Press "Enter" to skip to content

Lift up your fallen comrade or kick her in the kidneys?

“When the comrade beside you falls …”

When the comrade beside you is captured by the enemy, do you curse her name and write her out of the movement, or do you rescue her if possible and aid her and keep solidarity with her if that’s the best you can do?

If the enemy extracts information from the fallen or captured comrade, at what point do you determine that that comrade is a traitor rather than a victim? …

In my view, we need to accept that the state is at war with us — all of us, not just “movement people” — and recognize that when we write off an actual or potential comrade because he or she was brutalized to the point of (quite possibly temporary) surrender, we are by definition adding one person to the state’s ranks and removing one person from our own.

When I read that Tom Knapp piece in the abstract, it makes some very moving sense. I respect Tom Knapp. This isn’t meant to dis him; just to disagree.

When I realize he’s writing about this young activist and stunning hypocrite who who turned three people into accused felons to save her own backside, I say, “Go ahead. Kick her in the kidneys.”

I don’t know erstwhile libertarian-anarchist Stacy Litz.

She apparently sold drugs to a cop. Seven times. Then became the cops’ agent. (That link is to another sympathetic account; many of the commenters on that article put it better.)

After getting busted, Litz rolled over about as fast as an eye can blink.

Two of the people she betrayed were fellow freedom activists.

All three of her victims are reportedly being more steadfast and principled in facing their plight than she was.

It appears that her real belief, beyond the freedomista rhetoric, is It’s perfectly okay for non-violent people to go to jail — as long as one of them isn’t me.

There’s no sign that she’s trying to undo any of the harm she caused. No sign of extenuating circumstances; she wasn’t waterboarded or threatened with death. She just betrayed her friends because it she thought it was better for them to suffer than for her to suffer.

This is really the only part of Tom Knapp’s essay I can agree with:

In my view, we need to accept that the state is at war with us …

That’s the indisputable truth.

None of us is perfect and as Tom Knapp implies, we can’t know another person’s breaking point — or even our own.

But how do you ever rescue and keep solidarity with someone who betrays both her principles and her friends to benefit tyrants? (And then reportedly whines that everybody’s being unfair to her) Why would you even try?

It’s not a matter of “adding one person to the state’s ranks and removing one person from our own.” She added herself to the state’s ranks — under pressure, granted. But she did it knowing she was doing unto others precisely what she didn’t want done to herself.

If you want her back in “our” ranks, you’re welcome to stand shoulder to shoulder with her. But don’t be surprised when she stabs you in the back.

If somebody has facts that change this picture, by all means speak up. I almost hope I have to admit I’m wrong and am being unfair.

Otherwise, place her name beside that of pseudo-anarchist Bob Black and leave it there.

—–

UPDATE Stacy left a comment on this post. I responded that I would gladly blog a full statement from her without editing or editorial comment, or link to any statement she’s posted elsewhere. I’ll be very glad if she responds with further information — even gladder if her statement details how she’s planning to help her victims.

33 Comments

  1. just waiting
    just waiting May 11, 2012 6:13 am

    Once a snitch, always a snitch. That is one Rubicon which cannot be recrossed.

    Its a shame to see that the self centeredness and self interest that has motivated and characterized the 1% infecting those who would stand against it. But it seems to me that society in general promotes this Me 1st, I’m Entitled philosophy. The willingness to endure any hardship or make personal sacrifice for the greater good has succumbed to quest for personal comfort and convenience. Government learned from Katrina, but people have not. People still depend on gov’t, actually, on anyone but themselves, to provide for their comfort, for their very existence.

    We’re becoming a society of The Entitled.

  2. Jim Bovard
    Jim Bovard May 11, 2012 7:08 am

    Excellent post, Claire.

    Having written about informants often over the last couple decades, I have no confidence that they will constrain themselves to the facts.

    Once they start singing, they get ‘brownie points’ for creativity. The more scalps they bring in, the lighter their sentence – or the larger their cash bonus.

