Reflections on the Demise of Bash Back!

Print PDF

The following article, "Reflections on the Demise of Bash Back!", is from the recently released zine Pink and Black Revolution #6, available for download here.

Bash Back! was started in 2007 as a network of queer anarchists to have a specifically queer presence at the Democratic National Convention and Republican National Convention protests in the summer of 2008 noticing this absence at past mobilizations. Bash Back! quickly expanded, with chapters across the United States. One of the main themes of the 2010 Bash Back! convergence was the assertion “Bash Back! is dead.” I would like to offer some thoughts on this assertion and its implications.

On the Network
Bash Back! formed as a network with a specific goal in mind: the DNC/RNC convention protests. At the time of BB!’s formation, there were no national organizations/networks specifically for queer anarchists. While long-standing queer anarchist groups have existed in specific cities and regions for years, these groups have a local focus. Bash Back! formed to fill a need for a national network of queer anarchists, which was demonstrated by its rapid growth and popularity. The establishment of a national network was deemed useful at the time for its ability to gather a large number of anarchist queers in the resistance of the previously mentioned conventions/summits. This also demonstrates the desire for a large number people to rally specifically around this identity.

Points of unity were adopted and more chapters popped up across the country. The only requirement for membership was adopting the points of unity, which led to the creation of a decentralized, very informal network of chapters (with some international presence). The structure of the network also facilitated quick expansion, because it did not operate on a traditional, formal principles of organization and instead focused on building a network between autonomous local chapters. Emphasis was placed upon taking action. Ideological and tactical unity was not prioritized beyond the points of unity. Even these points offered only a basic framework of broadly defined anti-oppression, anti-assimilation, liberation, and diversity of tactics. Bash Back!, as a network rather than a formal organization (such as a federation), did not make any formal attempts to define its political analysis.

The local chapters that comprised Bash Back! were far from homogeneous. Chapters were linked only by a name and perhaps some social connections, with each chapter being unique in how they formed, how they operated, and what they did. For this reason, it is difficult to speak of Bash Back! members as a distinct group, since there was no ideological unity implied by membership in Bash Back!, nor was membership controlled or tracked in any way. Some chapters were more active than others, with the Midwest having a high concentration of especially active chapters.

While there was no central organization for Bash Back!, there have still been national convergences after the founding convergence. These are different from conventions or conferences, as participation was not limited to members of the organization, and no decisions about the network itself are made. Rather, the convergences focused on the strengthening of the network in an informal sense.

On Tension and the Death of Bash Back!
“Is our violence one of substance or of image?”
- “Questions to be Addressed Before the Bash Back! Convergence in Denver”

Once BB! began its rapid expansion (after the summer of 2008), questions of political unity began to arise, culminating in conflict at the 2009 convergence. One reason is that, with the growth of Bash Back! across the continent, the personal connections that had been established due to the relative proximity of the first chapters were no longer in place. While there has been no formal political position for the organization, informally it seemed that the first chapters had strong affinity with the others, especially tactically. At the 2009 convergence, strong disagreements (both political and tactical) arose between participants in an action. In the absence of strong personal connections, these conflicts were intensified.

By the time of the 2009 convergence, Bash Back! actions that involved multiple chapters had also become less frequent.

Actions were taken by individual chapters, rather than the multiple chapters that had been involved in the DNC/RNC protests, the Mt. Hope Church action, and the Avenge Duanna campaign. While it is impossible to pinpoint a reason for this decline, it is likely that the decrease in multichapter actions contributed to the declining tactical unity.

The formation of personal connections from taking action together declined as BB! grew. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as it could indicate a shift of focus to working locally or to clandestine activity. In any case, it points to a weakening of the inter-chapter bonds that had characterized Bash Back!’s origins.

Political and tactical differences, unable to be resolved by any organizational process within Bash Back!, grew into competing visions of the organization. At the 2010 convergence, this culminated in a discussion regarding the future of BB!. The competing visions of Bash Back! centered on the organizational form of the group. Some people advocated an organizational form more akin to a federation, with formalized relations between chapters and a stronger emphasis on political/theoretical unity. Others claimed that Bash Back! is dead/ought to die as an organization.

Many points would come into question later: the question of organization versus anti-organizationalism, affirming queer identity versus negating identity, the nonviolent versus those calling for a diversity of tactics, autonomy versus revolt, building an autonomous queer liberation that displaces state/heterosexual power versus destroying the existent. It is necessary here to make clear the role of identity in creating these tensions. Those who felt that self-identification was the necessary basis for entering into struggle clashed with those who saw understandability and identification as necessarily the recuperation of struggle.

Bash Back! was declared by some people to be dead immediately before the 2010 convergence in Denver. While the veracity of the statement is still a point of contention, the idea of Bash Back! being dead provides an excellent starting point for a discussion of the role of Bash Back!.

As an informal network, BB! was never focused on the tasks of formal organizations, such as signing up members, conducting political education, or defining campaigns or strategic directions. These tasks, if they were to be done, were left up to each chapter. Thus it is difficult to speak of BB! as a whole, because it did not have explicit organizational positions or policies.

Indeed, the chapters across the country varied in size, activity, and organization. Some chapters openly recruited while others were established from preexisting networks of friends and comrades. The wide differences between chapters makes discussing BB! problematic, because what constituted BB! was never clearly defined beyond an agreement with the points of unity. The ease of joining BB! allowed for tremendous growth in visibility and numbers, with actions across the country being claimed by BB! chapters and members.

On Organization
“If we are ever to have a member-list, count us off of it.”
- “Questions to be Addressed Before the Bash Back! Convergence in Denver”

The extremely decentralized organizational form that Bash Back! adopted at its inception brought with it limits and trade-offs. These limits, coupled with the identity-based nature of BB!, can provide some theoretical insight into the rise and fall of Bash Back!.

Political and theoretical unity was not a priority for Bash Back!, with action and networking as the main impetus and expression. While this position is not inherently problematic, the internal contradictions of queer identity resulted in complications in the attempt to build a network of queer anarchists. Because queer is widely understood to be an explicitly social identity rather than an explicitly political identity, the actual political views of the people who constituted Bash Back! varied tremendously. This occurred despite the anarchist principles of BB!; anarchist was used in a sense of a passive political identity, rather than asserting any specific political unity. The lack of political affinity became problematic when membership was based on a social identity. This limited the options that Bash Back! had for organizational form, as any shift towards formalized structure such as a federation model would be hampered by the lack of ideological unity amongst the loosely-defined members.

Bash Back!’s organizational form also had implications for the longevity of the group. Lacking strongly defined membership, delegated responsibilities, and specified strategy and goals, BB! had no processes by which to sustain itself in any official sense. As stated earlier, the group was founded with an emphasis on networking for a specific set of actions (the DNC/RNC protests), that is, to fulfill a specific need.

Rather than focusing on organizational permanence for its own sake, Bash Back! relied on the minimum amount of structure needed to achieve its goal of building a network of queer anarchists.

Organization in response to a specific need makes organizational permanence unimportant once the need has been satisfied. If organizational permanence becomes a secondary concern, then the demise of an organization is not undesirable. Indeed, dissolution is a preferable alternative to continuing an organization for its own sake. The product of a shift from a highly decentralized network to a more formal organization would irrevocably change the character of the organization. The desire to attempt such a radical restructuring of an existing organization indicates that a premium has been placed on the name and legacy of the organization, instead of the actions that created its reputation. If an organization is not meeting people’s needs because of structural limits, it seems more reasonable to discard it.

The End
“Fuck, Just Fuck”
- writing on a wall during action planning debate BB! convergence May 2010

Bash Back!, at its inception, was an attempt to fill a void—the lack of a queer anarchist network. Bash Back! was constituted by the affinity of its participants, and this affinity was expressed through action, and new chapters emerged as a result of a certain resonance carried by Bash Back! actions. While the origins of Bash Back! as a tendency based on resonance fostered its growth, it also allowed for different chapters to re-envision Bash Back! from their particular political desires and local situations of struggle. Bash Back!’s status as a network imposed certain limits; limits that could not be broken without fundamentally shifting from the model that allowed for its initial success.

To speak of the death of an organization generally connotes a negative event, but this relies on the assumption that organizational permanence is a good thing. Moving past this assumption, the question becomes: have we accomplished our goals with this organization, this means, this tool? If the answer is affirmative, if the organization has been pushed to its limits, perhaps its death is deserved. If Bash Back! is dead, the resurgence in anarchist queer activity and networking remains. Relationships now exist that would not have existed had Bash Back! never formed. When our projects reach the end of their usefulness, letting them go is no cause for concern.

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Crimethinc. Look Back at their Childhood

Print PDF

There's an at-times-interesting and at-times-funny piece by Crimethinc, "Fighting in the New Terrain: What's Changed Since the 20th Century", which (if you have the time) is worth skimming, up at anarchistnews.org

Why amusing? Well, partly just because it's funny to remember how oblivious these folks could be when they started out, and even more so that to the degree that they now acknowledge this, they still need to frame it as "what's changed with the terrain". I.e. the implication being that they were clueless because they didn't see the changes coming, rather than maybe that they simply didn't see things properly as they were even at the time. Such as:

The defining provocation of our early years was to take literally the Situationists’ dictum NEVER WORK. A few of us decided to test out on our own skin whether this was actually possible. This bit of bravado showed all the genius of untutored youth, and all the perils.

...

In the late 20th century, when the majority of people identified with their jobs, refusing to pursue employment as self-realization expressed a rejection of capitalist values. Now erratic employment and identification with one’s leisure activities rather than one’s career path have been normalized as an economic position rather than a political one.

No real acknowledgment here that what they needed today's economic conditions to notice was being shouted at them by all manner of anarchist well-wishers at the time. They were neither "on the cusp" of unemployment, nor of the debate about work, which goes back further than Marx and the utopian socialists.

