Anarchy and the RNC: Protesters Won’t Rule Out 2008 Violence
Monday, November 26, 2007 at 12:33 pm
- 22 Comments
As Republican National Convention officials are stocking up on bunting and balloons, booking hotels and ordering canisters of helium, others around the country are equally busy preparing for the Republican nominating committee in the Twin Cites next September. Coming from Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, and Chapel Hill, N.C., and beyond, their interest isn’t in supporting — or even protesting — the GOP presidential contender. They’re anarchists and anti-authoritarians, and they’re coming for one reason alone: To shut it down.
The protesters won’t work with law enforcement or corporate media, two factors that contribute some mystery about how many will show up in 2008 and what tactics they might use. Through the organizing power of the Internet, however, notes from organizing meetings give anyone with access a glimpse of plans for bridge blockades, strategies for disrupting public transportation and even information about a family-friendly anarchist area. They’ve even created a video that spoofs common misconceptions about violence by anarchists.
The truth, however, is that several statements by organizers assert that violence is not off the table. Although the protesters say they won’t take the first swing, they vow to protect themselves as law enforcement will likely attempt to thwart their plans involving illegal behavior.No Working with Authority
Anchored by the Twin Cities-based RNC Welcoming Committee and facilitated by Unconventional Action, the protesters have organized groups in cities such as Madison and Milwaukee, Wis.; Pittsburgh, Pa.; Iowa City, Iowa; and Chapel Hill, N.C. Planning for the RNC disruptions has been under way since it was announced that the convention would be held in St. Paul.
The network of activists isn’t coming to St. Paul to protest the policies of the Republican Party necessarily. The protesters will attempt to make the convention as big a headache for Republicans as possible by tactics such as blocking access to the convention and creating a “free state” near the convention. Businesses supporting the RNC would not be exempt as targets. Ultimately, “making the Republicans/Democrats (whatever you want to call them) obsolete” is the focus, according to the Welcoming Committee. The two-party political system — in fact, the political system itself — isn’t working for them. They aren’t Democrats, and they aren’t liberals. They are anarchists.
The plans of those arriving in September 2008 to disrupt the RNC don’t include working with local law enforcement. At a recent community discussion with St. Paul police regarding security and free speech for convention protesters, the RNC Welcoming Committee didn’t show up. They did send fliers, however, which read, “Don’t believe police propaganda: Authority belongs to the people, not the police.” The flier listed reasons why they won’t dialogue with law enforcement:
“Police protect the current power structure, not the people. Police rely on violence to protect a system that promotes violence. Police protect a social order that is founded on racism, sexism, and homophobia. Police brutality has consistently been a problem.”
“[P]eople ought to be allowed to control their own lives, and not each other’s,” the Welcoming Committee flier read. “Real problem-solving in communities doesn’t and can’t occur through authoritarian intervention… Communities should have the resources and power to manage themselves, but not enough to control others.”
It would be accurate to call them the ultimate believers in a “small government” ideology.
Planning Early
The early start to organizing disruptions at the RNC is purposeful. “It may seem strange to organize a gathering primarily focused on mobilizations so far in advance,” wrote the Chapel Hill, N.C.-based Carolina Consulta in notes from a meeting last May (PDF). “Past experience has taught us that it is unrealistic to expect hundreds of people from different parts of the country to be able to develop an effective strategy at a last-minute spokescouncil held two days before we hope to shut down an entire city center. Ideally, affinity groups across the country should know exactly what their roles will be many months in advance, so they will come mentally, physically, and tactically prepared to fulfill them.”
The tactical goal for the groups is to shut down the convention. “We can only have leverage over our rulers by showing our own power, that we must back our demands by demonstrating that we can interfere with their business as effectively as they interfere with our lives,” says Unconventional Action. The Carolina Consulta writes that among its goals is “to shut down the cities, delay and disrupt the conventions and corporate media coverage, to deter cities from wanting to host the conventions in the future,” and “to use the media to our advantage.”
The plan so far is this: “Tier One: Establish 15-20 blockades, utilizing a diversity of tactics, creating an inner and outer ring around St. Paul’s Xcel Center, where the RNC is to take place. Tier Two: Immobilize the delegates’ transportation infrastructure, including the buses that are to convey them. Tier Three: Block the five western bridges connecting the Twin Cities.” The group has been collecting information on transportation routes and logistics for the convention.