    And you don’t need to buy drugs from them to get busted. All that is necessary is that you allegedly told them where they might procure illicit substances.

  3. Kent McManigal
    Kent McManigal May 11, 2012 7:25 am

    I’ve known of Stacy for a couple of years- at least- through her Examiner columns and facebook. I was very saddened at what happened. I probably wouldn’t kick her while she’s down, but I don’t have anything to say in her defense either.

  4. Matt, another
    Matt, another May 11, 2012 7:56 am

    looks like the classic example of a turncoat, traitor to the movement, etc. I doubt that establishing a beneficial relationship with the authorities to provide a stream of information was something she had to be tortured into. Historical “freedom” movements would only welcome such a traitor back into the ranks long enough to dispose of the traitor.

  5. Joel
    Joel May 11, 2012 8:31 am

    I understand caving under pressure, and (as Knapp said) it doesn’t have to be physical torture. I can sympathize.

    I can sympathize with somebody who contracts leprosy, too, but that person shouldn’t expect a big kiss. This Stacy can never be trusted again – clearly should never have been trusted in the first place, but who was to know? Now they know, and only a fool would ever take her back. Doesn’t mean the right action is a bullet in the back of the neck.

  6. Claire
    Claire May 11, 2012 8:45 am

    It appears Stacy Litz is getting something much less merciful than a bullet to the neck. At least that’s quick.

    She’s losing her friends and her reputation. The cops — surprise, surprise! — appear to have treated her as dishonorably and deceptively as she treated her poor, trusting friends. Her career (she was headed for law school, I believe) has most likely been derailed. And as this spreads she’s going to live with the consequences of Google searches possibly for decades to come.

  7. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty May 11, 2012 9:23 am

    The really sad thing is how this sort of mess divides and keeps us fighting each other.

    The statists really like that. 🙁

  8. Steve
    Steve May 11, 2012 9:25 am

    Like the saying goes, “If you can’t do the time – Don’t do the crime.” Most people who hang out here completely disagree with the War on Drugs and drug laws in general but we all know these are vigorously enforced by the puppykillers. She should have been smart and also been ready for the heat coming down on her.

    I can’t totally condemn her. Nobody really knows whether there is a hero or a coward inside until the test comes. I still can condemn the way she rolled over on her friends. She could have tried to be less effective as a narc. It was also incredibly stupid selling drugs when she was already involved in political activities that piss off the authorities.

    Claire is right that this stinking situation will follow her around forever thanks to the internet. She doesn’t seem like a good enough informant to be rewarded with a new identity so she is stuck with herself.

  9. Jim B.
    Jim B. May 11, 2012 9:49 am

    Need to be careful here where others are concerned. Actual torture will make everyone talk, this is known and should be respected.

    What I don’t agree with is rolling over as lightly as this woman had been. She shouldn’t be kicked. She needs to be shunned as heavily and as soon as possible. But before I would do that, I’d go to her and explain as politely as possible what she’s done and what the consequences are now going to be as well as I can figure. She needs to know what her future is going to be like so she can suffer in full knowledge and in misery rather than live in peaceful bliss of ignorance.

  10. Matt B.
    Matt B. May 11, 2012 10:13 am

    This is where I feel the difference between libertarian and anarchist is illustrated. As a Libertarian I feel we need to fight the encrochment of government with civil disobedience. However I feel that I must do so in a responsible way. When it comes to drugs, I disagree with the government’s position, and were I so inclined to want to use drugs I would have to step up to break the law to practice what I preach. I would, however, in no way require others to break the law so that I might practice my “activism”. That is I would acquire the drugs where legal or produce my own. By selling drugs, she steps from an activist to a simple criminal in my mind, especially since she just flipped on her fellow outlaws upon being caught. In the 60’s black folks who wanted to change the law broke the law and paid the consequences with jail time, fines, etc. If you are going to protest by breaking the law, at least step up to face the consequences honorably. Even though we are libertarian, we still believe in the rule of law, we just feel the laws should be very limited in scope and application. Those, apparently including the subject of the post, who simply want to avoid the rule of law may try to latch on to the libertarian coat tails, but are really just anarchists who want to do whatever they want without consequences. A very important distinction.