That's what's a bit irritating about this piece. Under the guise of being humble, it's really quite self-congratulatory. While Crimethinc may be unpopular amongst many anarchists, may have been criticized by many comrades, that remains unconnected from the fact that today "much of what we proclaimed has become passé".

However, for those interested in recent anarchist history, this is an important document. It does provide an account of how the changes of the past twenty years have been experienced subjectively by one of the most dynamic sections of the anarchist movement. It also provides insight into the ongoing weaknesses and blind spots of this tradition.


Related: Butch Lee's review Would You Shoplift "Days of War, Nights of Love"?

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Can't Stop the Kaos: A Brief History of the Black Bloc

Print PDF

Excellent news, comrades - at a time when inquiring minds want to know, the folks at Autonomous Resistance have delivered the goods, producing this snappy little pamphlet history of the Black Bloc in europe and north amerika.

You can download Can't Stop the Kaos from their site, or mirrored here.

Read. Discuss. Apply.

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Afterglow

Print PDF

What happens when the foundations are cut out from under an observation? When a solid thought gets emptied out, vacated, left as hollow as a drum? When we're talking ideas, what does a giant with feet of clay look like? An emperor with no clothes? Could what seems that way really be a chrysalis, an intermediary stage in which an idea jettisons that which was old and truly comes into its own?

What i've been thinking about is a subsection of all those things that we "know", but we don't know why we "know" them. The countless cases where, as a former Attorney General once apologized, we don't know how to define something, but we "know it when we see it".

i'd suggest that this feeling can indicate one of two things, each one a consequence of transition. On the one hand, perhaps it's a sign of a thought or observation in the process of forming, coming into being - something that can be intuitively seized as a logical conclusion, even though we haven't done all the math yet. An obvious way forward, a part of building.

That's not what i've been thinking of, though.

What i've been thinking of is those cases when a belief still feels self-evident, but the intellectual road that got us there has been obscured or lost. So we're left with the observation - we may even cling to it - but we can no longer explain why it's so. While it still feels important, its presuppositions seem obsolete.

Former conclusions float free, untethered from the ideas and movements and context that they were tied to. Perhaps they will be integrated into new movements or grand theories, perhaps they'll find other freefloaters and together form a foundation for something new, or else... do they disappear? or do they just wait to be rediscovered? i'm not sure...

In any case, this orphaning process, this process of conclusions surviving the death of their arguments, is what i mean by "afterglow". Like the embers of a fire that's gone out, or the afterimage you get after you stare at the sun, or the feeling one might get in the last moments of a drug trip.

i've been thinking this way in relation to the transition away from the 20th century left, our present time of post-whatever, and specifically the way in which some of the political insights from the previous movements have survived their parents' demise. Am wondering where they'll end up.

For instance, a lot of anti-sexist and anti-racist "common sense" was actually the result of hard ideological and political battles within and between different groups of people. Queer and trans realities exist not just because of struggles by the "progressive movement" but also because of struggles within and if need be against said "progressives". (These are the broad outlines, if anyone wants examples there's a litany of anecdotes and horror-stories preserved for the anti-nostalgic who want to feel good about how far we've come, or who want to fuel the drive to distance themselves from their own movement's past.)

The movements and thought-structures that produced this "common sense" and these new realities no longer exist. Or if they do exist, they might as well be unrecognizable. Subjectively, we feel like we're in a time between cycles of struggle, a low tide, or an interregnum, as one of my pals is fond of saying.

If one were to explain ideas that way, i guess what i'm talking about could be translated as "ideas losing their material basis" - all i'll stand by, though, is that they've lost their mooring.

So what will happen to these ideas? Will they be reintegrated into the left? If not, have they been internalized sufficiently to be retained? As part of the left or as part of society in general? Or will they slowly fade away?

The context in which i have been asking myself this is the relationship between insurrectionary anarchism and the insights that get put under the "anti-oppression" umbrella.

On the level of theory, i understand insurrectionary anarchism to be hostile to identities, and to be hostile to the 20th century left and to the various social movements that existed in its orbit. Insurrectionary anarchism seems therefore to be hostile to the movements and schools of thought that produced most of the insights about racism and sexism, and which helped to create the space in which queer and trans liberation could sprout. (i'm not talking about "identity politics", but i'm talking about the presupposition that we're not an unvariegated mass, but that we individually and collectively have specific experiences which give us more in common with some people than with others.)

At the same time, many of those who seem broadly within the insurrectionary anarchist orbit are obviously very serious about opposing racism, sexism, gender oppression and homophobia. Their intellectual lineage may have been hostile to these insights and breakthroughs, but these certainly constitute their reference-points now nevertheless.

But insurrectionary anarchists seem to be uncomfortable theorizing about this. And when they do, they're not really that radical, or new, or even interesting. And so i wonder to what degree their opposition - real and fierce as it is, today - is a consequence of afterglow - right now the insights of yesterday's left may still seem "obvious" and like "common sense" even to those who reject their lineage, but how will they look in the future? As optional? As having been superceded? It's open to question.

i would argue that within the broader radical left, this process is further advanced in regards to opposition to antisemitism. Once an almost axiomatic aspect of being on the left, opposition to antisemitism remains widespread but undertheorized, and in some quarters you get the sense that it is being looked at like the guest nobody can remember inviting to the party. Nobody wants make a fuss (apart from those who enjoy drama for its own sake), but there are signs that its place at the table is coming up for grabs.

i'm not talking about a process that only effects those who are comfortable with these developments. Whether one is for or against it, happy or sad about it, the way antisemitism is presently undertheorized is evident both is the superficial arguments of those of us who can simply repeat that it is "bad" and also in the dishonest arguments of those who say they're against it but that the real problem is talking about it.

to think about...

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Reflections on the RCP's "Legitimate Revolt Is Not a 'Conspiracy'"

Print PDF

Just finished translating this text by the Revolutionary Communist Party - the Quebec-based Maoist organization, not the american avakian outfit - examining post-G20 fallout on the left: http://theredflag.ca/node/18

Legitimate Revolt Is Not a “Conspiracy” provides a pro-militancy critique of the "Trotskyist and revisionist" left and their shameful rush to spit on the Black Block and present themselves as "good protesters". It is a welcome voice of solidarity, and as such the RCP stands out from the morass of shameless sycophants on the left, who just couldn't wait to reassure the state that they were "good protesters".

What the RCP has to say is correct, and refreshing. And even amongst those of us who favor militant action, some of their observations bear repeating. For instance:

The protesters’ stated goal was to attack the fence. This action was about attacking a symbol of power, oppression and exploitation. If the police stopped them, then there were other targets – perhaps less significant, but still symbolic – and a segment of the protesters took them by force. The heavy deterrent force employed by the police was not enough to prevent this legitimate expression of those protesters who attacked other targets – mainly police vehicles, media vans, and big chain stores. Small businesses were not attacked, citizens were not hurt, there was no looting. In point of fact, there has been more carnage at certain Stanley Cup riots in Montreal. In 2008, when the Canadiens beat the Boston Bruins, there were 11 police cars that went up in flames.

It is easy to claim that an attack against the fence would have been more meaningful and would have enjoyed greater public support. The political meaning would have appeared more direct and obvious to the masses. We can’t know for sure. What we do know for sure is that the police and the public authorities understood these to be attacks against their power. They understood that this was a political action. No Stanley Cup riot was ever followed by 1,100 arrests!

 Or better yet:

Accusing the revolutionary masses of being agent provocateurs is a dishonest ploy to cover up one’s own refusal to play a vanguard role. It amounts to situating oneself as an elite that hopes to replace the current elite. One denies the role of the masses, their political positions. One denies their capacity to transform society. One denies the possibility that they can make mistakes or score successes, just as one refuses to admit that the bourgeoisie and its authorities can also make mistakes. The elite is supposedly all-knowing and all-powerful; the only logical response is to hope to join it, as the masses are supposedly stupid and easily manipulated. This is what the Trotskyists and revisionists are: wannabe bourgeois full of contempt for the masses.

The RCP's contribution is not surprising - this organization has consistently supported militant action and resistance. Despite political differences on a number of points, these are indeed comrades. So far as the anti-G20 events go, they're on the same page as we are.

That said, the RCP's document is thought-provoking for other reasons, too. Despite - or in fact, because - we are on the same page for the main story, it brings out other areas where we may disagree. Worth examining, perhaps, in the spirit of solidarity and respectful exchange.

As already noted, the RCP is almost the only organization from the "party-oriented" left to support militant resistance. This "party-oriented" tradition - which is entirely of Marxist descent, and which has organizational genealogies going back decades and in some cases much further than that - stands in contradistinction to what i call the movement-oriented left, which is of mixed descent, with Marxist influences for sure, but less consciously so. The movement-oriented left often seems to "have no past" organizational history beyond a few years, and of course is much more likely to want to wave the black flag of anarchism. (It of course suffers from some serious weaknesses too, but we can leave those til another day.)

The RCP text itself does not touch upon this distinction, and that gives it an odd feel. For instance, the torched cop cars and broken windows are not described as the work of political activists, but of "the radical wing of the protesters" or even simply "a section of the masses". To name the key political current behind this militancy would be to name anarchism, which the RCP's text does not do.

This leads to weaknesses.

First, this frames what happened in a much more "organic" light than warranted. It is true, of course, that political activists are not "outside of" society or various social classes, but it is equally true that their (or our) political attacks mean something different than spontaneous outbreaks of popular or working-class violence. As the comrades point out in their comparison with the Stanley Cup riots, in many ways politically premeditated activity is far more important and threatening - but by the same token, as a barometer of where things are at with the "Canadian population", our self-consciously organized activity has to be given less weight, not more.

The desire to blur premeditated political activity into "a revolt of a segment of the masses" leads to a distorted appraisal of capitalist hegemony, but just as importantly it makes one's texts and analyses seem disconnected from reality and propagandistic. With no disrespect intended to the comrades, who i know take seriously the injunction to tell no lies, when many people read this stuff with a dispassionate eye, they go away with the feeling that they have read something dishonest, or at least misleading.


