc. ive seen better "CULT-SPEECHES" in B-rated movies. you sound like some sort of cult-anarchist to me. and thats not an assumption thats my opinion. Kid has really proven all this to me already.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



I dont see that. Being allowed to be different doesnt mean being allowed to squat. Be as different as you want, but why should everyone else have to subsidize it?

Well LotM the people who bought this building and demolished it don't want people to be different, not like these people anyway. So although I think it's reasonable for them to pay some rent, if not market rent, I do think this is about being allowed to be different.

And what about being poor. The poor are allowed subsidies so why shouldn't these guys. They were running a soap kitchen among other things here.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by laurentius


Yes because squatting is such a threat to our society!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squatting

UUUUUH PR334R! Squatters work for satan!

Theres like a million squatted social centres in Italy alone. Good luck evicting all of them too.

if the state, by democratic decision decides to allow squating thats one thing. I personally dont think thats required in order to be said to allow 'being different' but if Italy or Austria want to do it anyway, thats their democratic right.


Its not squatting thats a threat per se, its the willful violation of the law, and the use of violence against the law.

[Kuciwalker]

If idiots like Ludd had any say they wouldn't have houses.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by AAHZ


well you are defending KNOWN anarchists and you seem to be in some sort of CULT that is allied with these nutballs.

Damn now a person can't even DEFEND an anarcist. You call yourself a democrat. Is that like a McCarthy democrat or something?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Well LotM the people who bought this building and demolished it don't want people to be different, not like these people anyway. So although I think it's reasonable for them to pay some rent if not market rent I do think this is about being allowed to be different.

And what about being poor. The poor are allowed subsidies so why shouldn't these guys. They were running a soap kitchen among other things here.

Excuse me? A private entity isnt required to want people to be different (although from what I can gather in Denmark being a fundie makes you just about as different as being a punk rocker does). I dont allow anyone who wants to be different in my living room to do so.


Look, Kid. What if there are poor neonazis? or poor trekkies? Or poor hassidic Jews? Or whatever. Is the state required to provide a property to each group? You want to be different, you have to do it on your own dime, and if you dont buy or rent your own place, you dont get the right to grab one. Now some folks think that simply squatting gives you rights - I mean you can argue that if you want, but its got nothing to do with diversity.

[ZEE]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Damn now a person can't even DEFEND an anarcist. You call yourself a democrat. Is that like a McCarthy democrat or something?

if you break the law you go to jail. if you defend criminals you will get pounced upon by those that believe in law and order. you are giving the left a bad name. DEMOCRATS believe in DEMOCRACY kid. not SOCIALISM.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



Excuse me? A private entity isnt required to want people to be different (although from what I can gather in Denmark being a fundie makes you just about as different as being a punk rocker does). I dont allow anyone who wants to be different in my living room to do so.

I didn't say they had to want people to be different. My point is that protesting the fact that they are taking action to prevent diversity is something worth protesting for and even breaking the law.

Look, Kid. What if there are poor neonazis? or poor trekkies? Or poor hassidic Jews? Or whatever. Is the state required to provide a property to each group? You want to be different, you have to do it on your own dime, and if you dont buy or rent your own place, you dont get the right to grab one. Now some folks think that simply squatting gives you rights - I mean you can argue that if you want, but its got nothing to do with diversity.

I don't expect to agree with you about whether they should get a subsidy, but possibly you may understand the civil disobedience.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by AAHZ


if you break the law you go to jail. if you defend criminals you will get pounced upon by those that believe in law and order. you are giving the left a bad name. DEMOCRATS believe in DEMOCRACY kid. not SOCIALISM.

its quite possible to believe in democratic socialism without believing in this anarchist adventurism.