While the preliminary plans continue to be discussed as local organizers build toward a consensus, affiliated groups around the country continue to organize. Anti-RNC forces will convene in May 2008 to solidify plans, according to the Welcoming Committee Web site.
The Violence Factor
Will anarchists and anti-authoritarians attempting to disrupt the convention use violence as a tactic? The answer: Maybe.
“As the Welcoming Committee, we refuse to condemn the defense of individuals, communities, and the Earth. Most violence comes from the state. When you come to our protest, look around: We won’t be the ones with nightsticks, guns, and Tasers,” according to their Web site.
A frequently-asked-questions section on the site addresses the consensus on violence and destruction. “What is your stance on violence and property destruction? Destruction bad. Property bad. The concept of property is used to deprive people of the basic necessities of life. We live here, and want to live in beautiful, clean environments, just like you. We also believe we have a right to defend ourselves, and if the tools used to attack us include the tools of property, it’s not exempt.”
In a press conference in late August, Welcoming Committee spokester Bea Bridges said, “The State asks that we only resist in ways it finds convenient and easy to contain, promising repression of those who act outside the parameters it sets. This is a threat — a violent threat with which the State hopes to terrorize us into submission. Therefore, there exists no ‘peaceful’ option. Some among us may choose to resist State violence using pacifist tactics, while others use whatever methods they deem necessary and appropriate. But, no matter how we respond to it, violence is already present at the protests through no fault of our own.”
The suggestion of violence is one the Welcoming Committee pokes fun at. A video released by the group in August has created buzz among media outlets this month.
Police Encourage Cooperation
The Welcoming Committee is part of a larger demonstration against representative politics. The Democratic National Convention in Denver next August will see similar tactics. But the groups understand that they will be working with others who do believe in the power of representative politics. “We aim to organize militant direct action that manifests opposition to both the Democratic and Republican Parties,” says a statement on the Unconventional Action Web site. “As anti-authoritarians, we oppose so-called representational politics, but even those who still believe in it must understand that we can only have leverage over our rulers by showing our own power, that we must back our demands by demonstrating that we can interfere with their business as effectively as they interfere with our lives.”
In a letter to the Minnesota Monitor, St. Paul police officials wouldn’t comment on specific strategies to communicate with the anti-RNC forces or if they have specific plans to deal with disruptions caused by the protesters, but did provide some general statements about what residents can expect. “We encourage those people who wish to demonstrate during the event to work with us to develop a relationship, which can only help make the event an enjoyable event for everyone,” said the letter signed by St. Paul Police Chief John Harrington and Commander Douglas Holtz. “We want to have an open and honest dialogue with any group who wants to express their concerns, and we are very willing to reach out to enhance communications in an effort to make the event a success for everyone.”
As for violence, the St. Paul police said, “While there has been attention given to those that might want to disrupt the event, the St. Paul Police Department would like to assure the residents, businesses, and visitors, we will be prepared to keep the peace, we discourage acts of disruption — and we will not tolerate criminal activity.”
The letter says that they “anticipate that those who come to St. Paul will follow the law.”
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter22 Comments
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
Inaccuracies can even be dangerous Andy:
Your comments about wild anarchists in the streets don’t surprise me even a little, but they are also inaccurate. Let me be very specific.
First, there are TWO main groups that have been working together to protest the convention. One group is a group of anti-authoritarians (or anarchists, in your words). Their website is at http://rncwelcomingc…
Second, their is a coalition of peace and justice groups that you can check out at http://protestrnc200… The second group has tried repeatedly (at least 3 times) to apply for a permit to march on Labor Day, Monday, September 1. Each time, the St. Paul police department has refused to consider the application for a completely peaceful protest march, giving the reason that St. Paul city ordinances will not allow such an early application.
Stated very clearly, the object of this march is not at all to shut down the convention. The object of this march is to hold a very large, peaceful and legal protest, safe enough to allow grandmothers with their walkers and fathers with young children in strollers. A march so massive that the entire world will see that most Americans don’t agree with the neocon agenda of dominating the world and assigning all resources to a tiny elite.