  11. Claire
    Claire May 11, 2012 11:15 am

    MamaLiberty, I don’t see the divisive harm you perceive. Without a doubt Litz did harm to herself and those unfortunate enough to be her friends. She certainly took out one potentially effective anti-drug-war activist (herself). But it seems to me that, if anything, the fight against the drug war will only become stronger because of this.

    I also don’t perceive any problem with having a difference of opinion over Litz. We all still agree on opposition to the drug war. This gets out in the open a topic we always need to keep in mind — the danger of betrayers and state agents in our midst. Beyond the wreckage Litz created, I don’t see how this hurts us.

  12. Claire
    Claire May 11, 2012 11:19 am

    Matt B. — IMNSHO, I think you’re correct about some people who call themselves anarchists. But a lot of folks around here are anarchists. I’m an anarchist, though I don’t go around using the word much. And I wouldn’t put us in the same bag with some young libertine or window-smasher who just uses the word as an excuse for “anything goes.”

  13. Jim Bovard
    Jim Bovard May 11, 2012 11:44 am

    Unfortunately, this 1997 Playboy article is not out of date….

    HEADLINE: Time out for justice: why talking about drugs is worse than murder.

    by James Bovard

    Politicians in Washington are demanding a new crackdown on–and harsher penalties for–cocaine users, among other narcotics violators. Yet before the nation embarks on drug war number 327, we should stop and examine what our political ruling class has already achieved. The files of the November Coalition, Families Against Mandatory Minimums and various media accounts are filled with horror stories. It is worthwhile to compare sentences that are given to drug offenders with those received by murderers, rapists, child molesters, armed robbers and other victims of difficult childhoods.

    (EDIT: Jim asked me to replace the full text of his Playboy article with a link to his blog. There, you can read the sad and maddening rest of the story. http://jimbovard.com/blog/2012/05/11/playboy-why-talking-about-drugs-is-worse-than-murder/)

  14. kevin m
    kevin m May 11, 2012 12:49 pm

    I could have sworn I read something by Claire that referred to informants as “soul destroyers”.

  15. Claire
    Claire May 11, 2012 1:02 pm

    kevin m — I was just realizing yesterday how much of my old work I’ve simply forgotten. If I didn’t use the phrase “soul destroyers,” I should have. Informers destroy freedom and human relationships like termites destroy wood.

  16. naturegirl
    naturegirl May 11, 2012 1:13 pm

    I agree with just waiting, and while that may seem over simplified reasoning I bet it’s exactly the right answer…..they just don’t make people with integrity & morals like they use to, now it’s all about “me” and skating thru life as easily as possible…..

    I actually wonder which one (gov or society) will be the final blow to all of us…..while we are bracing for one to attack, it just may be the other that takes us out….

  17. Pat
    Pat May 11, 2012 3:22 pm

    As I see it, society is made up of individuals. A large number may follow where ‘leaders’ lead, but Society has no will of its own. Followers do not Act, they React… to Conventional Wisdom, and – dare I use the term – like *sheep* they go in whatever direction they are guided.

    If any part of “society” is going anywhere by itself, or attempting to lead, it will be Alternative Wisdom – maybe Activists, Ghosts, and Moles? – who will kick up the most dust down the “road less taken.”.

