G8/G20 Communiqué: Hunting the Black Bloc down like rabbits

Careful on your comments in this thread.  I have been warned by a moderator for the offence of calling a person an asshole when they were merely and quite reasonably calling for people in protests to be beaten by other protesters or at least beaten up by the cops.

And this is what I get for defending my son from oppressive language.  I have been warned so many times this week I guess I will just let it go and chalk it up to the right of the right to have all the space everywhere.

Anarchy is clearly the problem not the nice police officers or the nice progressives that think it is PC to not want my son to be used as an insult. I'd tell him to fuck off but I would likely be banned for intemperate language.

Law enforcement is NOT the enemy of labour movements.  Anybody who is trying to promote this idea is just trying to stir trouble and is trying to destroy the legitimacy of labour unions and the causes they fight for.

Anybody who goes to a labour rally, puts a mask on and start attacking the police or their cars is trying to crash the rally and should be dealth with approriately by the rally organizers.

He's been banned, kropotkin1951.

I just saw that.  I love being compared to fascists when I stick up for my non-verbal son. 

The black bloc are not my comrades, the black bloc are an excuse for vandalism and violence, they provide cover to provocateurs and as such I see them far more as a friend of the police state than any friend to me.  Their actions are used to justify violence against peaceful protesters and that discourages people from protesting.  How does this help?

Especially considering that the judicial system is rife with complaints of racism, classism, sexism, ableism... do we as a community who fight back against oppression every day want to hand anyone over to face the full brunt of that oppressive system with the naïve expectation that they will receive fair treatment and a fair trial?

I think that's the salient point in all this, and it effects not just "Black Block" people, but surely the sorry guys who were arrested for the RBC firebombing.

You may dissagree with thier tactics, and in some cases, if guilty they should be spending some time away, particularly with whoever bombed the RBC.    

But it's hardly about public saftey, it all about politics.

You see, if your politics are in order, the law can be very accomadating and understanding in Ontario.   Just ask Rahim Jaffer, Micheal Bryant and John Snobellin-- to name but recent examples.

If your politics are not in order, you don't even have to be breaking the law to be detained, arrested and abused at the hands of law enforcement.

There will be no fair trials for those whose politics are not in order.

So, dissagree with the Black Block all you like, but ratting them out will subject them to punishment well out of proportion for what they may, or may not have done.   

Guilt or innocence will not be an issue before the courts, no matter the evidence.

First of all you have not been on many picket lines if you think the police are there to protect the interests of workers. I have walked many a picket line and the police intimidate and harass and enforce the rules the employers get compliant judges to order.  

The second part of your post is non sensical.  This has never happened in any labour rallies I have been in so why do you need to bring it up. The only picket lines that I have seen violence on were ones like the Edmonton strike when Peter Puck was trying to steal the meatpackers pensions.  I remember a lot of damage to buses loaded with scabs and the people throwing light bulbs full of paint at bus windshields had masks on but they were union people there to support a strike.  Different tactics for different events.  

The Vale Inco dispute is a perfect example of the interplay between violence and labour gains.  I grew up in Sudbury and in the late 50's and early 60's is when they one the pensions and benefits that the capitalists form Brazil are now trying to take away.  In the 50's Inco miners were primarily battle hardened soldiers with no appetite for being ordered about buy either the government or the rich.  The miners in Sudbury had an interesting bargaining chip that began in the 50's.  Prior to any potential strike the first thing that would happen would be that thousands of pounds of explosives would disappear from the underground magazines.  The union never mentioned it at the bargaining table but both sides understood the backdrop.  

The second part of those strikes was the union movement solidarity.  I remember the trainload of salmon arriving in town during one of those bitter long strikes. The West Coast unionized fleet sent food to help the miners.  The IWA sent money at the insistence of their locals.  

Fast forward to 2010 and we have a nice group of workers standing on the side of a highway for a year.  We have now adopted some sort of historical revisionism that the rich elite in this country in the 50's and 60's handed pensions and health care to Canadians because they wanted to not because they had to.

Tommy, if some want to use Black Bloc tactics in a labour march I would politely request that they hold a separate march and not be part of ours.  Read Ennir's message above, it explains a few things.

Okay, Cruisin Turtle.   So, what does vandalism generally get you in this province-- unconnected to a protest?   

Do you think those kinds of sentences will be handed down to anyone who is accused of vandalism during the G20?

Take the politics out of it.   Yeah, I don't like vandals either.

But, they are not as high on my list of disdain than those who hide hand guns, kill bike couriers or drive drunk and careless.

I was under the impression that the organizers of the "labour" march welcomed the participation of the more militant groups with the understanding that those groups would respect the character and tone of the People First march. Which is what happened.

I'd also suggest that if it's going to be a "labour" march, labour would do well to mobilize its members to actually attend it. 60-70% of the "labour" march were "unregistered participants".

Labour was merely one of many organisers of the Saturday march. Five of us unionised types were there as "unregistered" because registering for a public march sounded far too restrictive and slightly suspicious. I'm sure it didn't even occur to most people to register; nor was the request well publicised. I'm still not clear why the request was made, beyond the rather odd attempt to get people to march by affiliation.