While it is certainly true that many "regular people" joined in the fun on the 26th, it is just as true that some of the rank-and-file or "passive base" of the soc dem and socialist groups did, too. But to the degree that this was rebellion and rage - because for some, of course, it was curiosity and fun - the ideology that held hegemony, not only within the Black Block, but throughout the "radical wing of the protesters", was anarchism. i don't mean that most of the militants were anarchists, but that anarchism is the ideology that most informed the structure and strategy behind the BB in particular and militant anti-G20 resistance in general. To the degree that the 26th was a political defeat for the bourgeoisie, it is primarily anarchism which will take the credit and harvest (or fail to harvest) the bounty.

So what's behind this non-mention of anarchism?

i think it may say something about the division between the party-oriented (or vanguard-oriented) tradition, and the movement-oriented tradition. i say this because it does not seem to specific to the RCP - for instance, this desire to blur anarchist-dominated political activity into "a revolt of a segment of the masses" reminds me of the Sparts and other Trots who, when they want to be sympathetic about anarchist militancy, tend to describe it in terms of "angry" or "frustrated" "youth" or "young workers". (i recall the milquetoast american SWP went through a phase of referring patronisingly to "fighting youth".) Within the "party-oriented" left, there is a tendency to see everything outside of the "party-oriented" tradition in passive sociological terms, maybe more than a "class in itself" but somewhat less than a "class for itself", or at least without conscious political plans or strategies. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.

This coyness does have consequences not entirely separate from those mentioned above. For instance, when the RCP states that "The proletariat is not really interested in debates on the evils of Stalin, or the quarrels between different Trotskyist sects," they are certainly correct. But if they are thinking specifically of "proletarians interested in revolution", then i think many of these people are in fact interested in what they've heard about Stalin. Not only is the Stalinist legacy one part - not the main part, but a factor - in why since the 1980s in Canada Trotskyism has enjoyed greater success that Maoism within the shrinking milieu of the party-oriented left, it is also a large factor in why anarchism and other non-Marxist ideas hold sway in the much larger and more dynamic movement-oriented left. (Plus, let's face it: that majority of "the proletariat" that does not care about debates between Trot sects, rarely cares about the GPCR or the Makhnovists either.)

Certainly, given the importance of anarchism within the "revolutionary segment of the masses" who were active on the 26th, i think for communists to dismiss the question of Stalin - by which people often really mean, "what went wrong with communism in the 20th century?" - is an error.

Which brings me to the final point - look at how the RCP ends its text:

To convince the masses in English Canada that communism and revolution go together will require a broad campaign of ideological decontamination to wipe out Trotskyist and revisionist ideology. Maoists in English Canada should take on this operation. While it is certainly true that the surrounding ideological scene is infectious, in deepening the ideological struggle it will be possible to free it from its opportunist tendencies.

Calling for "ideological decontamination" and "wiping out" ideologies is partly a matter of writing style, and i certainly know that anarchists and everyone else can be sectarian too. But this kind of metaphor - incorrect ideas being "contaminants" that must be "wiped out" - can lead to a qualitatively different political stance. One should deal with incorrect ideas differently than one deals with infection. The medical model is not conducive to democratic process. For those of us who cannot dismiss debates of the "evils of Stalin" as irrelevant, this kind of metaphor is not very appealing.

In all, though, i gotta repeat, the RCP's statement on the anti-G20 events is a welcome voice of solidarity. My criticisms are not criticisms of the document - which is overwhelmingly good - so much as questions and observations regarding the relationship between different traditions of struggle.

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Montreal Anarchist Bookfair this weekend May 29-30!

Print PDF

MONTREAL ANARCHIST BOOKFAIR 2010

MAY 29-30, 10am-5pm

at the CEDA, 2515 rue Delisle

(a short walk from Lionel-Groulx metro)

FREE. Welcome to all!

For anarchists and people curious about anarchism.

Check out the HIGHLIGHTS below: Main Hall, Kid Zone, Introductions to Anarchism, Workshops and Presentations, Film Room, Indigenous Solidarity Room, Anarchist Parents Discussion Room, Anti-Capitalist Resistance Room, Anarchist Cabaret, Festival of Anarchy and more.

Participants from all over Quebec and North America, booksellers and vendors, workshops, films, discussions, kids activities, art exhibits and more!

NOTE: During this year’s Bookfair, tabling will take place over TWO DAYS: May 29-30, between 10am-5pm.

[français: www.salonanarchiste.ca]
[fully updated information below and on the website: www.anarchistbookfair.ca]
[please post and forward widely; curious about anarchism? check us out!]

----------

The Montreal Anarchist Bookfair -- and month-long Festival of Anarchy -- bring together anarchist ideas and practice, through words, images, music, theatre and day-to-day struggles for justice, dignity and collective liberation.

The Bookfair is for people who don't necessarily consider themselves anarchists, but are curious about anarchism, as well as a space for anarchists to meet, network and share in a spirit of respect and solidarity. All are welcome.

The Bookfair is organized in a spirit of openness towards the different traditions, visions, and practices of anarchism. Together we share a commitment to promoting anarchism through the values of mutual aid, grassroots democracy, direct action, autonomy and solidarity, while opposing oppression in all its forms.

The Bookfair and Festival of Anarchy provide an important gathering and reference point for anti-authoritarian ideas and practice in North America.

• What Happens at the Montreal Anarchist Bookfair? Read more here: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/about/what-happens-at-the-bookfair
• Accessibility Statement: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/accessibility

----------

HIGHLIGHTS:

MAIN HALL: The Bookfair features over 100 booksellers, distributors, independent presses, zines and political groups from all over Montreal, Quebec and North America, and abroad. This year’s out-of-town vendors come from France, England, Switzerland, Belgium & Sweden; Oakland, Baltimore, Washington, Cincinnati, New York City, Indiana, Virginia, New Jersey, Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut & Vermont; Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Fredericton, Halifax, Guelph, London Hamilton, Toronto, Kingston & Ottawa; Trois-Rivières, Drummondville, Saguenay-Lac St-Jean & Quebec City; and more! For a full list of vendors, visit: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/participants

KID ZONE!: Fun activities, snacks, outdoor games, craft room, quiet space and more for all interested kids (and their parents): http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/kids-and-parents

ART & ANARCHY: Art & Anarchy brings together the creations of dozens of anarchist-inspired artists and organizers. This year’s exhibition will include sculptures, paintings, posters, banners, drawings, and other multi-media forms. info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/art


INTRODUCTIONS TO ANARCHISM:
- On Saturday, May 29 at 1pm:

• Anarchism and Its Aspirations (Cindy Milstein)
• The ABSs of Anarchism (Anna Kruzynski & Marco Silvestro)

- On Sunday, May 30 at 1pm:

• Anarchism without Anarchists / Anarchism with Anarchists: The Practice and Relevance of Anarchism (Jaggi Singh)
• The History of Anarchism in Quebec (Mathieu Houle-Courcelles)

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/workshops



SATURDAY WORKSHOPS & PRESENTATIONS (May 29):

• 11am: Refusing to Be Abused: Histories and Present Realities of Copwatch as a Tool Against Police Repression (Copwatch Montreal & Winnipeg)
• 11am: Self-Management versus Capitalist Management (Nicolas van Caloen)
• 1pm: Building land defence and anti-colonial resistance movements: Becoming a force to be reckoned with (Shabina Lafleur-Gangji & Matt Soltys)
• 3pm: Solidarity City: Migrant justice and the everyday practice of mutual aid and direct action
• 3pm: One Big Union and revolutionary syndicalist movements in Quebec and in Canada (Mathieu Houle-Courcelles)
• 3pm : Practical strategies for anarchist writing (Alexis Shotwell)

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/workshops



SUNDAY WORKSHOPS & PRESENTATIONS (May 30):

• 11am: Anarchism and Riots (Marc-André Cyr)
• 11am: Panel: Taking Ourselves Seriously: Developing Strategy for Social – Transformation (Chris Dixon, Cindy Milstein and Maia Ramnath)
• 12pm: Anarchist Writers of Fiction Meeting (facilitated by Norman Nawrocki)
• 1pm: Basic Computer Security (the Koumbit Network)
• 3pm: Eugenics in Anarchism and Feminism (AJ Withers & Griffin Epstein)
• 3pm: Capitalist Authority versus Anti-Colonial Breakout: The example of the militant direct-action Civil Rights movement in one Northern u.s. city, 1960-1965 (J. Sakai)
• 3pm: Sea Piracy and Anarchism: Beyond the myths (Marco Silvestro)

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/workshops



FILM ROOM (Saturday, May 29):

• Deux roues sur terre (Guillaume Girard, 2009, 66 min., FR, Uruguay / Canada)
• Slug love (J. Mary Burnet, 2009, 3min.30, EN, Canada)
• Contre-culture à vendre (Pierre-Luc Junet, 2009, 7 min., FR, Québec)
• Tortilleria (Chloé Germain-Thérrien, 2010, 3min.30, no dialogue, Québec)
• Motions for web (Anita Schoepp, 2010, 4 min., no dialogue, Québec)
• I didn’t know what to say to him (Jessica McCormack and Stephen Brown, 2008 7 min., EN, Québec)
• Psychic Capital (Jessica McCormack and Rae Spoon, 2009, 16 min., EN, Québec)
• If CSIS comes knocking (People's Commission Network, 6 min., EN, 2010, Québec)
• Interviews from Defenders of the Land 2008 (45 min. excerpt, 2008, Winnipeg)
• Regards de société : Afrique, Palestine, Montréal (Santiago Bertolino and Steve Patry, 2009-2010, 65 minutes, FR, Québec)
• Les Anarchistes (2009, 25 min., FR, France)
• Whatever happened to Who’s Emma (Lyndall Musselman, 2009, 27 min., EN, Canada)

