Liquor Store Glut

To justify these types of attacks on small Arab-owned grocery stores by citing some kind of national statistics (no matter how true) or national policy, supports the attacks. It almost stirkes me as soem kind of anti-arab bias from some parts of the black community. Miley, like any city official and any other decent person, should be condemning the attacks, but what do you expect from a politician anyway.

Who are the bulk of Nate's constituents, the 300 liquor store owners or the tens of thousands of people of Oakland? His consituents have been barking at him about these stores for a long time (I know because I had a friend who worked for him 10 years ago when he was on the City Council).

What he said is correct. It *is* a symptom of overconcentration.

The same thing would be happening if the store owners were white, Asian, or African American. There are too many of them. There have been too many of them for too long. There are no decent alternatives. People have fought against their growth and for alternatives for years and years to no avail.

People are frustrated. Doesn't justify everything people do with that frustration, but Miley who has been around the block a few times in Oakland knows that people are frustrated. They tried to follow all the rules to deal with these stores and got nowhere.

Interesting that you do not have peep to say about the Feds funding these stores in poor neighborhoods that already have too many. Your gripe is that Miley did not state the obvious more loudly, that trashing and burning a store is bad. He's not a kindergarten teacher afterall.

>It almost stirkes me as soem kind of anti-arab bias from some parts of the black community. <

Deanosor, I'm sure you've heard of the divide and conquer strategy. Well ya know, this is a prime example of this strategy in practice.

On the one hand you have a portion of one community that has an ongoing struggles with alcoholism and drug addiction, and on the other, a portion of a second community that is trying to make a living, support families, and so on. Both communities are of color.

Now, guess who tends to win in that situation. Frigging nobody, that's who, save for the people who are controlling the situation. Everybody else is just caught in the middle.

I'd add more, but I'd be repeating what I said on another thread. If you're interested, the comment (which you may have already read) is here: http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/11/1785540_comment.php#1786595

1. Nate Miley is ass. I totally agree.

Miley says that the recent destruction of local liquor stores is a symptom of over-concentration.
Bullshit. Its the product of the violent offspring of a petty fascist cult named the Nation of Islam.

Several days ago I talked some negative shit on indybay about this situation.. Well since then we now have arson a kidnapping. Will "no heroes" and Mr Mixed feelings keep apologizing for these idiots? We will see.

>Will "no heroes" and Mr Mixed feelings keep apologizing for these idiots? We will see. <

Oh, whatever. I'm out.

The world is not simple, but this issue is. What these men are doing is wrong. Period. No excuses.

>stirkes me as soem kind of anti-arab bias from some parts of the black community.

Damn right it does. If a bunch of white guys in uniform trashed Arab owned business the racist left would be up in arms. But when Black guys do it, they let them slide, even praise them. That's racist propaganda. It's disgusting. It doesn't belong on Indymedia. Throw the racists out.

Would you go a mile or two out of your way for the neighborhood liquor store? What if it was only half a block away, and there were a couple more like it down the street? Not surprisingly, researchers have found that the number of alcohol outlets in a given area is directly related to how much alcohol that area consumes. "We have a whole body of science," says Robert Reynolds of the Pacific Center for Violence Prevention, "that says if you increase the physical distance between outlets, the amount of drinking in a community goes down."

And, notably, so may the violence. A soon-to-be-released book by sociologist Robert Nash Parker, "Alcohol and Homicide: A Deadly Combination of Two American Traditions," cites a 20-year study of 256 U.S. cities demonstrating that alcohol outlet density has a significant effect on that area's homicide rates, and that the nationwide increase in outlet density from 1960 to 1980 played a major role in the skyrocketing violence during that period.

