Add new comment

Once again, here is what Gelderloos said on polling places, word-for-word:

In very general terms, I think the most important place to be is protecting the anti-racist movement, which is currently the most radical expression of struggle. Protecting polling places should probably be left to progressive de-escalation activists, both to give them the opportunity to see if they actually have the organizational capacity to make their own chosen strategies viable rather than just attacking real social movement participants for being “violent,” and because of the certainty that if anarchists are present at any polling place where there is unrest, the Democrats will try to pin the blame on us.

What Gelderloos is saying, and it is crystal-clear, is that anarchists in the US shouldn't be at polling places trying to protect them during times of "unrest", but should leave that less important function to "progressive de-escalation activists" - whatever the fuck that is - while anarchists serve their assumed function as shock troops for the Revolution. Even to suggest that protecting polling places might be a worthwhile activity for any activist - radical or otherwise - betrays a fundamental hypocrisy in his purportedly anarchist analysis. Gelderloos is a leftist who cannot conceive of anarchists having any independent goals or strategies that don't mesh neatly into whatever the most popular protest movement of the moment happens to be.