Call for a Padded Bloc on April 7

Can you describe if it is illegal to carry any of that stuff? It seems like the law often isn't quite what you'd expect. Apparently they were detaining people for wearing masks recently, and in other cities such as Miami they declared carrying the armor illegal, as well as walking in groups of more than 4 without a permit. It's supposed to be conspiracy if you use cell phones to coordinate crossing against the light too.

While I fully support the creative efforts of the "padded bloc" I'm just wondering really what the point is? Will you be protecting us as well as the padded bloc did in miami? A padded bloc is an escalating tactic. The cops can escalate on their own -- they don't need our help. If you want to protect people why not start with the folks who are subjected to daily violence from the police in east and west oakland and hunters point in sf.

i wonder what seenit does to help people in east oakland and HP.

it's easy to criticize people. wearing padding is a perfectly legitimate response to the police tactics.

While Hunter's Point, West and East Oakland, and other communities that are on the front lines of police repression could use *respectful* help from anybody and everybody who is willing to be a real ally in their struggles, that in no way runs counter to the need for lines of defense at direct actions. They're not mutually exclusive at all -- remember when the Panthers told John Sinclair to go start his own organization? I can't help but wonder if the real object here is over tactics, which is an internal debate amongst direct action organizers, most of whom are white and don't live in neighborhoods such as Hunter's Point or West Oakland. It sounds like an attempt to deflect the focus onto a community that has plenty on its mind just getting through the day to day. If I lived there myself, I'd say "butt out" -- since I don't, please take this as a request to do your homework first. Thanks.

I would like to request that folks planning to participate in the padded bloc first talk it over with others who will be out there on April 7. Is there support for this tactic? Will the padded bloc coordinate with other affinity groups prior to the action, or just show up? I would be especially interested in hearing first from the folks who were arrested and beaten last year and plan on returning -- do they see this as a tactic to keep them safe, or as a way of unintentionally escalating police violence? I'm wary of supporting a padded bloc action without some more information on what the bloc is planning. I understand the need for security and not discussing every detail in public, but please give us some assurance that you're taking the views of other participants into consideration and are striving to make this a way to keep people safe.

as someone that is participating in planning april 7 and as someone who knows the intentions of those who are calling for the padded bloc, as i discussed it with them...i think that things will be fine on our end...i don't believe that this is an escalation in anyway...other than emphasizing our right to express ourselves in one of the few time honored traditions in this country that is worth upholding, non-violent civil disobediance...the padded bloc is firmly set in this tradition, and being organized to protect the right of fellow protestors and make a bit of a point based on last years police attacks and ongoing police violence in our communities(not only in oakland, though we are focusing on police issues in oakland on april 7)...i don't know how much this really has to be explained, but i do believe that as an organizing group we are ok with the padded bloc call...there is already a call for a Bikes not Bombs contingent also for A7...

I would tape my shield and hand together in case a cop tries to take it. I would leave my good hand free to throw back any projectiles that were shot at me. I would wear thick gloves and a gas mask just incase you know what.

FUCK THE ANTI-EXPRESSION FASCISTS.

Wanting to have protection when being assaulted by cops and their projectiles is common sense, but much of what will win our political breathing space is also about political self defence, not only physical tactics. Political self defense means keeping and winning support from our allies and our communities and doing what we can to effect how we are mediated by corporate and alternative media to make it clear--as it has been all along around the Oakland Docks--that the cops (and the sytem behind them) are the violent, unreasonable, secretive thugs.

A suggestion for padded blocers is to make protective stuff that is clearly defensive, even outrageous, maybe beautiful and positive. Padded bloc seems like it's been most effective when it's been understood as a spectacle in comination with a physical tactic--making the cops look ridiculous and violent if they act out. Check out the stylish Spanish padded block: http://free.freespeech.org/yabasta/barcelona.html

If padding looks like scary battle gear it will be easier for the cops to get away with repressive measures and rather than increasing the safety of everyone else it could actualy put us at greater risk and not really help our efforts to build a mass movement to topple the empire and replace it with a something better. This could end up with other folks having to protect the padded bloc or like the unpadded majority are being used as cover for nonconsensual and unsafe warrior fantasies.

