▲ top

Indybay

Indybay

Indybay

Indybay

protest cheer

Indybay

Indybay

Regions

Indybay Regions

Topics

Publish

Publish to Newswire

Add an Event

Newswire

Calendar

Features

From the Open-Publishing Calendar

From the Open-Publishing Newswire

Indybay Feature

SF Black Block and Breakaway // Report by SF-IMC Radio

by ziggy

Sun, Jan 19, 2003 5:32AM

SF-IMC Radio report on... (mp3, just over 5 minutes)

Listen now:

Copy the code below to embed this audio into a web page:

Download Audio (2.1MB) | Embed Audio

The attached mp3 is just over five minutes long. It's a recording from today's SF-IMC radio stream. An IMC volunteer reporter talks about what he saw breakaway / black block people doing. According to the report, the breakaways targeted Citicorp, the British Embassy, Victoria Secret, Starbucks, the INS building and the San Francisco Chronicle building (perhaps more... just keep an eye on the newswire). Included is an audio clip of the scene at the INS building. The mp3 ends at that point because SF-IMC radio moved directly to a music track thereafter.

I don't endorse these actions. I post this only as news and to stimulate debate. I'm against violent protests in general -- that's just me. I have a hard time understanding how breaking windows is going to accomplish much -- again, that's just me.

I tend to think creative "direct action" is a powerful tool. For example, Philip Berrigan leading the first draft card burning action held substantial symbolic value that many people identified with and fully supported. Another similar example was the first sword to plowshares action, when they busted into a General Electric nuclear bomb components facility and started pounding on equipment. Maybe the fact that these actions were so powerful indeed explains part of the reason why the Government was so intent on keeping Berrigan in the slammer off and on for 11+ years.

Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)

§pictures

by ziggy

Sun, Jan 19, 2003 5:35AM

someone just posted some pics

http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/01/1562053.php

§more info

by pointer

Sun, Jan 19, 2003 6:29AM

http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/01/1562051.php

by Legal Eagle

Sun, Jan 19, 2003 8:54AM

Go Here:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2003/01/1562102.php

§What is the difference?

by Brett

Sun, Jan 19, 2003 8:03PM

The plowshares actions sometimes involve destroying warheads. So why is smashing a window make this a "violent protest" when smashing a bomb is non-violent. Let's really think about how we use the word violent. I think a violent action is an action that harms another being. The INS is not a being. It is an enemy institution, just like the CIA, Lockheed Martin, Starbucks, etc. The effectivness and value of specific actions is worth discussing, but let's not write actions off as violent so readily. I actually don't think violent vs. non-violent is the issue. I think if we talk with each other openly we will most often find that we generally share the VALUE of "non-violence" in our daily lives. Many of us who support destructive tactics passionately try to embody compassion and peace in our daily lives. When it comes to tactics, I think the effect is the most important thing (of couse, harming other beings is an effect that is definately worth serious consideration). As for the windows of Victoria Secret, I sure don't feel sorry for the window. My only concern is how effective the action is. It sure inspired me, and the woman on this webcast recording. That is important.
PEACE AND LOVE ALWAYS

§Hit them Where it Hurts

by GaryRumor (garyrumor [at] aol.com)

Mon, Jan 20, 2003 11:18PM

I find that the actions that are most effective are the ones that the government represses most directly. The breakaway was fun, it was a moblie direct action event that caused little damage and helped a few of us get a little emotional gratification. The unfortunate truth is that the actions were little more than a way to let off steam as there was no media coverage outside of Indymedia and anarchist sites that I have seen, but I went back to LA soon after and on the long drive sorted through the sensations especialy those of pleasure that came with participating in the events. It may not have done much to bring down the capitalist system, but it went a long way in restoring my own mental health.

§When pacifists start shutting things down, they'll get respect...

by Anarchist

Tue, Jan 21, 2003 2:07AM

Without their "voluntary servitude" the leader would be impotent. As Gandhi points out:

Even the most despotic government cannot stand except for the consent of the governed which consent is often forcibly procured by the despot. Immediately the subject ceases to fear the despotic force, his power is gone (Gandhi, 1980, p.27)

In actual practice, the withdrawal of co-operation takes the form of civil disobedience, strikes, occupations, boycotts, and a general mass non-compliance with the wishes of the oppressor. [Gene Sharp (1973) has documented over 200 successful techniques of nonviolent resistance.] In the great Indian strike or hartel of 1930 against the Salt Laws, for example, virtually the entire subcontinent was shut down and British rule paralyzed (Bondurant, 1958).

§Excellent point

by mpbubb (michael [at] minimamoralia.org)

Sun, Feb 2, 2003 12:57AM

I liked your brief reflection on direct action. There is a key difference between the symbolic (or liturgical) quality to the plowshares actions (or the earlier homemade napalming of draft records in Catonsville) and the smashing of a corporate facade or an INS doorway.
But it is hard to articulate the difference.

There is no inherent meaning in smashing a McDonalds - the glass is swept up and replaced, the walls repainted and they are back in business after a brief delay. It is perhaps a valuable way to express anger and get some press coverage... but the disturbance soon gets smoothed over . Such an act is a logical response to the violence of the organizations themselves.

The plowshares actions are different, they resonate long after in a quieter way. The logic is different and not determined by opposition to something. The refusal to use power as a means to an end and the attempt to live in such a way as to not benefit from the excercise of power. The Christian anarchist, Jacques Ellul expressed it thus: "What constantly marked the life of Jesus was not nonviolence but in every situation the choice not to use power. This is infinitely different."

On a personal level, I remember as a child having the first chilling sense that there was something wrong with this thing called Vietnam on seeing a picture of a Buddhist monk in flames. The serenity of the pose, the absense of noticable affect - it is and was an incomprehensible act having as little to do with suicide as pouring blood on a warhead has to do with vandalism...

For more information: http://www.nonserviamnyc.com

Support Independent Media

We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$260.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

Regions

Topics

International

More

Feature Archives

► ▼ IMC Network