Once again, the police beat us, torture us, imprison us, molest us, and now kill us - and meanwhile all hear from the Left is the same old tired rhetoric about "peaceful protest," "nonviolence," and the "mindless desruction caused by the Black Bloc"

I am a Black Bloc Anarchist. One of many thousands. I do not speak for anyone other than myself, but please hear me regardless: I am at this moment ashamed to be part of the "anti globalisation" movement, and not because of the actions of police who infilitrated the Bloc in Genoa - that is a sign of our effectiveness - I am ashamed to be part of an umbrella movement that would allow the state and the police to divide it so easily and sell out some of its most dedicated fighters.

good protestor, bad protestor - good cop bad cop.

either way the state trys to play us off against each other, to divide us, to make us weaker.

At this point it seems certain that there were neo-fascists and undercover cops actively infilitrating the black bloc and doing most - if not all - of the damage against small buisinesses. They could have just as easily infilitrated and discredited the white overalls or the neo-hiipies or the commies or any other group, it could just as easily be you geting fingers pointed in your face and being blamed for not being organized enough or being "violent." And, if they thought you were a big enough threat to bother with, they would have done exactly that.

The Black Bloc comes under fire because we are not just another group of protestors, we are Revolutionaries who are engaged in a war for the survival of our planet and our class. We will, and do, actively work with others, going so far as to put our bodies in between the police and the "nonviolent" protestors who they are attempting to beat. We have done this time and time again. Left-reformists criticize us for not participating in the planning of these demonstrations. What you do not realize is that oftentimes many of the people who laid the groundwork for those demos, the people in whos homes you stay, the people who dumpsterdive and steal the food you eat - are Black Bloc Anarchists. You do not recognize us behind our masks, and you don't bother to question your predjudices long enough to try.

Time and again you - who talk so loudly about "diversity" and "democracy" have ridiculed us, criticized us, attacked us through both the mainstream and radical press; and we forgive you for your shortsightedness and still put our bodies between you and the police who would harm you. We Are not only a valid integral part of this movement, but our participants are among those who laid it's foundation. You stand on our shoulders and spit on us, just like the corporate politicians you claim to oppose.

I am tired of being labeled ignorant and "angry" by people who should by all accounts be my comrades. You discredit yourselves, your organizations, and our movement when you attack us out of your fear and ignorance.

Solidarity is our strength, and you are throwing it away.

All Power to the People!
Lynx
(your friendly neighborhood Anarchist)

Not all reformists are against the BB tactic. (Most of my actions and positions are reformist, and I'm okay with the BB.)

The tactic may have outlived its usefulness, at least in Europe, where the cops now dress up as BB and disrupt the events. But, that's an outsider's perspective. The BB will exist as long as people want one.

Your lead story is a poorly conceived apology for the Black Bloc? When did the LA IMC become a dissemination vehicle for anarchist essays.

I'm not against it, but it seems to bear the name of your local pretty heavily.

Does this mean that those of us with other ideas should start promoting them on the middle bar of our sites?

All that said, I'm a communist and one of many (in fact all I know) who support the BB's activities in general.

In fact, the only people I know who are getting in a tizzy about the resistance activities of a few are salaried activists from groups like Global Exchange. For those of us who don't want a place at the table, the BB has really helped bring the idea of direct resistance to the fore.

That said, I find it fascinating how anarchists accuse communists of being a disconnected "vanguard" and then turn around and do basically the same thing. Even when hundreds of groups don't want their tactics at an event - not on principle, but do to concerns particular to the event - they just go on a rampage anyway.

What about democratic accountability? What about respecting those with different ideas? What about the concerns of opportunism relating to how you latch on to much, much larger events and steer coverage and discussion to your micro-universe?

Anyway - I still think it's inappropriate for an IMC to give priviledged space for one stripe of the movement. We should be an open resource where articles are given the center space and commentary is freely posted along the side.

Great site overall!

Please avoid stuff like saying you can't be criticized, it just doesen't make sense !
I have been in Genova for 12 days and I think BB missed an opportunity. You could have communicated with the movement and you didn't. Neither you get informed about what other people were going to do nor you informed them what tou were going to ! This was the biggest error. Most of blacks weren't italians and didn't show any will to understand the specific situation of Genova and of italian politic.
This also made fascists able to dress black and destroy small businesses and cars. All the intelligent coordination between blocs which happened in Prague was forgotten.
I' m not claiming it's only blacks' fault, but mostly it's theirs.
Black bloc isn't the only way for protesters to use force and I think there are more intelligent ones than those shown in Genova. PLEASE NEXT TIME USE WORDS BEFORE WAR !