It is not illegal under the First, 2nd (yes radicals should use and argue the right to self-protection), 4th, 9th, 10th, and 14th Amendments and articles of the California state Constitution to use padding, wear masks, etc. You should not get so paranoid. The Miami ordinance (very unconstitutional on many grounds) was put in for a short period and no longer exists. Oakland and California have no law(s) to this effect. The cops however will interpret (and makke up if necessary) any existing laws the way they want to, according to the needs of the state and the capitalist system that they are protecting. We have to fight it in court, in public opinion, in the government itself and by using ust continuing to use it. I agree with the person who says the padding should not look scary or militaristic, And let's not play big brother, and protect those who don't wnat to be protected.

once, if memory serves, exactly one friend and i took the intersection of van ness and mcallister, i believe it was? sat right down not quite in the middle of it and stopped traffic. there were actually more of us at first, maybe 20 or so, and we were standing with linked arms blocking traffic... until the cops showed up in riot gear and formed a phalanx, batons drawn. the pigs did a very nice job taking over the traffic-blocking part, as usual.

but there we were, all 2 of us, looking at a lot of blue meanies. so we looked at each other instead, put on our motorcycle helmets, and had a seat. one of the nicer arrests i've ever experienced, i can only surmise it was a mixture of our utter resistancelessness to the actual arrest, combined with our perfectly-proportioned and otherwise entirely-unexpected preparation for police violence. we were out in a few hours and the state got an important reminder not to fuck with abortion rights.

may your efforts at system chastisement go as smoothly, and with much greater effect.

Thosands got arrested. Did it stop the war? If not, it's a failed tactic and should be abandoned.

People the world over recognize San Francisco as being an epicenter of antiwar resistance, and from such resistance in the "belly of the beast" they can and do take hope and encouragement in their efforts elsewhere. Just like we, at our best, are inspired by efforts the world over. Protests aren't just a dialogue with power, they communicate to the peoples of the world.

Furthermore, if political events in europe are any indication, then yes, protests have played a big part in both resisting the war before it started, and stopping it once it has, by increasing its political costs. Just ask the Spanish. At home, protests created a space for a candidate to question the war. Such systematic questioning has since become mainstream opposition, with obvious reluctance on the part of its would-be "leadership." This crummy little war might yet cost Bush his job.

Nowm, that may or may not stop this war. But it would almost certainly stop a multigenerational "cold-war" style conflict with all that that implies-- the neocon wet dream of a permanent war on Islam to prop themselves up and justify their continued militarization of US and global culture, the way they did with the Soviets (as well as distracting us from the continued excesses of corporate-criminal culture). That might be worth even just impeding, let alone stopping. And these protests might be playing more of a role in doing thqat than, say, CNN is going to spoon-feed to ya.

So you "functionalist" opponents of silly little things like marching, getting arrested (with minimized brutality, thanks), and other silly things people do like volunteer for other people's political campaigns, all I can say is, what have you done that's stopped the war so well that you've made the rest of us look such fools?

If nothing else, you should travel outside the US just a little more. It's a lot easier, in terms of public opinion, to be from the good ol' USA, when you're *really* from San Francisco, where we do things a little bit differently than, say, Texans do.

Or are you the type to put a Canadian flag on your backpack & try to "pass"?

"If not, it's a failed tactic and should be abandoned"