  18. graham
    graham May 11, 2012 7:52 pm

    Part of this is her age. She hasn’t been tested yet. Sibel Edmonds has been through the fire. Irwin Schiff is in it right now. And countless others. I spent many months in their gulag for political non-violent activism (sit-ins). I know how horrible jail can be. I was fortunate that my first real time behind bars was with others and even though it lasted several days, it was tolerable because of them. Later I endured long stretches on my own. I never want to go back and feel sorry for the next of kin of any cop who tries to put me in a cage because my activist days are over and it will most surely be on imaginary charges since I am now “not pushing it”.
    I understand her fear but even by her own admission she rolled over and was out of jail in under six hours. So much for being tested by the fire! She could have had some creativity with it by snitching on the mayor’s son or some other prominent person who uses drugs but no…. she ratted out her own.
    I am sorry for her but six hours is way too short of a time for her to roll over. I hope she grows up in jail and sees the real teeth of Leviathan. Maybe then she will have something more than hollow words to contribute to the cause of liberty. Jail could be a good thing for her. It has been for many. There is real spiritual power when one suffers “like a man” and shoulders it. From Christian martyrs to lefty liberal types like Mandela, jail can be a profitable experience which enables you to be of greater use in the future. And yes, God is in control. She needs to learn how to bear up under the load. It will be for her good. I hope she has faith because I know the suicidal thoughts she must resist. God be with you Stacy, this could be the richest blessing in your whole life.

  19. Stacy
    Stacy May 11, 2012 9:18 pm

    Instead of making accusations and circulating stale information, and a lot of your interpretations are just that — they do not address how I felt while committing such heinous acts. You have twisted the story just right enough to make it sound scandalous (and get more readers).

    My actions were wrong, un-libertarian, and a flat out mistake to make from someone who has been a “beacon of liberty” for so long. I apologize deeply and I am looking to seek retribution. I know it will be a long process, but I will not give up. I hope that we can all learn from this, be safe, and draw a lot of conclusions that may have never been thought about before in this movement.

  20. kevin m
    kevin m May 11, 2012 11:08 pm

    Has anyone swam out of a prison? I swam out of the Enid, OK. community correctional center in August of ’92 [prison flooded]. I ended up in the Oklahoma State reformatory [OSR] for awhile [a territorial prison!]. Prison[s] can be the most surreal places on earth. I’m lucky i’m a behemoth [6-6 and 300+] So I wasn’t bothered much. I just cannot sanction her conduct.

  21. Sheldon Richman
    Sheldon Richman May 12, 2012 5:57 am

    Very sad story. Good post, Claire.

  22. Claire
    Claire May 12, 2012 7:39 am

    Stacy — Thank you for posting here. If I’ve misrepresented anything I’ll be glad to post a correction. Just give me the facts and a link to verify them.

    I will also, if you want, post a statement from you on the blog, unedited and without any commentary from me so you can be sure it fully represents what you want to say. (If you want to do that, say so and I’ll send you my email address.) Or, if you’re updating your situation elsewhere, I’ll be happy to post a link to that site. I looked on your blog and didn’t see anything about your case.

    That said:

    Why should I have posted anything about your feelings? Your feelings would be relevant in a psychological analysis of snitches, and I’m sure they’re very relevant to you. But your actions were were what mattered.

    I’m also curious why you speak of seeking retribution. Not restitution?

    And although I’m sure there are valuable insights to be gained here, I’d be very surprised if there are many conclusions that nobody’s thought of before. At bottom, this is a very old, very familiar situation in human history, even though we seem to be surprised by it over and over again.

    Still … I wish you good luck in trying to undo the mess and I will gladly post or link to anything you wish to say.

  23. Claire
    Claire May 12, 2012 7:41 am

    Hello, Sheldon. Thanks for posting here — even if it has to be a sad story (and I agree, it’s a sad one) that brought you.

  24. Claire
    Claire May 12, 2012 7:42 am

    graham — Good insights. Voice of sad experience. Sigh.

  25. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty May 12, 2012 8:03 am

    Claire… I took some time to follow this story on a number of different blogs and websites, reading through the comments yesterday. In many cases, the majority of it seemed to be emotional overreaction and little serious analysis of facts or possible consequences of not having all the facts first. I’ve since read a great deal more and the general reaction seems to be fairly consistent and reasoned, even when emotional.