Here's a wonderful response I received about this issue re: how the movement treats each other regarding contentious issue since the comment I posted below reflects the sentiment that I'm trying to avoid. It was posted publically on my facebook wall but I will omit the poster's name since this is not about him but about the issue

Quote from the person I mention above whom I will not name:

[my voice ends, quote begins]

"We as the Citizens of this country have the right to take certain actions that prevent people like the Black Bloc from doing what they do. And really bud, a 300 pound cop aint going anywhere, at most they weigh at around 220-250 including the gear they have on.

Point being, IF we see the Black Bloc doin somethin stupid. Jump in there and take the Mofo down hard, even if it takes a dozen of you to do it. And if he has a weapon, let him use it. Better to paint them as idiots so there is further investigation into the incident. But really, if that was happening here in E town, you bet your ass i would go in there and knock the idiot up side the head and beat the piss outa him for the actions he was taking.

Then when the streets are cleared and the black bloc's bodies are laying there all bloodied and needing medical assistance. Deny it to them and let em die. Leave them as examples of what happens when people try and take legitimate protesters and paint them as evil criminals."

[

Statica I found your post confusing and can't tell whose voice is speaking those incredibly nasty and vicious things. I presume that you were highlighting the depth of depravity the comments about protesters has reached but it is affecting me immensely to have to see these kinds of posts reprinted.  It is like reprinting an Ann Coulter piece, it makes me wonder where the space is on the net for alternate views.

Can we please stop posting peoples urging violence within our ranks.  Fuck the people that write like that they are most likely agent provocateurs.

Do we need to be bombarded with messages of violence against protesters at babble?  Apparently violence against property is to be condemned but beating up people protesting against the state power is to be encouraged as progressive. I hope I don't get warned for being to harsh in my criticism of this kind of language. I thought about taking out the fuck above but then thought WTF! Why should I self censor to protect the thin skinned people who post their believe in the power of the "real progressives" to crush dissent that is not respectful enough of the police state and the property of the police states overlords..

Um It sounds like the writer was present on bloody sunday

but as a paratrooper

I have, by and large, refrained from joining in the discussions (pile-ups?) on the Black Bloc, but all good things must come to an end...

The major problem I have with them is not so much with the smashy smashy itself, it is with the targets of the smashy smashy. I did spend some time checking out the maps of the fenced off security zone at the G20, and while it appears that the Stock Exchange itself might have been behind the fence (or at least it appears that way, google street view footage of its address mysteriously shows a nice suburban street) large sections of the so-called "Financial District" appear to be outside the perimeter... when I checked the maps to see where the torched police cars had been set ablaze, lo and behold, this self-same financial district (or at least that is how it looks on the maps). When I couple the location of these vehicles and the reports that the police were absent from the scene I am kind of left wondering why they opted to smashy smashy a few of the retail outlets rather than the steel and glass cathedrals of the financial district... Now, if they were agents provocateur acting on behalf of the "powers that be" I can see why they would be attracted to the retail outlets... if, on the other hand, they were angry anti-capitalists seeking to take direct action against the symbols of capitalism, let me just observe they are very myopic angry anti-capitalists.

I get the same feeling.

I have, by and large, refrained from joining in the discussions (pile-ups?) on the Black Bloc, but all good things must come to an end...

Thanks for sharing Bagkitty. In all the days and threads since this debate started I have come the closest to defending the tactics and even I haven't gone that far.  I personally would have preferred if the good thing you refer to had continued since it seems you have repeated a point made several dozen times at least.  This is not a debate it is a constant drone.

Historical Note: The reference to "hunting the Black Bloc down like Rabbits" seems to be a reference to Leon Trotsky's statement during the Kronsdadt rebellion of Anarchists in the Soviet Union, where he reportedly threatened to hunt them down "like rabbits", unless they surrendered.

Kropotkin died in February 1921 and thus was spared seeing the end of his lifetime of work promoting revolution.  Syndicalism and democratic revolutionary organizations are scary thoughts for people who want to control the whole economy within their own little cabal.

The police are not interested in them then or now.    Why should you be?

The Police are interested in, first, repressing disent, and where possible, having fun beating up helpless people.   That's what they are fervently trying to cover up.

Our task isn't to fetishize the minor-- yes minor-- lawlessness of one group while some fairly FUCKING MAJOR BREACHES OF LAW committed by the police go unquestioned.

Meatheads.

What we should be doing, if we are so interested in law and order and good government, is getting together off line, (yes, get the industrial sized spatula out and scrape that butt off the chair) and helping to find out precisely what cops did what, and doing whatever we can within the law to make thier lives uncomfortable.  Not for revenge.   But for next time.

They are bullies.  They had their weekend of fun.  Now it's time to illustrate to them-- however long it takes-- that it came at a price.  

And, we should be extending the same coutesy, in measure, for the totalitarian sympathisers in the media, and federal, provincial and municple politics.

Meanwhile, the Black Block people will grow up, buy a house one day and start working for the clampdown, don't worry about them.

statica, I find that post frightening but not surprising, as it is said violence begets violence.

I do not support hunting anyone down like rabbits.

What I feel is that we are being pushed towards becoming a violent society without respect for eachother and that this violence serves to feed the machinery which would benefit by increased policing, increased incarceration and that unless we wake the fuck up to how we are being manipulated  we are lost.  Truth of the matter is I think we lost this battle years ago and what remains of our rights is only part of the dog and pony show that makes "Canada the best place in the world to live". 

