Black Bloc, protest, demo, etc. Question

[Stand Your Ground]

I noticed when I see these things happen it's always cops on one side and protesters on the other and cops always try to drive back the protesters, why don't the protesters ever flank em and attack from behind as well as in front?

[Widerstand]

There are several issues here:

A) Attacks on the cops always provide a scapegoat for repression and cop violence. Often there are agent provocateurs within the bloc trying to provoke attacks on the police to justify a police attack on the bloc.
B) The cops are often better organized than a bloc (headsets and shit), have better equipment and often outnumber it.
C) The protest marches usually have defined routes, and usually adjacant streets are under cop control. Flanking or kettling them could prove difficult and would often meet severe resistance before the formation is ready to strike.

[Peace on Earth]

Because the minute protestors attack, it is cause for law enforcement to go apeshit on them.

[Magón]

Because no Black Bloc has ever done what those in the Battle of Seattle did. (link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTO_Ministerial_Conference_of_1999_protest_activit y)) Plus what Widerstand and Peace on Earth said.

[Widerstand]

Because no Black Bloc has ever done what those in the Battle of Seattle did. (link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WTO_Ministerial_Conference_of_1999_protest_activit y)) Plus what Widerstand and Peace on Earth said.

But you gotta acknowledge that the Battle Of Seattle involved a fucking lot more militant protesters than your average black bloc, as well as largely unprepared cops - as far as I know it was America's first anti-capitalist protest of that magnitude. I mean, over 40,000? People nowadays are happy when they can get 2000.

That ahead, what exactly do you think they did different? Were their tactics different from modern anti-G20, anti-G8, anti-IMF/WTO, anti-Castor, etc. activities?

[Sasha]

Attacked cops retreat, cornered cops shoot.
We want to set the plod running, not killing them, let alone give them a reason too kill us.

[Stand Your Ground]

I see. Thank you for the replies.

[Magón]

But you gotta acknowledge that the Battle Of Seattle involved a fucking lot more militant protesters than your average black bloc, as well as largely unprepared cops - as far as I know it was America's first anti-capitalist protest of that magnitude. I mean, over 40,000? People nowadays are happy when they can get 2000.

That ahead, what exactly do you think they did different? Were their tactics different from modern anti-G20, anti-G8, anti-IMF/WTO, anti-Castor, etc. activities?

I think their mindset was totally different, or at least different enough to make them pissed off enough at the WTO, and take it to the streets. I mean, in today's world you're seeing the "Battle of Seattle attitude" again, but in Greece. (And with a more fierce manner of acting.) Speaking just from an American point of view, I don't think many who are Anarchists have as much of a militant mindset as those in Seattle did. (Just here in the US.) Maybe a little here and there, but I think there have been a lot of national/state laws to really damper the militant mindset (Patriot Act, etc.) so these "militants" think twice on their actions.

But of course you get the anti-G20 Rallies in Pittsburg, and they have somewhat the same attitude but of course they're never quite prepared fully for Cop Retaliation.

[Ele'ill]

It depends on the situation.

2,000 people in a militant march- maybe 500 are willing to engage at a militant level- there's 5-10 thousand police officers- most of which are in riot gear and have vehicles to get around- they have helicopters watching movements of demonstrators-

It's pretty much unarmed militant demonstrators against a military force with less lethal munitions.

Which is why the best tactics usually involved engaging where the police aren't - at that particular moment.





In regards to 'the battle of seattle'- there were several thousand fewer police present compared to what we currently see at such events and it was at the height of the Global Justice Era and it was taking place in the Pacific North West. The demonstrators were seasoned to say the least and the organizing leading up to it and live on the ground was intensely precise.

Seattle wasn't simply anarchist militants running the show- it was anything but that.

It was a beautiful example of how a diversity of tactics can work.

Lockdowns played a huge role in shutting down the city-

[RED DAVE]

Frankly, if I were on a demo and there was a black bloc that was looking for a confrontation with the fuzz, I would remove my ass from the area, urge my wife to leave with me an take any kids, should they be with us, along.

To provoke the poiizei on a demo where such is not planned, is irresponsible and undemocratic.

RED DAVE

[Ele'ill]

Frankly, if I were on a demo and there was a black bloc that was looking for a confrontation with the fuzz, I would remove my ass from the area, urge my wife to leave with me an take any kids, should they be with us, along.

To provoke the poiizei on a demo where such is not planned, is irresponsible and undemocratic.

RED DAVE

I agree with this surprisingly. There are far too many people that view 'diversity of tactics' as an excuse to engage in feel good property destruction (that does nothing for progress- at all) and police provocation.