The St. Paul police and the St. Paul city council have absolutely refused to begin negotiating a safe route. A so-called “free speech” committee has been set up to advocate for a free and constitutionally protected protest, but that committee has not met for months and months and months.
So far, in fact, the St. Paul police have given many vague reassurances that they live and breathe in order to protect free speech. But so far there have been no permits. So far there have been no routes established. So far there have been no procedures outlined to deal with incidents of difficulty.
None of this is surprising, nor does it shock me that you have fallen for the distraction of the “anarchist” label. Marginalizing protest is a central technique of suppressing dissent. Obviously, it is easy to stir animosity against black-clad, masked brick-throwers, but much harder to get angry with praying nuns, especially when 70 % of all Americans agree with the nuns that the United States is going down exactly the wrong path.
Please take a few minutes to read the blog I wrote last week on exactly this issue. You can find it at http://www.mnblue.co… I think you will see exactly what I am talking about.
Andy, it is really important for you to understand what is going on here. Otherwise you will be part of creating an atmosphere what is going to get my head cracked. Or get me tased, which with my heart might be fatal. Check out my essay, please, even if it is a bit long.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
please be creative What I hope we don’t see are a bunch of boring 60′s era “Ra ra ra, blah, blah, blah, stop whatevah from doing whatevah” marches.
Can’t protests break the old mold of predicable and questionably effective actions? Who cares if a march takes place if everyone yawns when they walk by. I am encouraged by the “anarchist” video, they show some self-deprecating humor. As long as they resist the temptation to do anything violent, they should be an interesting group to watch.
As to the permits, what is the standing procedure when an event of this scale is not taking place? I think the authorities have all said that permits will be handed out 6 months out. That does seem like plenty of time. Can’t plans be made without permits anyway? I just don’t really get the permit thing, right now it feels like since everything else is going so smoothly, this one thing has been picked up as the point to gripe about, and I just don’t know if it’s worth all the fuss.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 8:21 pm
Ok Thanks Charley for your comments.
You say: “Your comments about wild anarchists in the streets don’t surprise me even a little, but they are also inaccurate.”
I say: I would love it if your could point to an instance where I commented about wild anarchists in the street. I also wonder why it wouldn’t surprise you that I would make that statement. I believe this is the first time I’ve written anything remotely related to this issue. So, your assertion is not based on experience with me or my writing.
You say: “One group is a group of anti-authoritarians (or anarchists, in your words).”
I say: Nope. Their words. Read the RNC Welcoming Committee website a little closer.
Charley, you are insinuating that I’m describing all RNC protesters as “wild anarchists.” That is incorrect. My post has nothing to do with the Protest the RNC march… Nothing at all.
It’s not marginalizing protest. These folks have said in direct, easy-to-read words that their goal, their singular purpose for coming to St. Paul is to disrupt the RNC to the point of preventing it to happen.
Should that not be reported? I dunno. I found it interesting. I was very careful not to conflate them with the others who intend to demonstrate. But, I only repeated what the RNCWC had already said and written. If you are concerned that their actions, which have promised to be questionably illegal, might result in you getting hurt, then maybe your beef is with them.
Nothing I wrote is anything that the police don’t already know about.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
Join us, Ag You are completely correct, Ag. Those chants are getting old. We could really use your creativity. Would you like me to send you links to the organizing meetings, or perhaps to the Radical Cheerleaders?
As for the preoccupation with the permits, I would ask you to think about how much lead time you would want, if you were organizing a protest for 50,000 to 100,000 people, without $50 million of public funds.
By the way, have you gone to the blog I linked, just to see the context?
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 9:31 pm
thanks Charley I’m probably on all those lists already, so no need to add me to any, but thanks.
I know groups that are planning peace marches in the size you suggest, and they are professional organizers who do not have a problem with the normal procedures of permitting. They also have no public funding, however, they do see the need to raise a million or so just so they can actually fund a march of that size properly.
I am just concerned that there are interests here (not you Charley) that have an agenda to make havoc, and building a meme of “the cops are all bad” or “the city is corrupt” or “it’s the guv’munt vs. the people” is a bullet point in their game plan. I just don’t buy it. Sure things can go wrong, and there are real concerns, but these permits just aren’t one of them.