An italian fighting for ALL the comrades to be released.

When I was young and growing up in the suburbs of L.A. I was against the VietNam war. What we in the burbs saw of the movement was what the press wanted us to see, because in the burbs there was no left leadership. We thought the people that were the leaders of the movement were Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, and the rest of the "Yippies", and of course on another level the Panthers.

So when we'd hitchhike into LA for a demo we would emulate our heros. Older folks and people doing the day to day work of the movement thought we were nuts and pretty much stayed away from us.

When I finally moved to the city I ran into some folks that realized I just needed a little leadership, a little patience and a lot of education.

What we face now is a world where the working classes and all progressive people are fed up and see through the lies of capitalism in it's highest stage. And the people are taking to the streets! But they are doing it in a spontaneous way without an ideology, without leardership.

We need to develop leadership for revolution.

We need to be sure that we don't push away anyone who is honest and who has the interests of the people in their hearts.

We cannot blame the people for not having direction.

Where do good ideas come from?
Do they fall from the skies?

Dear Burningman,

I don't think you realise what is happening (or maybe you're watching too much television). You are saying that hundreds of groups don't want black bloc tactics yet you refuse to see that much of what you call "black block tactics" is POLICE TACTICS and maybe even POLICE infiltration.

And number 2: Why do you accuse a movement of steering a coverage in any direction? The movement is there the COVERAGE is steered by the MEDIA simply to get us divided and pissed off against each other. Its working I think.

With that...I'd like to say that I'm unaffiliated and glad to see a voices from all kindos of groups being able to express themselves on IMC.


Burningman writes"..Even when hundreds of groups don't want their tactics at an event - not on principle, but do to concerns particular to the event - they just go on a rampage anyway.

What about democratic accountability? What about respecting those with different ideas? What about the concerns of opportunism relating to how you latch on to much, much larger events and steer coverage and discussion to your micro-universe? "

I admire, respect and envy Today's Anarchists.

Blac Bloc, White overalls, Ya Basta, everyone ia the vanguard of our Revolution. I come from Vietnam Protests and was attacked and injured by the Gestapo facist military 'police'. I was a troublemaking agitator.

My resources are not enough at the moment to risk life or limb like my Comrades do.

Anarchists are my heros and I will do all I can to support and spread the Good Word about our current and upcoming Anarchist Revolution.

We don't need leaders (today's technologies are good replacements) since then the Facists can pin blame and use the excuse to commit atrocities. Our Art of War is to keep the Enemy mystified until we vanquish them.

We need to do what Capitalist History said the US did: win WWII. Facism stayed alive ad now is flourishing. We need to erase Facism period.

When millions of us wear black masks and take back the streets, we can join our Comrades around the globe.

You've got to be the only "communist" in the world that would criticize the IMC for giving center column to BB and say nothing about the article previous to that being given to a Democrat!

I'd be curious as to what group you affiliate with so as to stay away from that Party's line.

I didn't say all block block actions everywhere are always appropriate and I didn't say that anyone should be barred from criticizing anyone else. as for the communist who is concerned about the bloc attracting attention to our "microuniverse" - well, quite frankly there are far more anarchs in this movement then there are commies - thank goodness! Unfortunately, due to the fact that you commies are so much more comfortable with haveing people speak for you, you have more speakers on more platforms and so your numbers appear much greater than they actualy are. this is a weakness and a strength in your movement and something that needs to be talked about more in ours. Do not assume that just because certain "figureheads" carry red flags that they speak for anyone other than their own narrow groups.

all of which is a little bit off the point. What needs to stop is this thing where after every protest you see "articles" - diatribes more acurately - against us written by reformists and yes, communists, who want to take control of this movement and see us as a threat, and are trying to expell us. This is not acceptable by any standards of conduct.

As to why the indymedia center gives attention to anarchists, indymedia gives attention to everyone who resists. it might interest you to know that indymedia was founded largely by Anarchists and a huge percentage (I would say most, but there is no way to prove such a claim in either direction) of the people who are involved with indymedias internationaly are anarchs. The question might be more accurately asked "why do they give space to communists who have a long history of betraying and murdering anarchists and other anti-authoritarians?"