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/films


INDIGENOUS SOLIDARITY ROOM (Saturday, May 29):

• 11am: 500 Years of Indigenous Resistance (with Gord Hill, Kwakwaka’wakw)
• 1pm: Justice for Missing, Murdered and Disappeared Indigenous Women (with Bridget Tolley, Algonquin from Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg)
• 3pm: 20 Years Since Oka: Kanienkehaka Communities in Resistance (with Clifton Arihwakehte a member of the Kanehsatake Mohawk Community)

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/indigenous-solidarity-room

ANARCHIST PARENTS DISCUSSION ROOM (Saturday, May 29):

• 11am: Alternative Birthing (presenters include Martine Quimper, Melissa Bellemare, Francine Rhéault and others)
• 12pm: Radical Learning and Education (with the Rad School, Cap Libre, Jerry Mintz from the Alternative Education Resource Organization in New York, Kamala Bhusal of Sri Aurobindo Ashram/Orphanage in Nepal and others)
• 3pm: Supporting parents dealing with state authorities

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/kids-and-parents


ANTI-CAPITALIST RESISTANCE ROOM (Sunday, May 30):

• Toronto Community Mobilization Network (TCMN)/Southern Ontario Anarchist Resistance (SOAR)
• G20, Power and the Economic Crisis (Coalition féministe radicale contre le G20)
• Student Resistance to the G20 (le Regroupememt Anti-G20 Étudiant (RAGE))
• The Economic and Ecological Crisis of Capitalism (presented by the popular education of the
• Anti-Capitalist Convergence (CLAC2010))

info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/clac2010



ANARCHIST CABARET (Friday, May 28, at Il Motore, 179 Jean-Talon Ouest): A kick-off and benefit for the Montreal Anarchist Bookfair. A night of music, hip hop and dancing: Micros Armés, Dramatik, Chaotic Insurrection Ensemble, Emrical and Don’t Put Charles on the Money. info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/anarchist-cabaret-may-28

FESTIVAL OF ANARCHY: The entire month of May in Montreal is part of the Festival of Anarchy, with diverse anarchist-themed events occurring at different venues all over the island of Montreal. info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/festival-of-anarchy

DONATIONS: The proceeds from this year’s Montreal Anarchist Bookfair will support the DIRA Anarchist Library (Montreal) and the new Anarchist Bookfair Accessibility Fund. info: http://www.anarchistbookfair.ca/donations

Curious about anarchism? Check us out!



TO STAY IN TOUCH:

• e-mail: info@anarchistbookfair.ca
• web: www.anarchistbookfair.ca
• telephone: 514-679-5800
• announcements list: https://masses.tao.ca/lists/listinfo/salon-annonces
• facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=71082453058
• twitter: http://www.twitter.com/BookfairAnarMTL

On FRIDAY, May 28, after 8pm: We’ll be at Il Motore (179 Jean-Talon Ouest) for the Anarchist Cabaret.

On SATURDAY, May 29 and SATURDAY, May 30, 10am-5pm: This year’s Anarchist Bookfair is taking place in two buildings, which are across from each other. Our main space is the CEDA (2515 Delisle), and adult education and community center based in Little Burgundy/St-Henri, site of the Bookfair for the past 8 years. We are also using the Georges-Vanier Cultual Center across from the CEDA.

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Spartacist (ICL) Theory of Anarchism

Print PDF

The International Communist League, represented in (english) Canada as the Spartacist League, have a theory of anarchism emerging specifically as a result of the "low tide" or "movement interregnum" that followed the last cycle of struggle. In other words, in pissing-contest fashion, the line is put forth that because the left is weak, well-intentioned people are drawn towards anarchism. (In so doing, they seem to draw on Lenin's accusation that "Anarchism was not infrequently a kind of penalty for the opportunist sins of the working-class movement.")

For instance:

The emergence of anarchism as a prevalent ideology among radicalized youth today is a reflection of what we Marxists understand as a global retrogression in political consciousness following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991-92 and the restoration of capitalism in the Soviet degenerated workers state and the deformed workers states of East Europe.

Yippedy doo daa!

The implication being that a strong and vibrant left would see the decline of anarchist ideology.

Now i'm not an anarchist, nor am i a Trotskyist, so in the pissing-contest sense of this discussion i can say "i don't have a dog in that fight." But as a member of the radical left, as a post-anarchist leftist, i am interested in what evidence supports or contradicts this theory.

Ideas, anyone?

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Crass: There is no authority but yourself...

Print PDF

From Crackle: Crass: There is no authority but yourself...

heard about this video earlier tday, haven't checked it out yet bt thought some of you might be interested...

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Mark your calendars!: Montreal Anarchist Bookfair (May 29 & 30, 2010)

Print PDF

The 2010 Montreal Anarchist Bookfair will take place on the weekend of May 29-30 at the CEDA (2515 Delisle, metro Lionel Groulx). Please note, the next Bookfair will take place over two days (ie. there will be tabling on BOTH days). As well, please note that the Bookfair is taking place later in May than in previous years.

In the coming weeks and months, we will be sending more updates and callouts on this list, with more information, but for now we wanted to inform everyone about the dates and locations of next year's Bookfair (our second decade!).

-- The Montreal Anarchist Bookfair Collective
info@salonanarchiste.ca

-> Our announcements list:
https://masses.tao.ca/lists/listinfo/salon-annonces
->Our facebook group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=71082453058

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Pennsylvania Charges Dropped Against Elliot Madison and Michael Wallschlager

Print PDF

"Tortuga" is the name of the collective house where Elliot Madison and Michael Wallschlager live. Madison and Wallschlager are the two anarchists who were arrested at the G20 protests in Pittsburgh in September, accused of using twitter to help demonstrators avoid the cops. Following their arrest, Tortuga was raided by the Joint Terrorism Task Force, seizing boxes of personal belongings - computers, passports, even stuffed animals.

This just out on the Friends of Tortuga blog:

In the face of a PR nightmare, Pennsylvania authorities have withdrawn all charges against two members of Tortuga accused of using Twitter to aid protesters at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh. At a hearing today, instead of oral arguments regarding a defense motion to unseal the secret 18-page affidavit authorizing the arrests of Elliott Madison and Michael Wallschlager at a motel just outside of Pittsburgh, the prosecution immediately moved to withdraw all charges against the two before the defense had a chance to argue its case. Although clear from the beginning that these charges were absurd based on the State’s very own laws, our housemates were incarcerated for 36 hours, had their van towed and belongings confiscated, and one house member was given $30,000 in straight bail.

The District Attorney and his spokesperson were at pains to explain why the State would drop all charges against these dangerous twitterists and of course, refused to admit that these charges were unconstitutional and a heavy-handed attempt to scare anarchists and others from protesting in ways unsanctioned by the government. Instead, the prosecution says they decided that pursuing the charges “would be unwise” after consulting other law enforcement agencies and because of other pending investigations. The secret affidavit authorizing the arrests in Pennsylvania is set to become public on Nov. 23rd. We imagine the Pennsylvania State Police will seek an extension to keep this document sealed—perhaps in order to hide the flimsiness of their secret evidence? However, no matter the reason, we will fight to unseal this document and we will not let the State hide behind sealed evidence, obscure innuendo, and other traditional tactics used by secret police.

Though it is a victory that all the charges against our two housemates were dropped in Pennsylvania, we cannot forget that there is still a mysterious grand jury and other “ongoing investigations” out there. While we may be free from criminal proceedings now, we are still under the threat of future charges/indictments. What these might be, when they might happen, and what cause the State has is, of course, secret. Although our only option is to wait and see, we refuse to let them go about their business ruining our lives in peace and quiet and will continue fighting them every step of the way.

For more information and updates, please go to friendsoftortuga.wordspress.com

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Report from Pittsburgh G20 Protests

Print PDF

Below, a report by an anarchist participant at the G20 protests in Pittsburgh (from Crimethinc):

This is on-the-spot reporting just in from the first day of the G20 summit in Pittsburgh, which has seen a great deal of spirited resistance and confrontation—perhaps as much as has occurred at any anarchist mobilization in North America in half a decade. This gushy, hastily composed account presents the context, attempts to convey the spirit of the day, and raises a few preliminary questions.

The basic narrative of the day runs thus: The protesters attempt to reach the summit site, but are brutally forced back by police. They eventually turn around and march through Pittsburgh neighborhoods and shopping districts, where the police pursue and attack them. Property destruction intensifies in response to these attacks, and the conflict culminates in a standoff between police and students during which a black bloc destroys a business district.

One might interpret all this as legitimate acts of revenge for the police murder in London at last spring’s G20 summit; but it also signifies the survival of militant street resistance in the Obama era.

Never Felt More Alive
In the monotony of capitalist daily life, it’s easy to forget that we have a negotiable relationship to reality. Streets are for faceless traffic; crowds are impersonal assemblies of strangers studiously ignoring each other; windows are for displaying merchandise, or staring out of as we wait for shifts or classes to conclude; decorative stones outside banks or fast food franchises are inert objects devoid of interest or possibility.

When all this is interrupted and the unknown opens before us in every instant, the world becomes a magical place. In these moments, we discover new organs within ourselves—or if not new, then atrophied or atavistic—adapted for an entirely different way of life than we are used to. It turns out we are creatures made for another world—and made well for it!—who are barely getting by in this one. Changing worlds, we shift from malaise and misery to incredible joy and pleasure: finally, we are at home in our own skin, in our own environment. Charging down the street together rather than driving down it separately, fighting or outrunning police rather than submissively accepting their authority, we come to life.

No words can do justice to this experience, but it is real—one day of it is realer than a decade of rental contracts, traffic tickets, service work, and nights at the bar.

The Tension Mounts
The first out-of-town anarchists arrived in Pittsburgh apprehensively. The protests at the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions had been almost the only national anarchist mass mobilizations in half a decade, and they had hardly been unqualified successes. Many around the country seemed skeptical of mass mobilizations, even including those who stated they were going to Pittsburgh.