For all their revolutionary intentions the black bloc participates in this destruction, they are being used, they need to wake up to that fact and find other ways to express the need for change.

Why is the assumption made that the Black Bloc are allies?

This video suggests they're not. In fact, I will argue they 're not allies in any sense of the word. They're actions serve the status quo in a radical fashion. The left, centre left, and labour protests bear the brunt of the BB tactics in the following ways: Their message is lost; Their audience turns against them, blaming them for the violence; they're civil liberties are suspended and they're subjected to violence and brutality; the issue to which they wished to focus attention is lost.

The BB if anything are allies and agents of the police. Organizations that call for and promote a "diversity of tactics" following the Battle in Seattle need to give their heads a shake. If a tactic is counter-productive, then it is a counter-tactic. Wake up!

Heres another take on it:

"Fortunately, there are encouraging signs within the circles that
contribute to the black blocs. In preparing for the Pittsburgh
protests, some anarchist voices expressed the need for greater focus
on long term organizing within local communities. Indeed, within
Pittsburgh, there was an ambitious outreach campaign in a few
neighborhoods. Yet, generally, there remains among many a striking
insularity, reflected not only in group social dynamics but in the
failure to seriously consider outreach to the broader public.
Frequently, this kind of outreach never even seems to occur to those
who identify as anarchists. Tabling, door knocking, distributing
fliers - any form of outreach that permits conversations with the
public - these are the tactics of groups interested in building mass
movements."

http://ideasandaction.info/2010/07/black-bloc-headed/

I agree entirely with this and the listed pressure points as well..

I like the idea of making their lives uncomfortable. In tandem with pressure for inquiries which reach high enough up the chain to reel in the federal involvement, I think Torontonians on the ground can do a lot to chasten the local police - naming and shaming, isn't it called?

Use stills from the abundant video evidence, identify the more egregious offenders in terms of gratuitous violence - track down the nasty little fucks that were eating and drinking in front of the prisoners at Eastern for example - or the lady cop with a terrific expression as she swings her person-beating club...some nice large colour posters featuring such images, with NAMES and details, time date location, plaster those around the downtown core, on websites; make the police responsible for their behavior.

I saw reports of an interview with a Black Bloc, guy said he was a husband and father and in post-grad theology ... now, even if he made it up this piques my interest

I wonder where these people hang out? I would like to talk to them

there are people who would like to stereotype those who participate in the Black Bloc to portray them all as dumb skinny punk rawk kids with not a brain-cell to spare

but unfortunately, they really arent all that cool and tend to come from all walks of life

i also think the Black Bloc thing is dinosauric, and anarchists should really abandon it and focus on other types of organizing...but some people insist on smashing windows...poor windows

but really, the idea that the police man-handled everyone else because of the black bloc is pretty ridiculous...i agree that the tactic has been coopted by the state, and anarchists may be unwittingly helping those in power more than hurting them...but really, the cops man-handled you because you allowed them to...which is not unreasonable...they can seriously kick your ass and even kill you...and they will get away with it, even if 250 people record it happening and 538736367 trillion people watch it on Youtube

you should blame that on the black bloc too...it's all their fault...

i have no idea where one might be able to talk to these people, though...theyre pretty busy coming up with new ways to piss off the left, i would imagine...

Police seek help identifying '10 Most Wanted' protesters This is footage of today's follow-up release of additional pictures by Toronto Police G20 task force. This is going to be a weekly event. At today's conference, the man in the expensive jacket was singled out, with the statement that he is not a cop. It is acknowledged that most of the people without facial covering are *not* protesters and/or aligned with the black bloc.

It is stated that police were on the scene taking pictures. So why were they not on the scene policing? It begins to stink of large-scale entrapment.

Is the budget for this ongoing investigation part of the $1.2 billion or in addition to it? I will be interested in what statica might dig out about the involvement / consultation of Montreal police. How much will that partnership cost?

Note also the role of bankers' facial recognition software, and the use of images from the mass detention.

Hoping that others will have more insight.

A must-read.

CBC News has been hyping the police point of view - refers to Black Bloc  simply as 'protesters' - says the public has responded 'overwhelmingly' with vids and photos of 'protester violence'. Says that in the 'battle for the media', the protesters message 'lacks focus'. CBC news has become truly just a state mouthpiece for elite interests.

It's well worth watching the actual police video of today's release. Here's the raw footage, from the source iteself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5sk6baBIjw

Wow. From RT TV. Haven't seen this linked to anywhere: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCRVNMy97g

Interesting that no mention was made of video footage taken from the dozens of surveillance cameras that the police installed before the G20. I have seen some acknowledgment that their central command in Barrie was watching the action real time. 

From I've seen from videos, one of my "issues" is the way in which the black bloc tactic was used (not that I condone it otherwise). As I suggested before the G20, by using another event as a launching pad for a "separate" action, lots of people appear to have joined in the excitement of the moment. They were not in affinity groups. They were not prepared. They were not masked. They were identifiable and vulnerable. How many black blockers warned those who were not masked not put themselves at risk? Not many from what I saw on the "tube".