it can be the case that it might be absolutely impossible for a single individual or tiny group to change the world. Like, even the most clever individual who had the best ideas, like Einstein or Gandhi, technically might be unable to select a tactic and stop X problem, even if they chose severe violence like self immolation which hardly causes a glance these days.
5% of germans were locked up or killed during the 3rd reich for political disobedience, and some more resisted and weren't caught, yet they were unsuccessful. But they still should have done it, and they had a local effect. My grandfather was a glass grinder in a factory and he didn't go in the army and started to refuse to do the heil salute partway into the war, and he had to appear before a court or tribunal, but his family claimed he was retarded so he didn't know what he was doing and they'd take care of him working in the back of the store, and he had difficult to comprehend speech, so they believed this and let him go. But his uncle who defended him was sort of in trouble then, and got really depressed, so he committed suicide by drinking poison wine in his house. Someone was talking about a pamphlet by Lucy Parsons, the black indian anarchist humanitarian writer in chicago, where she was advocating that depressed people should go take out key targets on their way out. that's easier said than done. Really, more people have to come out.
in San Francisco, that was really effective. When the police are coming, you can all get out of the intersection when they're a block away and walk down the sidewalk to another intersection, because you're in a 2D grid rather than an easy to defend strip or point.

So how does getting arrested help?

Do you really want an explanation of civil disobedience theory? Or are you just being difficult? If the former, try doing your own research, starting with the writings of Martin Luther King Jr. or Henry David Thoreau or something, and then come back with some real questions. If the latter, kindly piss off.

What I don't understand is why people believe in it. It doesn't work. People believe in it anyhow. Why is that? Why do people believe in something that doesn't work? It didn't stop the Mexican War. It didn't stop the Viet Nam War. It didn't stopped the Gulf War. How many wars does it have to not stop before people catch on?

Just ask your real question. Or would it make your agenda too obvious?

I asked about the people who still believe in it, even though it has been proven wrong by history. Why do they do that?

We all must have missed your scientific treatise providing evidence of the inefficacy of civil disobedience in general, and/or of that involving arrests in particular. Why don't you provide us that before asking us to falsify it?

That's proof enough. Now why wont you answer my question? Why do people believe in something that history has disproven? Be specific.

My POV:
Civil disobedience is not a disproven tactic, saying it is is like saying that evolution is "only" a theory, and so it's therefore disproven.

There's no debating blind assertion, just like there's no debating faith.

Your Answer:
Your much-demanded answer: Viet Nam, baby. But you must have seen that coming. Now, what's your proof that mass CD didn't stop it?

The Viet Nam War did not end because of civil disobedience. The Viet Nam War ended because the soldiers themselves began to rebel, sabotage and frag. Then the war ended, no sooner.

...and all the CD had nothing to do with changing military opinion? All that CD had nothing to do with changing the cultural paradigm that had made the war possible? All that CD had nothing to do with..... well, for that matter, nothing to do with the Republican insecurity complex we've been living with ever since, not least of all the "culture wars," which most by now acknowledge they're losing, even on the vaunted "drug war" front?

Head out of butt time. CD changed an awful lot. Of course, a steady diet of anything is a bad idea. Variety is the spice of life and the joy of ecosystems.

But I still don't think you've made any sort of case, certainly not convincingly. You've merely pointed to an effect to try to disprove a cause.

Don't flatter yourself. Those soldiers rebelled on their own, usually one or two at a time, occasionally in small units, and almost always because of facts on the ground that effected them directly. These guys weren't stupid, you know. They didn't need a bunch of long haired eggheads to tell them what was going on. They could see it with their own eyes.

Here's one example:

http://www.transbay.net/~nessie/Pages/fred.html

For more on the subject, read this:

http://www.geocities.com/cordobakaf/gis.html

Your analysis is an insult to the real heroes of the Viet Nam War, the men who brought it to an end. Show some respect.

yeah, you're right. there was never a teenage american soldier that preferred dope and free love to napalm in the morning. they were instead heroes of purity one and all, doing the right thing for duty and conscience. that's why they were never seen demonstrating or engaging in CD when they got home, either.

i must be delusional.

as the president's old man used to like to say, there's no linkage here at all. least of all, the link that the hippies were simply having more fun, and getting laid more. that kind of thing doesn't matter to teen-aged boys.

Of course some demonstrated when they got home. But that's not what ended the war. People demonstrated for years and nothing happened. As long as the soldiers were willing to fight, the war went on, demos or no demos.