I also read MNBlue regularly and enjoy your writing.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 10:10 pm
Singular Purpose? From the nornc website:
“What we want (the goals):
1. Build Our Capacity – A new reality will not emerge by simply stopping the 4 day spectacle of the RNC. We need folks with an alternative vision to come to the Twin Cities and turn their dreams into reality. Start something new, be creative, and come ready to build sustainable alternatives worth fighting for and defending. The new skills that we teach, learn, and put into practice here will allow us to return to our communities stronger, smarter, and more empowered.
2. Crash the Convention – We didn’t get an invitation, but we’re showing up anyway. This party will be what we make of it. We don’t want to confine our potential by imposing a single vision of what success will look like. We recognize that there will be a lot of people coming with their own agendas and carefully laid plans and want to be open to the diverse tactics that will be necessary to accomplish our many goals. Together, we can derail the purely ceremonial show of this repressive system and remake it with our own hands and according to our own visions.”
To present these nornc folks as having a “singular purpose” or having “one reason alone” seems purposefully misleading.
Comment posted November 27, 2007 @ 12:23 am
Trying to be clear, Andy Andy, I am sorry if my words were not clear. Looking over what I have written, I can see exactly how you reached each of the conclusions. I don’t blame you a bit for protesting. Please let me try again.
I am not suggesting that you have previously written about the Republican National Convention. Nor am I suggesting that you equate a peaceful, permitted march with the other tactics you describe from the Welcoming Committee website.
What does not surprise me is that anarchists would be the ones mentioned in the context of opposition to the Republican National Convention. If you read the link I sent you to my blog, you will see that I characterize this as a very common approach to controlling street protests and limiting their effectiveness. It isn’t particularly you, but most of the time that public comments are made about large street protests, it is anarchists that are mentioned.
You and I both understand that most Americans oppose torture. Most oppose the direction and even the intent of the war in Iraq. Most oppose an imperial presidency and those bloated war profiteer cronies. Hell, even quite a few Republicans oppose the tragic neocon agenda that has been foisted on us.
Clearly it isn’t just anarchists who oppose these things. It’s capitalists and social democrats and Oprah-watchers and folks who like cross-country skiing. But notice how the anarchist angle nearly always gets played.
Here’s my worry: If the good citizens of the Twin Cities believe that only anarchists oppose the Republicans who are coming here, then they will be much more tolerant of police over-reaction, the use of “less lethal” weapons, appearance of overwhelming paramilitary force and the massive curtailment of civil liberties.
Please read my blog on the Miami model, Andy. Then you will have a context for why I get nervous. It isn’t that I want to censor you or tell you what to write. And I’m not accusing you of making anything up. Sure, it’s interesting. It just that I want a huge, safe demo against this war, and I don’t want to be marginalized with that anarchist label.
Comment posted November 27, 2007 @ 12:42 am
Thanks Charley I get exactly what you are saying. I certainly don’t want to marginalize anyone with any label.
I do think Twin Citians should know that there are people who intend to disrupt the activities. Whether I agree with their tactics or not, there are people who’s purpose is much more than having their voices heard.
I plan on writing about the others who plan to demonstrate, march, hold up signs, etc. I started here because it was the most interesting.
Comment posted November 27, 2007 @ 12:55 am
We could play semantics But I do believe both of those goals themselves state that the purpose is to shut downt he convention. #1 says, and I’m paraphrasing “while you’re shutting down the convention, let’s build community and learn something!”
The second goal, and again I’m paraphrasing “Let’s all band together and derail the convention.”
Perhaps I’m wrong on a reread of the first one. I should have said written “their two reasons are shutting down the convention and learning something new while their here.” Is that a more accurate description?
I don’t think I’m far off from what their stated purpose is. Both goals state pretty clearly that they will be here to shut down the convention.
Perhaps if you could summarize for me what you think those two goals mean other than shutting down the convention and learning something, I’d consider retracting or correcting anything I’ve written that appears misleading.
Comment posted November 28, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Some thoughts I think it’s completely understandable why Andy’s attention would be drawn to the Welcoming Committee’s organizing. We’ve all seen the peaceful, law-abiding mass marches and we know exactly how effective it is to respectfully disagree with the architects of our exploitation and allow any resistance we might have to be cleanly dealt with and swept under the rug.
