I wrote yesterday that some people in Oakland are calling for a revolution. Revolutions, let’s remember, are inherently violent. In our own American Revolution, nearly 7,000 Americans were killed, the equivalent of 93,000 today. When you make a revolution, the system you’re trying to overthrow fights back. That’s when things get nasty. Each side tries to kill the other. Civilians are caught in the crossfire. And revolutions can escalate. The Russian Revolution grew into a world crisis whose repercussions continue to be felt. Revolutions are not a good thing. So why are some on the Left in Oakland calling for one?
Cat Brooks wants a revolution, but she’s very canny in how she says it publicly. She’ll never come out and issue a blatant call for violence because that would harm her political brand. Instead, she alludes to violence, with coded winks and nods her followers understand. When she refers to revolution as “the longer term work that we’re doing,” or as “an alternate model,” her pals know exactly what she means. (It’s like when KellyAnne Conway referred to “alternate facts.”) In this, Brooks follows the Trump playbook. She gets as close to the line as she dares, and then depends on her witless, violent crowds to cross it. Witness Jan. 6, 2021.
So Brooks is canny enough to guard her language. But you can tell what a person’s thinking by the tweets they retweet; retweets are a form of homage in which the retweeter is saying, “I agree with what this tweet expresses.” So who is Cat Brooks retweeting?
Consider a tweeter who calls himself Dave Id. We know very little about him, except that he claims to be “an independent journalist covering social justice movements.” Here’s one of his recent tweets, which Brooks retweeted: “If you don't have the numbers to do smashy, that's not APTP's [Anti Police-Terror League) fault. You didn't put in the ground work and build support for what you wanted to do ahead of time. You've got to talk to more people. Spontaneous smashy is relatively rare. Most of the time it takes planning.”
Let’s break it down.
“Smashy” is a cute neologism leftwing radicals such as Dave Id use to describe the anarchy and riots that so many of their protests descend into. The Urban Dictionary defines “smashy” (or, sometimes, “smashy smashy”) as “vandalism, property destruction, at a demonstration, protest march or the like. A common example is breaking windows.” We’ve seen that criminal behavior repeatedly in Oakland ever since Occupy’s mercifully-brief period of fame in 2011-2012, and more lately in many of the BLM/George Floyd riots downtown.
People of good will and decent instinct denounce wanton destruction. But not Cat Brooks. Inspired by the Black Panthers, she’s never lost her revolutionary ardor. Here’s another Id tweet she retweeted: "We hate when Black people are murdered by cops, but not enough to work with any Black-led organizations to get things done. Black people can keep on dying because we're not interested in any half-steps that might decrease deaths. Only a full revolution on our terms will do."
No “half-steps” for Dave Id, but only “a full revolution.” Hmm. What would that look like? From APTP’s and Dave Id’s perspective, smashy is a good thing, but the problem is that too few people are willing to do it (thank God). That’s what is “not ATPT’s fault.” Brooks is doing her best to arouse anger and resentment toward cops and White people in general, but, sadly for her and Dave Id, The Revolution isn’t happening as quickly as either of them wants.
Dave Id adds a telling comment: “Spontaneous smashy is relatively rare. Most of the time it takes planning.” Which supports the notion that the downtown riots and accompanying destruction are planned and well-organized in advance and not spontaneous outbursts of righteous indignation, as the Left claims. I’ve seen masked rioters with radio receivers communicating with each other, and I know that OPD has information on that subject. “Most of the very best [protests in Oakland] were carefully planned ahead of time, and coordinated on the ground.” In revolutionary terms, this means staying off social media, texting and emails, all of which can be monitored by authorities.
So ask yourself: Do you want revolution? Downtown wrecked and burned, people turning on each other in the streets, guns fired recklessly into crowds, targeted assassinations, your own life and safety put at risk, the society as a whole crumbling and toppling? ? If that’s what you want, then you should contribute money to Brooks’ APTP cult. But if you desire peace and safety and real progress, then please stop supporting Cat Brooks! Stop supporting the people who support her! There’s a network out there, led by Sheng Thao, that utters sweet-sounding platitudes about equity and love and togetherness. But lift up the rock and see what’s underneath: anarchist plotters are actively planning a violent revolution and they have people like Thao fronting for them. Whether she’s conscious of this, or is merely a useful idiot, I don’t know, but either way, she’s a tool.
Steve Heimoff