In the anti-war era that concluded with the 2008 DNC and RNC, it had been standard for police to allege that about 5% of expected protesters would be “bad apples,” and to craft their arrest estimates appropriately. But this time, while the police said they anticipated 3000 protesters, they announced that they expected to make up to 1000 arrests, ratcheting up the proportion of bad apples to 33%. Police arrest estimates in advance of the 2008 RNC had proved accurate—did that mean that practically every anarchist who attended the G20 protests could expect to be arrested?

On top of all this, the story circulated that 100-200 “nonviolent” inmates were to be released from Pittsburgh jails to make additional space for protesters. This itself counts as a victory of the mobilization, but at the time it sounded ominous.

The city announced that there would be something like 4000 police on duty, augmented by National Guard. Downtown Pittsburgh was practically a military occupation zone, with assault-rifle-wielding soldiers staffing road blocks and helicopters overhead.

The weekend before the summit, police harassment increased, with police paying visits in force to local collective houses thought to be occupied by anarchists. Several aggressive raids and preemptive arrests had preceded the 2008 RNC; these visits were tamer by comparison, but still brought back bad memories. Police also detained the Seeds of Peace bus that was to help provide food to protesters.

Tuesday afternoon, there was a picnic for protesters at Friendship Park, a mile east of Arsenal Park. Numbers seemed low, though some locals insisted there would be many more by Thursday. It seemed that some planned buildup actions weren’t coming together; indymedia reporters grumbled about having nothing to do. The Climate Convergence scheduled to coincide with the International Coal Conference September 21-23 appeared disorganized. No one knew what to expect next.

The Eve of the Storm
On Wednesday, September 23, while some bloggers complained of boredom, anarchists and other protesters were scrambling to prepare for the following day. How many people would come to the unpermitted mass march scheduled to leave Arsenal Park at 2:30 p.m.? Would the police block the march in the park, or attack it as it proceeded southwest towards the site of the summit at the tip of the peninsula of downtown Pittsburgh?

Some people were concerned that the presumed march route was a disaster waiting to happen; the two-mile corridor between Arsenal Park and the convention center passed between a river and a cliff, offering only a couple parallel roads and long stretches without exits that seemed perfect for blocking in crowds. The neighborhood was sparsely populated, marked by empty lots surrounded by barbed wire; it was a full twenty blocks to the shopping district outside the convention center. Surely thousands of police would be able to contain and mass arrest a march that made it far enough southwest towards the summit. On the other hand, other protesters argued strenuously against marching east away from the summit, on the grounds that this would lack clear messaging and could create tension with working class residents of the neighborhoods any other route would have to pass through.

The geography of Pittsburgh is challenging—cliffs, steep hills, and gullies break up the city in such a way that there are few routes between many neighborhoods. The northern part of central Pittsburgh, where the march was to begin, is sharply divided from the southern part, where many of the major universities and shopping districts can be found. Any route for the march, whether towards the summit or away from it, would involve a variety of risks. Some anarchists were only expecting a few hundred participants, a number which would be comparatively easy for the police to control.

Adding yet more suspense, the spokescouncil Wednesday night barely concluded in the midst of police intimidation; participants had to scatter as riot police and undercover agents surrounded the space. All night helicopters and police cars roamed the city.

September 24, 2009
A student march arrived at Arsenal Park around 2 p.m.; by 2:30, the park had over a thousand people in it. This was a considerably different scenario than some out-of-town participants had anticipated.

Once you have a certain critical mass of participants, everything changes. A crowd that extends further than a city block is much more difficult to pen in; even if police can pen that many people in, they may lack enough vehicles or maneuvering space to arrest and transport them all. A broader diversity of participants, such as generally exists in larger crowds, can also discourage police violence. And while both police and protesters can lay concrete plans for an unpermitted march of up to a few hundred participants, past a certain threshold no plans can take into account all the unpredictable factors that result from so many people acting autonomously at once.

One might even extend this metaphor further to describe movements as a whole. So long as they remain small, they can be predictable and limited; but past a certain point of expansion, their energy and diversity give rise to a feedback loop that produces more energy, diversity, and expansion. Anarchists in the US are not used to organizing events in which more than 1000 people participate; sometimes it even seems we hesitate to try, whether for fear of being immediately quarantined by the police or out of lack of imagination. This can contribute to our own self-marginalization. The experience of being together in such numbers at Arsenal Park and in Pittsburgh throughout the remainder of the day was unfamiliar and exciting.

A tremendous amount of credit is due to the Pittsburgh G20 Resistance Project for doing such an impressive job involving participants in the Thursday action. The successes that occurred in the streets today would have been difficult or impossible without such numbers. Some anarchists had initially feared that it was a mistake that the unpermitted march was not scheduled to take place contemporaneously with other events; days of direct action at the 2000 and 2004 RNCs that were scheduled not to coincide with other actions had been unsuccessful, whereas the Seattle WTO protests and the 2008 RNC protests both succeeded because a wide range of protests occurred simultaneously. But, as Pittsburgh locals had insisted it would, it proved advantageous that no other actions were scheduled for the first day of the summit: it meant that the unpermitted march drew together everyone who wanted to oppose the G20, legitimizing direct action and involving participants from a wide variety of backgrounds. One comrade reports discovering early on that Cindy Sheehan was marching next to him in the middle of the black bloc.

First Movement
As large as the crowd was, leaving the park still looked dicey—riot police were blocking it to the east on 40th Street, and it appeared they could move in to block 39th at any point. Shortly after 2:30, a small segment left the park, moving up 39th towards Penn and Liberty, the two parallel avenues leading toward the summit to the southwest and into the Bloomfield neighborhood to the east. The rest of the crowd slowly filled the street behind them.

As soon as the crowd reached the top of the hill, the divisions over march route emerged. A small but spirited black bloc headed east toward the neighborhoods and shopping districts away from the summit, while others behind them shouted that they were going the wrong way and directed everyone southwest. Some of the latter reputedly shouted “Don’t take the bait!”—perhaps alleging that the attempt to go east was a infiltrator provocation. In any event, the black bloc returned to the crowd moving towards the summit.

The march only proceeded a couple more blocks before running into a serious line of police resistance. A prerecorded dispersal order could be heard playing over a loudspeaker, punctuated by the crack of tear gas canisters being shot; this eerie refrain was to repeat over and over throughout the day in various situations, lending an Orwellian atmosphere to all confrontations with police. In such a large crowd, it was difficult for those towards the back to tell what was going on ahead; the sight and scent of tear gas in the distance was enough to send many moving down a side alley. Some anarchists emerged from the alley with trash cans and a mobile dumpster. At the foot of the hill ahead of them was another line of riot police and military vehicles, shooting tear gas and attempting to force them back with military audio weaponry that sounded something like a car alarm.

Imagine, if you will, gentle reader, the animist version of this story in which dumpsters, long accused of complicity in anarchist “lifestylism,” step out of their social role to join the social war. Free food, even when distributed via programs like Food Not Bombs, is not enough—we want freedom itself, and the dumpster does too, and it gains momentum down the hill as it rolls, alone and magnificent, directly into a pair of oblivious policemen.

There followed a period of chaos, as various contingents of the march attempted to make their way forward without being penned in by police. This was made more challenging still by the chaotic atmosphere, the fact that many groups had already lost track of each other, and the unfamiliarity of many protesters with the terrain.

In such a high-pressure situation, decisions take place anarchically, and not necessarily in the best sense of the term. Neither voting—noxious as many of us hold it to be—nor consensus process are possible. Instead, it is as if the hundreds of people involved are collectively operating a Ouija board, in which all their individual movements—conscious or unconscious—strain against or flow into each other, becoming something different and unfamiliar, even supernatural. A person or group can occasionally have agency, for example when one person’s shouting voice happens to be heard above the uproar: “GO LEFT!!!” That person may know exactly what he is talking about, or he may be a police officer; usually, one hears so many conflicting instructions that it is impossible to choose rationally between them. The crowd surges to one side, then to another. One may have personal goals of one’s own, but as the context is constantly shifting according to what others are doing and where they are going, one often cannot simply carry out one’s own program. This may explain the sensation of “losing oneself” described by rioters and psychology professors alike; it is simply a fast-paced microcosm of the way individuals struggle to make their own history as infinitesimal components of a much larger society.

The role of the stressful discussions that often take place before these events, then, cannot be to plan out exactly how they will go, but simply to familiarize the participants with some of the questions and possibilities.

Second Movement
Some protesters remained in the neighborhood for over an hour, never making it more than a couple blocks further southwest, harried by police at every turn. Another body of marchers, numbering approximately 200, slowly began to move out of the area, returning east along smaller streets and soon ceasing to encounter police. Many of the neighborhood residents, especially the poorer ones, came out to watch and shout support from their doorsteps. The marchers emerged from the neighborhood onto Main Street, and shortly found themselves on Liberty Avenue where it turns to move southeast into the Bloomfield neighborhood. One way to view the events of Thursday afternoon is as a process in which the idea of going east rather than west slowly gained legitimacy. At first, participants had rejected it outright as a violation of the goals of the march; now, this retreating group reluctantly accepted it as inevitable, though not particularly desirable.

As Liberty Avenue makes its way southeast through Bloomfield, it passes through a shopping district full of small restaurants, bars, and banks. The march was remarkably timid in this environment, considering that there were no police around whatsoever. Perhaps it really is true that property destruction largely occurs as a reaction to police violence; it may even be that self-professed insurrectionists find it psychologically easier to smash things in the comparative danger of a police confrontation than in the absence of any authorities. In any event, there was practically no property destruction until finally a bank on one side of the street was attacked.

Police cars eventually appeared at the back of the march; they did not act until an the sirens of an ambulance approaching from the front were mistaken for police reinforcements, causing the crowd to panic and begin to disperse or move onto the sidewalk. The police took the initiative, and the march was dispelled.