I have nothing but good feelings toward Mr. Underwood and anyone else acting their conscience and working to counter the RNC, but there is absolutely no chance that the ruling parties are going to be impressed by a large turn out to a demonstration, say “Oh my goodness. We were wrong all along”, and quietly dissolve into the sunset. The people in control of this country and our lives have proven beyond doubt that they will do, say, and kill anything in pursuit of their interests, and remaining in power is perhaps their most dire concern.
Even the molotov-throwing, cop-punching, window-smashing anarchists (or at least the ones I know) don’t believe that those kind of actions alone are going to accomplish anything without a broader context of resistance. Whether it’s raiding an armory or writing letters to congress, a single tactic held as truth above all others will surely fail. We need to confront power on every possible front, with every means necessary and available to us.
Comment posted November 28, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
Invading Anarchist. “…violence is not off the table. “
Violence is definitly on the table, but it will be the police useing it not us. Let’s be realistic here, who will be bringing guns, chemical weapons of several varieties, stick built for the sole purpose of hitting people, restraints like handcuffs, ect. and wearing full body armour?
We got a message from the MPD at our meeting a couple of months ago while some people where riding there bikes.
The message seems pretty clear to me, “when you show up we are going to beat you up and trow you in jail”.
Acctually I found this article amazingly unbiased and understand how we might seem more interesting than the people who get permission to protest. I still don’t get that one.
As for kneeling nuns and brick throwers, I plan on comming in an unbrella group that will include Catholic Workers and Freinds “Quakers”. Let’s keep our eyes on our common goal instead of stereotyping each other. If you get tazed blame it on the person pulling the trigger and those that told them to do it, not reporters or fellow protesters.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 12:16 pm
Inaccuracies can even be dangerous Andy:
Your comments about wild anarchists in the streets don't surprise me even a little, but they are also inaccurate. Let me be very specific.
First, there are TWO main groups that have been working together to protest the convention. One group is a group of anti-authoritarians (or anarchists, in your words). Their website is at http://rncwelcomingc…
Second, their is a coalition of peace and justice groups that you can check out at http://protestrnc200… The second group has tried repeatedly (at least 3 times) to apply for a permit to march on Labor Day, Monday, September 1. Each time, the St. Paul police department has refused to consider the application for a completely peaceful protest march, giving the reason that St. Paul city ordinances will not allow such an early application.
Stated very clearly, the object of this march is not at all to shut down the convention. The object of this march is to hold a very large, peaceful and legal protest, safe enough to allow grandmothers with their walkers and fathers with young children in strollers. A march so massive that the entire world will see that most Americans don't agree with the neocon agenda of dominating the world and assigning all resources to a tiny elite.
The St. Paul police and the St. Paul city council have absolutely refused to begin negotiating a safe route. A so-called “free speech” committee has been set up to advocate for a free and constitutionally protected protest, but that committee has not met for months and months and months.
So far, in fact, the St. Paul police have given many vague reassurances that they live and breathe in order to protect free speech. But so far there have been no permits. So far there have been no routes established. So far there have been no procedures outlined to deal with incidents of difficulty.
None of this is surprising, nor does it shock me that you have fallen for the distraction of the “anarchist” label. Marginalizing protest is a central technique of suppressing dissent. Obviously, it is easy to stir animosity against black-clad, masked brick-throwers, but much harder to get angry with praying nuns, especially when 70 % of all Americans agree with the nuns that the United States is going down exactly the wrong path.
Please take a few minutes to read the blog I wrote last week on exactly this issue. You can find it at http://www.mnblue.co… I think you will see exactly what I am talking about.
Andy, it is really important for you to understand what is going on here. Otherwise you will be part of creating an atmosphere what is going to get my head cracked. Or get me tased, which with my heart might be fatal. Check out my essay, please, even if it is a bit long.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 12:51 pm
please be creative What I hope we don't see are a bunch of boring 60's era “Ra ra ra, blah, blah, blah, stop whatevah from doing whatevah” marches.
Can't protests break the old mold of predicable and questionably effective actions? Who cares if a march takes place if everyone yawns when they walk by. I am encouraged by the “anarchist” video, they show some self-deprecating humor. As long as they resist the temptation to do anything violent, they should be an interesting group to watch.