Now some of these folks may pay a heavy price for spontaneously jumping into something that was consciously planned out by others. Yes, they did it of their own free will even if that wasn't their intention when they left home that morning.  Many of those who were disguised simply walked away and will never be identified (sort of the point). 

In other words, by engaging in this adventurist action, the BBers deliberately allowed others to "sacrifice" themselves. They could't even come up with a "rule" that said, no mask, stand down". 

I don't get what's different about this video.  It's the same as many others talking about the black bloc tactics of vandalizing, ..etc.  It has no mention of any non-main stream media thoughts such as that police infiltrates these groups with agents who in many cases are leaders of the group.  This phenomena is wide spread.  Remember the apartment building bombings that terrorized  Moscow during the Chechnya war and how eventually the people of Moscow caught in the act what turned out to be Russian agents while they were laying a bomb in a building.  After that incident it all stopped.

I can't help thinking the BB was cleverly manipulated by police/government/other interests with the sole purpose of taking attention away from the organised and peaceful protests against the G20, and to make those protests look bad by associating the vandalism and violence of the BB with the organised protests.

Y'all are fools if you don't believe this was cleverly planned.

My thought exactly - that this a staged event using the BB as pawns. How else to explain the video that showed "BB's" with police-issue boots - during the demos? Those infiltrators - if that is indeed what they were - had to have planned this well in advance.

This is what news reporting looks like, in case anyone hasn't seen television journalism before. It is charachterized by a number of features. For example, it reports the story using statements from a variety of sources, and the editorializations of the reporter is kept to a minimum in favour of reviewing differing perspectives on events. Interestingly it is Russian.

One might compare it to our coverage of events overseas by our media, and note how quick we are to condemn local state media in places like China for presenting a one sided view based on the official story, while our media more freely reports the story.

I\m shocked you're able to post and not get busted Cueball.

Can't similar boots be purchased commercially?  I bet they can.

What is suspecious is not the boots but the fact the police was present and didn't arrest any of the vandals.

That isn't going to happen.

Suspicious indeed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeMKM-eQPB4

eta: cross posted

Exactly my point. Thanks, Cue.

RTV had the best coverage of the protests at the Olympics also. However I suspect they will not report as well on the protests for the next Winter Olympics. 

Countering Conspiracy Theories on Police Response to Black Bloc: http://mostlywater.org/countering_conspiracy_theories_police_response_black_bloc_1

More or less the point we just made.

I am very irritated by people on the left who are deflecting attention - that should be focused on the police - onto the "Black Block".  Take another look at the youtube footage of that weekend.  Are we going to let that sort of paramilitary style police action go unchecked?  Sure, the Black Block is stupid.  But if we let the police enjoy the shade provided by all this fuss over the Black Block -- We're stupid!

Right.

Welcome.  Yes it has been almost over powering. 

Pointing out the Black Bloc idiocy has nothing to do with letting the cops off the hook.  It would be much easier to nail the cops in the court of public opinion if the Black Bloc hadn't been so dumb.

Bullshit.

All you are doing is reasserting that paradigm that the police are using to cover their assess. A top ten wanted list, and a high profile weekly press conference, for "mischief". Ridiculous, are there no rapists, muggers and murderer's to investigate?

Of course, rather than attack this ovbious missuse of the public purse for a political end, you for some reason feel duty bound to keep going with the idea that you (and we) are somehow responsible for denouncing a relatively small group of people, as if it is incumbent on the Montreal Canadians Hockey organization to denounce the post game rioters who torched and damaged far more police cars back in April than were destroyed during the entire G20 weekend.

Have fun making the police case for them.

Just finished a book about JJ Harper. Really, this stuff isn't new. As the case of a cop recently pushing a woman with disabilities on the DTES of Vancouver also illustrates. Like officer Cross in the case of shooting Harper, the cop in Vancouver apparently claimed he thought the woman was going for his gun.

The cops can always find excuses. The challenge is whether the populace is prepared to buy those excuses for the transitory notion that they gain increased safety for themselves in exchange.

Of course they can always find excuses.  The point is that the Black Bloc gift wrapped one for them.

Just because your arguments play well in the lefter than thou crowd that populates Babble doesn't mean the they work in the larger population where it really matters.

And yes, it really matters more what the larger population thinks.  It's called democracy.

Just because democracy is a pain doesn't mean you should ignore it.

Edit for minor language issue.

Are you sure the populace "buys" those excuses?

Flash polls after the event indicated that 30% of Canadians didn't support the police action. Clearly, despite distorted media coverage, a large number of people simply did not buy the police version of events. Indeed, in the wake of overt property damage and vandalism to police vehicles, one would expext the poll results to be 95% in support of the police actions. But that isn't the case.

Indeed if you had polled Canadians after the Montreal Hockey riot about whether or not Canadians supported the police actions, the response would almost certainly be in support of the police. What is surprising about the G20 polls, is that they did not reflect a nearly unanimous assent in favour of the police.

Now take into account that this Canada wide poll was taken immediatly after the events themselves, and based on very scant and inaccurate knowledge provided by the mainstream press. What people heard was "riot", "property damage", "protestors"... "arrests were made." Of course an majority is going to support the police action on those grounds.

This will no doubt change, once more information is available.

However, some of our friends here seem dead set on reiterating the police line at every opportunity. It is time that stopped, if one actually wants the real story to get out, despite the bias of the mainstream press.

