Those that destroy property at protests do it because they recognize that the only language capitalism speaks is profit. Protest songs or banners mean nothing to the leaders of capitalism, only the price tag of suppressing protests and fixing the damage registers on their radar. Only when public resistance to their policies becomes so expense that it isn’t worth it do they change their deadly policies. That is what activists mean when they say capitalism values property more than people and that is why activists target property.
If you intend to beat Capital on the field of economics, you’re not going to win. Property destruction for the sake of harming profits may effect some capitalists but you’ll never win a war of economic damages. Capital has no issue with destruction, it loves to level territories and rebuild again (since it can’t expand anywhere else, it’s gotta rebuild itself).
We don’t break windows and fight in the streets because we intend to win a war of profits and losses, we’ll never win that way. We break windows to shatter the illusions of a total surveillance state, to show that police don’t control the streets when we’re together, and it’s actually enjoyable unlike Leftist/NGO marches.
Yeah, one of the things that I didn’t word quite right in the post is that people think I mean ‘the cost of a broken window’ when what I meant was ‘the cost of a broken window AND the costs of pulling all available security personel to one place because someone might break a window AND the costs of putting up an elaborate PR campaign because someone broke a window etc all to uphold the illusion of control’.
& of course it’s not about draining ALL of Capitals resources, that shit can’t be done
& yeah, the impact of showing that windows really can be broken is super important.
QueerAnarchism 