Portrait of a Police Agent: Deceit, Manipulation, Sexism
Posted by Mike E on March 23, 2010
The following appeared in the Rag Blog (March 22), which has written extensively on the story of Brandon Darby. In an intro to this piece, Jed wrote:
“Machismo, manipulation, sectarianism, pseudo-militancy. Agent provocateurs use a set of behaviors, whether they are paid to do it or not. Don’t tolerate the behaviors. They treat our open arms and morality as weakness. Knowledge is power. Learn the tricks and they don’t work (so well). Thanks, Lisa, for this brave truth telling.”
Late in this piece Lisa writes:
“I am still struggling with forgiveness for choices made in activist communities and by some of my friends. I understand how difficult it was; Brandon, at times, was also my friend. In the end we must examine the behavior we experienced, reflect on the array of choices we had, and explore what we could do differently to insure this does not happen again. Brandon’s behavior was problematic long before 2008. Whether or not he was actually working for the state, he was doing their job for them by breeding discord within our politically active communities. I raised my concerns about Brandon’s behavior in New Orleans, in Austin, and also in Minneapolis.”
* * * * * * *
Sexism, egos, and lies: Sometimes you wake up and it is not different
By Lisa Fithian
On December 31, 2008, the Austin Informant Working Group released a statement titled: “Sometimes You Wake Up and It’s Different: Statement on Brandon Darby, the ‘Unnamed’ Informant/Provocateur in the ‘Texas 2.’” It’s been over a year since then and here is my long-overdue version of that story.
The Texas 2: David McKay and Bradley Crowder.
It was on December 18, 2008, that I learned unquestionably that Brandon Michael Darby, an Austin activist, was an FBI informant leading up to the 2008 Republican National Convention protests in St. Paul, MN. He was the key witness in the case of two young men from Midland, TX, Bradley Crowder (23) and David McKay (22) who, thanks to Brandon’s involvement, have been convicted of manufacturing Molotov cocktails.
They are now serving two and four years, respectively, in federal prison. In 2010, Brandon will be a key witness in another important case to the Government — the case of the RNC 8, Minneapolis organizers who are facing state conspiracy charges.
The case of the “Texas 2” gained national media attention as a result of Brandon’s unique blend of egomania, the media’s attraction to charismatic and controversial men, and the persistence of the U.S. government to criminalize and crush a growing anti-authoritarian movement. I found myself strangely entwined in the story — past, present and future.
I knew Brandon, and I was given a set of the FBI documents because, as it became apparent from reading them, I was one of the primary people he was reporting on to the FBI. (I, like many others engaged in political protest, am suspect because of my politics not my actions.) Now all of us who knew Brandon and worked closely with him, have been coming to terms with what he did, how he was able to do it, how we were used and abused in the process, and what we might do differently next time.
Waking up
Some of us were more surprised than others when Brandon revealed himself as an informant.
My first reaction was deep sadness. I then went through a range of emotions: disbelief, shock, anger, outrage, and at times vindication. I am still hurt and angry, not just with Brandon, but with the whole system that supports and enables him.
I am still struggling with forgiveness for choices made in activist communities and by some of my friends. I understand how difficult it was; Brandon, at times, was also my friend. In the end we must examine the behavior we experienced, reflect on the array of choices we had, and explore what we could do differently to insure this does not happen again.
Brandon’s behavior was problematic long before 2008. Whether or not he was actually working for the state, he was doing their job for them by breeding discord within our politically active communities. I raised my concerns about Brandon’s behavior in New Orleans, in Austin, and also in Minneapolis.
The news story broke on Thursday, December 29, when Brandon published an open letter to the community admitting he worked with the FBI. He knew we were about to blow the whistle, so he successfully preempted our headline. His initial words, however, were lies.
When asked why he got involved with the FBI, Darby said it was because he discovered that people he knew were planning violence.
“Somebody had asked me to do something that would’ve resulted in hurting people, and I said no,” he said. “So they started asking other people. At that point, that’s when I went forward and contacted somebody in law enforcement.”
Darby had been involved with a group of young people from Texas who traveled together to the RNC. Their journey has become part of the fodder in the legal and media frenzy since September 2008. The trip proved to be a disaster.
David and Brad ended up in jail, and the rest of the group was served Grand Jury subpoenas. The subpoenas were eventually dropped. While preparing for their trials, David and Brad both said Brandon was an informant and the community refused to heed their warnings. They felt like they knew Brandon, he’d been around for years.
Scott Crow (left) and Brandon Darby were photographed together
on Nov. 3, 2007, at a party in Austin hosted by KUT Radio.
Photo from bestofneworleans.com.
In November an article appeared in the St. Paul Press asserting that Brandon Darby was an informant. This, unfortunately, was based on false evidence. Scott Crow, a friend of mine, and Brandon’s main ally in the activist community, defended Brandon calling the accusation a “COINTELPRO lie.” Little did Scott know how right he was – this whole damn thing is COINTELPRO shit.
The documents we got in December 2009 were clear — Brandon began working for the FBI in November 2007. In November 2007 Brandon had no relationship with David or Brad and could not have known their plans for the St. Paul Republican Conventions. Their plans didn’t develop until after Brandon had become an informant and after he established himself as their ally and mentor.
Furthermore, Brandon has never been squeamish about violence. He owned guns and cultivated his reputation as a hotheaded, militant revolutionary. At least a half a dozen people were prepared to testify, under oath and with some risk to them, that Brandon had approached them with proposals to commit robbery or arson. Ultimately Brandon admitted that he turned informant for the money.
Brad, David, and their families’ lives have been changed forever because these two young men were seduced and influenced by a paid FBI informant. In his early memos to the FBI, Brandon referred to them as “collateral damage.” Now these two men are spending several years of their young lives in Federal Prison.
There are many people in the activist community who have crossed Brandon’s path and have been hurt, demoralized, alienated, frightened, or run off by him. Those of us who were lied to or lied about, spied on, bullied, must deal with the trauma of his abusive behavior. We must also come to terms with the behavior of those who supported and enabled Brandon. And, as a community, we must deal with those parts of ourselves that were seduced, manipulated, and marginalized by Brandon so that we can defend each other, our political work, and ourselves.
Background
I met Brandon through his relationship with another organizer, after I moved to Austin in February 2002. Over time I learned that it was a tumultuous and abusive relationship. When it ended in 2004 Brandon moved to New Orleans for about six months. Years later Brandon told me that he had turned himself in to the New Orleans Office of the FBI when he lived there during that time. He apparently told them that he knew they were looking for him, so here he was.
