community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Come to DC on January 18
by Citizen
Sunday, Dec. 22, 2002 at 12:10 PM
Come out to DC on January 18.
There will be a big rally and march against Bush the Terrible's war, in DC on January 18, 2003. A six-digit turnout is anticiapted. While many will be involved with preparations for Jan 24-26 in Pittsburgh, this event is not intended to detract from their efforts, but will be a great warm up event. Getting there for the day will be easy. Contact the Merton Center (http://www.thomasmertoncenter.org) and reserve a seat on their buses.
There have been objections from some of the anti-authoritarians to the organizer ANSWER, but please consider that they are just the clerk getting their "permits". What YOU do on the streets is up to you! On Oct 26, with a turnout of 100K-150K people, there was a tiny police presence. There were opportunities for huge umimpeded breakout actions (use your imagination) - if thousands of anti-authoritarians hadn't stayed home. Their energy was missed that day.
So, come on out to DC and make a this one different!
hmm
by hmm
Monday, Dec. 23, 2002 at 11:45 AM
""There have been objections from some of the anti-authoritarians to the organizer ANSWER""
This is just not true. Many "moderates", green party members, liberals, and others have serious problems with International Answer. Trying to play if off as though it is only anti-authoritareans who are concerned is disingenious and unconstructive.
"" they are just the clerk getting their "permits". What YOU do on the streets is up to you! On Oct 26, with a turnout of 100K-150K people, there was a tiny police presence. There were opportunities for huge umimpeded breakout actions (use your imagination) - if thousands of anti-authoritarians hadn't stayed home. Their energy was missed that day. ""
This again is just not true and obscures a lot of the issue. Answer actively collaberates with the police to discourage un-sanctioned actions. This is the reason for the relatively small police presence. Why do you need thousands of more police if the organizers are there to do it for you. If there was any sign that direct action (beyond a unpermitted feeder march) would happen the police would crack down as per usual.
I appreciate your sentiments, but we can not just remove the conflicts that are present. The only "Answer" to these problems is to speak honestly about people's complaints. If people think they will be effective by being in DC then go to DC. If they think time or money is better spent then don't.
reply...
by pjd
Monday, Dec. 23, 2002 at 5:25 PM
As someone who was there, i can vouch that the turmout was dominated by moderate-liberal green types. Forget what you may have seen written by the liberal pundits. The only group noticably low in turnout were the anti-authoritarians/ anarchists.
While I was there, I was physically free to do what ever I wanted to do - I saw no ANSWER people functioning as police and I'm not sure where the sufficient number of police would have come from to constrain a breakout activity. Of course, sitting down at a White House gate all alone would not have done much good, but a few thousand people leaving the "official" route could have made it a very different kind of protest (like maybe shut down the white house for a few hours?) - not like the fiasco a few weeks earlier. A couple other Pittsburgers made this same observation and can vouch for me on this.
I am confused as to what the "organizer" has to do with anything. When I'm on the street at a mass protest, I represent myself and you should feel free to represent yourselves.
Hope to see some of you there and the next week in Pittsburgh.
clarification..
by pjd
Monday, Dec. 23, 2002 at 6:54 PM
I forgot to point this out, but it goes without saying that I fully agree with hmm and others that ANSWER's backers (the WWP) adhere to repugnant politics.
But the WWP is in no danger of becoming anything close to a significant voice in the movement, or even at their own events. Every event they orgaiize, they dilute themselves even more by the turnout of new younger activists.
So show up and bring a monkeywrench.
well now
by urghhh
Monday, Dec. 23, 2002 at 7:15 PM
First off. You seem to have a specific agenda which is to advocate people to come to dc for the event. That is fine, but worth pointing out. You had the same agenda last event answer put on. Your arguments then turned out to be largely hollow. Answer's event had very little impact on stopping the war and didn't (that I've noticed) contribute to an upsurge in local anti-war work. You do not seem interested in a dialogue. You have also completely ignored the fact (brought up in the first reply to your post) that a lot of prgressives have serious concerns about Answer as an organization. This isn't just an issue of Anti-auth's not liking to be policed. A lot of people do not think IA is good for the movement or that the events they put on contribute to stopping the war.
"The only group noticably low in turnout were the anti-authoritarians/ anarchists."
Says who? Compared to what? How do you know this? I know a number of anarchists-anti-authoritareans who went. How many anarchists do you think were there? How many should have been there? Are you basing your assement of low turnout on the lack of organized bloc's? Were you at the feeder march organized by the acc and other radicals?
"While I was there, I was physically free to do what ever I wanted to do - I saw no ANSWER people functioning as police and I'm not sure where the sufficient number of police would have come from to constrain a breakout activity."
You were only free to do as you wanted in a very narrow way of looking at it. Answer controlled the program, logistics, and message. Do you know a large part of the crowd tried to start marching because they were tired of waiting for Answer's speakers to finish? What happened? The police stopped them as answer wasn't done with the program! That was a big break-out as you describe. Anything more then that would require some type of organization to it and a more militant crowd to carry it through. There is currently talk of a black bloc so maybe that will happen this time. Who knows.
""but a few thousand people leaving the "official" route could have made it a very different kind of protest (like maybe shut down the white house for a few hours?) ""
As I said earlier thousands of people did try to deviate from what answer wanted. The police shut them down. It doesn't take very many police to block a march or crowd.
""I am confused as to what the "organizer" has to do with anything. When I'm on the street at a mass protest, I represent myself and you should feel free to represent yourselves.""