In his study, Parker was able to factor out other causes of inner-city violence such as poverty, ethnicity, and family structure. He concluded that high alcohol outlet density doesn't just coincide with a high level of violence in the area, but is in fact a cause of it. Other studies show that almost 50 percent of convicted homicide offenders used alcohol prior to committing their crimes; a Canadian study shows 42 percent of all violent incidents involve alcohol consumption.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/1995/03/sinha.html

Research has clearly established an association between greater outlet density and alcohol-related outcomes such as:

assaults
• one study estimated that in a typical Los Angeles city of 50,000, with 100 alcohol outlets and 570 assaults in 1990, adding one outlet would be associated with 3.4 additional assaults per year (Scribner et al. 1995)

homicides
• a study of Cleveland alcohol outlets and crime calculated that adding a bar to a block would increase the risk of a murder taking place on the block by almost 5% (Roncek and Maier 1991)

motor vehicle crashes
• one study estimated that a city of 50,000 residents in Los Angeles County with 100 alcohol outlets in 1990 would experience an additional 2.7 crashes for each new alcohol outlet opened (Scribner et al. 1999)

youth violence
• a study of Mexican American neighborhoods in three northern California cities found that for every area with 1,000 residents and no alcohol outlets nearby there were 1.19 violent crimes committed by youth, compared to 2.57 crimes per 1,000 residents in areas with at least one outlet nearby (Alaniz and Parker 1998)

cirrhosis deaths
• a study estimates that a 1% increase in on-site availability of alcohol in Los Angeles County cities would be associated with a 0.35-0.51% increase in deaths by cirrhosis (Scribner et al. 1994)

alcoholism rates
• a study of 38 states and the District of Columbia found that there were higher alcoholism rates in states that had higher rates of on-premise alcohol outlets (Harford et al. 1979)

Two major theories have been advanced to explain the relationship between outlet density and violence:

theory of selective disinhibition
Alcohol tends to lower people's inhibitions against using violence to achieve their goals. In addition, alcohol's well-known negative effects on people's perception, ability to interpret others' actions and intentions, and judgment make it more likely that interpersonal conflicts arise. These effects of alcohol (lowered inhibitions against violence, altered perceptions, etc.) are more likely to lead to violence in situations in which a complex set of social and psychological circumstances neutralize the normal social and psychological constraints against violence. There is a greater likelihood that these situations, and hence violence, will occur when alcohol is more readily available, such as in areas of high outlet density (Parker and Rebhun 1995)

great attractor theory
Increased outlet density is associated with violence because alcohol outlets, by their nature, define a physical and social environment in which social norms and external controls are weakened. Thus, people in this environment may be more likely to engage in illegal, dangerous, or violent activities. The consumption of alcohol also makes people in this environment more susceptible to situations described by the theory of selective disinhibition.(Alaniz et al. 1998)

REFERENCES
Maria Luisa Alaniz, Randi S. Cartmill, and Robert Nash Parker. Immigrants and violence: the importance of neighborhood context. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 20(2):155-174. May 1998.

Maria L. Alaniz and Robert Nash Parker. Alcohol outlet density and Mexican American youth violence. Berkeley CA: Prevention Research Center. 1998.

D.M. Gorman, P.W. Speer, E.W. Labouvie, and A.P. Subaiya. Risk of assaultive violence and alcohol availability in New Jersey. American Journal of Public Health 88 (1):97-100. 1998.

P.J. Gruenewald, B.A. Millar, and P. Roeper. Access to alcohol: geography and prevention for local communities. Alcohol Health and Research World (20) 4:244-251. 1996.

P.J. Gruenewald, B.A. Millar, and A. Treno. Alcohol availability and the ecology of drinking behavior. Alcohol Health and Research World (17) 1:39-45. 1993.

T.C. Harford, D. Parker, C. Paulter, and M. Wolz. Relationship between number of on-premise outlets and alcoholism. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 40:1053-1057.1979.

D.P. MacKinnon, R. Scribner, and K.A. Taft. Development and applications of a city-level alcohol availability and alcohol problems database. Statistics in Medicine 14:591-604. 1995.

Robert Nash Parker, with Linda-Anne Rebhun. Alcohol and homicide: a deadly combination of two American traditions. Albany: State University of New York Press. 1995.

Dennis W. Roncek and Pamela A. Maier. Bars, blocks, and crimes revisited: linking the theory of routine activities to the empiricism of "hot spots." Criminology (29)4:725-753. 1991.

R.A. Scribner, D. Cohen, S. Kaplan, and S.H. Allen. Alcohol availability and homicide in New Orleans: conceptual considerations for small area analysis of the effect of alcohol outlet density. Journal of Studies of Alcohol 60 (3):310-316, 1999.