It was early 2003 around the U.S. invasion of Iraq, that Brandon inserted himself in the anti-war community and gained a reputation as a paranoid guy who got himself into unusual situations with police.
During the protests on the first day of the war, Brandon was supposedly arrested for photographing undercover cops. After that action he was, mysteriously, the only person who did not want legal support. The arrest apparently does not show up in any legal records.
(check out: http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid:151843.)
During this time, Brandon began showing up regularly at anti-war rallies, trainings, and other events. The anti-war community had started to use civil disobedience as a protest tactic. In the first training I did following Brandon’s supposed arrest, Brandon insisted that one of the participants was an undercover cop and demanded that I ask that person to leave. High drama around other people being undercover is behavior I’ve learned to associate with informants as a way to divert attention from them. It also breeds distrust and is destabilizing of collective efforts.
In another intense protest when UT students attempted to block an intersection with a tripod, the police unfortunately were waiting near the intersection and quickly pulled out the legs of a tri-pod, and dropped the person about 15 feet onto the pavement. Brandon who had helped bring props to the site became erratic and started yelling at the police resulting in even more people being arrested, including people who were not intending to risk arrest. Several students left the anti-war movement as a result of this action.
At this time, it became very clear that a key local organizer was being intensely targeted. Her home was broken into repeatedly. She found her vehicle tampered with, was fired from her job, and her cat was poisoned. Coincidentally, also at this time, Brandon began to court her as a mentor, asking her to teach him what she knew about organizing.
The first time she recalled meeting Brandon was the day he was arrested, when he ran up to her yelling that there were undercover cops in the crowd. Following his arrest, Brandon consistently called her, wanting to talk about his arrest and aftermath but rejecting the legal support she was helping organize. Recently, when the Austin Informant Working Group did an open records request on this organizer, the FBI found 600 documents with her name in them (they have not been relinquished by the FBI to date).
Brandon also participated in a protest at the Halliburton shareolders’ meeting in Houston. He unexpectedly joined the group intending to commit nonviolent civil disobedience. The group was on edge the night before, and now I understand why. In the planning session the night before the action, Brandon argued strongly that provoking and fighting the police was a tactic to open the eyes of the masses to police brutality, and bring more people into our cause.
He held his ground even when the group strongly disagreed and told him that under no circumstances would the group agree to him provoking or fighting the police. Brandon was a loose cannon and a bully. Even when he said he would agree to nonviolence in the action, it was clear that in his mind his agreement was contingent on the police not “provoking” him. Going into the action the next day was like sitting on a tinderbox waiting to explode.
At some actions, Brandon would show up, all masked up, with a video camera and take a lot of footage. He has continued to do this over the years, including in Minneapolis. I don’t believe he has ever posted or published any of it.
Brandon also befriended a local Palestinian activist, a man named Riad Hamad. In the spring of 2008 his house was raided by the FBI. In April Riad was found bound, gagged, and drowned in Town Lake. The death was ruled a suicide and the FBI is not releasing any information, but it was made clear in David McKay’s trial that Brandon was also involved as an FBI informant on that case.
It was in the fall of 2005 that my path became more intertwined with Brandon’s.
New Orleans and Common Ground Relief
After Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans was a post-apocalyptic state. The whole social order had collapsed. A military occupation was underway and vigilantes were literally shooting Black men in the streets. It was in the midst of this chaos that Common Ground Relief was born. The organization grew from a driveway operation into a massive grassroots response to the Katrina disaster. With ex-Black Panther Malik Rahim at the helm, it was outside of government or charity organizations, and based in direct action, mutual aid, and solidarity.
Within the first year Common Ground Relief hosted over 12,000 volunteers and established an effective grassroots relief network in New Orleans following Katrina: CG moved millions of dollars in goods and resources; set up a free medical clinic; cleaned and gutted over 1,500 homes, churches and schools; organized a free legal services, media and computer centers; revived community gardens, planted thousands of acres of wetlands and did numerous bioremediation projects.
This work was done by an incredible group of long-term organizers who committed their lives for months if not years to the work. Brandon, was part of this team of volunteers but he held a great deal of power because of efforts he and Scott Crow made in the early days of the storm to rescue a friend, Robert King Wilkerson, and to defend Malik’s home in Algiers from the white vigilantes. It was during their second trip to New Orleans that Common Ground was born.
Despite all the good accomplished by Common Ground, there was discord with other local groups and organizers who were struggling to come home. Much of the discord involved Brandon. Brandon had strong authoritarian tendencies but his lack of organizing skills and experience and his resistance to working horizontally or collectively created discord and challenges.
He insisted on being the person in charge. He demanded a chain of command with him at the top. At one point he tried to create a central committee to insure that only a select few would be in any position of power. This style put him out front whether it was the media or a group of volunteers who would be doing the heavy lifting while he talked.
For example, in the Bywater area, Brandon insisted on being the liaison to the activist community. But he treated them with such disrespect and patronization that Common Ground lost an important ally base in the local community. In another example, a local organizer was talking about putting together a women’s space and clinic. Instead of supporting that process, Brandon just moved ahead and set up a space separate from that effort, further alienating local activists.
Brandon actively agitated against any relationship between Common Ground and the People’s Hurricane Relief Fund (PHRF). He and Scott Crow, one of the co-founders of Common Ground, took a particularly hard-line position against certain members of leadership within the PHRF.
In December 2005 Brandon goaded Scott Crow to write a public letter accusing PHRF of corruption. The letter was very destructive. I had never before or since seen Malik so angry. He understood the danger of this letter and the negative impact it could have on Common Ground and the community, and he moved quickly to limit the damage.
With Common Ground Relief as his platform Brandon attempted to extend his influence internationally. He pushed for a trip to Venezuela, which made little sense and raised even more questions about Brandon, especially for those who traveled with him. In the summer of 2006 Brandon tried to initiate another emergency response and relief effort only this time in Lebanon. It was called Critical Response and was going to save the people of Lebanon from the Israeli attacks in the war with Hezebollah. Fortunately this effort never happened.
Sexism, egos and…
Brandon was a master of manipulation, and worked both women and men. He would draw them into his sometimes-twisted perspective by cultivating them through coffee, cigarettes, alcohol, revolutionary rhetoric, emotional neediness, or his physical presence — either seductive or intimidating.
Young women are often attracted to Brandon. At Common Ground, his unrestrained sexual engagement with volunteers was a problem. His “love for sex” became part of the organizational culture. His leadership role set a tone that led to systemic problems of sexual harassment and abuse at Common Ground.
When a group of the women in leadership challenged his behavior and asked that he stop sleeping with volunteers, he said “I like to fuck women, so what.” Our concerns were disregarded. The abuse became so rampant that Common Ground had to issue a public statement in May of 2006 acknowledging problems of sexual harassment in the organization.