It is called staying on "message". It isn't so hard.

No, what some people are doing here is having a discussion in a semi public left space.  In the larger community the messaging from the left is overwhelming focused on the police.

Some of us think we can walk and chew gum at the same time, we also believe that the police reaction does not give the Black Bloc a free pass on being questioned on their approach.

They are not working in solidarity, they are not working to create a mass movement, they are not being effective.

Well, I will be looking forward to seeing your posts on the issue of the authorities attack on civil rights, in this "semi-public" left space. Oh! Right, you only intervene to condemn the black block, or did I miss a post somewhere?

There you are productively engaged in attacking the black block, and contributing to 9/11 threads.

Apparently you can't even imagine making a positive post about G20 activities other than those that were organized by the Sothern Ontario Anarchist Resistance and held in a place completely seperate from other G20 activities.

I sort of agree with you, but I'd have written that we already know about the cops, the BB many of us - myself included - are learning about for almost the first time. There was a post written not long ago - this week I think - that described the BB in Quebec and contrasted them with the BB of Toronto - two very different animals.

Black Block isn't a group. It is a demonstration tactic.

It has been current in anti-globalization tactics since the late 1990's in North America. In fact it is an extension of civil disobedience tactics first taken up by the peace movement, which included acts such as blocking roads, sit in's and so on. In fact, many peace activists in the 80's claimed that it was their "moral right" to directly damage the property of the military industrial complex, since they were doing nothing more than attacking the aparatus that commits murder on a daily basis.

It is called "direct action".

By extension. some activists today believe likewise that the whole corporate complex is part of the same destructive force that is daily murdering people and destroying the planet on a huge scale, and in that light, feel that they have the moral right to vandalize corporate property.

Unapologetic Anarchist Bloc in Montreal

I guess the question for people on the "left" is which they are more interested in condemning, the police, or these type of activists who assert their right to make this moral case against the state, the military industrial complex and corporate rule.

Honestly Boom Boom, I don't see how you are making this distinction between Toronto anarchists and Montreal anarchist activists. But it is good to see that you want to know what is up.

We need to keep the heat on Harper. Complaining about a few kids is ridiculous. It is ridiculous. What I saw on youtube and on the news could have been footage from Central America. Seriously. We cannot let the Police or Harper for that matter, get away with this. Harper went too far. And I don't care about a 100 or so rowdy kids. If 20 000 police officers can't fend them off with a $1.2 Billion security budget well, then maybe they shouldn't be getting paid so well. Obviously the cops didn't think they were a threat, or they wouldn't have taken 6 hours to show up. Please.

Home raids. Check-points. Random detentions. Family members wondering where their loved ones are. We should be outraged about this. Not worried about kids smashing windows.

Put the heat on Harper. Not the kids.

The reason I don't post about the cops is that I have nothing useful to add to the discussion.  I am right pissed about what happened.

Note, the response that I am disqualified from commenting on the tactics of protesters because I am not also pounding on the cops is part of the lefter than thou dynamic that is prevalent on Babble.

Pointing out that it would be easier to put heat on the cops (and their bosses) in the absence of useless window smashing is not taking the heat off the cops.

I think in the future G8/G20 protest organisers are going to include strategies for containing the Black Bloc because they're fed up with their message of protest being distracted or hijacked. This could include specific training of protest volunteers in making citizen's arrests of BB members who destroy property during a protest. I doubt G8/G20 protest organisers want any BB involvement, unless I'm missing something.

And how do you precisely propose such a containement to be achieved?

List and photographs of anarchists?

Banning certain clothes?

Marshalls being required to remove suspects?

Above I noted that the thread title is a direct reference to Trotsky's declaration on the occassion of the Kronsdadt rebellion in the Soviet Union, when he said that the anarchist strikers would be "hunted down like rabbits."

Indeed, what you fail to realize is that G20 organizers did take steps "contain" black block tactics from being part of peacful demonstrations. That is what "diversity of tactics" is all about. This is a mutually agreed upon strategy that ensures that Black Block tactics do not take place in the context of other demonstration.

As you see, the BB activists, removed themselves from other demonstrators before engaging in any direct action.

What else do you propose that is possible without becoming the police and imposing authoritarian measures, and starting street fights inside demonstration: pointing out here that street fights between protestors would be an excelent pretext for the police to supress a demonstration.

That was not an accurate description of the events.  The Black Blocers left an existing demo (rather than launch their own) and then rejoined the demo at Queen's Park, which is when the police started their attacks.

Oh really? Is that what happened JR? You have evidence to provide to the police that conclusively shows that people who engaged in vandalism returned to Queens Park?

Furthermore, had you actually read the Southern Ontario Anarchist Resistance call out for the action they organized on Queens Street, the specifically called to meet at a separate location, and also were very clear that no actions were to take place in any of the peaceful "child friendly" (sic) demos.

Southern Ontario Anarchist Resistance call out for the G20

In anycase, care to take a stab at how organizers are supposed to prevent "specific" people, or people of specific ideological points of view from attending events... I mean within a democratic process?

I defer to Unionist on those questions, he's better at it than I am.

You mean you personally don't really have a clue. That is what I thought.