Richard A. Scribner, David P. MacKinnon, and James H. Dwyer. Alcohol outlet density and motor vehicle crashes in Los Angeles County cities. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 44:447-453, July, 1994.

Richard A. Scribner, David P. MacKinnon, and James H. Dwyer. The risk of assaultive violence and alcohol availability in Los Angeles County. American Journal of Public Health (85)3:335-340, 1995.

http://www.tf.org/tf/alcohol/ariv/facts/fac15.html

Alcohol and Homicide: A Deadly Combination of Two American Traditions
by Robert Nash Parker

So, you are among that rare breed of white person who fully believes we already live in a colorblind society and people of color do not face historical, cultural, and personal racism every day. Well, you and every other anti-affirmative action right-winger in this country.

It's all just some craziness cooked up in their heads. They are just tooo sensitive or something. It's just an accident that this neighborhood is majority African American and also has amongst the greatest poverty and the highest concentration of liquor stores around. It's a "free society of willing equals" after all.

People of color, facing none of the racial barriers listed above, should be treated exactly as white people are. The same white people who do not face those racist barriers every day in this country. Maybe a lecture on "personal responsibility" is in order from you at this point, without looking at the larger forces at play in our still very UNequal society.


Now, that's racist. And that's exactly what right-wingers and those who viscerally detest groups like the Black Muslims, the Black Panthers, La Raza, and so forth do not seem capable of ever grasping. We DO NOT live in a fair society racially and hence for remedies to be effective to fix the harms that continue to this day due to historical injustices need to take into account the REAL EXISTENCE today of racism and the harms it causes.

Only selfish white dreamers can pretend we live in a colorblind meritocracy. It serves them quite well to think so. Well, them and Ward Connerly.

Researchers at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health have shown that predominantly black, low-income neighborhoods in Baltimore were eight times more likely to have carry-out liquor stores than white or racially integrated neighborhoods. Conversely, in higher-income Baltimore neighborhoods a higher percentage of black residents was not associated with a higher per capita number of off-site liquor stores.

First author Thomas A. LaVeist, PhD, MA, associate professor, Health Policy and Management, the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, said, "Our data reveal an intersection of race and income status that places low-income African-American communities at greater risk for alcohol availability through off-premises liquor stores. Such stores have been shown to be an important component of the social infrastructure that destabilizes communities." The study appeared in the June 2000 issue of Social Science & Medicine.

The authors noted that this disproportionate concentration of off-premises liquor outlets is significant in that these stores typically sell alcohol chilled and in larger quantities than in taverns or restaurants (40 and 64 oz. bottles), ready for immediate consumption on a street corner, in a nearby park, or in a motor vehicle -- drinking patterns more likely to result in excessive drinking, public drunkenness, automobile crashes, and physical violence. Some past studies have further suggested that such drinking behaviors in low-income black communities also distort black youths' perceptions of what constitutes an appropriate level of alcohol consumption.

The researchers used U.S. Census data on the racial composition and median income within each of Baltimore's 194 predominantly residential census tracts. They then examined the relationship between a neighborhood's racial composition and median income and its per capita number of licensed liquor stores. They found that less than one quarter of Baltimore's population lived in integrated census tracts (those where between 25 and 74 percent of the population was black). Over 45 percent of the population lived in predominantly black census tracts (75 percent or more black), while 32 percent were living in predominantly white census tracts (24 percent or less black). Median annual incomes for the individual census tracts ranged from $2,660 to $64,976.

The income status and racial composition of a neighborhood were each independently predictive of the per capita number of liquor stores within an area -- both low-income census tracts and predominantly black census tracts had significantly more liquor stores per capita than either more affluent or predominantly white communities. Neighborhoods that were both low-income and predominantly black had even more significant numbers of liquor stores -- up to eight times as many -- compared to other communities. This association between a neighborhood's black population and its per capita number of liquor stores, however, held true only for low-income communities. In higher-income census tracts, a higher percentage of black residents was not associated with a higher number of liquor stores.

The authors acknowledged that further research is needed to definitively determine whether the demand for alcohol in poorer communities is affecting its supply, or whether supply is inducing demand. They cited research on crack cocaine use, however, that indicates that the drug's easy availability does encourage increased use.