As to the permits, what is the standing procedure when an event of this scale is not taking place? I think the authorities have all said that permits will be handed out 6 months out. That does seem like plenty of time. Can't plans be made without permits anyway? I just don't really get the permit thing, right now it feels like since everything else is going so smoothly, this one thing has been picked up as the point to gripe about, and I just don't know if it's worth all the fuss.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 2:21 pm
Ok Thanks Charley for your comments.
You say: “Your comments about wild anarchists in the streets don't surprise me even a little, but they are also inaccurate.”
I say: I would love it if your could point to an instance where I commented about wild anarchists in the street. I also wonder why it wouldn't surprise you that I would make that statement. I believe this is the first time I've written anything remotely related to this issue. So, your assertion is not based on experience with me or my writing.
You say: “One group is a group of anti-authoritarians (or anarchists, in your words).”
I say: Nope. Their words. Read the RNC Welcoming Committee website a little closer.
Charley, you are insinuating that I'm describing all RNC protesters as “wild anarchists.” That is incorrect. My post has nothing to do with the Protest the RNC march… Nothing at all.
It's not marginalizing protest. These folks have said in direct, easy-to-read words that their goal, their singular purpose for coming to St. Paul is to disrupt the RNC to the point of preventing it to happen.
Should that not be reported? I dunno. I found it interesting. I was very careful not to conflate them with the others who intend to demonstrate. But, I only repeated what the RNCWC had already said and written. If you are concerned that their actions, which have promised to be questionably illegal, might result in you getting hurt, then maybe your beef is with them.
Nothing I wrote is anything that the police don't already know about.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Join us, Ag You are completely correct, Ag. Those chants are getting old. We could really use your creativity. Would you like me to send you links to the organizing meetings, or perhaps to the Radical Cheerleaders?
As for the preoccupation with the permits, I would ask you to think about how much lead time you would want, if you were organizing a protest for 50,000 to 100,000 people, without $50 million of public funds.
By the way, have you gone to the blog I linked, just to see the context?
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
thanks Charley I'm probably on all those lists already, so no need to add me to any, but thanks.
I know groups that are planning peace marches in the size you suggest, and they are professional organizers who do not have a problem with the normal procedures of permitting. They also have no public funding, however, they do see the need to raise a million or so just so they can actually fund a march of that size properly.
I am just concerned that there are interests here (not you Charley) that have an agenda to make havoc, and building a meme of “the cops are all bad” or “the city is corrupt” or “it's the guv'munt vs. the people” is a bullet point in their game plan. I just don't buy it. Sure things can go wrong, and there are real concerns, but these permits just aren't one of them.
I also read MNBlue regularly and enjoy your writing.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
Singular Purpose? From the nornc website:
“What we want (the goals):
1. Build Our Capacity – A new reality will not emerge by simply stopping the 4 day spectacle of the RNC. We need folks with an alternative vision to come to the Twin Cities and turn their dreams into reality. Start something new, be creative, and come ready to build sustainable alternatives worth fighting for and defending. The new skills that we teach, learn, and put into practice here will allow us to return to our communities stronger, smarter, and more empowered.
2. Crash the Convention – We didn't get an invitation, but we're showing up anyway. This party will be what we make of it. We don't want to confine our potential by imposing a single vision of what success will look like. We recognize that there will be a lot of people coming with their own agendas and carefully laid plans and want to be open to the diverse tactics that will be necessary to accomplish our many goals. Together, we can derail the purely ceremonial show of this repressive system and remake it with our own hands and according to our own visions.”
To present these nornc folks as having a “singular purpose” or having “one reason alone” seems purposefully misleading.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
Trying to be clear, Andy Andy, I am sorry if my words were not clear. Looking over what I have written, I can see exactly how you reached each of the conclusions. I don't blame you a bit for protesting. Please let me try again.
I am not suggesting that you have previously written about the Republican National Convention. Nor am I suggesting that you equate a peaceful, permitted march with the other tactics you describe from the Welcoming Committee website.
What does not surprise me is that anarchists would be the ones mentioned in the context of opposition to the Republican National Convention. If you read the link I sent you to my blog, you will see that I characterize this as a very common approach to controlling street protests and limiting their effectiveness. It isn't particularly you, but most of the time that public comments are made about large street protests, it is anarchists that are mentioned.