[Anarchist Skinhead]

Black Bloc is just a tool, sometimes good and valid, sometimes not. And to all of you criticising property destruction- if not for this, nobody would ever heard about Battle of Seattle.

[blake 3:17]

I've just been through the G20 in Toronto. The Black Bloc were a teensy minority and the official labour/NGO march avoided confrontation, but there were thousands of us willing to participate in trying to shut the summit down. We were outnumbered and lacked leadership but the spirit was there.

Back to Seattle...


But you gotta acknowledge that the Battle Of Seattle involved a fucking lot more militant protesters than your average black bloc, as well as largely unprepared cops - as far as I know it was America's first anti-capitalist protest of that magnitude. I mean, over 40,000? People nowadays are happy when they can get 2000.

Seattle wasn't just numbers. The Black Bloc got some media coverage, but there were many others there prepared for direct action. The Direct Action Network, social movement and student activists had allies in parts of the union movement. The AFL-CIO only wanted to exert some vague pressure on Clinton.

This is a blow by blow account from Labor Notes: http://labornotes.org/node/1379

Also from Labor Notes:

THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT--AND HAVE MUCH TO TEACH US

The labor movement basically piggy-backed on the courage of the young environmentalists and anti-sweatshop and church activists.

Without the Direct Action Network, which disrupted the WTO, the labor march would have received a two-minute clip on the nightly news, with some narration like, "A bunch of inefficient union workers from the rustbelt marched for a return of the bad old days. Fortunately the WTO delegates largely ignored these bits of roadkill on the way to the new economy. Although they are hopeless Luddites, it is true that something must be done for the losers in the new world economy who are too old and hidebound to run a computer..."

Then again, without the thousands of union members, it would have been easier to write off the young protesters as flakes--people who aren't worried about basic issues like having to earn a living. I guess the ideal mix was summed up in the now©famous sign seen in the Tuesday march: "Teamsters and Turtles, Together At Last."

The decision by the AFL-CIO not to plan direct action was a mistake. The literature and petition the AFL-CIO used for Seattle was mostly unreadable and unusable, with no edge. Despite some heroic efforts by union folks in Seattle and other places, the AFL-CIO campaign was reminiscent of the "old" AFL-CIO's campaign against NAFTA. Remember "Not This NAFTA"? If we had run a campaign against the Congressional "Fast-track" vote with "Not This Fast-Track," we would have lost that one, too. Did anyone really try to bring people to Seattle under the slogan, "We demand a working group"?
This is a period when, on certain issues, massive nonviolent direct action is in order, as the demonstration in Seattle shows. Every member who went on our trip reports that support for the demonstrations, even with the disruptions, is overwhelming. And not just from other workers in the shop, but family and others, regardless of what they do for a living. "We're being treated like conquering heroes," marveled one of our group.


Link: http://labornotes.org/node/1381

[Anarchist Skinhead]

there were some very or fairy successful actions with black bloc as well, Prague 2000 IM springs to mind.. but then again as I said, its a tool that sometimes is good and sometimes not, depending on the situation.

[bretty]

For the G20 in Toronto, the black bloc received most of the attention and were a very small minority. The aggression that the police showed was way over the top considering they outnumbered protestors in some cases. I'm pretty sure they caught undercovers instigating property destruction as well. Peaceful protests were met with violent measures by the police, to be honest it suprised me.. I can understand keeping things under control but I've never seen anything like that.. Their budget must of been massively unnecessary.

[Widerstand]

I'm pretty sure they caught undercovers instigating property destruction as well.

Recently, a German cop openly admitted that provocateurs in the black bloc are a regular police tactic - in the wake of the massive Stuttgart 21 repression, were about 400 people got injured by police brutality.

[Ele'ill]

Regarding Toronto- I heard numerous reports from both mainstream media as well as from activists that were there- that during the main hours of excitement there was between 2500 and 3000 people engaging in militant direct action. That is likely still considered a minority but you have to consider how many people likely wanted to take part but didn't and I think that number if accurate (which I feel it is) is extremely significant. However- I think it could have been put to use in other manners. We'll skip over that for obvious reasons.

Regarding Seattle- the anarchist militant bloc actions got a lot of attention but it wasn't those tactics that shut the meeting and the city down. It was the people locking down intersections and occupying space.

By the way- when leftists (all of us here) talk about events as 'anarchists and everyone else' it isn't accurate at all. A lot of the people in the streets are anarchists- regardless if they identify with it or not and regardless of how they're dressed or 'covered'. When asked a series of questions it is fairly clear that they are anarchists but perhaps are not fully out of what I'd call a 'reformist cycle' where they still have slivers of hope here and there in the systems that I've come to realize are intentionally failing to generate profit.. etc..