Exarchia - It has begun

[Safe-Keeper]

Whataboutism noted. I liked how you added a bizarre claim to make it even more likely to derail the discussion.

Anything to further the revolution, I suppose.

 

[caveman1917]

One squat just to the south of Exarchia is being evicted. We're now at 19.5[*]/23 in Exarchia and 23/26 in the surroundings.


[*] The reoccupation of Spirou Trikoupi 17 a couple of days ago was symbolic, it hasn't actually been taken back into use, so I'll count that as 0.5.

 

[caveman1917]

A couple of days ago several weapons have been seized from the naval base at Leros which, according to the government, could be traced to Exarchia although no results were achieved from several house searches in the neighbourhood. In particular it concerns two anti-tank rocket launchers with ammunition as well as anti-personnel mines.

In the meantime a new group called "Comrades for the Diffusion of Exarchia" has taken responsibility for a range of simultaneous attacks on various banks and New Democracy offices all over Athens.

Note: These two things probably aren't related, just didn't want to make separate posts for each.

 

[caveman1917]

The cops are whining that nobody wants to sell them coffee in Exarchia

 

[caveman1917]

One month into the occupation and almost three months after the government pompously declared it would "end" Exarchia within the month, Exarchia remains standing

42 out of 49 squats remain, while 7 buildings have been evicted and returned to abandoned status. Oh and should anyone in this thread ever manage to come up with an actual argument as to why these buildings must remain abandoned and the migrants who lived in them must be locked up in camps, then feel free to present such argument.

 

[Wolrab]

The buildings probably have to be cleaned up to meet basic standards for human habitation. The owners would probably love to rent them out.

 

[caveman1917]

The buildings probably have to be cleaned up to meet basic standards for human habitation. The owners would probably love to rent them out.

They're not for habitation, we're talking old abandoned schools and things like that. There are no plans for them, and indeed the buildings are being blocked off by building walls over the entrances after eviction. Which you would've known had you paid attention to the thread and the sources which were provided. Thank you, try again, this time accounting for the information already in the thread.

 

[Wolrab]

They are not for habitation? Then stopping people from inhabiting them seems to make sense. How do you know there are no plans for them? It's kind of tough to develop a building with squatters in it.

The information in this thread is mostly your very biased and not credible "reports".

 

[caveman1917]

They are not for habitation? Then stopping people from inhabiting them seems to make sense.

Yet the camps, let alone the streets, are much less fit for habitation, therefor concern for the habitation quality is clearly not the motivation. You lot really are so simplistically easy to debunk.

How do you know there are no plans for them? It's kind of tough to develop a building with squatters in it.

It's also kind of tough to develop a building that's been walled shut.

The information in this thread is mostly your very biased and not credible "reports".

"Any information I don't like is biased and not credible!"

Edited by zooterkin: 

<SNIP>
Edit for rule 0 and rule 12.

 

[Wolrab]

All you have are insults now?

 

[caveman1917]

All you have are insults now?

They're not insults but observations.

You lost the game when you arbitrarily declared the information you were provided with as "biased and not credible" without any basis in fact for those claims. Indeed, to the contrary, it has been the information coming from the Greek government - and its promoters such as GlennB - which has been shown again and again to be biased or outright false (claims of drugs yet no drugs ever being found, claims that the Greek camps are like really nice hotels, a letter by purported residents alleging the existence of a secret government conspiracy to bring the illegals into the neighbourhood, etc).

If you were actually analyzing your information sources for bias and lack of credibility you'd be rejecting the government sources (as their claims have been debunked again and again) and accepting the anti-government sources (as their claims have been verified again and again). But that's not what you're doing, you're just using your claims of "bias and lack of credibility" as a way to handwave away information you don't like.

Edited by zooterkin: 

<SNIP>
Edit for rule 0 and rule 12.

 

[caveman1917]

Shots were fired at a MAT checkpoint in Exarchia last night.

 

[Myriad]

Shots were fired at a MAT checkpoint in Exarchia last night.

Has anyone asserted property rights over the bullets?

 

[BStrong]

Shots were fired at a MAT checkpoint in Exarchia last night.

Fairly typical "revolutionary" rhetoric - 5 shots fired at authorities w/o casualties and it's a win for the insurrection!

More folks in search for a heroic identity.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

One month into the occupation and almost three months after the government pompously declared it would "end" Exarchia within the month, Exarchia remains standing

As I said, if the situation is that bad, I applaud the police finally taking action. You can't have citizens or neighbourhoods just deciding that the law shouldn't apply to them.

Oh and should anyone in this thread ever manage to come up with an actual argument as to why these buildings must remain abandoned and the migrants who lived in them must be locked up in camps, then feel free to present such argument.

That's two strawmen in one paragraph. No one says they have to remain abandoned. Evicting squatters enables the owners, or potential buyers or urban developers, to put them to actual use, or demolish them and use the lots for new developments.

Also, there is the basic idea that modern cities shouldn't have zones where the law is unenforceable, or that are dominated by illegal squatters. The latter has a tendency to lead to vandalism, drug use, vigilantism, and gang activity, and a disrespect for law enforcement.

They're not for habitation, we're talking old abandoned schools and things like that.

Thank you for admitting this.