Brandon left for a while but returned in November 2006 when he was asked to become the Interim Director of CG. His first focus was to dismantle the primarily women and queer leadership team at the St. Mary’s volunteer site. He then started recruiting men for the security team, trained them in martial arts, and asked if they were willing to carry guns, despite the fact that Common Ground had an explicit policy against weapons at our sites.
Offices of Common Ground Relief in New Orleans. Photo from BigGovernment.com.
Brandon picked fights in the community, increasingly drawing police into the area and to Common Ground. He initiated action to kick down the door of the Women’s Center at two in the morning, to get rid of a man who was staying there. Brandon also kicked in the door of a trailer and pointed weapons at a group of volunteers who were hanging out with someone whom Brandon had asked to leave CG. As the Interim Director, Brandon felt he could do what he wanted without the consent of or accountability to the volunteers, the communities CG served, or other leadership.
In another incident, Brandon was arrested in a car chase. He was so angry about being arrested that Brandon once again trumped other work being done by deciding that he was going to personally clean up the New Orleans Police Department. He printed up hundreds of yard signs and put them around New Orleans, with a phone number saying that if you had a problem with NOPD, call Brandon Darby, Interim Director of Common Ground.
Brandon’s ego was getting more and more inflated making him even more dangerous. He covered his megalomania with a practiced humility and drawl. He became increasingly reckless and kept everybody in defensive and reactive postures.
Sexism, like racism, affects all of us. Brandon was allowed to assume leadership and authority at Common Ground because he was a strong, good-looking, charismatic, straight white male who was willing to take risks, even if reckless. As Malik’s favored son he did pretty much whatever he wanted. Yet, the work of activists who were women or queer or busy doing relief remained relatively invisible. Those activists were only given power where it didn’t challenge Brandon’s and he made sure of it.
During the first year of Common Ground, Brandon decided that I was an obstacle to his authority, and he worked to undermine me. He successfully diverted attention from my challenges to his sexist, abusive, unethical, and unaccountable behavior by framing them as a “power struggle”. Where he wasn’t able to convince others in the organization, he silenced them with fear of his retribution.
Brandon attacked me in public and spread disinformation about my work. He built a small group of dedicated followers that were willing to do his dirty work. They would tape record people, including myself and report back to him. He snitch-jacketed me — accused me of being an FBI agent. When I reached out to others, particularly men in New Orleans to intervene, I received little support. None of them were willing or able to challenge Brandon’s clearly destructive behavior. Those who backed his authority contributed to the organizational divisions that allowed his continued abuse of power.
In January 2007 I drove to New Orleans to pick up a friend who was kicked out of Common Ground by Brandon because she was a friend of mine. She was one of the coordinators at the St. Mary’s site. Other relief work coordinators were leaving the organization and because of this Brandon accused me of coming to town to wage a coup against him.
Early the next morning one of his “assistants” called me, threatening me with lawsuits. Then I get a call telling me that Brandon told them that King told him that Scott and I were conspiring against him. Crazy shit, crazy COINTELPRO shit. At the same time Brandon began a purge of three long-time coordinators by demanding they turn in the keys and leave the premises. But this time even Brandon went too far. Malik intervened and stopped the purge.
Lies
Brandon lies. He lied at Common Ground. He lied to the FBI. He lied in his open letter. He lied to his friends. He lied to the media. He lied to the judge and jury.
The government and the FBI lie, too. There is a long history of government infiltration and violence to disrupt social movements, a history that they have lied about in the past and they continue lie about today. It is documented that the government infiltrated and disrupted protests at the Republican National Conventions (2000 in Philly and 2004 in New York City). But in St. Paul they took it to a whole new level and they were more than willing to use Brandon to do it.
The government’s efforts to break the grassroots direct action anti-capitalist movement led to one of the most fascist operations I have experienced in the U.S. During the RNC — between knocking down doors, confiscating organizing materials, raiding homes, snatching people on the streets, impounding the skills training bus, and even surrounding my car with guns, they also arrested hundreds of innocent people and are continuing to prosecute the RNC 8, who are facing state conspiracy charges.
To this day it is my firm belief that the government set up both Brad and David, and another young man named Matt DePalma, in order to legitimize their acts of repression and to taint the environment in the case of the RNC 8. There were only two instances of Molotov cocktails in St. Paul and both of them had an FBI informant involved. In the case of Matt, the informant brought him to the library to learn how to make them, brought him to a store to buy the stuff and then made and tested them together!
In the case of David and Brad, Brandon had been goading them into a destructive mindset from the very first meeting and he continued to goad them throughout. Brandon created the environment in which they made some very bad decisions. I do not believe that those Molotov cocktails would have been made if Brandon had not been a part of that group.
One year later
At the time of this writing, Brad and David are both serving time in federal prison. Brad plea-bargained and was sentenced to two years. David went to trial and the first jury could not reach a verdict. Awaiting his second trial, prosecutors threatened to bring additional charges against Brad and to call Brad as a witness to testify against David.
Rather than force his friend to choose between self-interest and defending him, David made a decision to plea out. Instead of leniency, the judge doubled David’s sentence to four years without parole as punishment for the first trial.
Kate Kibby, who was previously arrested dressed as a zombie in a demonstration in Minneapolis.
Then in November 2009 the FBI unsuccessfully prosecuted a young woman, named Kate Kibby, for allegedly threatening Brandon in an email. Fortunately, the jury delivered a unanimous not guilty verdict. One of the many interesting things we learned in that case is that Brandon had actually drafted his open letter near the end of October and posted it against the FBI’s wishes.
We also learned that one of the FBI’s motivations in pursuing this case was the hope of finding a new informant. In their interrogation of this woman, they asked if she was working with me or Scott Crow. They told her she could be facing 20 years, but more likely 2-4. If she wanted to become an informant in the Austin and New York City anarchist scenes, they could work something out.
Fortunately, this woman had integrity and principles, and refused to be threatened or bullied. Because of this, she had to endure an FBI invasion into her life, and a terrifying trial. As her father said afterwards, “I knew if we could get 12 adults to sit down and look at this, they would see how absurd it is…”
I wish that this trial could be the end of any damage that Brandon might do, but we know that Brandon is likely to be a main witness in the trial against the RNC 8, organizers from Minneapolis who are facing conspiracy charges. Who knows how many other people he will concoct stories or fabricate lies about? Or how his brain twists the facts.
