Greg Renouf: Dangerous Reactionary

BLOG POST posted on Février 12, 2013 by Renoufisagoof

Greg Renouf

Blogger Greg Renouf has been a terrible annoyance and worse to revolutionaries and activists across Turtle Island since at least December 2011 when he was called out publicly for harassing an activist about Occupy Vancouver even though that particular activist was hardly ever at the encampment. He has since moved to Toronto where he has engaged in a more long-term campaign of slander, harassment, and conspiracy theories about the “tides funded” “treason” of what he sees as the left.

This is a callout for awareness, in the hopes that someone can shut him down in whatever capacity possible on the internet or wherever. It should also not be taken lightly that he is fairly tech-savvy.

I realize that there are more important things in the world to be writing about, and that some may even find his accusations and conjecture rather amusing (I know I have at times), but he actually represents a very real danger to many peoples lives. From reading his blog, it would appear that an anarchist comrade in Toronto has already been arrested and charged with an apparent assault, as a result of his cape-fear-esque obsession with individuals involved in radical social movements in so-called “Canada”.

The man is a dangerous right-wing reactionary and his accusations often have racist overtones. One very telling example came last March when No One Is Illegal held a march against racism on Commercial Drive in East Vancouver. The march is held yearly against individual and systemic racism, and was being held on Commercial Drive that year because of a string of racist attacks in the area by members of a group named Blood and Honour. Renouf’s response was to attack an organizer from the group for their stance on Diversity of Tactics and charge them with reverse racism because they pointed out the racist implications of authoritarians and pacifists telling people what they could do or not do when they fight against capitalist society with its myriad of oppressions such as racism.

Another good example was when he backed up We Are Change Victoria a right-wing “libertarian” group for a demonstration they organized that had Doug Christie as a speaker. He does not in any way voice opposition to Doug Christie who as a lawyer has a long history of defending fascists, Nazis, and various holocaust deniers. Instead he goes into a redscare-like “beware the bolshivek menace” type rant about an organizer of the counter demonstration.

It is also quite telling his obsession with what he perceives as the left and similarities to the white power movement with its “rock against communism” as a response to “rock against racism” concerts.

Below I’ll let him speak for himself (in one of his latest postings) to show his absurd theories of a unified left, and his disgusting legalistic authoritarian arguments intended to whip up fear and hysteria against everyone from anarchists in a black bloc, to random university students

Most amusing of all perhaps is his assertion that the "anti-olympic movement" suddenly fell off a cliffs edge as a result of the Heart Attack demonstration on Feb 13th 2010. He clearly had no involvement in the movement and apperantly has no idea of the reason that there were thousands of people on the streets for the oppening of the Olympics and no time later. Because it was the only mass demonstration organized during the convergence! Masses of people don't just fall out of the sky and fly back into outer space because of some public image they like or don't like, it takes organizing! The capability of anticapitalist movements to mobilize people, and the autonomy that certain sections of the movement show is clearly something that threatens Renouf, and this is becoming dangerous for many people in these movements :

“It’s no secret now that Canadian activist movements have a problem with violence. Every major activist event in the past few years has been stained by violent acts- the 2010 Olympics, G20, the student fees protests in Quebec. Yet, despite the fact such violence very few activists have dared to speak-out. People who have, like peace activist Derrick O’Keefe, have ended-up being publically slaughtered. I can attest to that fact, having been on the receiving end of the abuse after standing-up against violence in the Occupy movement.

There are many leaders in activist communities who have been actively promoting the use of violent tactics. Some of the more prominent pro-violence activists I’ve written about include Harsha Walia (who O’Keefe and I were harshly attacked by), Alex Hundert, Julian Ichim, and Franklin Lopez. Pro-violence activists preach a gospel that it’s not only acceptable, but necessary to achieve societal change.

It’s hard to guess these people’s intentions, that should be left to the courts. But we can look at the results of previous activist violence and quickly realize it’s only had negative results. We can also ask the question of what would motivate people to promote such unproductive behaviour- are they simply unable to comprehend reality, or are some people intentionally leading activists down a path of self-destruction?

Let’s first look at the reality of the ineffectiveness of violent protest in Canada. One of the best examples is the 2010 Olympics where there were two major type of protesters- the ‘usual suspects’ of the anti-everything activist community, and then there was a large crowd of average middle-class folk who were unhappy having to carry the burden of the Olympic debt. The moment the violent faction began smashing-up the (American owned) Hudson Bay Company (in the name of anti-colonialism) the 100′s of average folk made a beeline back to the suburbs.

It was widely thought the protesters could have effectively shut-down the Olympics until that point…

Outside of scaring-away potential allies, and helping justify the building of a police state, there’s a more important reason to reject the use of violence. After reading through the Canadian Criminal Code (things one does when locked-in the house on a snow day) it appears that violence is the best possible tactic to kill an activist movement.

Have a look at section 2(a) of article 46 the Criminal Code:

(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,

(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

So, basically, anyone who uses violence while calling for a revolution is technically committing treason! When Julian Ichim chants it’s ‘time to pick up a gun’, or when Harsha Walia said that Black Bloc is “about breaking windows, but not about breaking windows” what they are doing is counselling people to commit treason. Treason is a serious crime- get charged with that, and you’re unlikely to be marching in next year’s May Day march.

Now have a look at section’s 2(c) & 2(d):

(c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);

(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; 

One doesn’t have to commit an act of violence to be charged with treason. All it takes is to be caught conspiring to be violent. The law is very clear on this- if your activism is focussed on using violence to overthrow the capitalist system, and you get caught, there’s a possibility you will be put away behind bars for a very long time.

Outside of using violence, there’s only one other scenario where it’s illegal to try and overthrow the government- when a person decides to work with a foreign government to achieve that task. This must be particularly troubling for people like PressTV’s Joshua Blakeney, who’s been broadcasting anti-government propaganda on behalf of the Iranian government. This is covered in section 1:

(c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

Beyond the use of violence, and collaborating with a foreign enemy, there don’t appear to be any other sections in the Criminal Code that deem it illegal to try and overthrow the government. It’s perfectly legal to (peacefully) gather people to protest and demand change. It’s legal to run for government and make change yourself. It’s also legal to lobby and communicate with political leaders (and fellow citizens) in an effort to overthrow the government. You’re just not allowed to use violence to achieve your goal.

So, regardless of their intentions- activist leaders who promote the use of violence are leading people down the one path that justifies the government to use force against their movements. If one had the intention to destroy the activist community, I couldn’t think of a better way to accomplish it.

The government knows this too- why else do you think the Quebec provincial police risked getting caught when they send provocateurs during the Montebello summit? They did it because they they knew it was the fastest path they could have to justifying a crack-down on the protesters.

As I’ve said, it’s impossible to know what’s going-on in the minds of the people promoting the use of violence- but, does it really matter what their intention is? The result is, and will continue to be, that each time violence is used, social & environmental justice movements end-up taking a step backwards. Then there are the individuals whose lives are destroyed- and more often than not, it’s the rank & file who end up in jail, not the leaders.

Violence is the one single issue that has the potential to kill people’s hope of achieving social change- isn’t it time that people grow-up and realize how misguided this is? And, isn’t it time to start treating people who promote violence as the real enemies of the movement?”