babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Jane's Walk seeks to exploit G20 violence for liberal discussions on urbanism

Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

Yell


Comments

Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

I like the idea behind Jane's Walks but it seems that the rich liberals running this one are using our suffering as coffee table banter.

Star Story

I liked this quote from the guy who will be leading the walk:

"I saw my local Starbucks get smashed and I ran out to protect it," he said. "I wanted to stop that kind of thing from happening.

Or this one (particularly disgusting given that people are still in jail, on house arrest or on trial for the G20):

"We have to remember, this wasn't Berlin," he said. "It's great to be hyperbolic about these things for effect but at the end of the day, we survived it."

 


Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

yikes, that should be urbanism not ubanism


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

So will they be going to the sites of the recorded police violence or just to the place where the bait car was burnt and the anti-union Starbucks where the windows where broken?

Will they visit the staging grounds and relive the Cossack style charge of the TO horse back police?  How about the famous bubble arrest is that on the tour?  How about the charge and baton kissing given the protestors singing Oh Canada in the streets.  Those are the images seared in my kind.

Seriously if this is only going to highlight the property damage then could some activists in TO please upstage them and remind the media of the real story.  


Timebandit
Offline
Joined: Sep 25 2001

So how does this stop any of you from showing up and sharing your side of the story?

It seems to me that Toronto belongs as much to these people as it does to you, and that these are their neighborhoods, too and that they are as entitled to their opinions as you are.  It also doesn't look like they entirely disagree with a lot of posters here on babble about G20.  The comment about the Starbuck's was followed by the information that the same guy was "kettled".  I notice that got left off here.  Does liking the Starbucks give negative points that neutralize the kettling points?  Why shouldn't they have a Jane's Walk?  It seems like an innovative way to use the established event.


Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

Lots of people got "kettled" but these two clowns are more concerned with the safety of their "local" Starbucks than the people that were brutalized. The fact that they refer to "hyperbole" means that they don't have any friends or commrads that are still paying the price for being organizers.

They are whitewashing the G20 with a liberal narrative meant to normalize the event as if it were not a huge act of cops and politicians abusing people.


adma
Offline
Joined: Jan 21 2006

Le T wrote:
They are whitewashing the G20 with a liberal narrative meant to normalize the event as if it were not a huge act of cops and politicians abusing people.

Yet because it's a Jane's Walk, it shouldn't dissuade those like you to offer a counter-perspective.  Just a suggestion.


Ken Burch
Online
Joined: Feb 26 2005

Northern Shoveler wrote:

 

Will they visit the staging grounds and relive the Cossack style charge of the TO horse back police?  How about the famous bubble arrest is that on the tour?  How about the charge and baton kissing given the protestors singing Oh Canada in the streets.  Those are the images seared in my kind.

 

Christ...this could lead to people being "G20 re-eneacters". like those Civil War obsessives on MY side of the border.  God help you.


Ken Burch
Online
Joined: Feb 26 2005

adma wrote:

Le T wrote:
They are whitewashing the G20 with a liberal narrative meant to normalize the event as if it were not a huge act of cops and politicians abusing people.

Yet because it's a Jane's Walk, it shouldn't dissuade those like you to offer a counter-perspective.  Just a suggestion.

Well, it would be interesting to see what happens if people tried to do pro-truth street theatre along the "Walk" route.  I'd suggest bringing camcorders and cel-cams and doing live feeds.


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

Ken Burch wrote:

Northern Shoveler wrote:

 

Will they visit the staging grounds and relive the Cossack style charge of the TO horse back police?  How about the famous bubble arrest is that on the tour?  How about the charge and baton kissing given the protestors singing Oh Canada in the streets.  Those are the images seared in my kind.

Christ...this could lead to people being "G20 re-eneacters". like those Civil War obsessives on MY side of the border.  God help you.

Wow G20 protests compared to the Civil War.   I hope you didn't strain any brain muscles with that leap of logic


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Thread title typo fixed.

That "local Starbucks" line is tragically hilarious. And a fair bit of hyperbole itself.


Maysie
Offline
Joined: Apr 21 2005

Le T, I saw this article when friends on FB had linked to it. Then I read the article. Fucking hell. I completely agree with how you've presented it.

