|
This site
made manifest by
dadaIMC software
|
|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Announcement :: Elections & Legislation : Environment : Miscellaneous |
|
Knock Nukes Out of the Climate Stewardship Act |
Current rating: 0 |
by Greenpeace
Email: actionalerts (nospam) wdc.greenpeace.org (unverified!) |
25 May 2005
|
|
Stop the Nuclear Fallout! |
|
Project Thin Ice, the first ever summer attempt at crossing the arctic is well under way. Two explorers are undertaking this expedition to highlight global warming and are asking that we all take steps to raise awareness about this issue as well.
You can help by taking important steps here at home. Write a letter today to urge your Senators to oppose Nuclear Power Subsidies in the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act. Senator McCain plans to add massive subsidies for new nuclear power plants to an otherwise good bill – the bipartisan McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act.
Stop this nuclear fallout! Act now at: http://usa2.greenpeace.org/action/start.php?action_id=48&usa;_source_temp. (If the link does not work, please copy and paste into the address bar). This will help make our country safer from possible terrorist attacks and prove once and for all that we will not stand for dirty energy.
Plus you can win cool prizes from companies that are committed to fight against global warming! |
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
Re: Anarchist wannabe's emulate Bush with pointless destruction |
by Sid
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: -1
25 May 2005
|
|
I believe it turned out that the destruction at the 1999 WTO was carried out by agent provocateurs. The same in Miami, Nov 2003 and the NYC 2004 RNC. (I don't have the links but I'm sure it's in the archives.) So, the same could be true here. |
|
Re: Anarchist wannabe's emulate Bush with pointless destruction |
by guest
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 3
25 May 2005
|
|
Troll. BTW, Sid is the pig. |
|
Tom resorts to name calling and half truths; good critique! |
by Vladamir Aaron
vladamiraaron(A)gmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 3
25 May 2005
|
>from a comment on Sunday vandalism on the Plaza:
"Now that you've had your little temper tantrum, do you feel better?"
and a response to that comment:
"Temper tantrum? The war on terrorism is a temper tantrum."
Precisely. The "war on terrorism" is pointless and stupid. I would have to give serious reconsideration to pointless and stupid minor destruction as a response if I thought it would work to stop the major destruction. I have no reason to think so. While it is certainly frustrating that people standing on the corner holding signs have not stopped the war, perhaps the reason for lack of success is they haven't gotten enough people to join them yet.
I think the point is that if one cares enough then empty rhetoric and stationary sign holding isn't going to cut it. I don't know for sure as I don't know them but I am an anarchist so I believe that due to a strong anti-capitalist critique targeting the rich and their establishments (bringing the war home) speaks to them; I can empathize. Of course one small action like this won't do much and the reactionary left is going to be quick to denounce it and jump all over it but imagine if all across the nation these actions started with a fury while other tactics were simultaneously used such as worker organizing and community organizing. That would be a full-scale revolution. I'm sure they understand this one action in and of itself is pointless in that no immediate gains were made save costing capitalists a bit of money and scaring the petty bourgeois. In my opinion if one cares enough that they are being used economically or physically to murder hundreds of thousands of poor taking to the streets when talk doesn’t work and saying we will tear it apart is appropriate. "Enough people" holding signs isn't going to work; we have a historical perspective to use as a tool of analysis. Enough people in the streets coupled with organizing would stop it however. Which leads into your next statement....
>Gandhi defeated the British Empire with nonviolence when enough people joined with him. The civil rights movement had its success when enough people participated in nonviolence. Courageous and principled direct actions wherein brave people took action knowing they would be arrested, prosecuted and sent to prison had an effect on people's thinking. Observers, press, even their persecutors were forced to think about why intelligent activists would thoughtfully participate in a direct action that led to their imprisonment and could could conclude nothing else than that the actions were a result of strong conviction. There are too many idiots and too much corrupt media fot these actions to have had complete success, but they did have a positve effect. They forced people to think.