Meanwhile, the comms office was being raided by police. One person arrested there is being held on $30,000 bail as of this writing, and another on $5000 bail. The comms system kept working, however.

Third Movement
At this point, it was almost 4 p.m. Friendship Park had been hinted at as a potential reconvergence point, and now the announcement went out over the Twitter system to regroup there. The participants in the march east down Liberty were already in the neighborhood, and moved north and west to meet their comrades at the park, who were filtering in from the deadlock to the west.

Soon the crowd was a few hundred strong. Some of those present had not expected the day’s events to go as far as they already had. Now they were inspired by the experience of taking the streets together, but not yet satisfied.

In contrast to earlier in the day, the general consensus now seemed to be that there was no sense in attempting to go west to the convention center, and that instead people should head southeast towards the plush shopping districts of the Shadyside and North Oakland neighborhoods. This was still a risky proposition, as those neighborhoods were separated from the Bloomfield neighborhood—in which Friendship Park was located—by geographical barriers.

And the police were no longer concentrated to the west, either. Now they too were gathering at the park and in the surrounding area. Before they could get control of the situation, a new march started out heading due south towards the intersection of Millvale and Liberty. Millvale crosses Liberty and spans a long bridge south into North Oakland; but such a bridge would offer an easy opportunity for police to surround a march, and there was a line of police already at the intersection. A great part of the march continued east down Liberty, picking up where the march an hour prior had left off. A bank in the area suffered broken windows.

Another group managed to cross the Millvale bridge into North Oakland, where the windows of a BMW dealership were smashed and strenuous games of cat and mouse ensued with police forces. Video footage from this area also shows fatigue-clad thugs kidnapping a protester from the area.

Meanwhile, the rest of the march continued down Liberty, at first outdistancing the police. Speed was of the essence at this point. Had the march moved any slower, dire consequences would surely have ensued for the participants; had it moved faster, things might have turned out better. Despite this, there were still some participants who insisted on shouting “Walk!” when others, aware of imminent danger, were calling out “MOVE!” or, more responsibly, “Slow jog! Slow jog!”

The march turned onto Baum, heading southwest towards North Oakland; lines of riot police appeared, attempting to secure the area and attacking marchers. The front of the march had rushed ahead to get around police lines, but some doubled back to defend their comrades by pinning the police down under a rain of projectiles. The police responded by shooting beanbag rounds, causing injuries. Meanwhile, a little further down Baum, protesters dragged a large section of chain-link fencing into the road to obstruct pursuit.

A few seconds later the march took off again down Baum, now at a run. A Boston Market franchise happened to be on this corner; protesters were enraged from the police attack, and it lost ten windows to a hail of rocks. Regrettably, there were people inside the franchise, who could be seen fleeing the windows; however, there is no indication that anyone was injured.

Now the bridge into North Oakland appeared, and the march crossed it at full speed. On the other side, a bank and KFC franchise suffered broken windows, and the marchers, aware that police were swooping in from all directions, began to break into smaller groups, ultimately dispersing and disappearing.

For the following several hours, North Oakland was filled with armored vehicles and riot police, roving the streets and blocking off areas to seemingly no purpose. When a person has an allergic reaction, it is often not the poison that causes the negative effects so much as his body’s reaction to it. Likewise, the relatively small actions of anarchists provoked a disproportionately disruptive police response. Everywhere an unpermitted march passed, a line of police cars and military vehicles followed; everywhere a window had been broken, traffic was halted by police blockades. All evening Pittsburgh locals could be heard on street corners and city buses decrying the police presence, the hassle of the summit, and the hypocrisy of their rulers.

Fourth Movement
On the other side of town, at the University of Pittsburgh in Oakland, people gathered at the Public Health Auditorium at 5th and De Soto, where a radical cultural event was taking place. The news came in during the performance of a particularly inspiring speaker that the police were raiding the Wellness Center at which injured and traumatized protesters were being treated. It was later announced that the police had not actually raided the space, but only threatened it; regardless, at this point no one present would have been surprised by any outrage on the part of the police.

Nearby, students had gathered close to the bridge to Schenley Park, where Obama had visited Phipps conservatory. Heavy-handed police repression ensued, including the usual electronic dispersal order and tear gas, but this only attracted more and more protesters and onlookers, and soon the crowd numbered up to 1000. Reports described students with t-shirts wrapped around their faces chanting “beer pong!” and “LET’S GO PITT!”; video footage shows them chanting more explicitly political slogans.

Shortly after 10 p.m., a Bash Back!-themed black bloc a hundred or more strong appeared on Forbes Street between Atwood Street and Oakland Avenue. The march was pushing half a dozen or more dumpsters, which were upended in the intersections while seemingly all the corporate businesses on the block lost their windows. Another dumpster was rolled further down the street and set alight before being upended as the bloc fled north.

We can imagine the atmosphere of the street at that instant: the running figures, the explosions of breaking glass reverberating off the buildings, the dim streetlights on masked faces, the sound of nearby sirens reminding everyone that militarized riot police in full force were on the way from only a couple blocks’ distance.

Pamela’s Diner, Panera Bread, McDonald’s, Bruegger’s Bagels, Subway, Rite Aid, FedEx Kinko’s, American Apparel, the Pitt Shop, and other businesses suffered damage. An H&R Block nearby on Atwood also reported vandalism. The bloc moved north, encountering a police substation on which a particularly bitter revenge was exacted. Police vehicles were already in pursuit and presumably speeding ahead to surround the march; however, the terrain of the college district was too open, and too populated by civilians, for the police to easily entrap their prey. Some participants broke off from the march at this point; others continued together as far as Craig Street, where Quizno’s Subs, PNC Bank, Irish Design Center, BNY Mellon, and Citizens Bank were damaged before the bloc finally dispersed.

Immediately thereafter, the police issued another prerecorded dispersal order to the students gathered in Schenley Plaza and around the so-called “Cathedral of Learning,” then fired several dozen tear gas canisters at the crowd. The following hours saw massive police occupation of the university area and ongoing clashes with students extending into their dormitories. As in St. Paul after the first day of the 2008 RNC, comparatively modest anarchist direct action provoked such a powerful police overreaction that the police ended up precipitating conflict with the public at large.

Recession Repression?
As of early morning September 25, corporate media reports cite 66 arrests, the majority of which happened during the evening and may include students caught up in random police attacks. Some of these arrestees have already been released; others are facing serious felony charges. Some charges may yet be filed, based on police and FBI intelligence.

The question remains—why didn’t the police succeed in controlling the demonstrators? Were there simply too many protesters, active in too many parts of the city, too mobile and often too savvy to keep up with?

Certainly, the rank and file of the police force in Pittsburgh are inexperienced—much less experienced than many of the protesters who have been in situations like this before. Video footage shows them forming sloppy lines, struggling helplessly with their equipment, dragging each other back from confrontations, and generally behaving like incompetent buffoons. It’s also possible that the city of Pittsburgh didn’t succeed in assembling their hoped-for 4000 officers; police officers are reported to have been brought in from as far away as Florida and Arizona.

Bearing all that in mind, though, the police were clearly ordered not to make mass arrests—that must have been an executive decision from above. There were several situations in which they could have tried to, but they never did. This is a change in approach from the 2004 and 2008 RNCs and the 2008 DNC. It’s possible that it is simply a local difference, but that seems unlikely. They promised up to 1000 arrests and carried out well under 100, even after repeatedly losing control of demonstrators all day long.

Is this the Obama administration finally coming through for anarchists? (Stay calm—it’s a joke, people.) Seriously, though, could someone high up have something to gain from letting anarchists destroy Pittsburgh? Or were their hands tied by factors we can’t know, like pressure to avoid seeming heavy-handed… or the financial constraints of the recession era? At midnight at the end of the day, an announcement went out that police were having trouble getting fuel and were trying to get a tanker truck to come refill their Humvees. Another report claimed “police not responding to other calls: ‘all units are in Oakland.’” Perhaps this is just more of the misinformation common to the Twitter era; but it also sounds like the first signs of the capitalist empire suffering from overextension as its resources run out.

We can’t know how much this was a victory until the dust settles and the charges are filed. The 2008 RNC was exciting on September 1, but by the following week so many felony cases were pending that it was impossible to see it as an unqualified success. We’ll expand on this report as more information comes in. But it’s important to convey the feelings we have at the end of a day like today, a day when we get to live the real lives we deserve, that we should be able to live every day. The exultation and joy we feel in moments like this is real, too—as real as our felony charges and the grim realities of long-term struggle.

Disclaimer: This was written the night of September 24, immediately following the events described, without time to verify all the reports summarized or assemble additional information. There may be errors; if so, we will correct them shortly.

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

[Voix de Faits] Mon Anarchisme

Print PDF

A heads-up i should have sent out a couple of weeks ago: Nicolas from the Quebec City UCL (the Quebec successor to NEFAC) has written a quick and useful look at his own political evolution, starting from when he was an anarcho-punk back in the 90s.

i wish i had time to translate it (i don't), as i think some of the questions he touches on in passing - notably the question of "counter-power", of turning revolts into "counter-institutions", not only dismantling power but also replacing it with something else - underscore for me the rich ambiuities within contemporary anarchism around the question of political power. Which i guess i find interesting because of my own uncertainty about how to distinguish between political power and state power.

For those of you who read French, i encourage you to check it out.

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST

Jim Campbell, Remembered

Print PDF

A debonaire looking Jim, 1981

It is two years today since Jim Campbell died of a heart attack, bicycling in rural Ontario with his partner Julie. He was 57, and had been looking forward to retiring in a few years, to finally being able to move out of the city.

When i used to visit toronto in the 1980s, Jim was always a great guy to look up and to hang out with. i was a teenager at the time, and he seemed to make the idea of being on the left for the long haul (after all, he must have been in his thirties!) without becoming a lunatic seem accessible and possible.

