Cut the crap about "anti-capitalist." S29 was anti-WAR-fever, and pro-JUSTICE.

Actually, there aren't all that many authoritarian communists (Marxists, Leninists, Maoists, Trotskyists, et al.) in the IMC. We're mostly libertarian communists, i.e. socialist Anarchists.

Also, the distinction between anti-capitalist and anti-corporatist/anti-fascist has long since ceased to be meaningful with respect to Western Euro-American political economy. Insofar as the United States is "capitalist", it can be fully and wholly characterised as "corporatist" or "fascist". In this day and age, an "anti-corporatist" who is not an "anti-capitalist" is simply confused and has an incomplete understanding of modern capitalism.

<p>I missed CSPAN's coverage in favor of the actual events in DC so i can't evaluate their take on the day, but there shouldn't be any doubt that yesterday's events were organized by the ACC (DC's Anti-Capitalist Convergence, organized along anarchist principles) and the IAC (the International Action Centerm, often characterized as "stalinist" in its organization and philosophy). Admittedly they were often hidden behind Police Chief Ramsey and his footsoldiers, but ACC banners were pretty clearly marked as "anti-capitalist," among many other slogans.</p>

<p>The ACC is organizing an action to save DC General Hospital – now closed thanks to ongoing privatization and budget-slashing by the DC city government, under pressure from its US Congress overlords to cut city services.</p>

'Post Corporate World,' by David Korten, is an excellent book you might have a look at - the form of our current economic system is quite different than the original form of 'market theory,' described by the Scottist economist Adam Smith in the 1700s. Market theory contains certain assumptions, such as the idea of no trade secrets existing, that buyers and sellers must be too small to influence the market price, that sellers must bear the full cost of the products they sell and pass them on in the sale price, etc. However, according to Korton, "the current conditions of what we call a 'capitalist economy' directly contradict the assumptions of market theory in every instance." The corporate structure we've adopted in the US has really altered what people automatically believe they are talking about when they say the word 'capitalist.'

I can see where you're annoyed at having a political title connected here, however, if you talk about being pro-capitalist, then please understand what the term means and how the corporate structure pertains. I don't know that much myself, but what I do know is very very scary. There was a time where I thought of myself as a 'capitalist,' thought the market would solve things, etc. And then I started to really see what we were doing to the world. I urge you to read anything by David Korton, he's an MBA, PhD from Stanford and is on the faculty at Harvard.

step outside of the box, dude. The only reason anti-capitalist means "communist" is when you allow your mind to only think in binary terms like good/evil, right/wrong, black/white. These are all dichotomies, just as left/right is. This is why many people thimk that you are automatically a communist by default when you critique capitalism. We need to think outside of the extremely limited political spectrum that we have now. It would be really sad if we only had two choices between economic models like capitalism/communism. I know there is more to life and political thought than what is given us in capitalism/communism, of which neither could ever allow the full realization and development of TRUE liberty, in the world, and in our minds.

If you think about it more deeply, you begin to realize that binary thinking is one of the mechanisms by which our rulers rule us, school us, and fool us. And allows us to let people like the president get away with talking to us like we're a bunch of idiots and saying "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists"! When your mind is limited in this way you are forced to choose sides.

I refuse to choose sides and be controlled in this way. I am not with the terrorists and I am not with the Empire. I choose to align myself with the victims of both the State and of terrorism who actively resist tyranny and repression. I am on the side of all peace-loving, anti-capitalist, anti-communist, freedom-loving peasants and heathens who are anxious to get on with the celebration and dance on the smoldering remains of this whole stinking order.

-with love & respect

Thank you for lifting the lid on the box!

I am a vegetarian, environmentalist, pagan, holistically growing member of the global (and beyond) family. Vegetarian because, for example, the cattle (the orginal capital, taken from the latin capit=head) industry greatly contributes to the worldwide condition of hunger and starvation (1 acre of cattle vs. 1 acre of soybeans = how many fed?). Envirnomentalist because, well, without an environment none of us can BE anything. Pagan because it's earth based and so are we--an intimate interaction with the earth allows true self-experience, not blind faith. Holistic because I am learning we are all connected and all responsible for each other and all the myriad life forms perceived (or not) sharing here together.