Talk about a middle-class whitewashing of infringement of civil liberties of the police and the largest mass arrest of people in Canada, ever. Now it seems that it was done with our full and complete complicity apparently. And re-writing the story less than a year after it happened, when activists are still living with the effects (Singh's recent trial in which he strategically pled guilty, for example).

Shame.


Ken Burch
Online
Joined: Feb 26 2005

Northern Shoveler wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Northern Shoveler wrote:

 

Will they visit the staging grounds and relive the Cossack style charge of the TO horse back police?  How about the famous bubble arrest is that on the tour?  How about the charge and baton kissing given the protestors singing Oh Canada in the streets.  Those are the images seared in my kind.

Christ...this could lead to people being "G20 re-eneacters". like those Civil War obsessives on MY side of the border.  God help you.

Wow G20 protests compared to the Civil War.   I hope you didn't strain any brain muscles with that leap of logic

I wasn't comparing G20 protests to the Civil War-I was comparing re-enactments of some battles to re-enactments of other battles. No disrespect to the G20 activists or to those who fought to end slavery in the U.S. was intended.


N.R.KISSED
Offline
Joined: Aug 22 2001

Maybe someone should show up to their walk dressed as cops, cuff them and throw them in the back of a van for a few hours.


Union Stayshyn
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2009

Are you people aware of how media works? 

I explained to the reporter that while damage could be fixed — and, as we made clear on the Walk, damage to property is *not* violence, violence happens to people — living in a neighbourhood means you develop relationships with those who work at local businesses - even the Starbucks.

So when I saw a tweet during the G20 about someone trying to start it on fire I thought about those workers and the people who live above the store so I rushed out to see what I could do.

When I arrived a young guy was harmlessly tossing out water bottles. No problem - it's property not people. I shrugged it off and returned home.  

I explained all this to the reporter but she chose to leave it out. Unfortunately, it seems her editing has resulted in self-righteous pricks drawing their own conclusions about me and my motivations.  

Anyway it was a great walk. People came and talked about what they experienced and how they felt about what happened to their neighbourhoods.

We ended the walk at 410 Richmond where we had snacks and drinks at Trinity Square Video. We're all so hopelessly bougie. Please save us, oh you, the politically pure.

 


daviddemchuk
Offline
Joined: May 7 2011

I'm David Demchuk, the other organizer of this walk. I have long admired the journalism on rabble, the comments from whining entitled armchair activists not so much--and this thread is a case in point. If you couldn't take two hours out of your lives to join us and help make the walk what you wanted to be (as 60 other people did, including queer activists, labour activists, progressive journalists, members of the Surveillance Club, people who were caught up in both the Novotel kettling and the Spadina/Queen kettling, and people who experienced harassment, police violence, detainment and rights violations at Queen's Park, Allen Gardens and other parts of the city), you could certainly have taken two minutes to look up the walk yourselves online (http://janeswalk.net/walks/view/dont_wear_black_a_g20_walk/) and read our description of it rather than that in the Toronto Star. As Justin noted above, the quotes we gave were truncated--mine about Berlin for example was in the context of a discussion about temporarily and permanently divided cities and how those cities typically are bifurcated along ideological boundaries under the pretense of protecting each side of the other. We also made very clear the distinction between vandalism (against objects) and violence (against people and living things) and spoke about how language has been sloppily used to push an agenda suggesting that protecting property is more important than protecting human life--or defending human rights. And we also spoke of how, sadly, the events of the G20 weekend really only caused outrage in the media and in many activist circles because they were happening to a largely white largely middle class tourist-activist group who had never experienced these abuses before--but that citizens in Regent Park, at Jane and Finch and in Lawrence Heights, and in cities across Canada and in G20 countries around the world experience them every day. It's too bad you didn't bother to come and join in this discourse...but judging on what I've read here, I doubt you'd have had much that was useful to contribute and that most of it would have gone over your heads. So, on second thought, thank you for staying away. Our walk and our discussion was better for it.


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

Welcome David. As a poster who lives on the other side of the continent and also as one who is no longer temporally able bodied (as you so obviously are) I find your condescending remarks disgusting.

Do you normally walk into a group of people and tell them all they have nothing useful to contribute.  I can't figure out why you have a problem getting people out to your events with your open and inviting style of leadership.