Plus he was funny as hell, with a sense of humour that could manage the improbable, combining cynicism with hope. i remember on more than once occasion he'd ask - rhetorically, and with a grin - who would be in charge of garbage removal "after the revolution." The question would be answered quickly enough: "I guess people like me will, just like now." A joke born of experience, as you can see below in his reflections on the "lazy faire" middle-class anarchist scene he was a part of for most of his life.

Still on the topic of "the revolution," i remember him joking that when it broke out and things were at their heaviest, he would make the grand sacrifice and volunteer for the dangerous job of going on the European Solidarity Tour. It wasn't self-deprecation, more like a cunning and sweet deflating of the romantic silliness people get into their heads about what the rev will entail.

i knew Jim, and saw him most often, in the 1980s and early 90s. For many of these years his main political activity was putting out Bulldozer/Prison New Service, a news-bulletin (and later newspaper) of writings and artwork by prisoners. It included amongst its authors some of the sharpest revolutionary minds locked down in Amerika at the time. i first read the words of Shaka Shakur, Kuwasi Balagoon, Standing Deer and others in those pages. Eventually with over 2,000 subscribing prisoners, and financed almost wholely out of Jim's wages as a city maintenance worker, PNS/Bulldozer was one of the most important radical publications of its day.

One of my last "political" memories of Jim was when some of us went to table at the Anti-Racist Action conference in Toronto in 1996. Jim had never been a part of ARA, but was certainly a part of "the scene" (i still remember him bumming a cigarette to help calm me down after police on horseback attacked ARA's '93 anti-HF demo), plus he was still one of most respected revs in Toronto, even though he had not been exempt from the internecine fighting which would shortly rip that scene apart. i was tabling with a crew of former ARA members, who were on pretty bad terms with their erstwhile comrades - but with Jim carrying in our pamphlets and magazines (which he got in shit for), we were able to table the entire weekend with no hassles.

Nevertheless, when political conflicts came to a head in Toronto, ripping through the ARA milieu (which was the most dynamic political force on the far left at the time), Jim like many others was left feeling emotionally burnt, and burnt out. i have been told that it was largely this experience which led to his withdrawing from political organizing at that time ... i have also been told that shortly before his death there was some reconciliation, and some tentative attempt to get back in the loop ... But about all this i don't really know, as for me those were busy years - personally and politically - and so with much regret i feel like i hardly saw him during his last decade.

From what i understand, Jim wrote a lot - but mainly in the form of letters to comrades in prison whom he corresponded with. While much of the editorial comment in PNS was undoubtedly by his hand, it wasn't all, and it generally wasn't signed, and so it's difficult to know. Probably his most well-known text is his essay about the Vancouver Five, initially a talk he gave to the Anarchist Lecture Series in Toronto in 1999, then published in the Spring 2000 issue of Kick It Over magazine, and which a group of us subsequently reprinted as a pamphlet (The Vancouver Five: Armed Struggle in Canada - looking online i see it has also been translated into Spanish).

But IMO an even better text is "Fifteen years of Bulldozer and more: The personal, the political, and a few of the connections", a reminiscence by Jim that appeared in PNS #49 in January/February 1995. The article can be viewed and printed as a PDF, but i am also reposting it here. Eitehr way, it is well worth reading in its entirety, not only as movement history, but also as one man's explanation of how he came across his politics:

Fifteen years of Bulldozer and more:
The personal, the political, and a few of the connections*

Fifteen years ago, in February 1980, the Bulldozer collective was formed when 4 or 5 activists from various places in southern Ontario met up in Toronto and decided that we should start working together on prison-related issues since we had individually begun to do so. We were so inspired by the letters we were receiving from prisoners that we decided that should share them more widely, that summer we put out the first issue of a newsletter called Bulldozer - the only vehicle for prison reform.

Much has changed since that time - and generally for the worst. Prison populations have increased in Canada by over 50 per cent, and by much more than that in the U.S. Conditions have deteriorated due to overcrowding and program-slashing. Control Units have proliferated and sentences have gotten longer. More than ever, prisons seem to be an inevitable part of the lives of the poor and marginal. Their role in disrupting and containing the colonized peoples - Native, New Afrikan, and Latino - is as effective and disguised as ever.

With only a few exceptions - i.e. the closing of the Lexington Control Unit for women - the struggle against prisons, inside or out, has been weak and ineffective. Only a few states like New Jersey have any connection with the earlier prison struggles. The prison struggle in Canada which was strong in the late '70s and early '80s met with a combination of reform and repression that killed whatever energy was left. Resistance in the Washington state system which represented one of the final thrusts of the prisoners' movement that reached back to the days of George Jackson was eventually disrupted by forced transfers and overt brutality. Since then conscious and active prisoners have generally found themselves isolated, either deliberately so in Control Units, or simply because the majority of prisoners prefer to remain asleep. Sadly enough, there are many prisoners who have been on our mailing list since the '80s.

On the outside, a small number of very dedicated individuals and groups have kept going, but there has been no movement to speak of until very recently. Prisoner-support work has not been that popular with the left, nor with social activists in general, and as in most movements out here, a year or so seems to satisfy most people's interest in doing the work. In spite of the hard work on campaigns to free particular POWs, such as Leonard Peltier, most of them remain in prison, a constant reminder of our weakness.

But Bulldozer has not survived fifteen years by dwelling on the negative, and I don't intend to. Recently, there have been positive developments on both sides of the border which suggest that we are able to take some political initiative in the crime and punishment debate. The meeting in Philadelphia in December, 1994, in which anti-prison activists from across the U.S. (and Toronto) came together to set up the Control Unit Monitoring Project (CUMP) is certainly a significant step.

CUMP is a major political initiative and will be a test as to whether or not a movement can be built on the outside, working with prisoners, to close down Control Units. The development of this campaign requires a political strategy. As one of the longest standing collectives involved in anti-prison work, Bulldozer has a certain responsibility to assist in this development. Yet we are hampered because we are based in Toronto, and after more than fifteen years involvement with the American left, there is still much that is totally mystifying about radical politics in the U.S.; the enormous division between the various races is particularly perplexing. One of the ways in which we've maintained credibility over the years is because we don't talk about what we don't know. We hesitate to make suggestions as to what outside activists in the U.S. should be doing to advance the struggle, beyond very general principles, because the political realities in the two countries are very different.

With this in mind, I would like to use this article as the beginning of an irregular series that would articulate some of the politics we've developed over the years. It is not intended as a "What is to be Done" but more where we've come from and what we've seen work. PNS does reflect our politics, but they have been more implicit than explicit. We've never written long essays telling prisoners what they should think. Rather, we've tried to provide a forum in which prisoners, individually and collectively, could articulate and develop their politics. We were always more interested in what we could learn, rather than what we could teach. If individual prisoners could learn from us, so much the better, but that would come from ongoing dialogue and communication. The political direction of the paper would be determined by prisoners, even if the decision as to what would or would not be printed was always ours.

Counter cultural politics

Bulldozer's politics are rooted in the counter-culture, going back to a student house begun in the fall of 1971 in Kitchener, Ont. which developed into one of the first anarchist collectives in Canada, with a heavy emphasis on radical psychology and existential philosophy (and sex and drugs and rock and roll.) All through the '70s, the collective tried to maintain a political orientation to counter cultural politics, even as the individualism that was glorified in these movements allowed for the reassertion of race, class and gender privilege, and a reintegration into business-as-usual for many former radicals and activists. In 1979, we moved to the country, and set up a communal dirt-farm with the expectation that it would be a viable rural community from which we could maintain a political practice.

The first issue of Open Road, a kick-ass, and very well produced, anarchist news-journal came out of Vancouver in August of 1976, transforming radical politics in Canada. Many of the articles in that first issue - Leonard Peltier's impending extradition to the U.S., George Jackson Brigade actions, an interview with Martin Soastre, a Puerto Rican anarchist and former POW, coverage of Native and prisoners' struggles - would not look out of place in the PNS today. My own sense of political possibilities and necessities were opened up by the year (1977) which I spent working with Open Road in Vancouver. But there was little opportunity to put them into practice when I returned to Ontario. I became increasingly dissatisfied with the self-indulgence of the counter culture and the anarchist-purism that celebrated it. I missed the more activist-oriented politics of the Vancouver scene but moved to the country anyway to follow the politics of collectivity through to the end.

The farm floundered right from the beginning due to a lazy-faire attitude and middle class arrogance. With self-expression and "do-your-own-thing" as the highest values, most communal members were unable to respond to the realities of a situation determined by an unrelenting hostile climate, and the cycle of the seasons. Having grown up poor and living-in-the-country, it didn't seem to be such a big deal to be back, poor, and living-in-the-country. I left totally disillusioned at the end of 1981, moved to Toronto permanently, cut my hair, and got a full-time job shortly after. I had started to write to prisoners and the first issue of Bulldozer came out while I was still living there. I was keen to continue with the work.

Open Road motivated the creation of a more action-orientated, militant politic in Vancouver such as the Anarchist Party of Canada (Groucho-Marxist) which carried out a series of "pieings" - literally throwing a pie in the face of a politician or celebrity, with Eldridge Cleaver being the most famous "hit" - in order to make a political point. As simple as this may sound, it brought about political and personal transformations from planning and carrying out the actions to dealing with the consequences - confrontations with reactionaries and authorities. The more serious people in the scene started to do support work for the prisoners in the old B.C. Pen whose struggles eventually resulted in its closure. From then on, prisons have been an essential part of the work taken on by our circles.

