Yes. I read it last night and sent comments about it to another list. If people are interested, I can re-post my comments.
I think that it is an interesting essay, but one that is rife with generalizations about anarchists and the anti-globalization movement. The most valuable part is about communication styles, which I think is worth considering as we fine tune our processes. I had a similar discussion with some working class anarchist friends in September. They were in town for the protests and they expressed their problems with the deliberative, process-oriented style of movement meetings. They said that they were more comfortable with a no-holds-barred argumentative style of communication.
What I pointed out to them and in my response last night was that these processes were developed for good reasons: 1) to empower quiet and shy people; 2) to minimize the problems with men dominating meetings, and 3) to short-circuit authoritarian leftists who want to run things based on 'democratic centralism,' in other words, a meeting with decision made by simple majority and run by a steering committee of leaders.
Lakey also took some swipes at 'diversity of tactics,' both fair and unfair. Yes, to some extent, there are many people in the movement who are tired of the nonviolence vs. property destruction debate. They have made their minds up and want to focus on doing stuff. It's pretty unfair to ask them to debate this endless topic constantly. Diversity of tactics was adopted partially out of recognition that people around the world use different forms of dissent. And activists in North America don't fall into clean categories. The black blocker smashing a window is just as likely to do Indymedia or cook food at the next protest. The activist who does teach-ins at one week of actions is just as likely to do the black bloc the next time.
Diversity of tactics also provides space for more diversity in the movement. Here in Washington, if you want to be part of a group that has strict nonviolence guidelines, you can join the Mobilization for Global Justice. If you want more flexibility, you can join the Anti-Capitalist Convergence.
Many people pigeonhole me as an advocate for violence and property destruction. I may be vocal about those things, but my actual position is ecumenical. Puppets and nonviolence are cool with me too.
Diversity of tactics is no more a cop out than adopting a set of nonviolence guidelines. There still is discussion in the movement about these issues, although more people are tired of the discussion.
Lakey also mentioned something about having interesting discussions with Trotskyists and Maoists in the U.K. I guess the think that our social movements should become some kind of leftist debating society. To a great extent that already happens on email. Frankly, I'd rather debate and talk to working people than I would Maoists (if you can find any).
<< Chuck0 >>
Infoshop.org -> http://www.infoshop.org/ Alternative Press Review -> http://www.altpr.org/ Practical Anarchy Online -> http://www.practicalanarchy.org/ Anarchy: AJODA -> http://www.anarchymag.org/ MutualAid.org -> http://www.mutualaid.org/ Factsheet 5 -> http://www.factsheet5.org/ AIM: AgentHelloKitty
Web publishing and services for your nonprofit: Bread and Roses Web Publishing http://www.breadandrosesweb.org/
INTERNATIONALISM IN PRACTICE
An American soldier in a hospital explained how he was wounded: He said, "I was told that the way to tell a hostile Vietnamese from a friendly Vietnamese was to shout ‘To hell with Ho Chi Minh!’ If he shoots, he’s unfriendly. So I saw this dude and yelled ‘To hell with Ho Chi Minh!’ and he yelled back, ‘To hell with President Johnson!’ We were shaking hands when a truck hit us."
(from 1,001 Ways to Beat the Draft, by Tuli Kupferburg).