I would agree to a point. I would also point out that in all of these cases there was another tactic being employed on other fronts namely violence. It was a symbiotic relationship. Both are tools not ideologies or faiths. If it were not for the violent actions of other groups the "authorities" wouldn’t have acquiesced to the lesser demands of the "good protesters" or "good civil disobedience practitioners". You have to understand something, as anarchists we don’t speak to power or beg authorities as a matter of course. We want to abolish those power relationships and will do so by any means necessary. We choose to use those non-violent activities when they are tactically useful and discard them when they are not. We practice a diversity of tactics. We do not limit ourselves. Whatever your personal convictions are they are yours and yours alone and I would suggest some real "putting yourself bodily in the machinery". That in conjunction with something a whole lot scarier to capitalists, (destroying their precious private property and abolishing their authority and dismantling their hierarchy), would end this war very quickly. There hasn't been a direct action in KC that I can even think of. It's always been begging some authority to legislate or some business to "do the right thing". Seems like folks believe that some religious like faith in non-violence and the benevolence of their passive "righteous" actions are going to somehow convince murderers and slave holders that they should work against their own self-interest. It won't happen, it never has.
I would like to take this time to ask you to please consider a "counter recruitment day of action" with you friends. One day a week...I have organized one and it seems viable so we will be having a workday action soon that will repeat once a week with a goal of community members organizing their own. Tactically this is important right now. They haven’t the numbers needed and are stepping up their parasitical behavior in poor and people of color communities. Now is the time to support all actions against the war and do what is within your comfort level. That is the least that can be done. I'm poor and am afraid for my wife because she is draft age (I'm within age too now that rules have changed) and I need help expelling them. The time for back biting and ad hominin attacks is over.
>Amazing, if brief, success at the WTO meetings in Seattle in 1999 came as a result of environmentalists, labor unions, and many other groups coming together, and that success there came IN SPITE OF a handful of idiots breaking shop windows, allowing the corporate media to paint the entire movement in the eyes of most of the public as a stone throwing mob, not because of them. If more success did not follow, it was because those groups of environmentalists and labor unions and oh so many others did not continue to work together.
I would argue it was because of 9/11 that the momentum was lost. Really though, this statement of yours is neither here nor there. Why are you so preoccupied with what the capitalists think of your "protests"? Who cares what the corporate media thinks? If we were unapologetic and open with family and friends it wouldn't matter. The middle class who watches television and identify with what they watch and see are not the majority experience or dominant paradigm anyway. People are not sheep or stupid, they understand their place in society and fight to preserve their comfort or to eliminate their oppression depending on their station. If you know better and I know better why are we not working to realize that better world? Why waste time and energy reproducing the mechanisms of our oppression? It's a good question I think and this action in question is directly related.
>These anarchist wannabe's deride the war protestors, but are so insecure that they have to try to hijack the war protestors' event and give the local media the excuse to lump them all together. Running through the Plaza tipping over newspaper boxes, then running away and afterwards declaring themselves antiwar geniuses, they remind me of rich boy president-select Bush declaring victory on the Abraham Lincoln. Kinda dumb. Very arrogant. Quite counterproductive.
Your wrong and no amount of childish name calling, hollow analysis and abstract smacking of the hands will hide your fallacious state of cognitive dissonance nor paint your empty critique. Grow up. I gotta ask Tom, what the fuck have you done? |
|
an example of why we participate in property destruction |
by @
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 3
25 May 2005
|
N30 Black Bloc Communiqué
by ACME Collective Dec. 4 '99
A communiqué from one section of the black bloc of N30 in Seattle
On November 30, several groups of individuals in black bloc attacked various corporate targets in downtown Seattle. Among them were (to name just a few): Fidelity Investment (major investor in Occidental Petroleum, the bane of the U'wa tribe in Columbia) Bank of America, US Bancorp, Key Bank and Washington Mutual Bank (financial institutions key in the expansion of corporate repression) Old Navy, Banana Republic and the GAP (as Fisher family businesses, rapers of Northwest forest lands and sweatshop laborers) NikeTown and Levi's (whose overpriced products are made in sweatshops) McDonald's (slave-wage fast-food peddlers responsible for destruction of tropical rainforests for grazing land and slaughter of animals) Starbucks (peddlers of an addictive substance whose products are harvested at below-poverty wages by farmers who are forced to destroy their own forests in the process) Warner Bros. (media monopolists) Planet Hollywood (for being Planet Hollywood).
This activity lasted for over 5 hours and involved the breaking of storefront windows and doors and defacing of facades. Slingshots, newspaper boxes, sledge hammers, mallets, crowbars and nail-pullers were used to strategically destroy corporate property and gain access (one of the three targeted Starbucks and Niketown were looted). Eggs filled with glass etching solution, paint-balls and spray-paint were also used.