The answer is simple: Indymedia is about free speech and Anarchists, unlike some on the left, are not willing to sacrafice our principles in order to gain power or prestige.

If there is a vangaurd, it's not a revolution worth having!
lynx

just free speech and anarchists..
I agree about the former but not the latter.,..
:-)

and I do agree that the great thing about indymedia is that everyone gets an equal chance to defend themselves in a reasonable manner.
I felt that the anarchist that wrote the main article highlighted by the la imc was a great article...
i do know many people who are starting to learn more about the global movement, and the black bloc tends to scare a lot of them into talking shit about them...
i'll have to admit that even I was scared because of their tactics...
and i'm still a little scared, but I do think that some violence is necessary...
but not towards people, more like against just protecting yourself, and maybe being a bit offensive towards objects near people.,..
i don't have problems with them making shields for protests,
and shaking down fences, and removing road blocks, etc..
or running in the face of danger, like most generals and revolutionaries have..
but I do think that it takes a large set of balls to do that..
I don't think I could be an anarchist at this early point in my development of activism, but I do think that the black bloc does things that are brave sometimes, and that bring good attention most of the time during protests...
it only gets ugly when the police begin their deffensive strategies...
i've never seen a member of the black bloc with a gun..
i do however see cops with guns...
all the time at protests..
and as the world saw... through the free speech of indymedia...
we saw Carlo leave us, and die for us in Genoa, Italy...
well, sorry, i'm not super eloquent, but that's what I think...
Thanks,,,
z

lynx, In the purest sense, you are right.

Having a vanguard without involving all theatres of Revolutionary activity is not worth having.

I agree.

SUMMARY: A certain mindlessness has overtaken some Black Bloc actions, and rigidly rejected any criticism. A certain mindlessness blindly condemns Black Bloc in its entirety. Neither form of mindlessness represents a way forward.
==============================

I think this whole issue reveals a fundamental conflict within anarchism: the Black Bloc anarchist strategy vs. the anarchist philosophy of the consensus process. The former, IMHO, is *vulnerable* to some of the same ills as so-called "right wing anarchism," aka libertarianism. It lacks a sufficiently grounded commitment to taking others seriously--their rights, their viewpoints and their welfare.

To say it is vulnerable to those ills is not to say that it always succumbs. Virtually every strategy is vulnerable to some ill or another. Anarchism has the advantage of tremendous freedom in responding to such ills, so it's really a shame to see people failing to use this freedom to examine and seek to counter the vulnerabilities that have become increasingly obvious. Instead we too often get muddled arguments, like the one presented in this story.

A couple of examples:

First, Lynx writes: "The Black Bloc comes under fire because we are not just another group of protestors, we are Revolutionaries who are engaged in a war for the survival of our planet and our class. " This is just self-romanticizing BS at best, and Limbaugh-style straw-man BS at worst. Sure some folks may criticize it on this basis, but to believe this is the ONLY basis means that you simply aren't listening to what other people are saying. And if you aren't listening to others, then can't really be an anarchist. You're just another flavor of self-deluding libertarian. Anarchism involves a profound belief in commonality as well as individuality. If you ditch the first, you're in libertarian country.

There are real, serious concerns about (1) the effectiveness of various Black Bloc tactics and (2) Black Bloc's refusal to be bound by the concensus process. Refusing to address these concerns on the basis of being "Revolutionaries" simply shows that you're ultimately no different from the Communists of the past 70 years. If this is so, then the quicker the movement is rid of you, the better. I sincerely hope that it's NOT true. I think that anarchism has a lot to contribute--just as Marxism did--and I'd hate to see it as badly represented in practice as Marxism was.

Second, Lynx writes: "Left-reformists criticize us for not participating in the planning of these demonstrations. What you do not realize is that oftentimes many of the people who laid the groundwork for those demos, the people in whos homes you stay, the people who dumpsterdive and steal the food you eat - are Black Bloc Anarchists." This further illustrates how completely a certain strain of thnking misses the point. The very same thing might be said about police infiltrators. Would this legitimize THEIR actions? Of course not! No amount of individual (or even coordinated group) contribution to logistics and such is a substitute for principled involvement in the consensus process. Black Bloc qua Black Bloc does NOT participate in the concensus process. This is the crux of the problem as I see it, and all of Lynx's overheated rhetoric is simply a way to avoid this contradiction between anarchist philosophy and anarchist practice.