There are no plans for them, and indeed the buildings are being blocked off by building walls over the entrances after eviction.

You don't suppose this might have something to do with the fact that squatters would otherwise instantly return to the buildings?

Which you would've known had you paid attention to the thread and the sources which were provided.

As others have pointed out, you mostly link to Facebook communities and blogs of dubious quality.

Yet the camps, let alone the streets, are much less fit for habitation.

Even if we accept this (if), refugees aren't the only squatters in Exarchia, are they.

"Any information I don't like is biased and not credible!"

Or "information from obviously politically motivated sites, which often or always fail to cite proper sources, and which often are written by anonymous authors are biased and not credible". Nothing arbitrary about that. You will find that this is how people on this site analyse all sources, not just the ones that advocate for edgy anarchists in Exarchia.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Greece
State: "We're going to evict all the squats to throw migrants into camps."
Leftists: "We're going to smash up your consulates all over the world as well your party offices."
State: *calculates...* "Well maybe just a couple of squats then."

State: "We're going to firebomb a squat."
Leftists: "We're going to give you generalized insurrection."
State: *calculates...* "Hmmm maybe just not yet."

State: "We're going to firebomb a neighbourhood."
Lefists: "How about getting to experience that nice titillating experience of having to run for your lives from your palaces?"
State: *quickly calculates...* "Yeah maybe better not do that."

Yes, I get that's really edgy and exciting and all. The problem arises when you're no longer the dominant force in this anarchist paradise of yours, and the police is powerless to deal with said dominant force, and it disagrees strongly with your worldview.

State: we're going to legalize gay marriage .
Facists: how cute. We're going to smash windows, beat up politicians, radicalise the youth, and march in the streets burning cars and throwing cobblestones.
State: on second thought...

State: we have a refugee crisis on our hands, so we'll be building some facilities for housing the refugees we're taking in.
Facists: better give them police protection 24/7, because we intend to burn them all down.

Etc.

 

[dudalb]

Fairly typical "revolutionary" rhetoric - 5 shots fired at authorities w/o casualties and it's a win for the insurrection!

More folks in search for a heroic identity.

Dammit, if you are going to start a revolution you need to have some halfway decent shots on your side...

 

[caveman1917]

Or "information from obviously politically motivated sites, which often or always fail to cite proper sources, and which often are written by anonymous authors are biased and not credible". Nothing arbitrary about that. You will find that this is how people on this site analyse all sources, not just the ones that advocate for edgy anarchists in Exarchia.

I don't care how people on this site analyse sources, as if people on this site are some sort of authority on this, most people on this site are idiots who just tag along because they think the whole skepticism thing is a cool badge to wear. The correct way to do it, if you have one set of sources claiming one thing and another set of sources claiming another, is to check which turns out to be correct and which doesn't. In this case there have been plenty of instances in which my sources disagree with GlennB's sources, for example:

My sources (the squat collectives) claimed that they had a strict no-drug policy, government sources claimed that the squats were drug havens. Result: no drugs were found in any of the squats.

My source (the migrant collective that got evicted) claimed they were taken to camps, government sources claimed that they were taken to nice hotels. Result: they were taken to camps.

My source (the migrant collective that got evicted) claimed that they were brutalized by the cops during eviction, the government sources claimed that the cops were gentle during eviction. Result: they were brutalized by the cops during eviction.

My sources (again the squatting collectives) claimed that the children went to school in Exarchia, government sources claimed that refugees were holed up without children getting education. Result: they went to school in Exarchia and will lack education in the camps.

and so on and so forth.

It is you (plural, also Wolrab et al) who is arbitrarily rejecting sources out of political motivation (anti-anarchism is a political motivation). Furthermore, my sources have almost always been cited, in particular my sources consisted of the people involved (social media accounts of the migrant collectives that were evicted etc). The only time when sources were anonymous is reports on things like firing shots at the MAT forces. But what did you expect here, that the people claiming to have done this are going to include their names and addresses?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I don't care how people on this site analyse sources

No, you seem to just have decided we throw them out arbitrarily if they disagree with us.

The correct way to do it, if you have one set of sources claiming one thing and another set of sources claiming another, is to check which turns out to be correct and which doesn't.

And to do this, you need to employ critical thinking. Such as being highly sceptical of political blogs, articles with anonymous authors, and so on.

 

[caveman1917]

State: we're going to legalize gay marriage .
Facists: how cute. We're going to smash windows, beat up politicians, radicalise the youth, and march in the streets burning cars and throwing cobblestones.
State: on second thought...

State: we have a refugee crisis on our hands, so we'll be building some facilities for housing the refugees we're taking in.
Facists: better give them police protection 24/7, because we intend to burn them all down.

Ignoring that police forces and fascists have a large overlap. Ignoring that homosexuals had no problems in Exarchia until the police came. Ignoring that some refugee squats have indeed been attacked and burned down by fascists about a year ago, after which the local anarchists organized self-defense and patrols in the neighbourhood. Ignoring that the police in Exarchia cooperates with fascist groups to hunt down refugees.

Essentially what you're doing is putting forth some abstract fantasy where you imagine that the State is a neutral arbiter existing above political factions, whereas in reality it is that homophobic attacks, racist attacks, etc are coming from both the State and the fascists, who have a large overlap and cooperation between them.