Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 21:05:05 +0530 From: TASC <•••@••.•••> Subject: [free radical] WE THE PEEPS Hey folks here's another great article from L.A. Kaufmann, whose chronicles of the new unrest are a great resource for nonviolent acrivists. At the end of this e-mail is a note on how to subscribe to her excellent weekly columns.. peace matthew > > FREE RADICAL: weekly chronicle of the new unrest > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >------- > by L.A. Kauffman > ------------------------------------------------------------------- >------- >[to subscribe, send a blank email to •••@••.•••] >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >---------------------------- >WE THE PEEPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Issue #5 > >The best story I heard about the World Bank/International Monetary >Fund actions in Washington, D.C. came from a North Carolina >Earth First!er, concerning the Battle of the Peeps. > >It was the second day of protests, and a row of menacing cops >in riot gear faced a ragtag group of demonstrators, in one of >many tense standoffs throughout the city. > >The stalemate continued until one protester reached into his >knapsack and pulled out a package of Marshmallow Peeps, >those neon yellow confectionery chicks that appear in store >shelves each Easter, and have developed a hipster cult following. > >One by one the activist placed the Peeps in a row between >the police and demonstrators: a thin yellow line. Then another >protester pulled out a doll and started stomping the chicks with it. >"Whose Peeps? Our Peeps!" the crowd began to chant, and >the police broke out in laughter. > >In an instant, the tension had melted: Even the most vicious >cops aren't likely to pepperspray people who have just made >them giggle. The Battle of the Peeps not only de-escalated >conflict with a flourish; it also poked fun at some of our -- >the activists' -- pretensions. > >If the D.C. actions didn't have quite the same exuberant >highs or harrowing lows as Seattle, they were much more >powerful in terms of movement-building. Thousands of newly >minted activists poured into town to take part in teach-ins, >rallies, and direct action against corporate globalization, >while groups with dramatically different agendas and >styles found fruitful ways to cooperate. > >But it's worth dwelling for a moment on how A16 and A17 >played out on the ground, to ponder some strategic and >political lessons learned. > >At the final spokescouncil meeting for the protests, a D.C. >resident commented that much of what had gone on seemed >like war games to her. She had a point. The basic action >scenario was to surround the World Bank/IMF meetings >with a blockade, much as had been done in Seattle. >Different affinity groups joined together in "clusters" and >took responsibility for blocking a slice of the perimeter, >some anchoring the location with a human barricade, o >thers functioning as "flying squads" which provided >reinforcements as needed. > >I was part of the tactical team that coordinated flying squads >from the New York cluster, in conjunction with clusters from >Seattle, Colorado, Florida, and several other places. We spent >endless hours before the actions planning how to use radio >communications, bike runners, and bullhorns to deploy >protesters as needed. > >Our logistical discussions were filled with paramilitary lingo >that became both more seductive and more ridiculous as the >big action day approached. Suddenly, we were referring to >ourselves as "tac" or "com," discussing "scouts" and "recon." >At least some wag had the good sense to give our supercluster >the appropriately cheesy name of Rebel Alliance (and to >broadcast "Star Wars" theme music as some of us lined up >for negotiated arrests on A17). > >What wasn't discussed, in big meetings or small, was why >exactly we were doing a blockade, and doing it the same way >as in Seattle. The actions were powerful, but it felt like a slogan >-- shut it down -- had dictated our strategy, and defined our >success. Plans already underway for a series of follow-up >actions (most notably the Republican and Democratic >Conventions in August, and a September meeting of the >World Bank and IMF in Prague): Can we try something new? > >More troubling was the secrecy that surrounded part of the >blockade, and contributed substantially to our failure to stop >delegates from reaching the meetings. During the big planning >sessions before the actions, members of the organizing collective >announced that several areas surrounding the meeting site >were "taken care of," and no one needed to take them on. > >Apparently, there was a plan to stop the delegates at the >Kennedy Center, the staging ground for the meetings, through >a high-tech Ruckus Society-type action, locking down to bus >axles and the like. Like many such sneaky actions, this one >proved too difficult to pull off; in the end, the planners gave up >before even trying it. > >The problem wasn't so much that a substantial part of the >perimeter was thus left unblocked, and delegates were able >to zip right in to the meetings. In the long view, these kind >of tactical blunders rarely have anything like the importance >they seem to have in the moment. The real damage in keeping >a matter of such weight on the down low was to our democratic >process: No one outside a small circle had input into the >decision not to defend the whole perimeter. > >There's a larger lesson here, about both tactics and transparency. >Actions like the abortive Kennedy Center lockdown require high >levels of secrecy; large movements, if they're to be truly democratic, >require high levels of openness. The two simply can't be merged, >meaning secret actions must be autonomous ones. > >In any case, covertly organized actions -- from lockdowns to >banner drops -- are the most useful when movements are small, >for they allow a small number of people to leverage their power. >We're in a different phase now, with increasing numbers of >people becoming inspired to take action. In both Seattle and >D.C., it was crowds of people, simply linking arms, who mainly >held the blockades. Bicycle locks and other gear played a >relatively small role. (Of course, several hundred lockboxes >were confiscated in D.C. during raids by the police, based on >eerily accurate intelligence about where they were being constructed >and stored.) > >But it's crucial to note, as anti-corporate and anti-capitalist >activism continues to grow, that what we now have is a massive >movement, but not a mass movement. Instead of ungainly >organizations composed of undifferentiated individuals, the >Seattle and D.C. mobilizations were created through coordination >among many small, closeknit groups. > >It comes back to peeps -- not in the sugar-shock sense, but in >the hip-hop sense, of the folks you feel most comfortable around. >Perhaps the most enduring contribution of identity politics to >radical activism is its insight that diverse coalitions work best >when members are strongly rooted in their own communities >and collectives. And in the wake of the affinity-group-based >actions in D.C., the peeps just keep getting louder. >(4/19/00) > >SELECTED LINKS >Coverage of IMF/World Bank protests (www.indymedia.org) >Republican Convention 2000 protests (www.thepartysover.org) >Democratic Convention 2000 protests (http://www.aztlan.net/demconv.htm) >September Protests in Prague (http://www.infoshop.org/news5/czech_imf.html) >Ruckus Society (www.ruckus.org) >Marshmallow Peeps (www.geekbabe.com/peeps/) > > >ABOUT THE AUTHOR >L.A. Kauffman (•••@••.•••) is a longtime radical writer and >activist. Currently, she is working on a history of American radicalism >since 1970, and organizing with the NYC Direct Action Network, the community >garden movement, and the Lower East Side Collective. Her work has appeared >in the Village Voice, The Nation, The Progressive, Spin, Mother Jones, >Salon.com, and numerous other publications. >-------------------------------------------- >TO SUBSCRIBE, send a blank email to: •••@••.••• > >TO UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email to: •••@••.••• > >All contents Copyright 2000 by L.A. Kauffman > >FREE RADICAL is syndicated by Alternet (www.alternet.org) >and on the web at www.free-radical.org > >For information on reprinting FREE RADICAL, write to •••@••.••• > >-------------------------------------------- >please ignore any commercial advertisements below