You and I both understand that most Americans oppose torture. Most oppose the direction and even the intent of the war in Iraq. Most oppose an imperial presidency and those bloated war profiteer cronies. Hell, even quite a few Republicans oppose the tragic neocon agenda that has been foisted on us.
Clearly it isn't just anarchists who oppose these things. It's capitalists and social democrats and Oprah-watchers and folks who like cross-country skiing. But notice how the anarchist angle nearly always gets played.
Here's my worry: If the good citizens of the Twin Cities believe that only anarchists oppose the Republicans who are coming here, then they will be much more tolerant of police over-reaction, the use of “less lethal” weapons, appearance of overwhelming paramilitary force and the massive curtailment of civil liberties.
Please read my blog on the Miami model, Andy. Then you will have a context for why I get nervous. It isn't that I want to censor you or tell you what to write. And I'm not accusing you of making anything up. Sure, it's interesting. It just that I want a huge, safe demo against this war, and I don't want to be marginalized with that anarchist label.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 6:42 pm
Thanks Charley I get exactly what you are saying. I certainly don't want to marginalize anyone with any label.
I do think Twin Citians should know that there are people who intend to disrupt the activities. Whether I agree with their tactics or not, there are people who's purpose is much more than having their voices heard.
I plan on writing about the others who plan to demonstrate, march, hold up signs, etc. I started here because it was the most interesting.
Comment posted November 26, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
We could play semantics But I do believe both of those goals themselves state that the purpose is to shut downt he convention. #1 says, and I'm paraphrasing “while you're shutting down the convention, let's build community and learn something!”
The second goal, and again I'm paraphrasing “Let's all band together and derail the convention.”
Perhaps I'm wrong on a reread of the first one. I should have said written “their two reasons are shutting down the convention and learning something new while their here.” Is that a more accurate description?
I don't think I'm far off from what their stated purpose is. Both goals state pretty clearly that they will be here to shut down the convention.
Perhaps if you could summarize for me what you think those two goals mean other than shutting down the convention and learning something, I'd consider retracting or correcting anything I've written that appears misleading.
Comment posted November 28, 2007 @ 7:41 am
Some thoughts I think it's completely understandable why Andy's attention would be drawn to the Welcoming Committee's organizing. We've all seen the peaceful, law-abiding mass marches and we know exactly how effective it is to respectfully disagree with the architects of our exploitation and allow any resistance we might have to be cleanly dealt with and swept under the rug.
I have nothing but good feelings toward Mr. Underwood and anyone else acting their conscience and working to counter the RNC, but there is absolutely no chance that the ruling parties are going to be impressed by a large turn out to a demonstration, say “Oh my goodness. We were wrong all along”, and quietly dissolve into the sunset. The people in control of this country and our lives have proven beyond doubt that they will do, say, and kill anything in pursuit of their interests, and remaining in power is perhaps their most dire concern.
Even the molotov-throwing, cop-punching, window-smashing anarchists (or at least the ones I know) don't believe that those kind of actions alone are going to accomplish anything without a broader context of resistance. Whether it's raiding an armory or writing letters to congress, a single tactic held as truth above all others will surely fail. We need to confront power on every possible front, with every means necessary and available to us.
Comment posted November 28, 2007 @ 8:16 am
Invading Anarchist. “…violence is not off the table. “
Violence is definitly on the table, but it will be the police useing it not us. Let's be realistic here, who will be bringing guns, chemical weapons of several varieties, stick built for the sole purpose of hitting people, restraints like handcuffs, ect. and wearing full body armour?
We got a message from the MPD at our meeting a couple of months ago while some people where riding there bikes.
The message seems pretty clear to me, “when you show up we are going to beat you up and trow you in jail”.
Acctually I found this article amazingly unbiased and understand how we might seem more interesting than the people who get permission to protest. I still don't get that one.
As for kneeling nuns and brick throwers, I plan on comming in an unbrella group that will include Catholic Workers and Freinds “Quakers”. Let's keep our eyes on our common goal instead of stereotyping each other. If you get tazed blame it on the person pulling the trigger and those that told them to do it, not reporters or fellow protesters.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