After Kate’s trial he sent an email to Scott, saying that Scott and I were responsible for David being in jail. He said:
I feel that you and Lisa bear some moral (not legal) responsibility for two of the years that David McKay is serving. Y’all let your dogma and your personal resentments guide you in the advice and encouragement you gave him. He did wrong and he would be free soon had he just been honest.
Y’all somehow convinced him that he had to “fight the man” and that his being honest was somehow unfair to the oppressed peoples of the world. Thankfully, Mrs. Kibby did not take y’alls guidance or drink your koolaid- and she’s free.
A few years ago, I began to feel that you guys were similiar to radical Imams in that y’all spout hatred (not all hatred, good things too) and young activists get in trouble all around y’all, but never y’all. I feel that y’all did that with my youthful anger as well.
Though I’m sure you don’t appreciate receiving an email from me, I think you can deduce some of my motivations from its words.
I am sorry; I have worked with thousands of young people over the years and none of them are in the situation that people find themselves in after working around Brandon. I have no time for his twisted logic, vague threats and destructive behavior. Instead, let us vanquish him and learn from this to insure that he, or people like him, can never do this again. To that end…
Behaviors of Brandon’s or others that enabled this kind of damage to be done.
- Deferring or listening to men, as opposed to women and/or attacking women in leadership positions. Our patriarchal society has taught us this and we need to deconstruct it.
- Charisma and confidence enabled him to assume leadership and control — people deferred even though he had little experience. He cultivated a handful of women and men to become personal assistants who did a lot of his work for him.
- Assuming credibility by his associations — Brandon tried to associate himself with other high profile organizers in the activist community.
- Preying on and exploiting people’s vulnerabilities and insecurities, particularly using alcohol or other addictions. He liked to “play with people’s minds.”
- Bullying. All bullies abuse their power and people let them do what they want because they are afraid of what will happen if they do not go along. They use their physical prowess to intimidate both women and men.
- Disrupting group process in meetings, derailing agendas, questioning process, challenging others, or not coming to meetings at all to avoid accountability. Or using secrecy and sub-groups to divide the whole.
- Pointing fingers at and ‘snitch-jacketing’ other people, accusing them of being cops, FBI agents, etc. This kept everyone on guard, and created an environment of suspicion and distrust.
- Seducing people using power or sex, leaving a lot of pain and destabilized situations in his wake or provoking people to do acts they would not do on their own.
- Being persistent and pursuing people, by calling them repeatedly or showing up at their homes, inviting them for coffee, he would wear you down, or find other ways back into important relationships.
- Being an emotional/physical wreck, becoming very needy and seducing people into taking care of him. Then people would defend him because of his emotional vulnerabilities or physical needs.
- Time and energy suck. Talk endlessly, consuming hours of time and energy — confusing, exhausting, and indoctrinating.
- Being helpful or useful — showing up when you most needed support. Brandon would arrive with tools, money, or whatever was needed at just the right time.
- Documenting through videotaping or photographing actions but never using it or working on communications systems which he attempted at the RNC.
Brandon Darby at work. Image from New Orleans Indymedia.
Some day I hope to wake up and find things different
Brandon’s behavior over the years makes it clear that he is a misogynist, an egomaniac, and a liar. Unfortunately, many in our broader community bought into the illusion that he was a great radical self-described “revolutionary.” They defended him again and again. He repaid their support with betrayal. He continues to make a mockery of our work and supports the FBI in their efforts to crush our struggle for justice.
Some day I hope to wake up and find things different. I hope to see our communities deepen our understanding and commitment to uprooting all the “isms.” I would like to see a community where we create agreements and structures of accountability that will not allow behaviors like those highlighted above to continue, and if they do continue, that men will listen to women, and stand up to each other when someone is clearly abusing their power and authority.
In the end, I do not know what other choices I could have made short of leaving Common Ground earlier. I actually believe I tried to interrupt, make visible, warn and mitigate the damage of Brandon, but it was the people around me that continued to support Brandon despite the obvious problems.
Some of the lessons I have learned are that if someone is continually engaging in a pattern of disruptive behavior, like those mentioned above, that people must make clear agreements about what kind of behavior is OK and not OK and then collectively hold each other to those agreements.
If people/women are continually raising an issue about a particular person I will pay more attention, do some research, and if questions or problems continue to arise about that person, I will work together with others to ask that person to leave. Whether they are infiltrators or not, the behaviors that they are exhibiting are counterproductive to a world rooted in justice and equality. They are also, by their very nature, putting all of us at risk of unjust government action and imprisonment by their reckless and provocative behavior.
I also hope that someday when I wake up that I will live in a world where people do not use the threat of or use of violence to get their way or impose their will. That if we have such people in our movement that we will not be intimidated but instead will work together to end those abuses of power, for they mirror the abuses the Government in their efforts to exploit and control.
I also hope more people will chose nonviolent action since such action prefigures our future, can be strategically effective, and minimizes our movement’s vulnerability — and because I do not believe we can make lasting real radical change through violent means in this country.
Some day when I wake up, I hope to find an end to the systemic oppression and repression that unjustly locks up so many innocent people, while destroying and thwarting the dreams of so many others. Perhaps if we built our communities based on just agreements and real accountability, prisons would become obsolete.
Until we wake up in that world, let us remember that no one is free until we all are free. No day will be different until we make it so. Let us begin today.
Here is a link to a story about a long-time informant in New Zealand that also made the news in December 2008. It is uncanny how many similarities there are and lots of good lessons for us…http://indymedia.org.nz/newswire/display/76563/index.php
A great deal has been written about the case of the Texas 2 and can be found at www.freethetexas2.org
Many thanks to the following for their editorial support: James Clark, Lauren Ross, Ted German, Casey Pritchett, Scott Crow, and Missy Benavidez.
[Lisa Fithian has been organizing for 35 years -- working with peace, labor, student/youth, immigrant and global, environmental and racial justice organizations and movements. Much of her work has been focused on using creative nonviolent direct action and civil disobedience in strategic campaigns. She is a member of the Alliance of Community Trainers, a small collective working to empower communities for collective transformation.
Lisa has worked with Common Ground Relief, the post-Katrina New Orleans collective; the new Students for a Democratic Society (SDS); United for Peace and Justice; and environmental groups like Save our Springs -- and she helped Cindy Sheehan coordinate activities at Camp Casey. Check out Lisa’s websites: www.organizingforpower.org and www.trainersalliance.org.]
Top: Lauren Ross, center, is comforted by her friend Lisa Fithian after they were arrested during a protest in New York Sept. 2, 2004. Photo by Bebeto Matthews / AP. Image from CommonDreams. Below: Lisa Fithian and Ken Butigan at a National Assembly of United for Peace and Justice in Chicago, 2007. Photo by Diane Greene Lent / dianelent.com.
