arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

violence is dumb? at least it has got more effect than dancing on the streets with your costumes (which are often very beautiful I must say) saying you'll stay peacefull and eventually reach nothing. let's look at it like this: authorities won't do anything when 100.000 people are on the streets peacefully demonstrating. They won't notice you at all cause you don't even dare to break through any red zone to express your opinion 'where it's at'. Militants hit the authorities financial and at the same time they show the press which companies are wrong. (okay, press broadcast what they want mostly, but let the criminialisation alone for now) for me an argument why VIOLENCE DOES WORK!
But personally, I think that throwing bricks at one copper standing next to the Q8 tankstation is a stupid thing to do. And besides, I'm also very disapointed about the fact that the big D14 demo didn't go to the place of the summit at all. I thought we would try to break the red zone?!

it is not because you're peaceful that you cannot go into a red zone to "express your opinion where it's at". There exists a thing called non-violent direct action, a tool to reclaim the summits. There were, I think, only two examples of that in Brussels: the occupation of the chemical lobby group and the street party. I wish we had tried to enter the red zone, but that hasn't happened, but that is no reason to cowardly (yes, cowardly! there is no chance of getting caught and having to be responsible for your deeds!) turn to smashing windows, cars and some cops...
Violence in protests gives the media the chance to focus on that violence rather than on what we have to say. It also gives politicians the chance not to listen to us because they can criminalise a whole movement due to a minority of violent protestors. That's why violence is not ok!

I too was disappointed that there was no attempt to break into red zone. but the problem was, that in Belgium there is no radical tradition. You cannot expect ATTAC or the rather bureaucratic an stalinist-influenced D14 plattform to attack the RED Zone.

At one point in the demo, there was an attempt to split and go right on to the red zone, there were even people with big banners shwoing which way to go to Red Zone, but most people [even most of the anarchist block] simply continued, because they actually didn't know that if they wanted to go to the red zone, they had to take the other route...

Next time, we have to take care we have a clear PLAN, as in Prague or in Genua...

Considering what I see on these demo's
it seems that only police violence is working for the moment.
you can throw you bricks if you want to. I don't care.
But I think if you use violence you should do it strategically and only when you know you have other results then bad media attention, more police repression & violence and some broken windows a bank has an assurance for.

Besides I think your article is quite fascist. Everyone who doesn't throw bricks is in your opinion someone who won't reach anything.

Are you really so ignorant you think you'll reach a better world and you'll be able to organise a better world with only throwing bricks ?
Get a life.

We al withnessed that tearing down the twin towers in Wallstreet NY destroyed capitalism. NOT. It made them stronger in my opinion. Violence does work indeed, but not in the right direction.

PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR "STRATEGY"

thanks.

Indeed,no-one seems to have tried to break through the Red Zone
Neither did I
Neither did you, I suppose
I didn't know my way, my fault.I should've studied the Brussels street maps before I went there.Now I was, obviously like many others, merely waiting for others to break through.So eventually no-one did.
Don't be disappointed in all of them who marched on on the approved route, before being disappointed in yourself first, because apparently you did exactly the same thing.
When I walked on because no-one tried to enter the red zone, I felt the same way. And then I saw some 16 year old masked kids throw rocks through a window, understanding their feelings but disagreeing with the action.More disappointment. A bit further they were pulling iron & wooden bars out of the ground, and I knew why & thought they shouldn't but I didn't say a word.
I went home disappointed in the violence of the so-called "black block", in the violence of the armed&armoured "blue block", in the fact that everyone just followed the ones before them like sheep.
But most of all in myself, because that's where it starts. I was one of the sheep, waiting for others to follow, waiting for others to say something.Waiting & wailing afterwards.Lost my right to blame other peolpe,because I became one of them.
So don't blame others for something you did too. Look at yourself first.Then complain if you're sure you got the right to complain.
Argue and talk with the people you despise, perhaps they just don't know any better. Tell them what you know, share your knowledge.
How would you like a brick in your face not knowing why, everytime someone disagrees with you?
If you don't like rules & laws, then self-discipline is the answer.If you want respect, then start with giving some.If you don't like state&police oppression & violence, then don't give a bad example, but show them the other possibility & start living in peace.

