arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

Loesje, a Dutch action group, put it this way: "All the people who are here have different opinions, but we come along because we all have idealism and love for freedom and justice in common.'"

True. In the demo, there were Turkish people next to Kurdish people, dancing and singing, catholic believers with wooden crosses next to labour union people, and anarchists in the middle of communists - a multiplicity of colours.

In my opinion, this means a breakthrough. We no longer are shallow niche at the edge of society, we are members of a society, and one day, perhaps society in general will see us for what we are: individuals with different ideas, but all demanding freedom, justice and peace, for all.

And diversity means power. We all felt it. But I fear the police must have felt it too. I saw only limited vandalism next to usual tagging and the unfortunate bank bust, but someone, somewhere, was frightened enough to turn our multicultural
feast into a demonstration of force – and a massive violation of our rights.

I would like to correct some mistakes in my article:

In total, the d14-manifestation totalled some 5 bank destructions, and also cars were attacked. When I wrote this article, I did not know this yet. I only saw one. My sincere apologies for this.

To the people who did this: go back to where you come from and never, ever show your face in our demo's again! You saw the news too and for the public, only the violence was shown! Are you completely stupid?

Know this: Indymedia-neutrality or not, you are as responsible for innocent people being injured than the police was. The next time I see one of you doing this, I will personally ignore my vows of non-violence and break your arms. Your disguises and sticks will not help you then.

Maarten, you are a fascist. I am in the Black Block and enthusiastically advocate property destruction of multinational corporations that exploit their workforce and rape the environment. However, I will not tolerate or endrose personal violence in any form (even against riot cops), unless it is in explicit self-defence. When injury to persons is threatened, I have often personally intervened to try and calm the situation down. Obviously you feel that "peaceful" protest can only occur when all your political opponents have been liquidated. There is a word for this attitude. Stalinism.

"Vows of non-violence?" What a joke!

It's so clever to call "fascist" anyone whom disagrea with you.
You should considere it in another way: what is establishement expecting me to do? Am i gonna do what they expect me to do?
Breaking some items is kinda uneffective politically (sorry, give me one example of victory by breaking windows, ;-), but it's good to justify repression sytem...
One more time: this is not about the use of violence, it's about tactical issues.

i think it is important to stress the positive partakings at these protesets. there are good things that happen on this planet every day, and people need to be made aware of them. why follow the mainstream media and highlight only the negative? as an independent media network, we should be focused on the creation of alternatives and the enhancement of all things good.

ps. the comments that follow this article are disapointing. as journalists, name throwing and threats are unacceptable. if we want to represent the free world, than we ourselves must be free.

Haha Maarten, nu wordt zelfs jij al een stalinist genoemd. Werken voor Indymedia is schadelijk voor je reputatie ;-).

Hi,
I wrote earlier telling a post entitled "No Maarten, YOU are the stupid one.". In it I made the point that he was advocating PHYSICALLY ATTACKING people that were destroying property. I argued that he was displaying a nasty, statist, petit-bourgeois mentality, that he equates hurting people with property. I used two "BAD WORDS" in it (perhaps the moderators would prefer if I wrote F******** and F****, does that suit your sensitivie litte eyes that can look at threats of violence from a so-called pacifist? Huh?).
My post has now disappeared. Why? Who took it off? Is this censorship or not?
In short f*** you, you s***-h**** and your "no violence against banks" and "indymedia with censored comments".
If you really believe in diversity of tactics then you should be protecting the black bloc who are _people_.
W.r.t. calling people fascists etc. I don't think that it is too far off the mark to describe a THREAT from Maarten to break the arms of people that don't do what he wants as fascist.

Worst wishes to all the Authoritarians,
-Phuc Hed
p.s. Love and hugs to all the Anarchists out there

I think (hope) that Maarten exeturated a bit in his piece on breaking peoples arms. I understand his anger, although I think it's a bad idea to start dividing the moouvement.

Now to the so called 'revolutionaries' of the black block, who are calling everybody who critizes them middle-class:
However fun it may be to trash a window of a multinational company, IT IS NOT REVOLUTION. Revolution consists of uniting the masses against this rotten system and not in breaking windows. I truly think that your strategy is tactically wrong, I'm not principally against the use of violence, because you can't destoy this system without it.
But you can hardly argue the fact that there was no point in the violence this weekend. Furthermore I would like to ask who is being the petit-bourgeois here. The ones trying to unite the masses or those who think that all you have to do to change the world is breaking some private property?

P.S.: you don't need 'bad words' to make your message stronger, if it is logicaly consistent.

Why don't the black bloc take their violence against property somewhere else more useful to the movement? Their violence would be better exploited by trashing some road-building plant machinery, etc. at the exact time when all the nation's police force is concentrated elswhere (at the demo) Just as symbolic, but would not give the police any excuses for attacking demonstrators. It really is a matter of tactics and of not shooting yourelf in the foot.