Joseph Ball said
We’ve all known some Brandons. The main lesson I’ve learned from people like this is be wary of those who cannot keep their personal issues separate from politics but who still want to be leaders. A leader is meant to put the collective needs of the people before their own personal issues. If they can’t do this, then they have no right to ask others to make sacrifices.
Of course, even leaders need to take a day off sometimes. But leaders who are sexually promiscuous with other activists, who drink heavily or who take illegal drugs are always a disaster waiting to happen. Anyone who wants to be a leader must show a capacity for self-sacrifice that the average police informer may find hard to sustain on a long-term basis.
One thing I’ve noticed about male informers (this may apply to female one’s too, but I’ve got no experience of it) is they tend to use women activists for casual affairs. As the women concerned gets to know the man a bit better than other activists they tend to be the first to notice that they are disappearing for periods of time without reasonable explanation. The woman concerned may believe this is because they are seeing someone else. This is certainly true-they’re spending their time with their wife and children who have also been given another tissue of lies. Of course, plenty of men pursue such exploitative double lives without being in the pay of the state but we should be very careful about men who join activist groups and are behaving like this. It’s 80% likely they are informers.
Joel said
What I’m interested in is balancing vigilence with paranoia, how have comrades dealt with this issue without being subsummed by it?
G said
I recall the rcp was infiltrated at one point (before my time, but I read about it) and it was a male who had affairs within the party, too, and gave a detailed report to LE. Fortunately, the report seemed honest in that it detailed there was no actual crimes, weapons, etc, taking place.
g. rowan said
I agree that it is important not to be overwhelmed by paranoia. That said, I think that the entire point of this article leads toward an understanding of security that avoids paranoia. The behaviors that are described are unacceptable, dangerous, and detrimental toward building a liberation movement no matter who engages them. Macho, adventurist, and abusive behavior should be confronted whether the person is a cop or a committed revolutionary. Security isn’t entirely about the cloak and dagger of avoiding or detecting state surveillance and infiltration. A lot of it comes down to building a movement that is liberatory, democratic, and disciplined. State repression and infiltration work largely on our movements real and existing weaknesses.
iris said
“War at Home” (Glick) recommends the following precautions when you discover or suspect an informant:
Also:
Avoiding paranoia:
It seems from the above that having a procedure and a plan–and keeping aware of the tendency to lose one’s head or gossip in a tense, emotional activist situation–is good safeguard. Also, believing that it could ‘happen to you’ would be a good first step. And though I have read many documents on infiltration and COINTELPRO–part of me thinks my group isn’t “big enough” to be interfered with. This is very naive.
I find the fact that Brandon’s white male machismo was so dazzling (and you could see how this would creep in, in a militarized situation saturated with fear in New Orleans)–and how activists use casual sex to manipulate fellow group members–really fascinating. Perhaps procedures for such complaints would help here as well? Something that brings tense activists “up for air” for self-examination.
William Dhalgren said
I find the fact that Brandon’s white male machismo was so dazzling (and you could see how this would creep in, in a militarized situation saturated with fear in New Orleans)–and how activists use casual sex to manipulate fellow group members–really fascinating. Perhaps procedures for such complaints would help here as well? Something that brings tense activists “up for air” for self-examination.
One of the difficulties I’ve found in confronting people about manipulative sexual behavior is that it’s very easy for the person being confronted to turn the focus of the conversation back to the person making the accusation. Are they uptight about non-monogamous sex? Are they jealous because they’re secretly attracted to one of the people involved? Given that radical communities generally include tight-knit circles of friends, most of the time I’ve seen such accusations handled via childish gossip and hearsay rather than an open discussion. While I think many activist groups and social circles have gotten much better at handling accusations of rape and sexual assault, it does seem that we lack an effective means for handling more routine problems.
Joseph Ball said
As far as I can gather Brandon was an anarchist. In anarchist groups it tends to be hard to separate personal and political issues as there is not meant to be a vanguard. But there’s no way a leader in a Marxist group should be conducting multiple ‘non-monogamous’ relationships with other party members. A communist leader has to be able to command respect. They should be stable individuals with stable personal lives. All too often the white left allows itself to be led by drunks, psychopaths and womanizers. One of the points of discipline of the African Peoples’ Socialist Party is that it’s members should carry themselves ‘worthy of emulation by the masses’. I think such points of discipline are worth studying. After all a communist leader is asking others to make sacrifices. If they are very self-focused, they cannot expect others to follow them.
The anarchist Brandon hung around with do sound very liberal indeed. No anarchist group in Britain would have entertained someone that said things like ‘I like to fuck women, so what.’ Also, Brandon is living openly on the outskirts of Austin, Texas, according to media reports. Any ‘outed’ informer on the anarchists in the UK would have to leave their home within 24 hours and start a new life. I’m not advocating such an approach (and neither should anyone else in this forum, obviously) but I think this difference says something poignant about the gentle, otherworldly idealism of US radicals as opposed to their counter-parts in other countries.
Iris said
William, I agree with you. Or, in a subtle way, the accusation can fall back on women who have slept with the activist in question, in a misogynist way.
I think a major problem is also a liberal habit–that is, your sexual activity or private sexual life has no business being outed in any way, unless it is something really heinous and blatant, like physical abuse. I feel like this is a touchy subject on the Left, that I recall long debates on Kasama (pornography, the politics of desire, private fantasies and their political context). There is this magical sphere around sex and sexual relationships that cannot be broken. Some really dishonest ‘relations’ broke an anti-war group (and a marriage) apart in my city–and I refused to see or ask about it openly for a long time because I considered it an unapproachable “private” matter! My mistake.
The FBI relies on the inflamed emotions around such incidents to shatter our ability to work together. Putting a procedure in place, I know wouldn’t solve things–but from my experience some really skillful social maneuvering to allow activists in an intense situation (emotionally or otherwise) to vent, cool down, and gain perspective and a sense of security would probably mitigate a lot of harmful gossip.
MOVIE, REVIEWED said
Whatever the veracity of the claims about Brandon Darby’s ties to the FBI (and, frankly, other than describing his role as a Cooperating Witness, the story is unclear) I think American leftists need to steer clear of “informantphobia”
Just about every leftist I’ve ever met in my 29 years on the US far left was convinced that they were being monitored by the FBI. This mass informantphobia was used as a standing excuse for never doing anything militant or aggressive, an implicit justification for continuing servility to the Democratic Party and as a weapon in internal disputes within leftist groups.
It also got in the way of actually monitoring real government surveillance – if everybody’s a suspect, it’s hard to find the real snitches.