lots of respect
let's all lead more & follow less next time

i was walking in the anarchistmanifestation an i'm an anarcha-feminist:i was dissapointed by the way the black block people decided for us as a group what targets to take .those targets are very important to think about in advance cause they will symbolise what you 're against...
so from my point of view , if you smash little or old or not so fancy cars or fancy cars like mercedes but in a working-class area,a sexshop,a nightshop, the shop of a little cardealer ( he had 4 cars probably secondhand ones in his shop)you just don't think enough about the fact that the working-class people are not going to like us ...
just after smashing the little cardealer we passed a big fancy citroën dealer: they just ignored it ,if they had to take a target then it's that one no?
we were walking in poor neighbourhoods , really workingclass people living there and they got attacked ,it was there were the smashing began , it was there too that i saw police coming into the group disguised as blackblock people : i even have the thought that they started it and i think it's a pity that suddenly a few people saw this as startsign to put their frustration on the cars and shops...
before you go out using violence against symbolic things study the environment, the kinda people who live there and know exactly what your fighting against...
who the fuck wants to fight working-class people , immigrants,people who live on the dole,don't they have it difficult enough ?do they have to forgive us for 'our revolution'?let's make it everyones revolution!*lila*

What we use is not really a violence comparing to what police is doing to us and other people. We prefer to call in confrontational tactic. I wouldn't agree that it leads to criminalisation of our movement and its isoaltion. Criminalisation begins when you becaem effective, when you became to change things. Then you become dangerous and they try to criminalise you. Now they try to use rule "divide and conquer". To show that some protesters are bad and some are good and civilized. Don't let them do that!
We need diversity of tactics. From confrontation to reclaim the streets and peaceful blockades. But we need to rememebr to each one of us has right to choose its own strategies. WE need to work together. And all fundamentalist pacifists and reformists can fuck off. Think before you do something-if you are going to change something or just come and beg leaders of the world for reforms?
Revoultion!

[one more time]

This debate about ""violence"" is always taken to the minor issues.
Everybody (almost) agree that you cannot call "violence" breaking a window because violence is something else, about structural violence of capitalism, cruel repression, etc...
So why to remind that, everybodies knows it!

* The real point is: is it the tactical action for here and now? (reminder: we're not in Argentina or Palestina, or i missed something ;-)

Some people think that it is now the best way to change the world. Some other don't, even if they agree that it's legitime to use violence against a violent system.

This is an issue about DEMOCRACY. Thoses so-called Black Blocks decide fro the all demo: "This is gonna be a confrontational demo". They're not trying to get any consensus or agreement about it. THEY DECIDE FOR EVERYBODY IN THE DEMO. This is a huge lack of repect, and it's the opposite of democracy. That's what it is about!

Plenty of anarchists, anarcho-syndicalists, commies, etc, think about creating a wide, open, mass movement, able to change the society. This is along term project. Those who want to attack some symbols now have choosen another strategy: they are elitist, selfish, anti-democratic and (mostly) machist. Sorry, i would prefere not to use such words towards 'comrades', but it's like that.

As long as you decide for the others and support non-popular actions that involve only a handfull of people you're acting against the democracy we're trying to build up.

This is not about violence...this is about DEMOCRACY!
.

Red Kitten correctly points out that breaking a window (or any other property) is not violent.
Then the assertion is made : "The black bloc is undemocratic and is deciding for everyone that the demonstration is confrontational".(paraphrased).
No!! How can you say that? A small segment of the demonstration (the BB) decides to engage in property destruction. How is that making the rest of the demonstration property destroyers?
It isn't!
You are accepting the POLICE ARGUMENT that if you are part of a crowd and someone in that crowd does something then you are guilty of it!
Do you really believe that?
If not then let the BB do their thing. It is up to the PIGS to catch them and stop them. Not you. Not me. Not anyone else.
If you argue that they must be stopped because the PIGS are going to teargas and club you (which will happen anyway) then you are accepting that they can attack you for what someone else does.