>I think you can say the point stronger-- there is no inherent difference in
>expressing your support through wearing a pin versus fighting with cops on a
>barricade, except how the state and others respond to your particular
>protest. In a sense, the level of repression by the state ...
To an extent I can agree with this if we are simply talking about risk and victims. Is this the right way to lok at it though. While I can see the moral attraction of being a victim it also requires that we are losing.
>Frankly, among my friends, fighting with cops up in Quebec (or staring them
>down in DC) is not so much daring as kind of cool, and therefore it actually
>has less political effect. People measure the political meaning of actions
>partly by what they think people are giving up or risking in order to make
>that statement.
450 arrested in Quebec, one in a coma, dozens injured 900+ arrested in Prague, torture (according to Amnesty International) one broken back.
A different sort of risk it's true but some people might see a severe beating or a month in jail as worse then being fired from a McJob. Then again if you have a permanent job and dependants you might look at this another way.
>There were complaints about labor folks just quietly marching through the
>streets (as there were in Seattle), but I would bet among the friends of
>those union folks, the fact that they gave up a weekend to be there is
>probably seen as pretty significant.
Actually the only complaint along these lines I've seen (and I've been collecting articles off 4 of the indymedia sites and a-infos) was from a union member who assumed that the march was going towards the fence and was pissed off to find himself in a stadium miles from the action. But your right, to the non activist it makes little sense to spend money and time going to a demo. I'm not sure this tells us anything that isn't obvious though.
It's possable some BB people have made these sort of critical remarks but anyone who has followed the reports knows they are far from typical and when they arise are actually opposed by other BB people (there was a really long running thread on indymedia a while back in relation to this under the title of 'critism of the manarchy'). I think generally its accepted that there should be a diversity of tactics from everyone except some would be leaders who use pacifism as a bludgen against the block.
>Organizing is all about recognizing that there are a whole range of
>different people in society, who will be moved to action and changes in
>social consciousness through a range of different tactics.
I think this is broadly recognised which is part of the reason the protesters divided Quebec into Green, Yellow and Red zones to facilitate people who wanted to take part but not to get arrested or tear gassed. Unfortuantly the police didn't recognise that division.
Andrew
***************************
International anarchism
Issues-> http://struggle.ws/revolt.html Me + PGP-> http://struggle.ws/andrew.html
Fax: 001 503 218 9764 (US number as it uses Efax)