In any case, Dr. LaVeist said, "The availability of alcohol in poor black communities is an issue that policy makers, health professionals, clergy, community activists, and other concerned citizens must address in their efforts to reduce alcohol abuse and its effects in African-American communities."

Public Affairs Media Contacts for the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health: Tim Parsons or Kenna Brigham @ 410-955-6878 or paffairs [at] jhsph.edu

http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnews/press_releases/PR_2000/alcohol_off_premises.html

>>stirkes me as soem kind of anti-arab bias from some parts of the black community.
>Damn right it does. If a bunch of white guys in uniform trashed

You have it backwards.

I believe that the same exact thing would be going on now regardless of the race of the liquor store owners. It could be martians running the stores and people would still be pissed. Besides, these poor ol' business owners are making a killing in the neighborhood - in more ways than one. While they don't deserve to be burned down per se, to fluff off the very real anger towards them as race-based is ridiculous and shows little understanding of the current dynamics in the neighborhood and througout Oakland.

Examining the setting or environment in which alcohol is sold and consumed in an inner city community is important to understanding the complexity of the grassroots response. When heavy industry fled most US cities adjacent inner city residents were left permanently unemployed and most commercial businesses eventually closed or relocated from the area. As large scale full service grocery stores disappeared small liquor stores run by marginal merchants began to dominate. Los Angeles is one of the few major cities lacking a reasonable public transit system, so residents in poor areas have little choice but to patronize the 1200 square foot corner liquor store like they would a full service 40,000 square foot grocery store.

In addition to the overconcentration of alcohol outlets, the affordability of the product significantly contributes to the problem. The primary alcohol inventory in the corner store is fortified wine and malt liquor.4 The alcohol content of fortified wines and malt liquor can equal distilled spirits and these products are specifically marketed to and sold in poor communities. The price of this "high octane" alcohol product easily places it within the reach of the chronically unemployed and homeless populations. It only takes moments to panhandle $1.50 for a bottle of fortified wine, and many people reluctantly give money to avoid harassment and intimidation. In many instances this "problem store" environmental results in violence and leaves residents feeling their life is in jeopardy when they need to purchase food items also available at the corner store.5 Where productive businesses used to operate, borderline legal and nuisance businesses have filled the vacuum. Nearby the liquor store might be a motel that rents rooms by the hour and a recycling center where impoverished people push shopping carts filled with items scavenged from trash cans. The recycling center gives cash for most items, the individual then goes to the liquor store, purchases alcohol, meets the drug dealer outside of the liquor store, then accompanies a sex worker (prostitute)to the motel.

The corner liquor store also supports the illegal drug industry by carrying many of the products needed for the distribution and use of crack cocaine. It is against the law in some areas to openly display drug paraphernalia such as glass pipes used to smoke cocaine but in some areas an enclosed shelf or paraphernalia room in the back is legal. The crack distributor can purchase items to weigh and package small amounts of the drug. The crack addict can purchase chunks of copper scouring pads used for heat conduction when smoking. Telephone booths outside liquor stores facilitate interaction between addict and distributor. In some instances the trafficker regards the atmosphere around the corner liquor store as an outdoor business office.

When nuisance activity clusters in neighborhoods, positive commercial activity is driven out, property values decrease and soon problem environments expand, taking over abandoned properties. In many inner city areas this constellation of problem businesses and activities exists alongside stable single family homes and apartments, churches, schools, parks and legitimate businesses. Inner city residents have an equal amount of pride and commitment to maintaining their property and neighborhoods as do residents of suburbs, but lack the resources and do not receive the same type of response from government.

http://www.tf.org/tf/alcohol/ariv/kbass.html

>While they don't deserve to be burned down per se, to fluff off the very real anger towards them as race-based is ridiculous and shows little understanding of the current dynamics in the neighborhood and througout Oakland.<

Thank you.

lets recap the last few days
1. two Arab store owners are terrorized by thugs
2. one store is arsoned
3. one owner is kidnapped

Then you have navel gazing liberals (who think they know shit about race) like mixed feelings and no heroes who think bad people only come in one color--white.

This crime looks like a hate crime and you have posters here publishing stuff on liquor store concentration which is in other words a justification for the ugly crimes that just happened.