The organizer sets the framework. This is very important to how an event turns out. The organizers control peacekeepers that report on "troublemakers". The organizers discourage autonomous actions, control the permits, and do not respect a diversity of tactics. The organizers sap the energy of the crowd and create an environment that is not conducive to direct action.
The solution is to improve our own organizing to the point that people don't have to go to an answer event to be with a hundred thousand people.
reply to clarification
by jonny
Monday, Dec. 23, 2002 at 7:23 PM
--Every event they organize, they dilute themselves even more by the turnout of new younger activists. --
That's the beauty of these types of hierarchies! They can bring more and more people in, but a small number of individuals will always control the groups and message. Then they can use the new people to add to the numbers of the "core" groups behind the screen.
Can we say Monica Moorehead? Brian Becker? His Brother? and lets not forget Ramsey Clark!
You win...
by pjd
Tuesday, Dec. 24, 2002 at 11:10 AM
OK, you win.
I'm not going, and I'll try to convince all my friends and co-workers to sit at home on January 18.
C'mon everyone...
by teamsterturtle
Tuesday, Dec. 24, 2002 at 1:49 PM
...PJD (Citizen?) is really trying harder now to convince us in a non-authoritarian fashion. Give him some credit. At least this time he made a respectful appeal to anarchists, transparent though it was. I do think it would be a good idea to have a larger black bloc, or, at least, an anti-authoritarian bloc that would be prepared this time to deviate from the planned march site. Anyone on the planned route should recall a golden opportunity passed-up (though some people were thinking about it) to march towards the White House (veering off to the left from the planned route) I wonder if it will be the same march pattern as last time.
Rally and March Route
by pjd
Tuesday, Dec. 24, 2002 at 3:06 PM
The rally will be on the west side of the Capitol - a good high-visibility location for once.
The march route is from the Capitol to the mostly deserted Anacostia Navy Yard - presumubly down east Capitol Street. But at least the march will go through residential areas - not the deserted-on-Saturday federal office areas. This includes the white-yuppified Capitol Hill neighborhood then the poorer, mostly black neighborhoods around RFK Stadium. It is being billed as a civil rights march as well as anti-war.
The positives important too
by M.
Wednesday, Dec. 25, 2002 at 8:43 AM
For once let's focus on the positives: the fact that we have so many people who might go to dc and the fact that so many went last time. There aren�t a lot of other places sending 100+ people to each national gathering. The work Pittsburgh people did on wb-imf and the work currently being done on anti-war is reverberating throughout this country. You go to Chicago and activists are talking about Pittsburgh. The same can be said for Boston, Richmond, and a hundred other points. How many other U.S. cities have such a strong peace movement right now? NONE! We should discuss strategies and tactics, but we must stay on a productive track. We've never been this strong. The time is coming when we are going to reshape this city and we will need each other more then ever. It doesn�t matter who you are or what group you�re in. Who will you look to when the state turns its power openly against you? Who will stand with you when the police crackdown begins? It will not be the power of one that finally brings some measure of justice to this system. It will only be the power of us all. Our voices and bodies united with one another. Mutual aid and solidarity is our greatest strength. Mutual respect and understanding will hold us together.
Thoughts on ANSWER
by Peter (not from Pitt)
Wednesday, Jan. 01, 2003 at 6:59 PM
faben99@cortland.edu
I have been thinking about how to approach ANSWER for quite some time now. I have only marched with them once, last September 29th. I can quite easily say that I did not enjoy the experience too terribly. I felt corralled and dictated too and did not stick around at the rally for more than a few minutes. However, I feel a certain amount of credit is due to them for organizing the largest peace rally's in 20 some years. Does that mean that their problems should be ignored and I endorse participation by anti-authoritarians (I use this term warily, however it seems to have a common understanding here)? Of course not. However, I think that they have the ability to appeal to mainstrean audiences. My parents, for example, wanted to attend and would have had it not been for conflicting time issues. In that respect, I understand the potential that ANSWER has. One must never forget their downsides and I for one will not be attending any ANSWER demos so long as viable alternatives exist (i.e. Piitsburgh).
In addition, it must be recognize that anti-authoritarians and ANSWER folk are both orgainzing under the rubric of 'anti-war.' Given that we are not a homogenous group, it follows that tactics and methods will be different and possibly in conflict. However, I feel it is prudent to recognize the ability of ANSWER to organize folks like my parents in these anti-war movements. Almost by definition, anarchist and revolutionary socialist groups who organize demos will not appeal to, say, protestant ministers. I don't see this as a problem, because I recognize that I am not allied with protestant ministers to preach, but rather to stop this and all wars. I know that these alliances will not last and that on many other issues we diverge to the extreme. However, it is that common issue around which we converge.
Therefore, I will be attending the demo in Pittsburgh and will be thinking of some other way to be productive than by attending the DC action the weekend before. And however much I criticize ANSWER, I appreciate some of what they are doing, it just isn't for me.
My thoughts...
by Sam
Thursday, Jan. 02, 2003 at 8:58 PM
Well, this is certainly a step up from saying that everyone who sincerely cares about what's going on in the world will go, and if you don't go you don't seriously care...
I don't see participation on the Jan. 18 action as an endorsement of Stalinism, nor do most of the participants, I'm sure. However, many people won't go because they either can't make it or don't feel comfortable particpating (because of ANSWER or because of any number of other reasons). I have mixed feelings, myself; if I go, it will be primarily to promote the Pittsburgh actions later this month.
In any case, people who don't go shouldn't be made to feel as if they're not doing their part to stop the war. If you want to go and you can go, go. If not, that's fine, too.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)