    But there is always the danger of some highly charged situation as this being used by unscrupulous people as a wedge between those who otherwise cooperate. I’ve been around long enough to see it happen a great many times. Some of that is inevitable, and some of that may even be valuable if people use the experience to rethink or reaffirm their own position and plans for adversity.

    I’m glad to see that happening.

  26. Ellendra
    Ellendra May 12, 2012 10:14 am

    I love it when people start out their apologies with accusations. That makes it sound so much more sincere.
    /s

    I’ll be perfectly honest. If someone were “committing such heinous acts” against me, I wouldn’t give a flying leap how they felt while doing it. They did it anyway, and that speaks to their character more than words and “feeeeelings” ever could.

    PS: An apology consists of: A statement of regret, a summary of what you did wrong, why it was wrong, and a description of what you’ll do to prevent it from happening in the future. Anything else comes off as insincere, or worse. Try that format, people might take you more seriously then.

  27. Ken K
    Ken K May 12, 2012 2:13 pm

    I’m sure Litz wasn’t my friend, comrade, or acquaintance. Lyin’ ass bitch.

  28. clarence
    clarence May 12, 2012 10:02 pm

    never apologize — your friends don’t need one and your enemies won’t believe one. (forget attribution)

    and if you’ve made your friends into enemies by betraying them to the evil ones of this world; after claiming to be fighting that evil?

    if she meant restitution rather than retribution, that was a very deep mental slip.

    clarence

  29. naturegirl
    naturegirl May 12, 2012 11:36 pm

    Yes, to everything Ellendra said….

    And I highly doubt Claire has to do anything more than Being Claire to get readers – and long time readers, at that….

    A condescending response out of Stacy; but I’m not surprised at that, either.

  30. Lee Killough
    Lee Killough May 14, 2012 5:02 am

    Has anyone considered that she might have been an agent of the state all along, infiltrating organizations as an agent provocateur? Her arrest could have been all for show. She could have been originally aiming to do more to bring down C4SS, or acting as an intelligence agent spying on the organization, but when she secured three arrests, they said she could blow her cover. Working in the “social media” part of C4SS gave her access to spy on C4SS members and provide intelligence back to the police.

    I admit I know nothing about her, the course of events and her previous work, so this is just idle speculation. But I have been in activist organizations which are monitored by agents pretending to be members.

    Barring prison, she can now look forward to working at a fusion center, putting on her resume her experience in anarchist online social media, and her snitching on “baddies” she’s convinced are worse than she is.

    I think she is a product of our national security state, and will not be the first or last one, as the state continues its war against the people.

  31. velojym
    velojym May 16, 2012 11:01 am

    I was involved as a “witness” in an arson case I knew nothing about, when I was 17 years old. The deputies in Curry and Roosevelt counties needed witnesses and couldn’t find any without criminal records, so they determined that, since I knew the alleged perp’s brother, they’d drag me in.
    After 8 hours or so, in a dank little cell with a couple of very pushy deputies, I caved and wrote down everything they told me to write.

    All they wanted me to do in court was to confirm what was written on the paper, and I’d be free to go, without about $12 for my trouble and travel. (whole lost day’s work).
    After I’d been sworn in, they asked me whether everything in my statement was correct. I responded by telling them yes, that I wrote down everything the deputies told me to write. When the judge did a double-take and asked me whether I’d even been at the scene, I shook my head and told him I was working at that time. Since the judge was one of our better customers (Dad’s pizza restaurant), I was dismissed, but all the thugs got was a stern look… no punishment for them. Their victim, who I later found was merely present when a discarded house… on an air force bombing range… was set afire, ended up in prison. Their estimate for the damage was as if the house was a habitable structure, not an oft-missed target just about ready to fall apart on its own.

Leave a Reply