Great, so now a certain individual that happens to be involved with Indymedia in all likelihood is allied with some right wing troll idiot. That's just great.

As far as you go, anon: I think you're a bigoted fool, so I'm ignoring you.

As for this other person (who's probably nessie, judging by tone): do you really want to ally yourself with racist dopes like anon? Have you considered that perhaps there's a reason that he's siding with you, and that it has to do with the racism that you seem to be more than willing to accuse those who disagree with you? Please use your head.

Lastly, for the millionth time: you can read unequivocating, uncritical support of whoever trashed the store on my part all you want. The fact is that I have never said that. You two, on the other hand, be more than willing to condemn anybody who is willing to look at the community issues surrounding what happened -- which makes me wonder why. For some reason, I have a hard time believing that it's entirely because of solidarity with arab-americans.

In any case, this has become a waste of time. Have fun, kids.

name the racism-- name it baby- name it white boy

To Mixed and no heroes-- I apologize for my overheated posts. Though I still think you guys are wrong. If you point how something I said was racist-- I'll look at it at least. Non specific accussations kind of piss me off. No heroes has tried to set a good tone here but I got overly pissed off. Sorry.

anon said, point out my racism...

>no heroes who think bad people only come in one color--white.
>name the racism-- name it baby- name it white boy

I'd say that's pretty representative, wouldn't you? If you still don't understand, I can dig through the last 150 posts (oh joy, not) -- but I think these two posts are pretty representative.

I am going to go back though, and find specific responses you've had in relation to the issue itself. Be right back...

nhso

First off, here's the very first thing I posted on the previous thread:

>While I don't agree with the attack, I also think that this is more complex than a simple matter of personal choice. As the blog author that is referred to in the original post states (click on the URL to see what I'm talking about,) there is a serious problem with poor african american and latino communities having an overwhelming abundance of liquor stores in their communities. While people can make their choices on their own (as well they should,) a closer look at both the presence of liquor stores and the presence of crack and heroin in these communities doesn't paint a healthy picture. As such, the line between providing ample access and shoving it down people's throats is finer than you think. I do think its messed up that an individual shop owner was targeted -- just another example of ordinary people being divided against each other in the midst of a genocidal war. But I can also understand how people get to that breaking point. Now, if it turns out that the NOI is involved despite their claims to the contrary, well, that changes things. I'd rather wait and see than judge, however.<

and finished with:

>Anarchy is fine and all, but anarchy (or more specifically, anarchism) that doesn't promote and create viable alternatives in a respectful way is just another box of soap on the shelf, and a rather empty one at that. I mean, most anarchists in the East Bay (but not all) are white, and don't have deep ties in poor communities, especially poor communities of color in the East Bay. Please show some care in evaluating communities that may be right down the block, but in reality, may as well live thousands of miles away from where you sit. (I'm not saying everybody who is a white anarchist in the East Bay is full of beans, so please don't turn what I just said into an over-generalizaion. All I'm saying is that to understand a community other than your own, it takes a lot of work -- and sometimes, even a lifetime of work isn't enough. Understand? I hope so.)<

To which you replied:

>No hereos-- You don't know shit. You sound like an irrating activist-type that goes around implementing behavior modification on whites who don't tow your idealogical fantasies.<

OK, that's "example of racism #1". Let's see here...

#2:

>Well, lets see here their now dead leader Yusef Bey was going around raping and impregnating multiple 13 year old girls. Nobody from this cult ever even apologized for this to those women.
His little cult of thugs goes around strong arming dissenters and race baiting detractors. In the last months there has been 2 murders and one shooting within their ranks.Yes that's community empowerment. Sorry mixed feelings but you're fucking clueless.<

Is this racist? Well, it's certainly ignorant -- not only are Black Muslim Bakery and NOI separate organizations, Yusuf Bey wasn't the leader of Nation of Islam. The question was whether or not the Nation of Islam does stuff like trash stores, and as was pointed out by Sherri', that's not typically their style. In terms of who actually did the breaking of the windows: well, I'm not a detective. Are you?