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

Hi David and Justin, welcome to babble and thanks for clarifying your position. I understand your frustration and feelings, but I'm sure you will agree that the Star's depiction of your story does not do justice to either your walk, your position on the G20, or your investment in the Toronto-area activist community. Based on the story, I, who, like Northern Shoveler, live in Vancouver, read a parroting of the liberal narrative of the G20 protests (emphasis on property damage and "extremists"); which I'm sure you didn't intend. You have to admit, though, a single, out-of-context quote expressing concern for one's "local Starbucks," deserves at least a snicker.

Many babblers, including those who post in this thread are also experienced activists and have plenty of experience dealing with mainstream media outlets who remain antagonistic to radical politics. Rather than attack our allies, perhaps we should look for common ground and condemn the journalist who perverted your intentions. And I'm referring to both babblers and your Jane's Walk comrades.


Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

Hey David and Justin. Apologies for my anger, clearly the Toronto Star has achieved a little divide and conquer.

I really take exception to your characterization of us as "armchair activists". The reason that i was so angered by this article is because i am active and many of the people who continue to pay the price for being organizers at the G20 (mostly people of colour, people without citizenship and Indigenous people) are my friends and comrades.

From your own admission it sounds that you two were not that connected to the organizing around G20 resistance nor did you participate in the protests so saying stuff like what i've quoted bellow is a little silly:

Quote:
It's too bad you didn't bother to come and join in this discourse...but judging on what I've read here, I doubt you'd have had much that was useful to contribute and that most of it would have gone over your heads. So, on second thought, thank you for staying away. Our walk and our discussion was better for it.

 

 


Union Stayshyn
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2009

Clearly you did no wrong and we're at fault. 


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

At fault for what? I think we're all in agreement that the Star is "at fault" for their hatchet job on what you say was your full message. I don't see how that gives you license to come in here and make assumptions about who and what is an activist. If you're interested in clarifying the record, please do. If you're interested in retaliation or spitefulness, well, we don't need it.

I'm actually interested in you telling us what actually happened on the walk. What do you say?


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

Catchfire wrote:

I'm actually interested in you telling us what actually happened on the walk. What do you say?

Indeed. So am I.


daviddemchuk
Offline
Joined: May 7 2011

If you are interested in reading about what happened on the G0 Jane's Walk, I encourage you to do a search on twitter for the commentary that was provided by a number of our participants: @goldsbie @sherrybgood @paisleyrae @starstriding @caseyoraa @vitty10 @dreahouston and of course @farrowjane, who was kind enough to launch our walk for us and deal with issues from building security staff, media and police. And you can feel free to message any of them to ask about their experiences.


Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

Ok, so you guys didn't participate in the G20 and feel comfortable leading a tour to explain it. Then when people here raise concerns about your representation you both dedicate multiple paragraphs to telling us what armchair activists we are because we didn't go on your walk. When we ask you to describe the event that you held to represent the G20 you've got nothing but "check twitter".

You guys do any court support? How 'bout donation to the legal defence fund? Any connection to the orgs or movements that coordinated the G20 protests? Will you be writting a letter to the Toronto Star to correct their misrepresentation of your walk?

 


Union Stayshyn
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2009

Here's the thing, "Le T": I owe you nothing. 

I feel no complusion to legitimize myself to you. I was there on the G20 weekend and I've since marched in support of those who were arrested. 

But as you're the High Priest of Political Credibility apparently I need to have my motivations vetted by you or I'm a "clown."

And, to be clear, our tour wasn't an attempt to "explain it," but to offer an opportunity for others to tell their stories. You don't own this.

It wasn't the Toronto Star who "achieved a little divide and conquer," it was your comments here. You decided to interpret out of context quotes as entirely representative of my feelings about what happened at the G20 in Toronto. Yes, I plan to write a response to the Toronto Star readers: "Don't believe everything you read in the newspaper."


Le T
Offline
Joined: Oct 17 2004

So that would be a "no". Have a nice day.


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

Union Stayshyn wrote:
 

You don't own this.

