Yes, I have a few ideas, but I can't share them here publicly. Several anarchists on the East Coast have come up with a few new strategies to neutralize the advantage that New York cops have, but we aren't quite ready to put them into motion. Chuck0
------------
I wrote something last night on this and deleted it. But after reading about the Holland Tunnel incident, I changed my mind. Here are some points from memory of the old days.
The best way to avoid getting penned in by a fixed site is mass scale. I think you want at least a 100:1 or better ratio of protesters to cops. If the cops close off the area too soon, they will get trapped between those on the inside of their line and those on the outside. If they wait too long, then they are likely to be spread out and be ineffective. But scale is completely contingent on context. Around here 30k pissed off people would completely stop everything, whereas in NYC, it would probably take 300k for the same effect.
If the cops expect a big demo, they will try to locate their command and troop assembly areas in a fortified locations like parking structures or underground garages near the demo stage or likely center. The idea is they will arrive in the middle of the demo and try to drive the crowd toward the perimeter. At the perimeter there will more cops waiting to channel crowds outward along pre-selected routes.
So the counter-tactics are first of all mass scale, with multiple centers of action, some peaceful some not, some very large, some smaller, but nearby. You also want an indefinite time line. Clear enough for the demos to start but unclear enough for the cops to manage. All together this makes containment and control very difficult.
Every city is different with different sorts of problems. If I expected a very big turn out in a fixed location, I would try to choose an area that was slightly too small. That way if the cops try to surround it, the crowds will fill in behind them. If the cops wait too long they will be spread too thin. Since every place is different that means making use of different ways to make the demo site porous or permeable, like too many side streets and alleys, or a lot of subway stations nearby. In other words some feature that makes it impossible to get penned in.
I used to think of these things as medieval war games. If there is a big main event, then auxiliary events that are more disruptive become a way to de-centralize and disperse the cops and their efforts. And there is always the traffic snarl to work with.
I guess I have to point out that none of these tactics require premeditated violence, since the cops can be guaranteed to supply that as they panic.
As for alienation of the masses. I don't think so. Anti-war events are more likely to polarize than alienate. I think making that polarization explicit is or should be part of the goal.
Start adding up the costs from the al-Bushid perspective: polarization of EU, UN, NATO, and now hopefully the US public.
I think of this as a large scale process. First there is alienation from government power (already accomplished), then there is polarization (on the way) by the exercise of power or its threat. What follows from that polarization is an increase in the isolation of power. In the isolation phase, power discovers its limits and usually panics. So we or the US public are at about stage one and half, heading into the polarization phase. I think its time to find out who really supports this administration and its bogus war and who doesn't. So let's polarize and see.
In case it isn't obvious, what I want to see is the polarization process solidify and then progress toward the isolation phase.
Chuck Grimes