OK, here's #3:

>oh please don't lecture others about joining your behavior modification plan. There is a word for guilt ridden whites it's called a doormatt-- you sound like one. The white anarchists that you and others seem to especially enjoy whining about may have their faults but as far as I can tall they aren't the ones smashing up liquor stores and telling people how to live. The Black Muslims are.<

I think this pretty much speaks for itself. Thanks for apologizing, though.

"no heroes who think bad people only come in one color--white."

Stand by it, though i regret my baiting tone. Some of leftists politics boils down to white people bad, people of color good. An extreme example might be the white uhuru types. I've met a lot of people that hover in this political sphere. Others can pipe in if I'm off base.

----name the racism-- name it baby- name it white boy -----

I shouldn't of taunted you. I apologize.

>Some of leftists politics boils down to white people bad, people of color good. <

Sure, people do that everywhere about things they believe strongly about. It's not just a left thing.

That being said, what is it about what I was saying that made you think I was saying "white people bad, people of color good"? I mean, if anything, what I'm trying to convey is that it's *not* that simple.

This is just down the block from me. I didn't hear a thing last night or the
night before, and Market st is the speedway for the fire and police depts.

It's amazing in how a couple of blocks difference can have on the vibe of
the neighborhood. Below the 580 freeway, life is very different- more
'ghetto' in the type and frequency of crime. You go past the freeway
overpass to my side, and the ghetto look is there, but there is nowhere near
the amount of questionable activities.
That liquor store actually had a produce section and was rather well stocked
with goods other than liquour and cigarettes. Real bread- from the fucking
black muslim bakery no less. The produce was little to be desired but it did
in a pinch, lots of junk cereal like you find in safeway, lots of oatmeal
and farina and cream of wheat too. Some cheap wine, some hard liquor all
behind the register. A bunch of beer too- typical ghetto 40 oz sizes and
some malt liquors. There was also a good selection of upper end microbrews.
They had better beer choices than any of the other liquor stores in the
blocks around me- I appreciated it- my days of downing 40oz are long gone.
It was the only place for miles that I oculd get a copy of the NY times, the
Chomicle and the wall street journal. You can argue their selection is a
mirror of gentrification- microbrews, the NY times, etc, and more and better
produce. But since when is better quality food at the same prices a bad
thing? It was still ghetto- they just had better stuff.
Hell, they had a better choice of just about anything than any of the other
liquor stores around me. The NY market was definitely trying to change their
business model and was selling things other than cheap beer and smokes.
There are 5 other stores that possibly deserve the bootstomping of the NoI
in the same area. But not the NY Market.
You could infer the torching and trashing of NY Market as the Black
Nationalists perpetuating a ghetto liquor store myth as they destroyed the
only store in the area that was actually different and rising above the
others with better quality goods at prices that were not much higher then EZ
liquors 2 blocks way. Keep the community down by eliminating non compliant
gentrified retail stores. Maybe the competition was just too much and the
nation of islam stores were not doing so well. Does NoI have grocery stores
in their little empire? If not, why not? They should put a good foot
forward, lead by example and open a grocery store on 7th and Mandela in West
O, or 88th ave and 14th st. in East O. Or are they too busy prosytelizing
and knocking over liquor stores to walk the walk?

"The white anarchists that you and others seem to especially enjoy whining about may have their faults but as far as I can tall they aren't the ones smashing up liquor stores and telling people how to live. The Black Muslims are."

yeah, the anarchists are busy torching car dealerships and telling people how to live. the pic is from 2 days ago.

more on above

Seven SUVs torched at two San Diego dealerships
http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/12/1786952.php


Commenters rationalizing bloody violence against people in this blast from the recent past:

G8 Protests: Police Officer Beaten

"If that cop were truly a righteous man, he'd have been protesting, too. But he wasn't. He'd rather collect a paycheck from an evil and corrupt system than do the right thing."

http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2005/07/1716737_comment.php#1721862

EDITORIAL
Liquor stores as targets
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Opinion

A SOUND CASE can be made for tougher regulation of the numbers and selling practices of liquor stores in urban neighborhoods. Badly run establishments and an excess of these outlets, especially in low-income areas where residents lack competitively priced groceries, are rightly regarded as a blight on their communities.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/11/30/EDGTSFVEOA1.DTL

The Chronicle editorial then goes on to condemn the attacks.