The black bloc was a loosely organized cluster of affinity groups and individuals who roamed around downtown, pulled this way by a vulnerable and significant storefront and that way by the sight of a police formation. Unlike the vast majority of activists who were pepper-sprayed, tear-gassed and shot at with rubber bullets on several occasions, most of our section of the black bloc escaped serious injury by remaining constantly in motion and avoiding engagement with the police. We buddied up, kept tight and watched each others' backs.
Those attacked by federal thugs were un-arrested by quick-thinking and organized members of the black bloc. The sense of solidarity was awe-inspiring.
THE PEACE POLICE
Unfortunately, the presence and persistence of "peace police" was quite disturbing. On at least 6 separate occasions, so-called "non-violent" activists physically attacked individuals who targeted corporate property. Some even went so far as to stand in front of the Niketown super store and tackle and shove the black bloc away. Indeed, such self-described "peace-keepers" posed a much greater threat to individuals in the black bloc than the notoriously violent uniformed "peace-keepers" sanctioned by the state undercover officers have even used the cover of the activist peace-keepers to ambush those who engage in corporate property destruction).
RESPONSE TO THE BLACK BLOC
Response to the black bloc has highlighted some of the contradictions and internal oppressions of the "nonviolent activist" community. Aside from the obvious hypocrisy of those who engaged in violence against black-clad and masked people (many of whom were harassed despite the fact that they never engaged in property destruction), there is the racism of privileged activists who can afford to ignore the violence perpetrated against the bulk of society and the natural world in the name of private property rights. Window-smashing has engaged and inspired many of the most oppressed members of Seattle's community more than any giant puppets or sea turtle costumes ever could (not to disparage the effectiveness of those tools in other communities).
TEN MYTHS ABOUT THE BLACK BLOC
Here's a little something to dispel the myths that have been circulating about the N30 black bloc:
1. "They are all a bunch of Eugene anarchists." While a few may be anarchists from Eugene, we hail from all over the United States, including Seattle. In any case, most of us are familiar with local issues in Seattle (for instance, the recent occupation of downtown by some of the most nefarious of multinational retailers).
2. "They are all followers of John Zerzan." A lot of rumors have been circulating that we are followers of John Zerzan, an anarcho-primitivist author from Eugene who advocates property destruction. While some of us may appreciate his writings and analyses, he is in no sense our leader, directly, indirectly, philosophically or otherwise.
3. "The mass public squat is the headquarters of the anarchists who destroyed property on November 30th." In reality, most of the people in the "Autonomous Zone" squat are residents of Seattle who have spent most of their time since its opening on the 28th in the squat. While they may know of one-another, the two groups are not co-extensive and in no case could the squat be considered the headquarters of people who destroyed property.
4. "They escalated situations on the 30th, leading to the tear-gassing of passive, non-violent protesters." To answer this, we need only note that tear-gassing, pepper-spraying and the shooting of rubber bullets all began before the black blocs (as far as we know) started engaging in property destruction. In addition, we must resist the tendency to establish a causal relationship between police repression and protest in any form, whether it involved property destruction or not. The police are charged with protecting the interests of the wealthy few and the blame for the violence cannot be placed upon those who protest those interests.
5. Conversely: "They acted in response to the police repression." While this might be a more positive representation of the black bloc, it is nevertheless false. We refuse to be misconstrued as a purely reactionary force. While the logic of the black bloc may not make sense to some, it is in any case a pro-active logic.
6. "They are a bunch of angry adolescent boys." Aside from the fact that it belies a disturbing ageism and sexism, it is false. Property destruction is not merely macho rabble-rousing or testosterone-laden angst release. Nor is it displaced and reactionary anger. It is strategically and specifically targeted direct action against corporate interests.
7. "They just want to fight." This is pretty absurd, and it conveniently ignores the eagerness of "peace police" to fight us. Of all the groups engaging in direct action, the black bloc was perhaps the least interested in engaging the authorities and we certainly had no interest in fighting with other anti-WTO activists (despite some rather strong disagreements over tactics).