If anything at all that happened at home had an effect, it wasn't the CD, it was the violence. In 1971, there were three thousand bombings in the United States. Ramparts magazine got a hold of some purloined documents to the effect, and tried to publish the story. The feds leaned on their printer. They had to go to Canada to get that issue published, and had real problems with distribution.

That’s how bad the feds wanted to suppress the truth that tens bombs a day were going off, the ground troops in country were rebelling, and this country was headed for civil war. So the powers that be cut their losses, pulled the troops out, sacrificed Nixon and Agnew, televised the Watergate hearings, and convinced most of us that “the system worked” and took the wind out of revolution’s sails. That’s how the war ended.

Now stop dodging and answer my question. Why do people think that getting arrested makes the world a better place, when clearly it does not?

"Why do people think that getting arrested makes the world a better place, when clearly it does not?"

What, you got a better idea? Then why don't you just come out and say it?

Its tiring to hear people talk about the good old days when activists did this or that better. There may have been a lot more unrest during Vietnam than now but there was a draft and a lot of the main unrest was caused because it was illegal for many people to ignore the war (and the US casualties were much higher). Massive unrest doesnt start because someone has the right theory and its isnt prevented because activists have adopted wrong tactics.

Why don't you answer my question? Why do people believe in something that history has proven wrong?

no, what's really tiring is someone with a hidden agenda baiting a crowd, looking for the right line to pounce on. maybe history bluff doesn't really have a point to make. maybe hb has a hidden agenda and wont say. maybe hb is just too superior/wise/cool for the likes of mere mortals like us. any way ya slice it, boo-ring and tedious. bye.

IMO: Getting arrested for political means is a complicated rite of passage that allows you to see the Prison Industrial Complex from the inside. It allows you to grow in understanding of the troubles others face everyday, as well build realtionships with your oppressors and those who have and will stand in solidarity with you.

My advice is that no one get killed by the police, or their will be hell to pay to those in charge. I on the other hand was killed in 1892 by cannon fire. Fired by militia men who were fighting the Pinkertons with us in the Battle of Homestead.

The padded bloc is a means to the right of self-defense. They say that the right to bear arms is to defend oneself and keep ones governement in check. Well as I have seen, the corporations are so tightly knitted into the security of the state, defending ones community by overthrowing the goverment by violent means is not a tactic I favor.

However the padded bloc is a means to stand up against the repression that is handed down by the code of law. A public service that is bought with a nice paycheck, benifits, and pension, all in the name of trusting god.

But money is only a means to creating social contracts. When will the police and inteligence officials see that the contracts our corporate state are creating and further seperating the equity that this country was founded for. These contracts are hurting other members of their family tree. But since some senses of community have been lost, they aren't even aware that it is Abel behind the padding and every mask.

And Cain is firing the tear gas. Cain is tazering innocnet brothers and sisters. Cain is victimizing those who are trying to remind evreyone of the bigger picture.

Viva la Padded Bloc!! As a means of protective non-violent civil disobedience.

Notice that (s)he never answered my question.

It would appear from this thread that "history buff" is neither African-American nor a union member, and probably not homosexual either, and I'll bet s/he is a he.

It would seem needless to observe that all those demographics have used CD, including mass arrests, to win substantial social rights....

always won in conjunction with violence and/or the credible threat of violence.

African Americans, for example, never got one shred of respect from this country until a significant portion of them made it abundantly clear that, if they did not, they'd burn the place down around our ears.

As for my own race, gender and orientation, they are irrelevant, as is everything else about me. This isn’t about me. It’s about failing to learn the lessons of history. Stop trying to change the subject by engaging in argumentum ad hominem.

For more about argumentum ad hominem, click here:

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm

Now back to the topic . . .

Why is that?

I would guess that the solution to your quandry lies in people's annoying tendancy to act based on what they believe, rather than on what you believe.

The source of our quandary lies in people's annoying tendency to act based on beliefs, rather than on facts.

Fact: In San Francisco this time last year, a couple thousand people got arrested, a purely symbolic action. It did not stop the war.

Fact: Around the globe this time last year, twelve or thirteen million people marched peaceably, a purely symbolic action. It didn’t stop the war, either.

