Street corner protests are one of the few outlets that local communities have to voice their descent. Street corner protests allow opportunity for community organizing and building a grass roots movement -- an issue that larger organizations like ANSWER have a problem addressing because of their white male dominated privileged hierarchy. I attended the ANSWER march -- the numbers were few. My estimate is 2,500 NOT 5,000. People are not coming out...ANSWER needs to address this issue. Perhaps they should consider working in local communities with community organizations to organize and educate. They have the power to raise the cash that local communities need. Organizations like ANSWER have a responsibility to local communities and the people that suffer every day because of US and local policy. The ANSWER movement cannot afford to exploit poor people and people of color in support of their own agenda…self promotion is not acceptable…its time to reach out and pass on opportunity and privilege…step aside and hand over the microphone to the people!

It takes lots of time to get the word out. It's all about advertising & out reach. You really need to post 1000's of flyers all the time to get your numbers up.

I think all the vigils should get together and have a conference to discuss ideas.

Most vigils are on Friday nights. Maybe this is not the best time for people? Maybe the sites we have chosen are not the best for out reach and connecting with people. Maybe try different times and locations. Maybe motorists in their commute get use to the site of the vigil at the same place and time every weak? Maybe there are more effective actions that don't require large numbers.

Also vigils can get boring. So try different things like rallying at the vigil site and then marching to other places. Sidewalk marches do not require a permit and you will reach more people than standing there waving at motorists that honk. Or do some other kind of action in your area. Like going to freeway overpasses with large signs or target sites in your area like JROTC at high schools or army recruitment centers.

hope this helps

The buck fush protests lacked a transparent organizing model. It was too diffuse and hard to understand.

I think that some level of real coordination between vigils to increase participation is necessary. This isn't to exert some kind of control over the project, but to allow for organizers to share ideas, and to really set some kind of timetables to measure progress.

This sounds bureaucratic, but, it would have helped me.

You don't need a lot of meetings. I think two or three big ones would have sufficed.

Also, having a global/local idea would have helped. All the local vigils are unified by a global issue, but, I get the impression that all of them have also done some local strike support, and even do things involving the local governments. Had this been more recognized, I think that the vigils' legitimacy would have been strengthened.

And, lastly, because a transparent model of organizing wasn't used, by default, I think the demos became centralized and uninteresting.

These are just some ideas.

Live and learn (over and over).

June 5 was good. Some of the other protest were bigger than saturday, but the size was respectible. I glad ANSWER did this. My complaint with ANSWER is that they don't do work in communities of color. They cater to the white liberals and thats not enought. They only represent a small part of LA. Does anyone know if ANSWER does better on this issue in other regions of the country?

Many vigilistas are moving from the street corners to the freeway overpasses and doing large banner drops.

Many activists in LA have done this at some point.

ICUJP is starting a program of this. See the link

http://www.icujp.org/home.shtml

Also: about ANSWER , they do have a problem with diversity in their ranks. But in all fariness to ANSWER I think they are aware of it and are working on it. ANSWER does stand for - act now to stop war and racism.

Also ANSWER is not a one issue group and does hold together a broad coalition of people, not an easy task.

I think Buckfush would do well to coordinate with ANSWER so that they don't plan events on the same date.

I have been preaching a mass meeting about eight months and I was booed of the Vigil Congress network . Good luck, you make it happen and I will be the first at the door. Harry The Man in the Wheelchair

I just mean that meeting would have been pre-announced, and any news and developments shared via email. Roles would be known to everyone, and maybe there'd be a clear deliniation of what the demo was and was not going to do.

I worked on a part of the project, and felt out of the loop. Not that I tried that hard to communicate either, but, if there were meetings, a lot of things could have been answered.

As for ANSWER, same story, sort of. I went to a meeting of theirs a long time ago, and it seemed like they just wanted bodies to fill jobs.

In retrospect, the project needed a historical committee that would communicate with all the participating projects, and write a newsletter so the different parts of the project could know what the other parts were doing.

The IMC model of self-reporting works/ed, I believe, because people are still caught in the thrall of authoritative media, even while "rejecting" it. I think that blogs got popular, mainly, because we revere authors, but we distrust publishers. Within a networked project, however, this culture probably causes people not to initiate horizontal communication, while, at the same time, mistrusting top-down communication.

What do you think?

Hmmm.

I agree that there could have been more coordination between ANSWER and BUCKFUSH. I do NOT think this was a competition. Those who would attend the larger Demo would, others will hold down the local vigils. We did. The NELA Vigil at Eagle Rock and Colorado blvds accomodated Buck Fush by having our vigil noon to 4 to coincide, we are regularly there 4 to 6 pm. I do wish KPFK would have promoted both equally.

(And if ANSWER is fighting against racism, then they need to be addressing the white male community in a big way. Who better to do that ?)

Coordinating would have helped us all to feel more connected. Personally I am up to my ears with meetings, not willing. That is why I participate in the e-lists where we can discuss and organize from home.

But if folks get together and come up with ideas, hey, I'm in on most of them. And there was one Vigil Congress (two ?) . There is a vigil congress egroup.

Our vigil is not "standing on a corner waving at honking motorists". That is such an oversimplification of our experience ! We engage people from all sides of the issues, we distribute articles and leaflets for events, have voter registration available, did three bake sales, birthday parties. . . .

We have people who pull over and spend 20 to 30 minutes talking with us about thier views, their questions, how they see us (many leave with a very differnent pair of glasses )

However, after over a year and a half of this vigil we are looking for ways to take it to another level. On that I am interested in ideas.

"Another level" to me means moving people to action -
We have witnessed people turning thier radios to KPFK after talking with us. THat is one of the biggest ACTIONs a person can take these days !

But to have people get up and vote, or vigil, or join an egroup, . . . . That would move me at this point.

The next level idea that we've really discussed as yet is to focus on a specific issue each week, get info out re that issue, have signs with stats re that issue, and be prepared to talk with people on that issue.

Well, back to it , Thank you all for all you do !

"Things to do today:
Stop the arms race
Floss"
- Do something for you today !

Nina

I think that the Congress of the vigils failed for a number of reasons.

1- The initiators imposed a structure to the first meeting that inhibited development rather than allowing the attendees to develop an appropriate structure.

2 – “Congress” is the wrong term and structure. It should be more like a loose coalition of those vigils that have already connected via their own self-directed networking.

3 - The congress moved too fast to try to structure and centralize decision making with a steering committee and many people said to themselves "not another top down group I'm withdrawing"

Let’s see the vigils for what they are – local affinity groups. We should organize along the same principles that brought us together and not adopt any organizational structure foreign to those principles.

Let’s meet-up informally like we did on the corners and take it from there.

Also here’s an idea: instead of meeting in some hall somewhere let’s pick a corner at a central location at a time that doesn’t conflict with any of our local vigil times and have a large group vigil/meetup on a corner some where.

P.S.

Thanks for defining the transparent term. I agree that that is the way to go.