It's amazing how many of these ritual denouciations go on about this thing, from people who can't even manage to articulate any simple solutions.

What is your idea, get a bunch of Teamsters to go around forcefully ejecting anyone one who meets a certain description? Perhaps marshalls will prevent people from leaving the march? I am thinking hard here. Any help at all from you JR?

To my mind the only thing that can be done is to prevent persons from engaging in unlawful and obnoxious activity within the context of labour organized events, not unless you want to hunt the anarchists down "like rabbits", Leon Trotsky style.

Sorry to be so snarky, but this is an organizational challenge that needs to be really thought out.

The whole point of "diversity of tactics" is to seperate peaceful activities from the not so peaceful ones. We do this to prevent disorganized pell-mell confusion everywhere that might infringe on the rights of those that choose peacful protest. That is the point of it.

It was the police who chose to view the attempt to make a clear distinction as an indication that peaceful protestors were complicit in the black block tactics, even though the whole purpose was to make a clearly defined seperation between the two.

The idea I suggested might happen in future demos was citizen's arrests of  BB if they were in the act of destroying property during demostrations. I can't be clearer than that.

It also occurs to me that the law enforcement industry probably loves  Black Bloc tactics, because to them the presence of the BB  during protest demos justifies lavish law enforcement spending, including generous overtime. Has anyone looked into whether the BB is being driven by law enforcement in the first place - to justify their extreme budgets?

ps:

Haven't seen this posted yet from Dave Coles in thestar:
 
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/839199--security-operation-or-political-theatre
 

Marshalls already are instructed to dissuade and even control protestors who step out of line, within the ranks of peaceful demos, and indeed, are usually instructed to have the police remove them if possible. Dave Coles showed how this was done at Montabello, backed up by a group of black clad and masked Anarchists.

But perhaps you mean something more: when people doing BB activities sneak away from the main crowd, we should send out our Teamster guys to "hunt them down like rabbits", and arrest them, and hand them over to the police?

All because they believe they have the moral right to attack corporate society by attacking its property?

I am 100% sure that there is some long term deep penetration of some Anarchist cells. Particularly in the USA. If there were such provocateurs at the G20 demonstration, I would not be at all surprised if there were some "unknowns" from the USA, who simply crept back across the border after the event.

Another good reason to have clearly defined zones of activity. Since, as Dave Coles shows above. Everyone has agreed to a specific tactic for the peaceful demonstration, it is then relatively easy to detect and expose obnoxious elements, since the terms of the event are clear.

Dave Coles's actions at Montebello were exactly the kind of thing I will support wholeheartedly.

I don't care how people dress at a demo, I absolutely support everyones right to hold whatever beliefs they have.  What I care about is people being visibly associated with demos running around breaking things to no purpose.

Oh, I forgot, I'm a white male.  I'm supposed to pontificate on everything under the sun and get annoyed when I am told I am hogging the conversation.  I am obviously not holding up my end of the bargain by deferring to people who are good at what they do.

I'm sure there are many who welcomed a black bloc presence. In all likelihood, some black blockers were G8/G20 protest organizers.

As the clip Cueball links to illustrates, black-clad quebec anarchists confirmed, supported and actively, physically backed Dave Coles' actions. So it could just as easily be phrased, "The masked anarchists' actions at Montebello were exactly the kind of thing I will support wholeheartedly."

Through what happened here in Toronto, I am mostly alarmed by the exercise of paramilitary actions – backed by the state through three levels of government – justified by notions of collective guilt / punishment and thought crimes – where people were arrested before doing anything the police believed they were going to do in future.

This is not the kind of justice I can support. Simply, this is not justice of any kind.

That sounds like a smear of the protest organisers to me.

This is the very type of citizenship we DON'T need : protestors defending property rights and acting on behalf of the state. If capitalist social relations are indefensible ideologically then why would we even dare reproduce them?

There needs to be a very clear distinction between our mediation of our image to the non-protesting public and engaging in the fascism of the state. Can we honestly defend an unjust system through citizens arrest while we chant different messages ? Is this not the right "tactic" to use to impress the wrong people (an uncritical public that naturalizes the "goodness" of property rights that are part of capitalist social relations)?  

I deplore trade unionists that deradicalize themselves and become good docile subjects for the state and capitalist mentalities, and further facilitate the state's interests while driving a wedge into the protesting body.  This is not the type of solidarity we need in an increasingly polarized and more authoritarian world.

So, you don't agree property destruction by the BB detracts from a peaceful demonstration? That's the only point I'm making.

I disagree with the optics of property destruction, but the violence of property rights as a social relations commits even worse atrocities on an everyday basis that is accepted by the very people who will find window smashing deplorable. And yes, property destruction legitimizes violence against peaceful protestors, even if it is after the fact (i.e., the police attack and THEN property damage occurs).

If peaceful protestors want to "belong" by engaging in citizens arrest activities then that is their decision. I think it is highly contradictory and further demonstrates a willingness to internalize the fascism of state rationalities.

You totally miss what I am saying. I'm saying that I think organisers might want to keep their protest peaceful and clear of BB thuggery by training some of their volunteers to make citizen's arrests when BB step out of line into vandalism and violence. The alternative - it seems to me -  is do nothing and watch in dismay as the BB hijack their protest.