Well the only way to really put the pressure on the goverments is by really giving them a good hiding.
Siatel, Prague, Genova will stay in history because they were (UNLIKE brussels) not peacefull. Because people stoped demonstrating and started fighting. People who in their every day life were pushed around decided to bear their teeth and started braking the symbols of capitalism ( THE BANKS NOT THE WINDOWS)
Well maybe you should ignore your vows for non violence and break your own arms. Because at the moment they are as useless as your brain. If you don't decide to fight back you will always be controlled by other people

START THINKING~~~

The energy used to brake stupid property that can be easily replaced should be redirected to the use of good strategy. It was with non violence that Gandhi broke the grip from the strongest empire at his time, which proved that unification was much stronger than violence. I agree that no empire was brought down without blood, but vandalism is exactly what the corporate media needs to alienate the masses. You're not only braking prperty, you're braking our hopes for changing.

there are many arguments that can be made against property distruction, but it is woth noting that since the present cycle of direct action against banks and the rest has begun, thousands more people have joined the movement, and i think it would be elitist to claim that the images of symbols of capitalism being smashed have had nothing to do with this welcome departure. Aside from that, when one lives in a society where every movement is monitored and there is no real leeway for self-expression, it can drive a person insane. when this amount of violence is internalized, it needs outlet or the person will suffer....
for some people, marching up and down with a placard like an automaton is not quite enough

after reading all the comments, expesialy the ones by the "journalists" of indymedia, I can't help remembering the conversation I had with one english photographer in Brussels-indymedia centre, where in a real patronising and furstrated way he was describing me his convictions of non violence, demonizing the self destructiveness of the "black block". People might be right that the black block tactics can be quite stagnated and non flexible (like in the case of dec14, where in my view the attacks on capitalist symbolic targets were tactically tolerated by a permisive never obviously present police force)on the other hand though those self righteous undiglobalization mothers should allways remember that this relaxed assosiation of diverse movements, the media unclusively call undiglobalization or anticapitalist movement was formed on the basis of dicentralised, and pluralist primciples (that are still taking shape)and its uniqueness as well its diversity of political views and forms of action can only be obtained through tolerance and respect for eachother's ways of going about things. Many people blame the anarchists, autonomists,eco-puncs,alternative antiothoritarians of the black block for all the shortcomings of the movement and they even go as far as excluding them from "THEIR" movement, adopting the role of preachers and cops, preaching dogmatic pacifism and reffering to Ghandi without even considering the different historical and cultural context between the situation in India around the time o Ghandi and the conditions in an anticapitalist demonstration in modern fortress Europe. The fact that somebody who has never been in a black block demonstation and perhaps never event had a real decent conversation with a member of the black block can be so judgemental to tactics that are not "aesthetically pleasing" to her/his revolutionary (or mayby reformist?) taste, is adopting the role of a mediaperson, dressed with an aura of objectivity and legitimation, is at least worrying about the quality of imformation published by indimedia. Anyway...such people are happy to institutinalise ressistance and make a name for their authoritarian egos out of well organised and highly commersialised "alternative" fiestas, MY self...no thanks I dont think I will Attend another carnival this year..at least not one so far away from the red zones of everyday life. open allways to disscusion, repressenting the Cultural. Error. Collective of Uxbridge

To quote Yiorgos..

"its uniqueness as well its diversity of political views and forms of action can only be obtained through tolerance and respect for eachother's ways of going about things."

This is a very dangerous line of thought. If we are to be blindly tolerent to all behaviour, why are we protesting in the first place? After all, the european government body is just going about things their own way. Obviously, this is a slightly far-fetched argument, but the point is still valid. Are we to only be tolerent to those in the movement? Turning a blind eye to physical violence done in our name while calling down social and economical violence?

On a less philosophical and more relative note, this kind violence only hurts the cause. Attacking a bank is like placing economic sanctions against a third-world nation. You only hurt the people at the bottom of the social ladder, who have done nothing wrong. These are the people who lose their jobs and their ability to feed their families.

On a more strategic level, no movement can succeed without the support of a very large portion of the general population. You may think 25,000 protesters is a lot, but you are still a fringe cause. The general populous abhors violence, and will never accept you or yout cause so long as you present yourself with the voilent image you have created. The ONLY thing you will succeed in doing is alienating your cause and ensuring that the people you are trying to help will cheer when you are eventually arrested and sent to jail.