Out of this came Direct Action, an armed group which in 1982 blew-up an electrical substation on Vancouver Island ($5 million in damages) and a Litton Industries factory north of Toronto that built components for the Cruise Missile ($10 million in damages and several injuries). Some of the same people were also involved in the Wimmin's Fire Brigade firebombing of three video stories specializing in violent porn. They were arrested in January, 1983, immediately putting us into doing support work. In June of 1983 Bulldozer was raided and threatened with a charge of Seditious Libel (calling for the armed overthrow of the state) for the distribution of support-leaflets we were putting out. A mid-wife, living with us at the time, was arrested and charged with "performing an abortion" in an attempt to get information from her about our links to Direct Action. After several thousand dollars in legal fees, and a year of high-stress, all the serious charges were dropped in connection to the raid. After losing several legal challenges over the legality of evidence, the Vancouver Five, as they had come to be called, pled guilty to several charges related to the actions.

Bulldozer was being published irregularly during this time. The 8th and final issue came out in 1985. I was personally and politically exhausted, and Bulldozer as a political project disappeared for two years. Fortunately, a very active group of young high school students in Ottawa had been influenced by the politics put out around the trials of the Vancouver Five. Even as our own political motivation had disappeared in despair, they took the ideas and started working with them, leading to the appearance of Reality Now! an anarchist zine that was very influential. Eventually, their enthusiasm helped to regenerate my own politics. After two years of inactivity the tedium of a comfortable working class life was becoming all too apparent. When Bill Dunne needed an outsider to help him with The Marionette, a prisoners' newsletter he was doing from Marion, I rejoined the struggle. PNS then developed out of The Marionette.

Social history

This provides a brief history of Bulldozer, though it is more of a social than a political history. I want to be clear that Bulldozer developed out of the alternative or cultural politics - i.e. the punks, and hippies, purist anarchism, women, lesbians and gays, etc. - which has been the primary means by which white youth have radicalized over the past few decades. It is all too easy, and certainly necessary, to critique these cultural movements. Their general failure to deal adequately with issues of race and class does make them little more than "white rights" groups as Lorenzo Kom'boa Erwin puts it. The social alienation that originally motivates many white youth into becoming part of these cultural or marginal movements get channeled into an accommodation with race and class privilege. Intense self-absorption, often combined with heavy drug and/or alcohol use, leads them to think that their subjective rebellion has some meaning. But modern capitalism cares little what anyone actually thinks, so long as one produces, or if unemployed, accepts being economically marginal.

The women's movement is, or at least was, different in that it did pose a real threat to the existing patriarchical structures of this society. This can be measured by the severity of the ideological counter-attack waged against it, even if it was discovered that the position of women in society could be changed without endangering the interests of those who get the goods. Awareness of their own misery had lead many women individually and collectively to develop a radical analysis of their social position. This self-awareness became a vulnerability as self-help, New Age therapies - often looted from Native societies in a continuation of the kolonial kleptomania that has characterized white society - were used to help women (and men) to fit into the existing system. Political consciousness was increasingly seen as being part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. The necessary struggle to feel good about oneself - self-esteem - allowed for an acceptance of class and racial privilege.

For all that, though, we haven't turned our backs on the alternative movements. The fundamental oppression and super-exploitation of, and violence towards, women remains. And mainstream culture is a death culture, not much wonder that so many young people, working class and middle class, try to find some life outside of it in one movement or another. Going way back into the early '70s where we were more political than the rest of the hippies, and more hippy-like than the other politicos, we've tried to develop what could be termed the political wing of the alternative movements. Through time, our politics chnaged thanks to people such as Kuwasi Balagoon and the local Leonard Peltier Defense Group - with whom we went through some real hard times from '83 to '85 - as we struggled to come to terms with the colonialism, genocide and slavery upon which North Amerikan society is based. I will take up this topic in some other article, but I wish to return to the politics of the alternative movements.

The original insight that the "personal is political" was truly radical in that it went to the root (radical means going to the roots) of social existence, our own individual lives. So great was the contradiction between the myth of social happiness, and the misery found in most people's lives once they looked, that it energized the various social movements from the '60s on. The slogan originally meant that there is a social context to our personal lives, and that a serious examination of who we are would lead us to understand the political context within which we lived. But its subversive impact has been smothered by reducing the political to the personal, as though nothing mattered politically except for one's personal life and a few close friends.

Yet it remains that coming to understand who we are is a necessary first step towards participating in an authentic liberatory process. Part of the impact of PNS itself is because it speaks directly to prisoners' lived-experience, rather than simply offering an intellectual explanation of political reality. The paper helps those who are struggling to know themselves in spite of living in a cage feel strong - and that's a victory. Coming from what could be called a "secular spirituality", we share with traditional Natives, New Afrikans and Muslims amongst others, the sense that an individual's life is a "struggle" in and off itself; that it is our task as humans to unravel the mysteries of our own existence, to determine the truth within it, and to find the proper direction. Politics come back into it since any honest examination should lead to a clear understanding that this society is based on a complex blend of race, class and sex. Many whites, and others as well, unfortunately back off from these political implications.

The critical importance of understanding the connections between politics and one's personal experience became much more vivid for me when I "remembered" five years ago that I had been subjected to severe and frequent sexual abuse as a child. Suddenly my own life made a lot more sense to me. I had discovered the key to my private mythology. The rage which I had learned to channel into my political work became understandable. It made sense to me why I was drawn by the plight of the prisoner. I had spent much of my younger days isolated, brutalized, surrounded by those much more powerful than I who were out to do me harm, used by bigger and stronger boys. An image that had haunted me for years of a prisoner, beaten down, forlorn and forgotten, huddled in a corner of a cell, had come straight from my own life, figuratively if not literally. I had been driven by a vow - as unconscious as it must have been - to not stand by while others were being abused.

There is much that we've learned over the past few years about abuse and healing that have political implications, particularly for prisoners since surely prison is nothing if not a system of institutionalized abuse. I will take this theme up more fully another day. But for now, I will say that as we became more aware of issues around abuse, it made sense to discover that at least half of the activists we knew were sexually and/or physical abused as children. We had lived the lies and hypocrisy of the family, religion and society. Our opposition to all three was not merely some intellectual construct, nor mere political fashion but was born of bitter experience. I did not need the suffering of others - women, Native people, Afrikans, prisoners or whoever - to motivate me politically. I had resisted long before I even knew there was a struggle. Like many of my prisoner-friends surviving long years of isolation and brutality, something within me refused to be broken.

I was in total mental and emotional anguish until well into my twenties, but for whatever unknown reasons, I was able to focus my rage on the corporate-state, and its bullies and bosses. Political activity became a means of eventual resolution. Slowly, but surely, I connected with other misfits, malcontents and losers. The counter culture gave us a certain space to be ourselves. We might still be totally alienated from society, barely able to function day-to-day, heavy drug use helping to keep the pain at bay, yet we were no longer alone. And we would fight back.

In a psychologized society such as ours, political activity will often be shaped by unresolved personal problems. We are driven by our demons. But working through these problems need not mean the end of the political activism that was energized by the inner conflicts. It should, in fact, mean that we target the enemy ever more precisely. The abuse must stop! We can stop being abusive. We can resist the abuse we're suffering. But abuse is not simply due to personal failure or the lack of appropriate therapy or bad genes but totally integral to a homophobic society that uses class, race and sex to determine who gets what. This is where political will comes in. As long as abuse continues, then we must fight against it even if, or especially if, our own pain and suffering has been eased. *

Jim Campbell


Postscript

I have used Bulldozer as a personal identification in the past, and the article above reflects my personal history and opinions, and have played the main editorial role since the beginning. But Bulldozer can't simply be reduced to me personally. There are several people who currently help shape Prison News Service and their efforts are much appreciated. I do want to acknowledge some of the others who have made significant contributions to Bulldozer in the past.

Sunday Harrison has been around Bulldozer more or less since the beginning, especially including the raid and its aftermath. Her technical skills and creativity have helped give PNS a much more professional look than it would otherwise have had. We have very much developed our ideas together - even if on any particular detail we are as apt to disagree as agree.

Bill Dunne, the editor and main writer for the now defunct The Marionette also was a major influence on my thinking. Our years of exchanging letters certainly tightened up many of my arguments. Without him, it is unlikely that PNS would exist.

After the raid in 1983, our support came from our Native comrades and from women working at a Lesbian print shop. Though I barely knew most of these women, they immediately came through with crucial assistance. It is many years later, but I don't forget those who were there when help was needed. The lesbian community has also done the basic work on understanding sexual abuse and how it affects those who survive it. I would not have been able to write the above if it were not for the personal support and political stimulation and information that came from lesbian friends. We are interested in connecting with anyone else who is working to integrate surivor issues with a radical political analysis.

Jim C.

Jim more recently

Like i said, there's not much written in Jim's name, certainly not enough to get a sense of how important his contribution was. This is much in keeping with his general demeanour, which was always humble, though not in any contrite over-the-top way, but more as would befit "a hippy amongst the politicos."

Here are the very few texts by Jim that have found their way into cyberspace:

• Who will Feed the Chickens?
• Report on an Anarchist Black Cross Conference (from PNS #47, Sept/Oct 1994)
• From 1988 Gathering to AR!1998
  
• The Vancouver Five: Armed Struggle in Canada

There are also two articles by Dominic Ali about PNS:

• The Tense World of Jail Journalism (American Journalism Review, Dec. 1996)
• Hard Labour: Jim Campbell's Solitary Crusade to Create a Free Press Behind Bars (Ryerson Review of Journalism Spring 1996)

And of course reminiscences both personal and political following his passing:

• Lives Lived - Jim Campbell (the Globe and Mail March 19 2008, by Jim's friend Richard Swift and his partner Julie Thiers)
• Remembering Jim Campbell (the Fifth Estate Spring 2008, Vol. 43 #1 #37, by David Watson)
• Stark Raven Radio interview with Bob Sarti & Ann Hansen, who share stories memories of Jim and his work (available on Radio4All and mirrored here)
  

A plaque at Dragonfly farm, to Jim's memory
click to see larger detail

hopefully we'll see you in the next world Jim; until then, you are missed...

CLICK HERE TO READ ENTIRE POST

COLLAPSE POST