Fact: The war is not only still going on, it’s gotten worse, and not symbolically, either, but for real, really real, real as cancer real.

Fact: There is no reason whatsoever to believe than any symbolic action, peaceful or violent, big or small, planned or spontaneous, anywhere on earth, at any time, can stop the war. Au contrair, all of the data available indicates the exact, precise opposite.

Fact: People continue to act symbolically, anyhow, despite the facts, which would fine if what we were trying to stop was a symbol of a war. But it isn’t. It’s a real war, people are dying, and symbols will not save them.

Fact: There are no symbolic solutions to concrete problems.

Fact: Continuing to restrict anti-war action to symbols flies in the face of the facts on the ground.

Fact: Denial is an act of psychopathology.

Fact: Time is running out.

What I fail to understand is how a post for a callout out of a padded block spiraled down to an incohherent mess. Of course, perhaps one could take the idea of a padded block being some form of Civil Disobedience but come on. But where are the criticisms of it? Instead, you have hijacked the topic with weighted questions.

This is the troll phenomenon.

Perhaps you can answer this question: What are you proposing? - Sound criticisms contain 2 parts: questiong AND proposing solutions. Until then, I don't think you'll get much dialogue with your questions.

I would if you answered my questions.

Why do people persist in acting on beliefs rather than facts?


>What are you proposing?

I am proposing that people act on the basis of facts, not on belief. Believe is what stupid people do instead of find out for themselves. Get smart. Face facts.

Fact: There are no symbolic solutions for concrete problems.

Fact: A padded bloc is just another symbolic action.

Fact: You haven’t answered my questions, any of them. Why not? Have you no answers?

You've been offered many answers, you just refuse to recognize them. That's fine, whatever.

Fact: Many lefties are superior in attitude and demeanor.

Fact: Many lefties are hard to work with, and you can't take them home with you.

Fact: Most reasonable people go out of their way to avoid working with difficult, demanding and pontifical personalities. It's a social thing.

...and it doesn't really matter, what you think about it. It matters what you do about it. Base it on fact, beliefs, the friggin moon.

All the rest of this is just romper room rationalism. It won't change people's well-founded skepticisms of *working with you.* Based on what I've seen, those wary masses are right.

PS: Go Padded Block! Yea!!

It's not about me. It's not even about you. It's about people's behavior. Why do people act on the basis of beliefs when the facts on the ground contradict them?

>Go Padded Block!

Go where? There's no where to go, except the hospital and jail.

If you tried, you couldn't possibly find worse terrain on which to confront the police. It’s terrible terrain, the worst, the very worst, completely devoid of cover and potential retreat routes. You’ll be out in the open, isolated and surrounded. There is precious little room to maneuver and no way at all to escape.

I oppose this for the same reason the Fredrick Douglass opposed the raid on Harper’s Ferry. It’s a tactically inept maneuver. You’re walking into a trap. Why? Why would you do that? More important, whywould you encourage other people to walk into a trap? What's your motive? Do you want to see them wind up in jail or the hospital?

I believe this is only the stepping stone for what is to come. We know what we are doing out there, we know what we are facing on the streets, we are not uneducated. I think we are ready to bring about a real change that might come with resistance quite brutal. I think most of us are willing to take this unknown and imbrace it, leave the fear behind. I am not afraid. I am a revolutionary mind and I am fighting a fight with unmatched love for this world. They spread their war, we spread our love.

I am not backing down!

This is only a war of ideas and everyone knows ideas change, now it is our turn to change the world. These are the changes we want to see and if it means my death in trying, so be it! Living their lie is already death to me.

Changing myself to help change the world!

"Live simply so others may simply live"

Peace to all,

Returning to the docks!

To: Just Wondering

Which way would you go? Do nothing or do more?

I'd go where the terrain did not favor the enemy.

Nessie,
did you read about the bicycles? That street is shaped like a shooting gallery, but it is also very big and spread out. In addition, people who aren't disabled can jump the fence and go down the train tracks. The end of Adeline st. is a spot where lots of travelers wait for trains. there are always people creeping around there unnoticed.