In actual fact, the FBI is kind of busy these days dealing with the Islamists (folks who are far more menacing to the rulers than the toothless defeated far left are – after all, those folks fly planes into buildings!!!) – do the feds even have the spare resources to deal with the far left, and would they waste them on us, considering how weak and ineffective we are?
The quadrennial conventions are an exception – the left can, and does, have an impact there and the feds (and their local counterparts) respond accordingly.
As for the rest of the time???
Beyond that, this post was filled with what amounts to gossip against this Daly guy’s sex life, and what sounds suspiciously like jealousy about his success in rising to a leadership position in that group.
Considering how informantphobia works – that is, how it gets used as a weapon in internal disputes within groups – this makes a lot of sense that the article would focus on those personal irrelevancies. That plus the militancy-baiting also totally fits in as well.
Perhaps Daly was isolated within the group because of jealousy from those who resented his professional and sexual success and who were uncomfortable with his militancy and that’s why he found himself in a position where he had to cooperate with the FBI?
On the real, this whole informantphobia thing is not productive for us.
Indeed we should avoid terrorist activity (for political reasons, not because we’re afraid of doing time for our beliefs) and those in leadership positions should conduct themselves with some decorum in terms of their personal lives.
But it does not serve our cause to be constantly policing each other in fear that the next person is an informant!
As for our personal envy of those who rise to leadership positions – or our dislike of how others lead their sex lives – we really need to not go there, that is beneath our dignity as revolutionaries.
The bottom line is, if they’re watching us, it means what we are doing is effective – and if we’re really effective, all the snitches in the world cannot stop us!
Gregory A. Butler
Alf Noreasta said
It seems that there is a link between misogyny and FBI agents see this case:
Name: Jason Munford, also later went by Valvilis Cormaeril
Age: Late Twenties
From: Mighigan, Iowa City
Background: Claimed he served in the Air Force as a MP stationed in Japan, then became a Conscientious Objector.
Interests: Considers self a Platonist, sword fighting, philisophy, informing for FBI
Charecteristics: clean cut, dry sense of humor, known to be problematic (overly flirty and pushy) when it comes to female bodied people.
Signed,
WRR
P.S.-Don’t Get Scared, Get Inspired!
http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20081217072004259
While we need not be Puritanical we need to engage with the Radical Feminist critique of sexuality in a patriarchal society and the violence that backs it.
If we are inevitably going to have infiltrators, we should at least follow Lenin’s advice and make sure that we get plenty of good work out of them, and at minimum hold them to revolutionary discipline and standards.
Seamus said
The exposure , or should i say self exposure , of this Texan informer is a rare occasion . I have been active in the US left for many years and i it’s been very rare to a actual informer to be ”outed”.
I write ”actual informer” because false accusations are all too common . Rival or perceived idelogical rivals within organizations or coalitions have often been accused of being agents or ”acting objectively like agents”.
Even whole organizations have been branded as such . While i thankfully haven’t heard this in recent years I remember more ”mainstream ”leftists smearing very different groups like the RCP and the Spartacists as ”agent organizations ”. When confronted for something approaching evidence all that they would just focus on the RCP’s alleged ”adventurism ” at Street demos and the ” Sparts” ‘sectarianism ” ie their scathing critiques of other Socialist groups.Nothing to justify their making what could be fatal charges in countries under outright dictatorships .
As for this Darby’s sexual behavior that is a bit tricky . I have known men and women , straight and Gay, in activist groups who had multiple partners and weren’t shy from using their physical attibutes and charms. I don’t think that in and of itself should raise any ”red flags ” (No Pun intended ) .We aren’t purtians and there’s no reason to think that those who are monogomous or celibrate (either intentionally or de facto ) are somehow more worthy or trust .
I have also noticed that ironically even in groups dedicated to the interests of the working class those activists from more reserved middle class backgrounds are often uncomfortable with actual workers.
Too crude, too loud , like sports too much, not subtle enough in expressing their interest in women or men , etc. So a working class recruit from say a building trades family might be more distrusted than someone who’s parents were therpaists .
Anyway the real signs for alarm in Darby’s case wasn’t his libido (and after all those women who did choose to sleep with him were consious adults not innocent victims ) but his constant promoting of ultra miltiant actions, incesstant self promotion , violating agreed upon rules re firearms etc.
Just a few rough thoughts .
redflags said
This is an important article, and was very good of Liza to share. That said, I do disagree with a number of her prognoses. Agents come in all shapes, and arguing that militancy (per se) or masculinity (as such) as signs of agent provocateurs is both naive, and false.
I suspect the author is a pacifist of sorts. That’s a fine belief system. But if the radical left has a problem – it’s not too many heterosexual white men who are militant. It’s largely the opposite. There are certainly many who think men are the problem, or white people, or heterosexuals: but those who think identity politics as a method explain anything really are ripe to manipulated by demagogues and actual agents.
Agents are elastic, and the Darby type aren’t trained FBI plants, but narcissists who use the language and habits of the communities they are involved in to rise to positions of responsibility. Flipping activists is the best way to infiltrate groups. Of note, of those convicted in the Green Scare anti-anarchy cases, all were imprisoned based on informants. Over half the people charged collaborated. That is atrocious, and is rooted in the me-first mentality and lifestyle activism of that community. When they had to face the costs of their choices, more chose to inform than not, which can’t simply be chalked up to narcissistic rats like Darby.
The conflation of movements with communities makes sure we get neither. When activists conceive of themselves as members of an activist community, it becomes more important to concede to the “community’s consensus values, vocabulary, dietary habits, sexual norms and so on than in breaking new ground, organizing the unorganized, confronting the power structure directly, disagreeing with comrades and struggling out ideas. The focus of attention is on the individual participants, not what they are doing
The inward-focused defensiveness of “community” is a bad legacy of anarchism (and liberalism) in all social movements in the US.
There is no “activist community” – and where such self-described communities substitute space for movement, this weakness lets signifiers (diet, dress, vocabulary) stand in for the signified (unorganized people, systems of oppression, program, etc.). By analogy, the Italian mafia may be a “community” of sorts, but it is essentially a self-involved, parasitic network of people in contradiction with the larger (actual) communities they inhabit. Using a style of dress, language and codes of conduct, they brag of their coherence while hiding their purpose. Self-selecting groups aren’t communities in a healthy sense, and where activists take on mafia forms, they end up with mafia problems.
This understanding of “space” – as distinct and in opposition to movement – is a legacy of defeat. When we point our attention inward we lose what it is that makes us vibrant. We don’t need safe space. There is no safe space.
