On 6th October I forwarded an item by Lenin on terrorism and what I called mass struggle, but he called "street demonstrations".
In this he said
>we supported the use of violence by the masses against their oppressors,
>particularly in street demonstrations
I do not think the left really addresses the point specifically except at an intuitive level, but breaking windows, and throwing stones is a form of violence. The very serious policing operations in Gothenburg and Genoa and the blunders by the police were because they were trying to contain, in the interests of their masters, tens of thousands of demonstrators, 5-10% of whom might become violent.
Throwing stones can kill people and this is sometimes glossed over. Legally permitted organising of demonstrations allows ritual confrontations in great numbers on the understanding that no one should get killed. Part of the skirmishing that goes into these challenges to state power are whether the authorities can think of a plausible reason to ban a peaceful demonstration, just because they fear, and the organisers know, it might turn violent. Both sides go up to the wire, sometimes literally, and then the battle moves onto the television screens of the world. The message then becomes the economic leaders of the world caged in a wire, and surrounded by smoke and sirens.
Fundamentally this is a challenge to the forces of the state and the emerging Empire state - can their armed forces suppress their enemies and maintain sufficient consensus among most of their subjects that they are acting in an impartial just manner. It was getting very difficult.
The fundamental relevance of Lenin's blunt arguments can be seen in the fact that WTC terroristic attack has utterly punctured the momentum of the global anti-capitalist protest. No one should advocate violence, and it is in order to reduce the sum total of violence and injustice that protest is progressive. But the sooner the mass street protests against the sins of Empire resume again, the better. They have a better chance of success if they present themselves as entirely non-violent but it is true that it will mean tens of thousands of protesting individuals in confrontation with tens of thousands of armed men required to support the status quo.
Chris Burford
London