The bicycles might have a chance, if they scatter, and if each and every one of them has a preplanned escape route, rondevouz points have been agreed upon, with back up locations, just in case.

The rest of it, I’m skeptical. The main problem is how well and how much the chopper can see. Out in the open, the chopper can see everybody at once. In downtown, urban canyon land, the chopper can see on a fraction of the ground. Also, it can’t land. It can’t even get down close. It’s not safe. It has to stay up above the canyons. The taller the buildings, and the more streets and alley ways there are in the maze, the less the chopper can see at any one time. Out in the open, this isn’t true. Out in the open you look like a fly on a plate.

In dense urban canyons, the effectiveness of the chopper is greatly, greatly reduced. Tanks don’t work down there, either, but that’s a separate issue. Let’s hope it stays that way. As New Grozny, SF wouldn’t look good at all. For one thing, it’d realy cut into the tourist trade.

I’m not going to the docks tomorrow. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t. But if I were you, and I was going, I would obey the law meticulously while i was there. I’d stay where the local TV news crews can film what happens to me, just in case I were to be mistreated by mistake. I’d carry nothing in my wallet but my ID and my lawyer’s phone number. I certainly wouldn’t carry my phone book, or anything that could be used to link me to any person but my lawyer. I’d also have my lawyer’s phone number written on my arm in indelible ink.

And at no time would I make any sudden movements, or put my hands in my pockets. There *will* be snipers standing by, “just in case.” You probably wont spot them, but they’ll be there. Do try to spot them, though. It’s good practice. Try to spot the cameras with the telephoto lenses, too. In the long run, they’re more dangerous than snipers. There will me more than one. One, maybe two, of them will be in relatively plain sight. Others will not.

Once, in the eighties, some people were on similar terrain at the Oakland Airport, protesting the CIA cut out air freight company that was flying weapons to the contras, and cocaine back, and owned a hanger there. There were three easily visible batches of both still and cameras trained on the crowd, two from roof tops and one from between two parked vans. One person counted four long arms, in among them. Later, some people stumbled upon a fourth camera, alone with no weapons, about three hundred yards away, positioned in ambush on what would have been an obvious escape route, had escape ever become part of the events that day. Fortunately, it never came up. Everyone was peaceful. No one got arrested. No one got hurt. Everyone got away. However, everyone also got their picture taken, coming in, standing around, and leaving. Those pictures are still around today. Now they’re stored in several really, really big computer databases.

If I was going to this demo, I’d wear clothes loose enough run in, in case I had to run, but tight enough that nobody looking at me would wonder if I was wearing baggy clothes because I was concealing a weapon. You don’t want to appear to be carrying a concealed weapon. Not actually carrying a concealed weapon is not enough. You have to also *look* that way. This is very important. You don’t want to make the wrong cop nervous. He might shoot you. Remember, he’s scared of you. He thinks you’re crazy, and he doesn’t know what you might do next, but anything’s possible. For all he knows for sure, you’ve been infiltrated by terrorists and they’re ready to make their move. If he hasn’t thought of this on his own already, rest assured that he’s been recently reminded of it by his superiors. Don’t make him nervous. He might do something you’d both regret.

Dress, look and act as harmless as possible. Don’t appear threatening. Personally, I like to dress blend in bland, and not draw undue attention. If you are one of those people who absolutely insist on dressing up, this time around don’t go so much for the Klingon Rollerball Team look. Dress up like Tinkerbell and the Easter Bunny. This is Easter Week, after all, so a Bunny Bloc would be totally appropriate. Imagine a couple hundred six foot tall, fuzzy, pink Easter Bunnies, each with a basket of brightly colored eggs. Imagine these Bunnies marching in step, with Busby Berkeley choreography, led by a brass band in full regalia. That’d mess with their heads a little, wouldn’t it? Just a suggestion.