Love, Peace and Understanding

They were called anti-capitalist protests because they are anti-capitalist protests, organized by the Anti-Capitalist Convergence for months and months before september 11th ever happened. The SF Indymedia headline says "Anti-Capitalist, Anti-War Demos..." That accurately indicates the two types of protests happening in DC. The ACC march went to the World Bank and IMF with an explicitly anti-capitalist message. The ACC has also participated in squatting actions this week, critical mass actions, action around DC General Hospital, and action around Housing & Urban Development agency. And I would also add that it seems most anarchists are some kind of anarcho-something, which means that they have meaningful disagreements and mistrust of Communists and Marxists, probably way more than you do.

If the other groups wanted to grab credit for this weekend, then they shouldn't have bailed out and left the Anti-Capitalist Convergence on their own to face a potentially scare police situation. Otherwise, the ACC and Black Bloc organized a large part of it, made a great showing, joined with IAC (a decidedly anti-capitalist organization), used the energy of the weekend to help local actions involving housing, health care and racism, and generally showed that the ACC is not as self-marginalized as mainstream groups/funded groups/corporate media makes it out to be. We are committed to social change and the destruction of obnoxious and destructive hierarchies, and mainstream groups should understand that you have given us a reason to mistrust you over and over again. ACC is a large group of kids and youth from low income and working families and it is on the mainstream groups to build the trust back up after you left us on our own this weekend.

I see that some people were just as offended by my use of the word "Pro-capitalist" as I am offended by the word "anti-capitalist." That was my purpose. I don't consider my economic views to be easily labeled. If I look at capitalism a certain way, then yes I can call myself pro-capitalist, because capitalism can be a good economic system if it is regulated with real anti-trust laws, progressive taxation, and many other tools to counteract its tendency to accumulate wealth and power in fewer and fewer hands. But should the anti-war-fever rallies be called "pro-capitalist." Of course not.

Just because groups who call themselves "anti-capitalist" start the ball rolling for an anti-war-fever rally doesn't justify calling the rally anti-capitalist. This is an obvious attempt at cooptation and no amount of verbiage can justify it. People wanted to protest this war fever and people from many groups will go to the rallies no matter who organizes it. And I will always expose attempts by any one group or political tendency trying to coopt rallies against war fever and against corporate control.

Anarchists have been trying to do the same type of cooptation of the large rallies against corporate control of trade. Should we allow the inaccurate characterization of those rallies as anarchist rallies or black block rallies to stand. Of course not. They were only some of the groups involved.

... if anything, the war protest co-opted the strength and months of organizing around the World Bank/IMF from the anti-capitalist convergence. If you had been out there at the ACC march, you would know that at least 1500 people were out to OPPOSE CAPTALISM. That is why the march continued to the World Bank and IMF, instead of a more war-oriented target (which there are plenty in the DC area). If you had been at the ACC convergence space, you would know that everyone there is against capitalism. Most of them are anarchists. Granted, out of the 10,000-25,000 people who came out to the anti-war demo from IAC ... we don't know how many are against capitalism or whatever. But that is why there were more than one demonstration. That is why the SF Indymedia headline says "Anti-Capitalist, Anti-War" ... indicating that they are separate but both were representing. I don't really care *why* you said "pro-capitalist," but I think you owe an apology to SF Indymedia for saying that they are biased and have an agenda. Indymedia is doing hard work while also working full time jobs, and it is bullshit for you to come on here with your attitude like that. To me, at least.

In a couple places on the San Francisco Indymedia frontpage there are, I feel, attempts (whether unconscious or not) to coopt the DC and San Francisco peace rallies into "anti-capitalist" rallies. When one views the rallies on CSPAN or reads the articles from the rallies in both cities one clearly sees that there are many groups involved, many of which can not be lumped under the label "anti-capitalist."

For example the frontpage says (for now):
"Anti-Capitalist, Anti-War Protest in D.C. is On!" No distinction is made between the anti-war rally and the anti-capitalist march.

Also, higher on the front page says (for now):
"Also on Saturday, hundreds participated in a women's march for peace in Santa Rosa, CA. The demonstration was held in solidarity with mass actions in D.C. in which thousands took to the streets with a thundering Anti-War and Anti-Capitalist message."

Within the above quote is a link to this message:
http://www.indybay.org/display.php?id=105092

Read the message above about the women's march for peace. The word anti-capitalist is not in the article. So the solidarity, if any, is not with the anti-capitalist march in DC, but with the far larger peace rally in DC.