Examples of this include “accountability session” show trials, which are all the rage in some circles. Cannibalistic guilt-sessions and brow-beating, which is 9 times out of 10 more abusive than whatever transgression the accused is guilty of.
I’m not against community, as such – just the substitution of friendship for comradeship, and with manipulative consensus (read: conformity) sessions taking the place of struggle. Adopting these anarchistic norms profoundly weakens, even dissolves, those movements which adopt them. They are conservative, and easy to use in de-activating working groups and movements unsure of a way forward.
Just use the right words, adopt the soft tone of the middle class white activist and *presto*, you are a “in like flynn”. Confuse privilege for power, and in term exercise small-group power over those who will tolerate it as the price of admission to the “community”. It is in this that guys like Darby run amok.
Real signs to watch out for include (yes) sexual manipulation by leaders, generally though not exclusively men; drug addiction, involvement in drug business or other lumpen activity; accusations as habit, eg snitch-jacketing; use of identity politics to denounce political opponents and leaders, eg: that idea is racist because a white person said it, or a man, or whoever.
Without organization, accountability of leaders (which requires formality and explicit delegation), and a culture of honest political disputation – charisma and resources stand in for democratic process.
saoirse said
Mafia’s seem to emerge largely out of ethnic and nationality based communities that are in part marginalized by hegemonic ethnicity. The signifiers RF mentions in post #11 are common expressions of the Mafia’s cultural tradition with some exceptions where the internal culture of the organization generate new cultural norms. we can draw parallels to how and why other political and social communities use and create new traditions and cultures outside of the ethnic/nationality model based on a preceived or actual marginalization but there are limitations to this approach.
Radical movements are going to face repression. Informers, etc. “Community” of all kinds often makes the informers easy to spot and isolate. This is true in mafia and in national liberation struggles. I am not sure what RF is really suggesting we do here to weed out informers. I agree with some of their criticisms of oppositional cultures while I feel like opposition cultures from the queer movement to the Irish community and NYC city sustain me and many other radicals.
I have no idea why Darby informed. We may never know. But we know there will be others like him and other kinds of agents of the state. How we deal with them is the issue.
Seamus said
I didn’t want to give the impression that ”sexual manuipulation ‘ by leaders or any other activists doesn’t exist and can’t be a problem . And Yes it certainly can be a device used by Real informers or agents .It’s probably has been used ever since espionage has been around . One example was the extensive use by East German Intelligence of ” Honey Traps ”. They would use very handsome men or women to seduce usually lonely West German Govt. workers . Both straight and gay .
But let’s don’t be naive . Leaders of whatever race or gender, no matter how dedicated , are all too human and as such can engage in all sorts of ”manuipualtions ” in internal faction fghts , to solidify their own personal power base etc. without being outright traitors .
I would also add that purtiancial sexual norms actually increase the potential for that . I really don’t know what it the situation is currently but in the late 70′s and 80′s the Maoist movement was known for it’s imposition of sexual morality on it’s members. The most notorious was the RCP’s absurd line on Gays . Less well known is that they also inteferred in straight members personal lives Ie Anything short of Monogamy was ” bourgeois decadence”. Anyway purtianism breeds hyprocrisy , even conditions for black mail etc. Not only should govts ” Stay out of the bedroom” so should Radical parties and other organizations .
Back to how to deal with informers. i tend to agree with those that argue that rather than engage in a potentially disasterous ”spy hunt’ the best method is to create a heathly open internal climate that , at the very least, would seriously the damage real informers/agents can do
nando said
Many different issues have come out here — some about infiltrators, some about the politics of sexuality.
First: The overall evidence of an agent provocateur has to do with the fact that they are doing a “set up” and trying to get others involved in things (in actions) that serve (not the people but) alien, hostile forces.
The evidence of an informant (who is not a provocateur) is quite a bit more difficult — since (as several people have pointed out) they can be rather well camouflaged. Informants are sometimes professional police “sent in” to gather information… but more generally they are people within (or on the perifphery) of a movement who (for reasons of money, or blackmail, or twisted psychology) are serving hostile forces. Sometimes genuinely progressive people get caught up in some real bullshit — and (in a personal crisis involving jail time or inner-movement hatreds) — decide to become an informant.
One guard against this is for activists to avoid activities that can land them in the cross hairs of government blackmail. And this is one reason — among several — to be wary of people who are deeply involved in “criminal activity.”
But one sign of people serving hostile forces is (as this post and thread point out) that there are often warning signs — that they are sometimes (not always, but sometimes) NOT on the same page with others in the movement about some key defining things. Somehow, they don’t “get it,” and their level of activity doesn’t quite “make sense” in light of their outlook and actions.
There are many examples of this: people without empathy, people who seem indifferent to politics but strangely “active” (or at least in attendance), people who want to film or record everything, people who repeatedly make very odd proposals.
One example of this has repeatedly been the fact that infiltrators often don’t understand (or respect) the sexual norms that progressive movements have developed.
It was not uncommon for infiltrators to “hit on” every woman they meet. They considered possible sexual liasons as a “perk” of their assignment — and their approaches reflected their actual outlook, and their incomprehension of the cultural norms of the movements they are infiltrating. (In the 60s, infiltrators were often fascinated by the rumors of “free love” in the youth culture — and were oblivious to the emerging discussons of women’s liberation and the objectification of women.)
There is complexity here:
Such behavior is grounds for suspicion, it is not proof by itself. When you have a mass movement that truly draws in large and awakening sections of the people you will have even MORE complex and diverse views entering the movement (people enter a revolutionary movement bringing their views and experiences with them). If you participated around a group like the Black Panther Party, that succeeded in creating the beginnings of a real mass base, it would have been unwise to assume that every predatory sexual event was sign of police presence.
However, the issue here is not any particular activity per se — but the fact that infiltrators often don’t “get it” — and when you get to know them, there emerges a “disconnect” between their claimed beliefs and their actual beliefs.
* * * * * * *
Seamus writes:
I think Seamus misunderstands this.
The various strains of the left (in the 60s) had sexual mores and sexual culture. This was not (generally or inherently) an “imposition of sexual morality on its members.” I was active in the New Communist Movement…. when I joined I lived in a loose commune of activists, with the social patterns of single teenagers and with the widespread seuxal experimentation of the general youth culture. Shortly after I joined the New Communist Movement, I lived (as did most other people) in a nuclear family, with a spouse and a kid. We were (more or less) monogamous. But none of this was “imposed.” It was our beliefs. And our movement had beliefs. And our movement (as a movement) had ways of working through those beliefs.