8. "They are a chaotic, disorganized and opportunistic mob." While many of us could surely spend days arguing over what "chaotic" means, we were certainly not disorganized. The organization may have been fluid and dynamic, but it was tight. As for the charge of opportunism, it would be hard to imagine who of the thousands in attendance didn't take advantage of the opportunity created in Seattle to advance their agenda. The question becomes, then, whether or not we helped create that opportunity and most of us certainly did (which leads us to the next myth):
9. "They don't know the issues" or "they aren't activists who've been working on this." While we may not be professional activists, we've all been working on this convergence in Seattle for months. Some of us did work in our home-towns and others came to Seattle months in advance to work on it. To be sure, we were responsible for many hundreds of people who came out on the streets on the 30th, only a very small minority of which had anything to do with the black bloc. Most of us have been studying the effects of the global economy, genetic engineering, resource extraction, transportation, labor practices, elimination of indigenous autonomy, animal rights and human rights and we've been doing activism on these issues for many years. We are neither ill-informed nor inexperienced.
10. "Masked anarchists are anti-democratic and secretive because they hide their identities." Let's face it (with or without a mask)--we aren't living in a democracy right now. If this week has not made it plain enough, let us remind you--we are living in a police state. People tell us that if we really think that we're right, we wouldn't be hiding behind masks. "The truth will prevail" is the assertion. While this is a fine and noble goal, it does not jive with the present reality. Those who pose the greatest threat to the interests of Capital and State will be persecuted. Some pacifists would have us accept this persecution gleefully. Others would tell us that it is a worthy sacrifice. We are not so morose. Nor do we feel we have the privilege to accept persecution as a sacrifice: persecution to us is a daily inevitability and we treasure our few freedoms. To accept incarceration as a form of flattery betrays a large amount of "first world" privilege. We feel that an attack on private property is necessary if we are to rebuild a world which is useful, healthful and joyful for everyone. And this despite the fact that hypertrophied private property rights in this country translate into felony charges for any property destruction over $250.
MOTIVATIONS OF THE BLACK BLOC
The primary purpose of this communiqué is to diffuse some of the aura of mystery that surrounds the black bloc and make some of its motivations more transparent, since our masks cannot be.
ON THE VIOLENCE OF PROPERTY
We contend that property destruction is not a violent activity unless it destroys lives or causes pain in the process. By this definition, private property--especially corporate private property--is itself infinitely more violent than any action taken against it.
Private property should be distinguished from personal property. The latter is based upon use while the former is based upon trade. The premise of personal property is that each of us has what s/he needs. The premise of private property is that each of us has something that someone else needs or wants. In a society based on private property rights, those who are able to accrue more of what others need or want have greater power. By extension, they wield greater control over what others perceive as needs and desires, usually in the interest of increasing profit to themselves.
Advocates of "free trade" would like to see this process to its logical conclusion: a network of a few industry monopolists with ultimate control over the lives of the everyone else. Advocates of "fair trade" would like to see this process mitigated by government regulations meant to superficially impose basic humanitarian standards. As anarchists, we despise both positions.
Private property--and capitalism, by extension--is intrinsically violent and repressive and cannot be reformed or mitigated. Whether the power of everyone is concentrated into the hands of a few corporate heads or diverted into a regulatory apparatus charged with mitigating the disasters of the latter, no one can be as free or as powerful as they could be in a non-hierarchical society.
When we smash a window, we aim to destroy the thin veneer of legitimacy that surrounds private property rights. At the same time, we exorcise that set of violent and destructive social relationships which has been imbued in almost everything around us. By "destroying" private property, we convert its limited exchange value into an expanded use value. A storefront window becomes a vent to let some fresh air into the oppressive atmosphere of a retail outlet (at least until the police decide to tear-gas a nearby road blockade). A newspaper box becomes a tool for creating such vents or a small blockade for the reclamation of public space or an object to improve one's vantage point by standing on it. A dumpster becomes an obstruction to a phalanx of rioting cops and a source of heat and light. A building facade becomes a message board to record brainstorm ideas for a better world.
After N30, many people will never see a shop window or a hammer the same way again. The potential uses of an entire cityscape have increased a thousand-fold. The number of broken windows pales in comparison to the number broken spells--spells cast by a corporate hegemony to lull us into forgetfulness of all the violence committed in the name of private property rights and of all the potential of a society without them. Broken windows can be boarded up (with yet more waste of our forests) and eventually replaced, but the shattering of assumptions will hopefully persist for some time to come.
Against Capital and State,
the ACME Collective
-------------
Disclaimer: these observations and analyses represent only those of the ACME Collective and should not be construed to be representative
of the rest of the black bloc on N30 or anyone else who engaged in riot or property destruction that day. |
|
|