Why not use the word "anti-corporatism" instead? It is easy to explain and will draw in a far-broader range of people into more direct action including myself. I have done my share of direct action.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."
--Mussolini

Get a clue "Pro Capitalist" dude! Capitalism is HOPELESS!!! You can regulate the hell out of it, but it is inherently CORRUPT TO THE CORE, because it is INHERENTLY HIERARCHICAL in its structure, which means that the FEW at the TOP will always strive to UN-DO any attempts to "regulate" or "Reform" capitalism! That's what we've been seeing since Ronald Reagan-"de-regulation", "globalization"(so capitalists are accountable to NO ONE), "free market/trade"(for the same reason).

FUCK CAPITALISM!!! It will benefit no-one except the VERY FEW it is DESIGNED to benefit!!!

While I see your point about not liking being lumped into anti-capitalist titles when you're really just out there for peace, I also have to ask, don't you see the connection between capitalism and war? This isn't some umbrella that's getting thrown over that people aren't noticing. And it didn't used to be that way, but these days that's a lot of what war is about - making money, the new-fashioned way (if you haven't noticed, the military and hi-tech applicable to military stocks are through the roof right now). If you don't see the connection between hegemony in the name of our corporate interests (i.e., democracy in 2001 = freedom to shop, not more than two presidential candidates, etc.), and your ability to buy cheap clothes at clothing stores like the Gap, then I just don't know what else to say. BTW, I suspect that women's groups not being labelled anti-capitalist probably has a lot more to do with unconscious factors than peace and anti-capitalist getting lumped into one.

I can almost always tell a Marxist by certain words they are fond of:
hegemony
imperialism
capitalism

Just like on hate radio the rabid right has their codewords designed to rally their little club: Team Fascism.

Capitalism, communism, and anarchism are all oppressive without real multi-party (more than 2 parties) democracy.

Communism has almost always been a one-party state, and so it has almost always concentrated wealth and power in few hands.

Anarchism has never succeeded economically in any large nation-size area. Not even a large regional area as far as I know. And it is becoming more and more obvious to me that anarchists don't allow much dissent from their ideologies. No multi-party systems in an anarchist "government." We'll all just agree by peer pressure and sham "consensus."

Capitalism, as bad as it is, is the only system yet to create a large thriving middle class. In Western Europe for example. Western Europe has many parties, universal healthcare, and a far better distribution of wealth than the USA. Child poverty rates are far less in western Europe versus the USA.

The USA has no real democracy.

My point in all this is that the problem is the lack of real democracy in the USA, not capitalism. And anarchists and communists need to get past simplistic slogans, and simplistic thinking.

I still think you owe sf indymedia an apology. Here's why:

1) you come on here and accuse sf indymedia of being marxists. really, it seems to me that they are more anarchist-influenced. but you say anyone who says "capitalism" is a marxist, which means you are pretty ignorant of the north american anarchist movement which has steadily become more organized, more active, and more respected in the last 20 years.

2) you posted the same story to DC indymedia. i think if you look at the DC/SF/global indymedia coverage of the protests this weekend, there is a clear distinction between the ACC march and the IAC march and the peace march on sunday. to be clear 2/3 of those were organized by explicitly anti-capitalist groups.

3) the peace rally was not "larger" than the anti-capitalist protests, which as i originally pointed out, included a week of actions before, months of public, open organizing and outreach before, housing actions, health care actions, squatting actions, etc. these were all organized and made happen by a consensus, anti-capitalist organizing group made up largely of anarchists.

4) the entire reason this weekend was used as a protest weekend is because of the World Bank/IMF protest organizing that has been going on. the "peace" thing is only a few weeks old.

i think you have a hard time showing that these protests were not organized by and largely attended by anti-capitalists. sorry. maybe you just have an old-fashioned idea of who says what and what you think people should say. also see: anti-authoritarian, anarchist.

the quote about the march in solidarity only says (briefly on a blurb) that it was held in solidarity with DC protests, *which* were anti-war and anti-capitalist. which they WERE. the link is there to provide more detail about the local march; what is in the blurb is never intended to be the final word on the subject.

again, i think you owe an apology. you may have a point and that's totally valid, but to come out and attack on such shaky grounds is pretty silly to me.