AnarCorp in its structure to seek justice and counter oppression needs to devise manners in which to forcefully work against violence and oppression.
We begin by stating that what is wrong with violence is oppression, not force, or conflict, but the use of harm and the threat of harm to psychologically violate other individuals.
This results in rules of action with contradict, in some instances, the common concept of violence. We explain this supposed contradiction by stating that the existing legitimate power structures utilize and validate oppression, and therefor need to label extremely violating and oppressive behavior as peaceful as a propaganda tool, we do not share this bias, and therefor do not act or explain using the same methods or arguments.
The first rule of action, which may seem violent is to confine conflict with violence to physical conflict. This means that persons involved in violence are not be asked to stop, they are not warned that they are to be restrained, they are restrained. Once the violent crisis is contained then, and only then, do AnarCorp members enter a dialog on the events.
Many would argue that this is unnecessarily violent as it uses force where talking would suffice. Talking in violent situations always contains, as an aspect of living in an oppressive society, the implication of threat of physical violence. It is therefor an act of oppression to warn or tell them to stop, it violates their consciousness and freedom of self-determination. Physically restraining them simply inconveniences and limits, in a very obvious and limited way, their freedom of movement. Given the choice between limiting self-determination, or physical movement, we must choose the latter as it is less psychologically oppressive.
Since we have no intent of either harm or psychological control it becomes difficult, from an anti-oppressive perspective, to classify forceful physical conflict resolution as violent. Certainly violence is taking place, as that is the cause of the intervention. This violence is not rooted in the actions of those who intervene, it is an actualization of the violence, psychological, physical and potential, already at play in the situation.
One of the consequences of non-oppressive restraint is that some acts which would seem to be less constrictive are, in fact, more oppressive. The most common example is the walking of captives. Once a person is in the physical control of others any act which they perform in cooperation with their captors is an act of subservient conditioning. AnarCorp therefor does not walk captives, they are bound hand and foot and carried, they are not asked, there is no implication that they have any control, as is used in oppressive psychological conditioning tactics as used by the police.
Once a situation is contained it is necessary to debrief all involved, this entails talking with assailants and victims and making sure that everybody understands both the dynamic of oppressive power which took place ,as well as exposing them to alternative behaviors and options. This is not intended to solve or got rid of peoples violent tendencies, only to provide perspectives and solutions which may have not been considered. It is important to note that the debrief for victims is not necessarily pleasant, the responsibility to not place ones self in an endangering position is vital for the actualization of non-oppressive society, victims have to deal with their own capacity to be empowered to solve and avoid violence, an issue which is rarely pleasant, particularly for people conditioned to be victims.
The debrief should be respectful, no deception or ridicule is used, people are treated as intelligent individuals who have, by some logic at odds with reality and justice, made destructive decisions. The debreifers attempt to discover and dialogue with this logic and show the manner in which it is false. Attention is given to addressing structural oppression and tools for the empowerment of the structurally oppressed, offering options, based on self-determination and justice, which can empower those trapped in cycles of violence to believe in other options.
Anti-oppressive force entails the selective destruction or impounding of property. By whatever means legally possible AnarCorp gains and exercises all options for the confiscation, impounding, and destruction of property used as tools of oppression. This is most directly applied to weapons, but in many cases extends to vehicles and other tools which give the irresponsible power.
One of the most widespread applications of oppressive force is law enforcement. It becomes necessary to address the manner in which this violence is to be handled. It is not practicable to arrest and detain every police officer we see, the gang war that would result would be unsustainable, and clearly undesirable. AnarCorp handles this by holding the police to the full extent of the law. This is in contrast to AnarCorp policy on dealing with civilians, but since the state so grossly over empowers police we feel it is not unjust to subject them to the system which they enforce. The method used is to sue, in whatever way possible, all those who have violated basic tenants of rights as stated by the law of the state and international law. These officers are not tried through the internal complaint procedures, but are sued as individuals, a tactic which is much more likely both to result in a guilty verdict, and one which holds the active party directly responsible to the rule of law which they supposedly uphold.
No deference is shown to the police, and no information given, arrests are not permitted of AnarCorp members to the extent feasible, and any attempt to illegally detain or arrest results in a full force implementation of legal defense of state and international right. AnarCorp attempts to imprison or bankrupt any abuser of state force used against any of its members.
As a necessary condition of implementing this principle AnarCorp member need to travel in groups the majority of the time. It is not practically feasible for an individual to defuse a complex violent confrontation without causing harm. though this becomes a reality with even a small group of well coordinated combatants. This is partially implemented by having people travel and work in apprentice-teacher groups, but is extended beyond this when practicable.
All intentional physical or psychological harm is considered by AnarCorp to be inappropriate at all times. No justification is made for defense of self or home using violent methods. This dose not mean that defense of self and home are to be disregarded, they are part of the responsibility of a just society, as we can not justly depend on the police, as their methods are oppressive. We must though not confuse the right to defend with the right to harm, the grouping of these ideas is based on a structure of defense through oppression, not on a structure of just defense.
AnarCorp provides for self and home defense largely through mutual live work structures with individuals trained to counter violence. It would be ridiculous to act against violence away form home, but to permit violence against it. AnarCorp collectives therefor assess their level of vulnerability to abuse and make sure that they have the means to detect and counter abuse. It is needful in some instances to have people on watch.