I get what you are saying. This is why I stated before that we should separate the way we 'appear' to the public from the issue of engaging in the fascism of the state. Because if you want to mix the two in the name of peaceful protest, you are just reproducing state repression and the legitimacy of capitalist social relations (property rights) that produce everyday violence.

So, maybe we should have a conversation about the tactics of trade unionists too? Black Bloc tactics aren't the only ones that should be under scrutiny.

If the public is so supportive, why have the Toronto police received thousands of photos and videos? At least that's what they claim. I don't know if it's really true. It could be a lie to cover-up the fact that most of the public is now ready to mask up next time around. 

Usually instructed? I've been attending demos in Toronto for a long time and I have marshalled many of them. I have not once - ever - received those instructions, even when some protestors have gone beyond the "approved" tactics. Another red herring.

Babble is a discussion forum. If people want to discuss tactics, that is their right. To infer anything from that about people's opinion's about the police abuses presents a straw person - a false dichotomy. It's another bully tactic to prevent debate and allow distorted views of reality to stand unchecked. It's an attempt at imposing self-censorship. 

And what of use have you added by posting about the BB?

Who gave you the right to tell other citizens when and how they should protest the violence of the state?  They did as asked and did not involve the main march.  Obviously that was not enough for you so what is it you want?  

If you have something useful to say tell us how you would prevent people from marching with your parade and then leaving to do something different?   I am still not convinced that the people who are actually affiliated with the BB had anything to do with the police car incident.  At most the tapes show a person dressed like a BB jumping on the car but they show a lot more people who look like they were just out celebrating a hockey game.  How do you intend to differentiate a proper protester from a hockey rioter if they don't wear black?  

Almost a thousand people are arrested and from all accounts they all had their Charter rights breached and the only thing USEFUL you can do is attack people for breaking Starbucks windows.  I'd laugh if it didn't make me want to cry.

Well, it's the truth. I think it's more of a smear to pretend that people who participate in black blocs don't do any organizing.

Did I say that? I assume the BB do organise with a view to disrupt the protests. I'm suggesting those who do the organising for anti-G8/20 protest demonstrations should start taking counter-measures to prevent disruptions by the BB.

F55 where do you want to go with your argument? If indeed people were organizing and also participating in black bloc tactics (which, by the way, have *many* variations), what does it matter? What exactly do you want to infer from your statement?

Boom Boom - Making dissent "safe" is a dangerous business. What is the difference between your language and that of the security organizers?

I've got a great idea: why don't the protestors create a security perimeter so that they can assure no one can enter that is unwelcome! Or they could infiltrate the crowds of black! Or hire security forces! Or surveil the area with security cameras! 

where's the rolling eyes smiley when we need it?

What would you do if you had a party and a bunch of uninvited people showed up to disrupt the festivities? Would you,

a) welcome them and ask them what kind of beer they like?

b) tell them that you support diversity of partying and that you won't criticize anything they do?

c) ask them nicely to leave?

d) throw them out?

In fact, no peaceful demonstrations were disrupted, except by the police.

Well Polunatic, you've answered your question. Apparently a protest can be compared with a party, both of which have to happen somewhere (do you usually start parties on propertyless spaces?). What is glaring me in the face in your question is the issue of "inviting people" and having "gatecrashers" as if protests happen in some sort of controlled space (like a party on private property!). The only way this discourse works is if you assume that certain protestors and organizers have permission to use space (where? likely on public thoroughfares owned by the state! so, who do they have to ask?) to thus control who can be at the party.

So, what is a counter-tactic for "disruption" then?

Actually the fact that marshalling was very amateur was pretty evident, I agree. All demonstrations that I have worked on have at least allowed head marshalls to act pro-actively in the case of disturbances. Dave Coles, an old school union activists, knows the score, as we can see.

Over the past weeks, I have clearly said that there should be more organized marshalling, because it was completely obvious that demonstrators were very badly organized overall, and without leadership. I did a pretty extensive survey of all the material on YouTube, covering all these demos (not just the exciting bits) and in particular the spontaneous march and demo that ended up at the Novotel hotel.

There were two serious problems, here, as far as I could tell,

1) No marshalls

2) No leadership

In fact, the real problem was not that there was not proper control of the crowd, and BB elements within, because there was no "direct action" evident in this footage, but the fact that the demonstrators were exposed to being picked off in ones and two and allowed themselves to be kettled.

So, at least as far as this goes, the real problem as far as I was concerned was not issues relating to the demonstrators, but in the fact that marshalling and leadership was not organized properly to confront and negotiate with the police.

There should have been some kind of "flying squad" marshall group created to properly co-ordinated off the cuff demonstrations, like that. Simillar problems occured at Queens Park when the police attacked the crowd, and the one "instigation" from the crowd was, as is to be expected, handled by the demonstrators themselves. But, no co-ordinated marshalling apparent, or leadership, as far as I could see, just demonstrators getting picked off one by one, and police being allowed to muscle the disorganized demonstrators.

The best marshalling I have seen in Toronto, was organized by Palestine House. These guys know how to run a demonstration and command the respect both of their supporters but also the police.

I'm suggesting that you're wrong to assume there's no crossover between the organizers of these demos and some of the people who march as a black bloc.