Keep the cell phone in your pocket. Don’t do anything that might cause anyone to mistake you for a leader. Obey the law meticulously. Keep one on the choppers. Don’t get arrested. It will accomplish nothing. Don’t get hurt. That wont accomplish anything, either. And above all, don’t start a fight. You can’t win and you can’t escape. You’ll get hurt. You get in trouble. You’ll get other people hurt and in trouble. And you will gain nothing.

That’s my advice. Take it or leave it.

someone obviously needs to get outside more...and maybe figure out how to relax a little too while outside...like not looking over their shoulder quite as much cause it all seems a bit neurotic...the writing and the thought process in a lot of the posts above is a bit scary in some weird way

kind of a weird unabomber updated to the 21st century/techie junkie sort of a way...

anyway, see some of you at the docks later today...after a little sleep...cause some of us still do that sometimes

Shut 'em down. Wish we were there...

That's a new one. Usually they say I am "paranoid" For example, I was recently flamed on an IMC process list by Jeff from Whispered Media. The moderators of the list wouldn't let me defend myself, and deleted my reply from the list. So I posted it on my personal website, where you can read it by merely clicking here:

http://www.transbay.net/~nessie/Pages/censored_reply.html

What it says applies, not just to myself and to Indymedia, but to all activists and all activist organizations. Check it out, before you decide whether I'm being realistic about the dangers all activists face. You will see that I’m not imagining this stuff. I’m speaking from years of experience, much of which I accumulated the hard way, some the very hard way.

If you want to learn about life the hard way, that is certainly your prerogative. Feel free. It’s what I did. Why did I choose to learn the hard way? Obviously, it is because I was too stupid to learn it the easy way. Learning the hard way, when you don’t have to, is how stupid people do it. This is a fact of life. I know because I was one. If you want to be stupid, too, go right ahead. I wont stop you. I couldn’t if I wanted to.

If you want to be smart, learn from the experience of those who have gone before. It could save you a great deal of grief.

The choice is yours. Make an informed one.

that y'all took my advice, and didn't try anything stupid out there yesterday. Good for you. You're learning.

Now will somebody please explain to me what was actually accomplished there besides everybody felt good when it was over, and the smarter ones among you added to your list of contacts? I'm a little hazy on that part. I can see where it didn't do any harm. But what good did it do?

It seems to me that, at best, it was a holding action. You’re proved that you have a right to protest. But you haven’t proved that protest alone changes anything, least of all America’s foreign policy. So what’s the point?

"that y'all took my advice, and didn't try anything stupid out there yesterday. Good for you. You're learning."

gawd, you're a bit self-centered and condescending, aren't you? probably hardly anyone except us bored folks at work got so far as to read your post. i'm sure folks planned and did what they did without your advice.

people were being so paranoid about this protest. did anyone really think the police would pull out their rubber bullets again in the exact same way w/ all the press attention, etc?

as for whether or not protest like this affects anything, i can't really tell you. i didn't go, had other obligations. but obviously the first action hit a nerve -otherwise, why the rubber bullets? i think economic disruption and chaos do have their effects, though, it's just not a direct cause and effect link.

and as for the padded block, from the photos i saw people did have plexiglass shields.

>are trying to do something creative and productive


Keyword: “trying”

It is *far* from clear that this action was productive. It didn’t seem to have done any harm, but whether or not it did any good is not clear at all. Lack of clarity retards our progress.

It *always* behooves us to analyze our actions, as well as our inaction, from a empirical standpoint, so as to learn from both our mistakes and our successes. That’s how progress is made. Anybody who is arguing against analysis is arguing against progress. Why would someone do such a thing? The list of possibilities is short. Some are downright sinister.

As for whether or not the action was creative or not, give me a break. It was numbingly predictable. Until activists learn to transcend repetition, we will continue to get nowhere fast. Creativity is what we need most right now. It is also what we most lack. We doo the same things, over and over and over, and every time we expect the result not to be the same. That’s neurotic. We are consumed by collective neurosis. If we don’t snap out of it soon, the war will be lost, and our planet and our freedom with it. We need to first get out of our own way, before we have any chance at all of success against the global monster that is warring against us, and against our world.



