|
Home | SchNEWS OF THE WORLD
A DEATH IN THE FAMILY
...BUT WILL IT BREATHE NEW LIFE INTO THE MOVEMENT?
By Flaco
Seattle may be touted as some sort of watershed, but Carlo's
killing in Genoa is a turning point for the anti-capitalist movement
(if such a thing really exists). How we play it from here will have
repercussions far beyond the blood-stained streets of Northern Italy.
It was no freak cub-cop overreaction that left one mother mourning
and several others preparing to, as the sun hit the sea on July
20th, but a deliberate act of terror - in the most basic sense of
the word.
The snowball that's been gaining weight and speed as it rolled
through Geneva, Prague and Gothenburg has become far too jagged
a spike in the side of those steering the planetary carve up. Young
people are shot dead for daring to think there can be another way.
The message from the world's authorities is clear: go back to your
homes, do not meddle in what doesn't concern you, return to your
televisions, to smoking dope and stealing traffic cones and leave
the intricacies of global economics alone - because if you don't
we will kill you. The same way we killed Carlo Giuliani.
For decades, the poorest of the planet's families from Asia, Africa
and Latin America have been burying the fathers, the sisters and
the first born sons who have dared to confront the forces of global
capitalism. But Carlo's death spells something different. For the
first time the global elite has begun to kill the children of its
own people. Dissent will no longer be tolerated. The whip of economic
dictatorship is finally cracking at home.
But where we go from here is still up for grabs. The globalisers
would dearly love to see us run scared, or split our ranks with
paranoid accusations of 'whose side are you on?'. Tactical difference
should not be confused with police-collusion and counter-revolutionary
activity... or vice-versa.
True enough, there were cops in ski-masks leading the more excitable
and naive among Genoa's young bloods on attacks on corner shops,
bus stops and post offices. But the agitators can be addressed.
If everyone who takes any action knows why they are taking it and
what sort of action they think is necessary to achieve their goal,
then the police will not be able to steer the crowds, the meetings,
the discussion groups or 'the movement' as a whole. The problem
is less one of infiltration, more one of focus.
The more liberal elements of groups such as the Genoa Social Forum
(GSF) or Prague's INPEG, need to understand, that just because they
have the ear of the newspapers, it doesn't mean they speak with
the voice of the people. The reformist agenda of these groups, who
call for more legislation, more institutions and stronger government
control over the runaway capitalist train, is an entire philosophy
away from the genuine participatory democracy sought by many.
Instead of calling for the deployment of "non-violent methods
of restraining and defusing violent behaviour" for those who
fail to adhere to "the political and ethical parameters of
our mass actions" (Walden Bello I expected so much more from
you), perhaps the up-in-arms brigade should be questioning their
own attempted coup of the global resistance movement. Both INPEG
and the GSF produced documents laying down "rules" for
"participation" in what were illegal blockades of international
meetings. The GSF tactical manifesto was insulting to the resistance
history of many of it's signatory groups. The anarchists were perhaps
the only people (police included) who took to the streets with honest
intentions, both about their goals and what they were prepared to
do to achieve them. The anarchists have long been aware that power
(be it economic or governmental) is the problem - not who holds
it - and needs, therefore, to be removed altogether. The Black Bloc
do not "detract from 'the message'"- they have a different
message. And unlike the liberals and the hierarchical groups of
the organised left who would, at best, replace those in power with
their own institutions manned by their own people, and at worst,
settle for a seat at the G-8 table, the anarchist's message is not
a lunge for the throne shrouded in the smoke screen language of
'justice' and 'liberty'. The anarchists recognise that a power wielding
state is no better than a power wielding corporation, and they are
well aware that the police are the front-line defence for both.
This is not to dispel organisation. Organisation is imperative.
Co-operation and communication between the disparate groups involved
in the resistance is key. But an insurrectionary pseudo-government
(complete with pseudo-police if Walden gets his way)? Hmmm... four
legs good, two legs bad time already.
The strength of this movement/loose-amalgamation-of-people-who-ain't-taking-any-more-shit,
has always been its leaderless fluidity, its constantly changing
strategy, its unpredictable tactics and targets. This is why the
authorities (until now) have found it so hard to get a handle on
what we were up to - we weren't following patterns or playing by
any discernible rules. Now, as we witnessed in Genoa, the Man has
caught up. Infiltration is the price of protesting-by-numbers. Though
Italy was an ideal venue for us to mobilise an unprecedented number
of insurrectionaries, it was also a touch for the global authorities
who could mobilise one of the West's most corrupt, right wing and
violent state security forces. Recent history has shown the Italian
security services are prepared to stoop to anything in order to
undermine subversive movements. Genoa proved they haven't lost their
touch.
James Anon made the point on Indymedia.org that if the non violent
protesters came up with something that worked maybe more people
would adopt their tactics. (http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=55463&group=webcast)
However, non violence should not be confused with not rocking the
boat - as often appears to be the case. Those who feel the 'violent
anarchists' are curbing their successes should maybe look at how
successful their own tactics are. It is no coincidence that Tony
Blair "welcomes" peaceful calls for debt reform - the
communiques are duly issued, the lip service paid, and then.....
nothing changes, and the global carve up getting mapped in the Oval
Office doesn't miss a step.
Maybe time within the 'movement' would be better spent skipping
the anarchist witch-hunt and focusing on our common enemies.
One of the more eye opening moments in Genoa came when the non-violent
protesters and the Black Bloc crossed paths. At around three o'clock
on July 20th, an anarchist bloc had tried to cross the Piazza Manin
en route to the red zone, the non-violent white handed pacifists
in the square, refused to let them pass. Discussions between the
two groups were interrupted by a vicious police attack during which
the white hand protesters sat down hands aloft and took a severe
beating without fighting back (as is their prerogative). However
an hour later when three masked youths walked back through the square
the (understandably upset) pacifists threw first a stick, then a
bottle, then a rock at them. They saw the Black Bloc as the cause
for their pain. No violence had been directed at the police wielding
the boots, the clubs and the teargas, but strict pacifist adherence
could be suspended in order to attack anyone (without authority)
who had not stuck to "their" tactical code. Perhaps this
pacifist submission to authority says more about the the authoritarian
nature of the society they seek, than about their abhorrence of
the Black Bloc's tactics.
The more reasoned voices of Italy's Ya Basta collective are already
admitting the error of attacking the brick throwers (there is something
twisted about an elite Tute Bianche hit squad in Subcommandante
Marcos t-shirts beating people with crash helmets for wearing bandannas
over their faces). However, the security services will no doubt
be fuelling the fire of division and will embrace the peace-policers
(as they did in the US during the anti-Vietnam protests of the 1960s)
who, they hope in turn, will return the anti-capitalist front-line
to the letters pages of the Washington Post.
The rats inside the global red zone want us to crawl back to our
workplaces, to the fear of unemployment and to the gratitude for
an irregular playtime. But we can say no. We can say: we do not
care how well protected you are with your armies, your police, your
banks or your brands, because we have had enough and we will not
run from your guns.
These would-be leaders can scuttle off to Qatar or cruise ships
or Rocky Mountain retreats, but we know their meetings have little
impact on the real decisions made elsewhere. Perhaps we in the West
should follow the example of India's farmers who removed Monsanto's
headquarters brick by brick and took it away. If we don't like Bush's
missile defence plans, we could go to Flyingdales and take it away...
brick by brick, bullet by bullet.
We could pick a company, say Balfour Beatty, and put them out of
business. A thousand actions at a thousand sites dismantling every
facet of their insidious business. Would their shareholders bail
them out? Unlikely. Then we could move on and up. When we can co-ordinate
our actions as millions of people, then maybe we can dismantle the
oil industry, the arms industry, the jail industry... the government
industry?
The mass street actions we have been able to mount and the dedication,
planning and application of those on the streets has shown us that
we have the wherewithal to make decisions and carry them out regardless
of what the state may think or threaten. If we put this dynamic
to work away from the mega-summits we can become a threat again.
But we need to be imaginative and we need to stay ahead of the beast.
Where we choose to go from here is crucial to whether we are in
the process of sparking serious global change or whether we are
merely in the death throes of another cycle of resistance.
If we don't want corporate activity in our neighbourhoods, let's
chuck the corporations out. If we don't want the police or the government
flexing their muscle in our neighbourhoods, let's stop recognising
their bogus authority and encourage others to do the same. Let's
link our communities together - not through state or business initiatives
- but through people who share a common struggle. If we believe
in making changes and creating something better, and if we are prepared
to take the risks and put in the time, then lets do it. Let's not
let Carlo's death be in vain. Because when one of us catches a bullet,
a club or jail sentence, a little bit of all of us dies. But together
we are alive and together we can, and we will, win.
See also The Case for Confrontation, by the same author:
http://uk.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=673
|