I know it's challenging for some to accept that point, because it doesn't fit the myths and assumptions that many people have about who participates in tactics, but that doesn't make it any less true.

It matters because if there's any point in discussing these tensions within the left, it's better that we deal with reality. That's my main point.

It would be naïve to assume (as many obviously do) that those who participated in black blocs at the G20 demonstrations had no involvement in organizing those same demos - that they were all cops, or outsiders with no real connections to the mobilizations against the G8/G20.

If you still want to expel these people, or keep them at arms-length from any future demonstrations, that's fine. But recognize; first, it's going to be hard to accomplish; and second, you will be losing some of the very people who make these mobilizations possible. Now they might be easily replaced - I don't know - but that's part of the reality that you'll have to deal with.

That's the type of thing I'd like to see more of.

Well, part of the reason that the police respect them is that it's pretty evident that if their leadership told them to riot. It would be a real riot. Not this black block civil disobedience stuff. Not that the Palestine House people would ever order such a thing.

I think it is very important to have organized marshalling that is not intimidated by the police.

To my mind the real issue here is developing strategies to diffuse, and otherwise thwart police repression, not deal with fringe groups, which are actually quite easily dealt with on a one to one level. Particularly BB activists, because as we see, they pretty much are committed to acting apart from other demonstrators, based on the principles of "diversity of tactics".

Diversity of tactics ensured that no instigations or attacks against property happened in peaceful protests.

Good post, Cue.

Dave Coles:  Security operation or political theatre?

There are so many issues with this post that I have a hard time figuring out whare to start.

First:  What do you mean what right do I have?  Are you really trying to say that some people have rights to speech and others do not?  Do you really want to go there?

Second:  Have you been reading the posts on Babble domination by men?  Like the issues with men repeating stuff that's already been said just so they can be heard?  I am trying to take that advice to heart and not just going me too in the threads.

This post is a classic of the bullying attempts from that professional leftists on Babble.

Given the political isolationism of the lefter than thou Babble posters I think pushing back against the foolishness is a useful thing to do.

This discussion is largely centered on the perception results of political theatre amongst the large majority of the population.  What the actual affiliation of people burning police cars is doesn't matter so much as what people think it is.  By being in the march, leaving, and then returning most people think that there is an association with the marchers.  Given the state of the discussion here I think articulating that perception is very useful thing to do.

jrootham, I want to thank you for taking that discussion to heart.

It would be great if we could discuss amongst each other, rather than putting so much energy into cooking up yummy insults to hurl at each other, to put each other in place.

Facts matter and spreading innuendo and lies about allies is not helpful. You keep repeating this same fantasy of the BB running back into the crowd after they trashed windows kilometers away from the main protest.  Where are the pictures, where are the videos?  Because to me it is central to your believe that some protesters rights should be curtailed by other protesters.

I was not trying to silence you I am asking you why you think you have the right to set the parameters of other peoples right to protest as they see fit. Why do you think you can determine someone else's reaction to our emerging police state?  That is the part I don't understand. Where is your perceived authority to rule over others actions in opposing the every day brutality that is the reality for many of the residents of Canada.

South of Queen's Park (please note crowd response): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e05T85GFKJc

"black bloc" demonstrator runs into peaceful police line at Queen's Park: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XgEI5dCrE [105]

"While they're deblocing, let's give them cover." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo6JYTGObsw [106] (doesn't look like an organized demo is happening at this time, but it is south of Queen's Park.)

For a whole series from Queen's Park from this point of view, check out: http://www.youtube.com/user/DeviousLeasha#p/u/7/z-j5FGwyDwQ [107]. This series is incredibly informative. Shows the trashing of the van, the movement of the crowd after this, the deblocing, the protests as police move in, and the *police* pressure to move the demonstrators north *towards Queen's Park* from College and University.

Here's the clip with the police forcing protesters north: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo4PSyzKp4o

The clampdown, a grassy median south of Queen's Park: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaYbq484abs [109]

I am still not sure what actually happened on the ground.  I saw the photos of one of the BB groups breaking the mirrors on a police van and trying to break the windows.  After that it looked like they were being herded by the police back to the park.  I have no idea and would really like to understand whether this is the same affinity group as was seen trashing windows and if so what is the time frame. Are these two different groups one of which was not successful in eluding the police although a sacrificial vehicle was left for them?  I would love to understand what happened and when.

But for the record the point is that broken mirrors on a police car probably happens every day somewhere in this country.  I don't understand this desire for a supposed mass movement to want to turn inward and somehow try to prevent anyone from destroying the sacrificial offerings left by the police.  I did not see anything that would require the arrest of a thousand people.  

I find the idea of looking to the boomer union leadership to lead us to salvation a troubling proposition.  Being a boomer trade unionist my view of the ability of Canadian union's to lead any parade is non existent.  However my believe in the power of the real union activists in all our unions is what keeps me going.  Over the years I have worn an Orange vest many a time at marches along with many of my sisters and brothers from other unions. I find it disturbing to be talking about doing the police's job for them and thus my "assertive" postings. The idea that it would be normal to hand people to the police is ludicrous and highlights for me how dangerous this debate is.

This opinion piece was posted in a thread on anarchy and it highlights far more articulately that I the dynamic that we are discussing.  What is the role of protest and is playing for the right media coverage worth striving for even if it that was achievable.