Even on the question of same sex relations — It would be easy to see this as mores “imposed” on a movement by a few strategically-placed homophobes. But the fact is the movement was “won over” to those views — and most people participating “bought into” those views to varying degrees.
I don’t agree with the ban on same-sex marriage. I believe that a revolutionary movement needs to have a welcoming approach to sexual experimentation and new forms of social organization.
But the truth is that any movement (especially a sweeping revolutionary movement) will develop mores, beliefs and limits.
For example: a revolutionary movement should not allow predatory sexual behavior and harassment. It should not allow leaders to habitually exploit their position for sexual advantage and adventures. Young women joining such a movement should not feel like “fresh meat” — they should not be “descended upon” by men within that movement (especially not leading men) while they are learning the scene and finding their place.
Such limits are necessary — and need to be organically developed out of the times and new generations that create the revolutionary movement (and central to that is a rupture in the treatment and empowerment of women — a rupture from the subordination and objectification imposed by the mainstream society.)
The issue around sexuality is not “puritanism vs. anything-goes” — the issue around sexuality is (like everywhere else) are we for liberation or are we not. And the point around infiltrators is they don’t “get it” and often (not always) bring quite conservative, traditional and mainstream views (on male sexuality or whatever) with them into their “assignments.”
Seamus said
A couple of comments. First off as someone who truly believes in Equality of the Sexes ,(and someone who rejects the Neo-victorian myth of the innate ”Innocence ” of women ) I think that women are quite capable of Bad behavior as any man.
re informers/agents quite a few spies thruout history have been women , The famous Mari Hari is but one of many examples. I also think that our enemies aren’t all idiots . I’m sure they are capable of inserting far more subtle , smarter snitches than this Darby . Perhaps instead of a ” Macho White guy ” they would be attractive ,very intellegent Latina or African American women . And if ever suspected they could deflect the attacks by attributing them to Sexism and/or racism .
zerohour said
Saoirse said:
“But we know there will be others like him and other kinds of agents of the state. How we deal with them is the issue.How we deal with them is the issue.”
Many people have raised good points above and I won’t repeat them, but I want to follow up from Iris’s comment [#5] where she brings up Brian Glick’s important book War At Home. This book should be required reading for every activist, and its lessons should be collectively studied and understood.
I’ve heard many radicals in the US criticize organizations like RCP for their security culture, and I would agree that they take it further than warranted with implications for their overall politics, but the main problem we face is the lack of security culture. On one level, it may just be ignorance about the ways that group cohesion can be subverted by destructive behavior, but on another, it may reflect a lack of perspective wherein we don’t consider our work or struggles to be the kind where the state, or freelance reactionaries, would bother to undermine them.
Even where such behavior is not being carried out by agents of the state, but by well-meaning but inexperienced, hot-headed individuals, we need to approach it with collectivity and politics, not as individuals and not on the basis of friendship or charisma.
Security should be part of our training, we should be familiar with the history and methods of COINTELPRO.
The whole point of a healthy security culture is to enable us to build our work under conditions of trust and solidarity, not to go on witch hunts for infiltrators.
We should avoid the twin perils of laxity and paranoia, but we can’t afford to act naively. There are ways, many suggested above, to address problematic behavior openly and honestly on the basis of principle.
zerohour said
One more point I’d like to stress, security culture is about politics, not technology or methods of communicating, though both are involved. How security is approached reflects views on relations with the people, the stakes involved in the struggle and the nature of the system, and how they are all intertwined.
land said
A while back – April 09, Kasama printed the Refuse and Resist Pocket Guide to Stopping a Police State. It didn’t include the Don’t Talk which was printed separately.
It didn’t specifically mention “people who serve hostile forces” but the reason this was printed and distributed was to raise standards particularly at times when large numbers of people would come together for something like the RNC or Common Ground and arrests were part of the situation.
I remember hearing that at the NY RNC when people were arrested the cops would say “you know I don’t really think you should have been arrested. You weren’t doing anything wrong. And what group are you with now? And they made a big effort to find out which organizations and ties people had. And for many it seemed very harmless when in fact it was giving the other side alot of information to use on people and organizations. So Don’t Talk is a big part of raising standards.
One of the posts referred to “people who don’t get it.” In “Defend Every Legal Right” it says “there is a constant chipping away of every legal right.” Well this is something people need to “get”. That’s why info like these pocket guides do need to get out in huge quantity. If you don’t raise standards people like Brandon are going to have a much easier time. And if someone says “I don’t see what the big deal is” well that could be an innocent remark or it could be something that sets off the alarm for everyone this person comes in contact with.
I think it is also important that people see themselves as comrades. We do have to watch out for each other. No one else is going to.
One part says “Defend Every Legal Right.” Another part says “Don’t Talk.” The politics of sexuality isn’t included and should have been although I think much attention was paid to this.
Hegemonik said
In belated defense of Lisa: From personal experience, Lisa has worked with folks well outside of the circle of nonviolence and pacifist traditions, and she’s generally worked out principled compromises. I’ll leave it at that.
—
Going against the grain somewhat, I’d like to point out that one of the oldest techniques in the interrogation book is that of “ego up/ego down” also known as “secret file” technique. In short: knowing that activists give themselves purpose from their work, it is very easy for an agent of law enforcement to manipulate that sense of purpose (ego) by first berating the cause then showing some sympathy, all the better to win trust and gain information. Similarly, the “secret file” technique is that of a law enforcement agent in interrogation to place stacks of paper (very likely to be blank paperwork) onto a table, to play upon the desire to be important (i.e., “we have thousands of pictures of you!”) and using it to gain confessions and/or compliance.
I write this because the popularization of “security culture” as a catchphrase often ignores the most obvious problem of interactions with law enforcement, which is that a) activists are often motivated by a desire for self-actualization and desire for adventure and b) there’s more self-actualization and adventures to be gained by telling off a guy in a uniform or bad suit (and trying to engage in a discussion with someone out to destroy you) than there is in saying “I am not going to talk, I am going to speak with my lawyer.”
While I think making it abundantly clear that activists (of many stripes) will not tolerate snitching is a basic matter of knowing that we’re not on the side of the State, being realistic: far more people are put away based on their own outbursts than by setups or stings, and I’m sure that police get far better intelligence based off of what people brag about themselves than based on snitchcraft.
Aagesen90 said
really useful for me :) thanks!
————————————-
All about High Quality movies
1080p movies blog
David_D said
I think what was pointed out above it key: we should “make sure that we get plenty of good work out of them (infiltrators), and at minimum hold them to revolutionary discipline and standards” When the need to know principle is maintained, there is little problem here. The intelligence agencies have sometimes unwittingly helped maintain left groupings through subscribing to their periodicals, etc.