That said, I realize that Black Bloc does have legitimate concerns about engaging in the concensus process. But the answer to having such concerns is NOT unilateralism that puts itself beyond the pale of legitimate criticism and debate, and it's certainly not this sort of self-romanticizing PR/BS.

Peersonally, I think it's great that Black Bloc is willing to directly challenge the fences that are set up to keep people penned away--and I think it's terrible that they go around trashing businesses. Others will have other points of view. But these can and should be discussed and debated on the merits--not by cloaking ourselves in one garb or another.

The truth is, people are richly complex. There is some of the revoluitionary in virtually every reformer, and some of the reformer in virtually every revolutionary. When you polarize debate ahead of time by invoking these labels, then you virtually ensure that the most vital form of interchange will not occur, the sort of interchange that takes us all--individually and collectively--beyond the categories that, to be honest, are ALL reactionary in a sense, since they are defined in reaction to what exists. It is, ultimately, in that realm beyond reaction where our true freedom, our true identities, and our true future lies. The only way that we ever get their is by letting go of our belief that we have the one true way to get there.

This stuff is so stale it reeks. You've learned nothing from history...maybe haven't studied any, just picked up a few bits here and there at meetings. You can't get anything going (beyond mindless running around in the streets and inconveniencing -- a bit -- the big shots who run the world, because you've got no plan, no program, no good leader/speakers (who's your MLK, Jr.,?), no sacred texts, no charisma, not telegenic types, no spokespeople, no nuttin' but endless talk about "where's the next demo, Dude?" See you in the funny papers.

It"s important to hear from Black Bloc no matter who they are and no matter what they say. How can you have any opinion if you don't hear what they have to say? This is the first time I've heard anything from them. As far as I've been able to tell from the European press, even from the radical Le Monde Diplomatique, etc., Black Bloc was just a bunch of young cop bashers, nasty people at worst and misguided ignoramuses at best. But I don't think that's so now. Reading the above article, I got the whole atmosphere down (especially the food stealing part, i.e. being outlaws). I don't know what, ultimately, is the best strategy in the anti-globalisation struggle. But I do know that violence gets media attention and that movements need martyrs and that what we're up against, money, is in itself a terribly degrading form of violence. I refuse to condone or condemn Black bloc, but I certainly identify.

Okay, while there has been some good feedback posted here, there has been some pretty trite rhetoric too. As far as not having any MLK etc at our lead, that is kind of the point. What part of anarchy don't you understand? The idea is that all are equal and must learn to think for themselves. There is a difference between supporting strong individuals amongst the ranks and playing follow the leader mindlessly. What we need is not a figurehead, but a global change. There have been several posts on various pages by BB, but even some of those are horrible examples. The one at www.alternet.org is pretty good though.
The BB is no more tainted by random idiocy and feedback loop ideology amongst the individuals than any other 'group' out there. Be careful to cast the first stone lest someone throw it back at you. Oh wait, that would not be politically correct in today's non-violent atmosphere. The BB is not all about smashing storefront windows, although it is not entirely ruled out by all. Believe me, most of the hardcore activists out there willing to smash corporate property understand very well what they are doing. Do you simply demonize it outright, condemning it as mindless violence, or do you bother to ask why? That is the real question.
The activists that do march with the BB don't necessarily make it the rule either. I have known Bloc supporters who have chosen not to march with the group on difference of opinion. These are also the people that are out there doing something every day. We are the people who try to live our lives by the creeds we speak. We don't just hop from one protest to another. It is not a mindless seething mob of violence and disregard for others and their rights. That is what we are here for.
First and foremost, I do this for myself and my own. Before the standards arguments of selfishness among anarchy come up, I don't consider it to be in my best interest to go around abusing others. When I say self interest, it is what will best enable me to give life to my morals and ideas. Helping others, including the environment, is all part of that idea. While I refuse to be consumed by the lies of altruism, I will fight and risk what I have to help the faceless masses oppressed every day.
The Black Bloc is not another activist patch you get to throw on your military surplus cammo jacket. They are not a bunch of people trying to intimidate the other activists. You may even know and respect some BB anarchists without realizing it.

'Nobody' wrote: "While I refuse to be consumed by the lies of altruism, I will fight and risk what I have to help the faceless masses oppressed every day."

Say what?

What "lies of altruism???" And why is it worse to be consumed by them than consumed by your own romantic fantasy of yourself as a champion of the downtrodden masses--dare I say it, an ALTRUISTIC champion of the downtrodden masses?