This was not done by "the" anarchists, but by some alleged anarchists. In fact, we don't know for sure who did it. Whoever did it, other anarchists condemn it. Anarchists are not of one mind on this stuff.


> Commenters rationalizing bloody violence against people in this blast from the recent past:

A cop is not a store clerk.

that's just reaffirming the accusation


and broken bottles of beer and liquor are not a person's bloody head who very well could have been killed or brain damaged. store shelves can be replaced

A store clerk was kidnapped. Are you trying to justify that? Or are you trying to say that cop shouldn't have been clobbered? Which is it?

count on people to miss the point.

political violence is a tactic, PERIOD. it always has been, it always will be. politics without violence is like, uh, whats that beautiful frederick douoglass quote... "Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning."

if you are a radical who disagrees with a violent political act, do it based on polticial justifications offered by the actor or supporters. dont do it based on the tactic per se, lest you end up a confused, pathetic, useless liberal.

...unless you are one of the rare truly nonviolent people out there (all 5 of them). in that case, go ahead.

A while back I remember some leftists complaining that campaigns to shut down liquor stores were a form of gentirification. By a lot of the comments on indybay, it's the opposite, we should be trying to shutdown the "overconcentation".of liquor stores. So which is it? I wonder what people think.

Well I would say certainly there are nuisance liquor stores that are bad neighbors. I have no problem putting regulation onto their commericial dealings. However I think the bigger picture is that they exist in greater numbers in poor neighborhoods because they fill the gap of no real grocery stores. Sometimes their prices and quality of food is bad. So it's obviously an inferior (in terms of service) place to shop. However we might also see their service as somewhat vital as well.

Probably in the big picture is that people should be fighting for decent grocery stores to move into inner city areas. Unfortunately a lot of discussion around here is any improvement = gentrification. I made a comment a while back saying that a somewhat proposed Walgreens in West Oakland would have been good. I got a nice smug response making fun of my comment. However for people down in the lower bottoms that don't have easy access to medicine and basic commodities this would be a big improvement. Not to mention some jobs for local residents.

In short I believe people that whine about gentrification need to offer an alternative. Being a snide cynic is easy. Coming up with some answers is difficult.

>In short I believe people that whine about gentrification need to offer an alternative. Being a snide cynic is easy. Coming up with some answers is difficult.<

OK. Briefly, then I'm back out:

If there was an effort to start a locally owned grocery that paid people a decent wage and didn't treat them like crap, I don't think you'll get a lot of flak here. Better yet, if it was a co-op (like Rainbow Grocery in SF,) I bet there would be widespread support, not just here but in the community in general.

I think it's important to remember that one of the effects of gentrification is that it divides communities, and this conversation has been no exception. That also applies for the Walgreen's thread you're referring to, but on a smaller scale (anti-corporate activists vs. community resource advocates, for example.) Why not start a community-owned and operated grocery as per above, and then open a pharmacy on the same principles?

"A while back I remember some leftists complaining that campaigns to shut down liquor stores were a form of gentirification. By a lot of the comments on indybay, it's the opposite, we should be trying to shutdown the "overconcentation".of liquor stores. So which is it? I wonder what people think."

The implicit assumption there is that leftists NEED to be doing something, taking some action. But we dont need to be involved in everything. The world doesnt revolve around "us", and people (obviously) arent waiting for "us" to give "them" the plan.

Let people in their own communities work out their own shit, they dont need a bunch of white liberal deciding the plan for the revolution on indymedia, and the riding in on white horses to either build or smash liquor stores. & If you want to criticize the actions of the people taking action then do it on the basis of their politics, especially if you cheer the same tactics when anarchists use them.

to no heroes-- rainbow grocery would be good in any inner city neighborhood. However that's not what was on the table. A proposal for Walgreens was. Activists helped killed it, though Walgreens might not have built it anyways. It would be better than what's there now.

As to the last poster. 2 points. The first one you made is basically a good one. I would just say that I live there. It effects me, so there is some direct interest involved, not to mention that I don't drive.

As to your other point. I criticized the actions of allegedly the Black Muslims on the content of their politics, enforcing their bizarre religious/cultish morality onto others. I think either I wasn't clear or I was misread. My comment about anarchists was about imposing a religious/moral belief system on others not about a particular tactic.