>>economic disruption and chaos do have their effects,

Indeed they do. However, that’s not what happened at the docks. What happened at the docks was a purely symbolic action. It didn’t disrupt anything.

And it’s not like things couldn’t be disrupted if people went about it right, either.




>> yr experience has seemed to have left you in some weird state, obviously not the one that most of us exist in today.

Precisely. I have experience. Many of us have experience. Those of you who don’t. and also refuse to learn from the experience of those who do, condemn yourselves to endlessly reinvent the wheel. Who gains from that? Hint: it’s not us.

Our enemies learn from experience. If we don’t, we’ll lose. That is not an acceptable option. This is too nice a planet to give up without a fight. If we are not going to fight to win, we may as well surrender. If we don’t constantly analyze our actions and refine our strategy, we are not fighting to win. We’re just going through the motions.


>self-centered and condescending, aren't you?

Right. And I eat babies, too. And that’s my good side.

See:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2004/03/1684593_comment.php


Fortunately, though, an ad hominem is not a rebuttal.

See:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html


This isn’t about me. This is about strategy. Stop trying to change the subject. Why are you trying to change the subject? Don’t you *want* us to refine our strategy? Why not? Whose side are you on, anyway?


Instead of changing the subject, let’s analyze what actually happened. What went wrong? What went right? What could have been done better? What mistakes could have been avoided? What were the goals? Were any of them actual accomplished? Were they even valid goals? How valid? How did this action effect our overall strategy? What is our overall strategy? Do we have one? Is it working? How is it working? How is it not working?

This is what we should be discussing, not my personality, not anybody’s personality. It’s not about personalities. It’s about doing what works, not doing what doesn’t work, and being able to tell the difference.

">self-centered and condescending, aren't you?
Right. And I eat babies, too. And that’s my good side. ....
This isn’t about me. This is about strategy. Stop trying to change the subject. Why are you trying to change the subject?"


actually, i'm not "trying to change the subject". i'm just pointing out what appears to me to be obnoxious behavior. as anarchists/anti-authoritarians (assuming you id that way, not sure, haven't read all your posts), i believe we need to look at our behaviour with each other as well as what we stand for. it's part of our praxis. i looked to see where the discussion on the padded block had gone since i hadn't checked in a few days and i saw what looked like an utterly obnoxious and condescending comment and took issue with it.

"Don’t you *want* us to refine our strategy? Why not? Whose side are you on, anyway?"

i want us to refine our strategy, and i also want us to respect each other in discussions, which unfortunately does not often happen in this format. it's often more of a put-down fest.

i thought this whole thing had to do with reaching out to ilwu brothers and sisters, because they are the activists' friends because of that labor dispute and shutting down the west coast ports a few years ago.

i think the strategy is called solidarity. the dockers have a lot of power over the war, actually. their friends the demonstrators might just want to use their free speech to communicate their feelings and stuff about that hot topic to their friends at the point of production.

i hope i'm allowed to say all that in public. nessie, what was the objection to that strategy for progress on the issues?

the whole war is symbols versus symbols. symbols might not stop symbols, let alone falling bombs, but they might answer or counter other symbols being used to manipulate mass opinions, and thus change some of the minds doing or supporting the bombing. i don't see how trying could be objected to.

surely we don't object to polemics around here?

im sick of your nutjob shit, nessie. and im curious as to whether youve ever asked yourself if anyone (anyone at all) appreciates it or learns from it. i know for a fact most people arent appreciative, which means youre not helping.

also, you cant fight the "war" from your living room, or bunker, or wherever it is you hideout. warfighting means taking risks, and all you seem to talk about is avoiding risks. meanwhile, id suggest that you see a shrink, and bring along some "writing" samples so they can see what i mean about you being a delusional self-referential paranoid.

Well, Nessie used to write those columns for the bay guardian, which were fairly good. They covered a topic or piece of history well for the general public. But why doesn't he spend more time writing new pieces like that instead of letting the OCD take control so he has to respond to a small number of people here all the time. Present what you have to say in a professional format rather than as quips.