As i have lived in an anarchist kommune, i'm proud of those new and fresh people on the streets.Saddly in Portugal, the anarchism mouvement is so passive, that it grows the will to go near these people again.
I feel isolated with the portuguese mentality.
All my love to the freedom fighters.
Alex

Quoth Sean " On a less philosophical and more relative note, this kind violence only hurts the cause. Attacking a bank is like placing economic sanctions against a third-world nation. You only hurt the people at the bottom of the social ladder, who have done nothing wrong."
Are you crazy?
I can see the arguments against non-violent direct-action as "misplaced energy" (although I certainly don't agree with them), but this statement of yours takes the biscuit.
How exactly does breaking a bank's windows hurt people at the bottom of the social ladder?
If anything, the problem with breaking banks windows is that it's too symbolic and not destructive enough. It's useful in that it means that banks will have to shut up for the day and that makes it economically disruptive for these institutions which are one of the most unpleasant day to day faces of usurious Capitalism. It's also useful in that it helps to remind us that respect for THEIR property is misplaced.
It's all about raising costs to the elites. You may have noticed that the most effective demonstrations have been ones where determined non-violent direct-action and also spirited SELF-DEFENCE from the murdering, clubbing, chemical-weapons-using, assaulting, law-violating, POLICE was practiced.
You will be allowed to walk in circles and make fun puppets and spectacle-shattering banners as long as it is ineffective. You will be allowed to NOT march to the Red Zone. You will be allowed to vote for "socialist" candidates in your "representative" democracy. You will be allowed to post on indymedia.org. You will be allowed to work for little for an NGO. You will be allowed to live and die. You will NOT be allowed to CHANGE things.
YOU, and YOU alone can CHANGE things (with other people in a consensus based democratic fundamentally-communist structure). Anything that THEY let you do is only because THEY think it won't topple THEM.

quote->
Why don't the black bloc take their violence against property somewhere else more useful to the movement? Their violence would be better exploited by trashing some road-building plant machinery, etc. at the exact time when all the nation's police force is concentrated elswhere (at the demo) Just as symbolic, but would not give the police any excuses for attacking demonstrators. It really is a matter of tactics and of not shooting yourelf in the foot. <-quote

THIS IS TACTICS. 'sceptical anarchist' is right on this point. black bloc is beautiful, don't understand me wrong, but solidarity can be given more spirit. people who want to smash capitalistic symbols or hurt earth destroying systems, do that! but don't do it at a place with thousants of others there who are voicing themselves and trying to get themselves -their opinions not their acts- heard.

it are two different ways of fighting against the system.
direct action and waking up peoples consions. my opinion is that both are good ways. but both actions can be separeted in place and/or time. and i hardly hear of the direct action -like smashing a bank- without having a demonstration next to it, where are also people who don't want to be involved in violence. i like to respect that.

and yes, phuc head, you will want people respect your fight, the smashing one, as well at a place like d14 brussel. i understand. but the d14 organised a non-violent demonstration, and people came for that. it was the place and time that their voices could be heard.

if the meaning of smashing a bank is that you destroy capitalistic garbage, then you can do it anytime. and please do, but not during the demonstration.

--------
Maarten, thanx for the article. it is great work that indymedia does!

I see many comment here attacking Black Block as if it is one thing but it is not it is many people.
I am a peacful protestor but i repsect the right of the Black Block to attack banks because how is attacking a bank violent?
I have had no violence to me from the Black Block and I do not understand the peoples that say they are violent?
Are the people here that attack the Black Block all policemen in their hearts?
I agree with the criticism of Maarten and I dont think the people that calls themselves anarchists and say no do not attack banks are anarchists because they also in all of their statements here say that the Black Block are violent.
I am not a violent protestor. I am not in the Black Block. I will not break their arms if they come on my demonstrations. They have a right to be on my demonstrations. Who is Maarten to make my rules? What is wrong with breaking a bank windows or burning rich cars?

Hi,
to anyone following this discussion: Maarten's article has been posted twice at belgium.indymedia (along with its "I'll break their arms Erratum). On the second post Maarten offers an offer of "dialogue". So far I've responded. Perhaps others would care to. I still argue that he's a violent fascist and that he has no business attacking the Black Bloc.
Here's where the other discussion starts (note that it starts off with the identical two posts from Maarten as this one that you're reading now):
http://archive.indymedia.be/front.php3?article_id=13336&group=webcast

you raise a good question by 'how is attacking a bank violent?' as far as it is not a retorical question, i say that it is not violent. though experience might have also taught you that the result is violent; that police busts in on you. and you are right, it is not violence from the banksmasher; it is policeviolence.

that is the violence i was talking about. did you see the police during the beginning of the demonstration? they were always on the paralell street of the demonstration. that was a nice thing, i think. me and most people around me felt good with that 'view without blue'.

why spoil this 'non-violent' demonstration at such a point by smashing goods (if you're not interested in goods anyway?) knowing that the police will come around and will hit anybody. that is a police mistake, i know, but it is a tactical failure of the banksmasher as well. it is not solidaire. (though it won't change the fact that over all solidarity is great during demo's lately!!)

next to that, you're 'rich cars' were second hand mercedeses from people living in that folk labour neighbourhood. come on!! noone is in no position anytime to tell someone else which car (or bike) he should buy (or build).

don't go and tell me i am a policeman in my heart. it's so lousy.