So why didn't you come on here and tell us that we were duped by the MSM and explain yourself? Instead you came in and insulted everyone for reacting to a press story that misrepresented you. You mention the misrepresentation but then you chose to enflame the situation with nasty back biting instead of laughing about how easy it is to be deceived and how insidious that type of thing is too any movement building.  

You chose to be the total tool of the Star and came on here and continued to be divisive and then made it personal.  What kind of community building is that?  You see your allies being duped and you blame them and shit all over them instead of correcting the Star piece.  A little ridicule for us not getting the real story would have been in order. A full out flame war is gross.  I don't tweet because most things of importance require more words, unless you are a haiku master. 

Read your sentence above and look in the mirror while doing it.  

 


Timebandit
Offline
Joined: Sep 25 2001

Frankly, many of the posters on this thread read a lot more of their own biases and shoulder-chips into the article than were there.  Granted, the article didn't fully explain what Union Stayshyn's and daviddemchuk's opinions and full gist in doing the Walk was about, but it didn't sound like such a big hairy appropriating deal as it was made out to be.  Some of us love a good teapot tempest, don't we?

The other point, Northern Shoveler, is that by defending themselves to you or Le T, they are allowing that you are the arbiters and they are obligated to make it okay with you that this walk happened.  You are automatically in the power position.  Why you should be regarded as being in such a position, I'm not sure. 

Pecking orders and purity tests.  Very socialist of you all. 


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

Timebandit wrote:

The other point, Northern Shoveler, is that by defending themselves to you or Le T, they are allowing that you are the arbiters and they are obligated to make it okay with you that this walk happened.  You are automatically in the power position.  Why you should be regarded as being in such a position, I'm not sure. 

Pecking orders and purity tests.  Very socialist of you all. 

This is a chat forum that happens to be like my living room.  I expect people who come in to respect the people already here.  Pecking order and purity test.  That is a nasty insult from a right wing perspective.  Now would you like tell us the benefits of the corporate structure?  Maybe you can explain how a franchise operation like Starbucks is a good thing for our economy.  Maybe explain how allowing rich people to hide their oppression of the poor behind the corporate veil is a good thing.  

I mean if all you've got is right wing slurs then you might as well finish you thoughts and get into extolling the virtues of capitalism compared to socialism.  I am not a socialist don't call myself one but I note you think it is a word to be used as an insult.  I need a nice cuppa now.  Got a tea bag I can borrow?


Timebandit
Offline
Joined: Sep 25 2001

Again, bias and shoulder-chip resulting in a personal attack. 

I don't have a right wing perspective, I'm a social democrat.  And do remember that you're in my living room, too - and I've got seniority, sunny boy.  (That's a joke, btw, as the mods will tell you, seniority is no free pass here.  Just want to make it clear that I am not serious - although perhaps you'd have next pegged me as a union activist for having used the word "seniority".)

Nobody here has treated Union S or davidd with much respect - why should it be accorded to you?  Why are you more special?

If you could just try for a moment to follow the logic in my previous post:  If you demand they defend, who are you?  The arbiter of what's lefty enough in terms of how they're structuring their event?  As I recall, there was a lot of disagreement about how "lefty" the property destruction of the G20 was or wasn't.  I'm not going to argue that point, nor I think were Union S and davidd trying to.  Maybe it would be good to have some continuing discussion on that.  If I'm reading correctly, both the article and the posts here seem to indicate that was the original intent of organizing the walk.

Demanding a defense silences.  It makes the point that only one point of view may be discussed.  And it puts you (among a few others) in the position of having the authority over the organizers to say what they may or may not talk about.

So this would be where I'm talking about pecking order and purity of political thought.  That's the problem with human beings.  We're twisted little status monkeys even when we're socialists and we're often wildly inconsistent.  Because the last time I checked, these weren't very socialist sentiments.  Well, the first one, anyway.

I'm not sure just how pointing out that their voices also deserve to be heard turns me into Margaret freakin' Thatcher.


Northern Shoveler
Offline
Joined: Feb 17 2011

Timebandit wrote:

 bias and shoulder-chip resulting in a personal attack. 

Thank you for that clear and succinct clarification of your first post that I responded too.  I agree completely!!!

Have a nice day.   Go lecture a coworker or employee if your a boss because  I sure as hell don't need your condescension other than as comic relief.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments