Publish to Newswire
Add an EventA Callout and a Challenge for O25
A CALLOUT FOR SELF-ORGANIZATION AT THE OCT 25th ANSWER MARCH
ANSWER has called for a mass protest against the occupation of Iraq, on Saturday, Oct 25th. We will be there in solidarity at the Civic Center at 11 o'clock and at Jefferson Square Park at 1 o'clock. We believe strongly in the power of numbers and in the importance of congregating together as a mass of people opposed to the policies of this current government.
But too often, we have woken up the next morning wondering why the newspapers say the same thing whether we have 300,000 in the street or 1,000. Perhaps it is because the 300,000 of us do exactly the same thing we would have done if there were 1,000 of us. Is there a better way to make our voices heard through democratic expression, and self-organization? We think so. Is there a way to let our numbers speak for us when we leave the civic center on Saturday, and actually have our numbers WORK for us when we are in the streets? We think so.We march in the streets to bring our message to other people, and we march in the streets to shake the elites and government officials out of their complacency. Thus, our dissatisfaction with the policies of the current government must be felt as well as heard at all levels of government, from local on up to national. Because if the business and political leaders of San Francisco don't squirm when we march in the street, then why should Washington care? And if the matter can wait for the ballot box (and look what it does for us!), then what is the point of marching in the street now?
Although we value the work of ANSWER, our current status quo is not working: we are not getting the attention we deserve, nor are we making officials or elites squirm. The status quo is the following: ANSWER chooses a protest day, plans a primary rally point (point A), a march route (one of 2 or 3 they always use) and a destination (point B), and then submits the plans to get a permit for the protest from the city. If the planned protest were problematic for the business interests of the elite or city officials, the city wouldn't give ANSWER the permit to do the protest, and the protest would not happen. ANSWER gets the permit because the city gets a guarantee -- that it can manage the protest with minimal effort for a few hours, after which the city will be back to business as usual.
Certainly, noone is squirming in this arrangement. And since part of keeping protest "manageable" means constraining protesters (whatever their numbers) to the same old routines, spaces, and times, we feel the status quo is dampening our message. So we think this needs to change. When our numbers reach into the tens of thousands, we say our protest belongs in every street. When our numbers reach into the tens of thousands, we say we don't need permits from the city, and we shouldn't ask for them.
We call out to all people participating in the anti-occupation protests. Let's expand our protest spaces rather than constrain ourselves to the same routines. Let's allow protest to be disconcerting to the powers that be. Let's make our presence felt by the government and heard by as many people as possible. We can and should take our message all over the city, wherever we want, without asking for anyone's permission. Therefore, we propose the following modification to the status quo and issue it as a challenge to other protest blocs in the hope that they will participate in this and other upcoming protests in the following capacity:
Those of us who organize our communities as 'blocs' or 'contingents' in the larger ANSWER marches, should also plan our own march routes from point A to point B:
- The first part of your march route should coincide with the ANSWER route so everyone leaves together.
- Some later portion of your route should break off from the main march and spill into adjacent streets.
- Breaking away can mean anything from simply moving one street over or it may involve a greater amount of deviation. Bike blocs (and there need not be only one bike bloc) can get all over the city and cruise right back to catch the protesters on the main march route!
- Blocs that breakaway can (and should) rejoin the main march as often as they wish.
- If a bloc doesn't rejoin protesters on the main march route, planners should make sure it still ends up at point B.
Please do not confuse this callout with the callouts for breakaway marches or "black blocs" or any particular bloc at previous anti-war marches. We are not asking for anyone to join ANY bloc unless they want to and are already planning to! We are asking people who are already coming or convening large groups to do their own thing, to exercise a measure of autonomy and self-determination for a short period of time on Saturday, to bring an atmosphere of vibrant, simple, irreverent, true! democracy to the streets of San Francisco.
See you in the streets on Saturday!
~the BIKE bloc!
Who hasn't wondered about the dynamics that create
- a "march" or "rally"
and then the layering of other dynamics such as
-police barricades
-street openings or closures
-the absent politicians and accountables
-and aloof media coverage? (At least we're creating our own media now, too).
Thanks for linking that to Craigslist - D.C. for our bike bloc! You've done us a service.
-NYC Pedal_Power_Pete
One point is that the march *did* go on a different route - didn't you smell the urine and stale beer in areas we haven't walked through before? Plus the Hayes Valley, where a few yuppies were. On top of that, cars were caught on Market off guard, cops were missing from many places where trafffic and people came together (even ANSWER people couldn't cover every inch so many of us took over and directed traffic), etc. Things are changing bit by bit. This time around, everyone *knew* that firetruck was bogus that broke up the march - no other truck ever came though, no ambulance or police, and it was just to get people to let a good old boy truck driver through with his motorcycle load.
But yes, radically different things need to happen and evolve continually.
The suggestions are good but take organization. It would mean either a) starting a group that comes together with ideas arouund the ANSWER events - meetings, etc., or b) somehow having enough people to lead sheeple in a different direction than the preferred one *spontaneously,* and if you've spent time with the sheeple, as you have, you see the sudden consternation on their formerly blank faces when the march divides, or when a group tries to break away - they don't like it one bit! They resist, sheeple that they are, and return to the safe route with a smug look if the transition isn't coordinated well. The real question around that issue of going in multiple directions - which I support - is how to really do it. That takes organization and meetings (assuming we don't have another catastrophic event, such as a mortar or RPG hitting someone important in the adminstration and allowing another country to be invaded on that premise). In which case the sheeple may have enough shock and anger to be unpredictable, and organization is out the window - spontaneity rules. But as we all know, at the current ANSWER marches, spontaneity is virtually impossible.
That said, I support ANSWER's efforts wholeheartedly. This morning on Larry Bensky's show, when he tried to criticize ANSWER, saying they weren't inviting people - like the 12 congress people who voted against some Bush thing lately - to come be speakers, Cynthia McKinny responded indignantly, reminding him that they always include Al Sharpton and Dennis Kucinich, presidential candidates, as well as herself. Bensky had nothing to say to that and had to back off. She stood up for ANSWER when jerk Bensky was trying to cut them down with his huge KPFA audience. We need to stand up for them too - why? Because as full of faults as they are, we haven't done more than they have, and they work their asses off. It's important to their survival for us to critique them. It's also important to protect them, while we do it.
As Barbara Lubin pointed out to me one day, ANSWER was one of the only orgs that - month after month, year after year - called for an end to sanctions in Iraq and stood out there with fliers, educating people. Who else was out there on the sidewalks against the sanctions while the country slept through the Clinton soap operas? Few.
Just my feelings, thoughts.
Thanks for the excellent post.
I don´t know that much about ANSWER, but I was wondering why people on IMC bash them so much? Is the main critique that they totally control marches to the point of stamping out spontaneity?
As Barbara Lubin pointed out to me one day, ANSWER was one of the only orgs that - month after month, year after year - called for an end to sanctions in Iraq and stood out there with fliers, educating people. Who else was out there on the sidewalks against the sanctions while the country slept through the Clinton soap operas? Few.
me:
Fred, you should do your own research.
That was the International Action Center, which is another front group for the Workers World Party. ANSWER was started as a response to 9/11 and the war on Afghanistan. The IAC existed before that, as did the National People's Campaign (NPC was the group that Workers World used for organizing around issues such as Mumia).
The thing about ANSWER and why they should only be defended to a certain extent (and some of these points run contrary to what Fred said) is:
1. They, along with the police, determine the nature, extent, and effectiveness of the protests. (see this critique for an expansion on that: http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/10/1655512.php)
2. The IAC/ANSWER is a funded organization and thus has a reason to keep going ($$). this doesn't mean that they pay their activists, but hey, when the money is coming in, why not keep it coming?
3. Based on my observations from about 3-5 years ago, when you work with answer/iac/workers' world, you can only get so far up in the decision making process. Most people are not invited to be part of that stuff. When you're invited (via flyers) to "activist" or "organizing" meetings, they organize you to go out and tell people about the events. You aren't asked what your thoughts are about march dates, routes, speakers, targets, etc. I am not saying that doing outreach is of less value than decisionmaking, but it would seem that way based on how they structure their organization.
4. How many spokespeople does ANSWER have? When you think of ANSWER/IAC, on the west coast you think of Richard ("Dick") Becker, Gloria LaRiva, the guy in LA, and a few other people here. On the east coast, Brian Becker is the first person who comes to mind. Is this because they are building a movement, or they are building their careers as representatives/organizers of that movement?
they got people out in the streets...forked out money to get those helicopter shots seen 'round the world ( and yes, i donated money for this, did you?) and laid to rest the myth that only a few thousand opposed this war. this fact alone put local media on the hotspot for not initially acknowledging how many folks were in the streets last year.
we don't have to agree...on this venue we clearly represent the spectrum of passions and causes. we need as many strategies as possible...we need as many concerted efforts as possible.
this was a march that included many vets and military families. incredible, i think. remember kovic's inspirational words to the rally crowd: "...i really believe it...it will happen in your lifetime...someday the soldiers will be marching with you, too."
Alliances exist - but the aftermath needs to be considered carefully.
This was not meant to be another booring ANSWER SUCKS, ANSWER ROCKS discussion.
These protests need to break out of their mold. ANSWER's politics are not the issue, finding a new set of leaders with a new routine is not the issue, people need to DO FOR THEMSELVES.
your question isnt relevant here, thats why.
do a web search to find out why people hate ANSWER. write them or post to a forum about whether ANSWER sucks.
the callout raises a particular issue. one that is not about ANSWER's politics, not for, not against, not about. its about the street strategy.
organize something concrete other than a route for protesters who showed up on bicycles before you open your mouth declaring that other org's do something for your pretentious "self-organizing" ideas.
if not for us, you would be riding by your self
The factually inacurate nature of many of the posts suggests that whoever is posting them isnt/wasnt involved in Gay Shame.
A Newsom victory (either in an over 50% vote next week or a runoff election in December) will have devistating consequences for all activist groups. We have to work together and prevent his PR team from dividing our opposition.
I dont know how overlooking that fact means we aren't "serious" about the protests. and Im not sure what "serious about the protests" is supposed to mean anyway.
If it makes you happier, when you read the callout, just pretend like it says "ANSWER and friends" instead of "ANSWER". The point, I think, remains valid.
Second, you apparently have some holes in your understanding as well. The "bike bloc" is not representative of everyone who brinks their bike to the protest, the same way the "black bloc" is not representative of everyone who wears black to the protest, the same way the LGBT bloc doesnt represent everyone LGBT at the protest, the same way ANSWER is not representative of everyone who marches...
People call for blocs so that particular communities can come together, find each other, etc at these larger marches. Im confused as to why this is offensive.
and about "ANSWER and friends", that is rather insulting to the other coalitions. they don't get along, they hardly work together, and they hardly have the same politcs. ANSWER, as you may've noticed plenty in other replies here, is very hierarchical and at times evidently authoritarian within its organizing. try calling chairman Becker and asking him what he thinks about the bike bloc, haha. you'll get his three secretaries before you even get to the second in charge who'll just blow you off. UFPJ at least is more open, you may talk to andrea buffa at Global Exchange, but she'll tell you she'll have to bring it up to everyone else in the coalition.
the idea is simple:
when the numbers get big, dont all march/ride in the same place at the same time.
the implementation is simple:
people that convene large groups should march in those groups, but should plan their own routes instead of letting ANSWER/UFPJ/NION plan the route for them.
whats wrong with that?
no wonder, coming from the group who puts in the least amount of effort and tries to take as much of the credit as possible!
you want feed back but if you don't like what you hear you just ignore. no wonder you are a secret society
you are soooo..damn touchy, my god ...get therapy or some thing!
Donate
$345.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.