Click
HERE to read corporate coverage from the Sun-Times and Tribune.
Thousands of Chicagoans mobilized on Saturday for marches and a rally to oppose the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Several hundred protesters -– including many seniors and parents pushing their children in strollers -– gathered illegally at Oak and Michigan at noon to try to march south on Michigan Ave. with their anti-war message, arguing that they wanted to march and flyer where the people were, rather than down empty side-streets with little public visibility.
Chicago cops massed columns of police in riot gear and cops on horses at Oak and Michigan, where police had earlier threatened to arrest people not just for assembling but for attempting to convene a press conference on the sidewalk. As Chicago police commander Phil Cline read a pre-prepared order telling protesters they would be arrested if they didn’t march down the designated police route, activists distributed about 7,500 flyers to on-the-spot volunteers who agreed to try to make their way back in ones and twos to major thoroughfares to distribute the information.
Police told protesters who went early to Oak and Michigan that M19 organizers had cancelled the assembly and acquiesced to the City's 'alternative' -- a flat-out lie that succeeded in tricking at least a handful of people to head to the cop protest pit at BugHouse square six blocks west of Michigan.
The double-sided flyers explained that the City had cancelled the constitution and free speech, and on the other side described the dollar cost of the war: over $2.1 billion in Chicago tax dollars alone, over $11 billion in Illinois tax dollars; over $200 billion – and growing daily – nationally. The flyer also described the even more devastating -- and growing -- human cost of the occupation: more than 1,500 dead U.S. personnel, and over 100,000 Iraqi deaths, according to the respected British medical journal, the Lancet.
People volunteered on the spot to take the flyers, try to slip away from the police blockade, and distribute them along the same thoroughfares from which the larger march had been barred.
”I made sure that every person I passed got a copy of the flyer -– and an earful about the City’s abolition of free speech,” said one woman, who was able to grab several hundred flyers and elude the police to get back on Michigan Ave.
Police arrested several people at Oak and Michigan before commanders gave the order to start shoving people with billy clubs and shields west on Oak Street. When activist Andy Thayer tried to address the press, police superintendent Cline shouted from the background "You’re under arrest, Andy," and cops swarmed the speaker. "You can protest in Beirut, but not in Chicago!" shouted Thayer as he was hoisted into a paddywagon.
Police also arrested Methodist minister Dan Dale and pacifist Brad Lyttle, who were trying to 'disperse' as individuals to make their way to Michigan Ave. to flyer passersby.
One woman with her infant stood defiantly on the Oak Street sidewalk just west of Michigan until police forcibly pushed mom, baby and stroller back towards other protesters. The column of peace activists was met by a group of protesters heading east from Clark and Delaware -- the designated police protest pit -- to try to join protesters on Michigan Ave. After confronting mass police lines at side streets along Oak, the protesters ducked south on Dearborn -- one block east of the designated police protest pit -- where they were joined by about 800 protesters moving north on Dearborn from feeder marches that had converged around Wacker Drive and State St. south of the Chicago river.
That larger group was stalled for about an hour at around Oak and Delaware while activists and their lawyers attempted to negotiate with the police to move the column one block east to State St., a more heavily trafficked corridor than the Clark St. dead zone, where protesters refused to march, and Dearborn, a street only slightly less deserted than the Clark St. corridor. Several hundred protesters elected to leave the assembly and march south on the police-designated Clark St. route away from the park at Delaware, where the main column of marchers was stalled. A number of observers on the scene have reported that the Clark St. column included many members of the International Socialist Organization and PL -- the Progressive Labor Party -- who broke with the larger M19 coalition commitment to refuse to accept Clark St. under any circumstances. (To be fair, the PLP never endorsed the M19 coalition, the rally or its consensus to refuse a police dictated march route on Clark St.)
Communication among protesters during the standoff with police was uneven, with many near the front line calling for a push to Michigan Ave. rather than State St., and protesters on the south end of the stall largely left out of the information loop, although several anarchists were able to convene an on-the-fly consulta that gave people some measure of information about the situation on the ground.
Police appeared to bail from their initial excuse that any assembly or march outside of designated -- and largely empty -- police protest pits and streets would be too disruptive of traffic and commerce. On Dearborn, police brass insisted instead that protesters march the wrong way down Dearborn, a one-way street. Protesters argued that people could march on the sidewalk on State St., which is two-way, with much less disruption to the vaunted car traffic. But cop superintendent Cline and the CPD’s attorney mouthpiece and pathological liar Sherry Mecklenburg refused, and eventually the lawyer on site agreed people should head south on Dearborn, tying up traffic along the entire corridor for almost two hours.
OK, I’m gonna take off my reporter’s hat and speak as a participant in this action. Couple things. First, unfortunately the assembly at Oak and Michigan was small -- maybe several hundred people -- and autonomously organized feeder marches were never able to make it to the area to support these folks, many of whom were elderly or with kids.
A lot of those who DID assemble at Oak and Michigan came because they were outraged to learn that not only would police arrest people who tried to march, but would arrest people for even attempting to speak to the press at Oak and Michigan, a truly jack-boot cop move that I learned Thursday evening from Chicago Alderman Joe Moore. Moore, who had originally volunteered to participate in that press conference, bailed, saying he supported us but wanted Saturday’s message to be about the war, and not about the permit flap with the fascists that run this city. One local luminary, police brutality critic Rev. Paul Jakes, did step up to the plate, and arrived just after noon with Thayer in a cab. Unfortunately, Paul walked into a tactical situation about which he knew nothing, so it was pretty confusing on the ground.
The cops’ jackboot bullshit continued on Dearborn, where both police commander Radke and CPD lawyer Sherri "I wanna wear a uniform" Mecklenberg told me that I would be arrested if I left Dearborn to go by myself as a pedestrian to flyer fellow pedestrians on State St. with the anti-war flyer. "You’ll be arrested, Chris," smirked Radke, who also noted that it would probably all be 'worked out' in court, ie. any charges would be tossed out. He did not note that the flyers would, of course, be tossed out, too. Bear in mind that I learned later from a National Lawyers Guild attorney that the CPD actually has budgeted money for payouts to arrestees whose civil and constitutional rights are violated by the cops and later successfully sue the department for being autocratic pricks.
I want to take a moment to dissect the police press bullshit in the wake of the action. Note that on the corporate media outlets police sub-commander Mauer, Cline and the department’s other stooges have gone to great lengths to talk about how people got to exercise their constitutional rights, a flat-out lie that would be hilarious if it weren’t so outrageous.
Second, the police have stated publicly that 'no extra tax dollars' were spent for police actions on Saturday, which I find amazing given the number of cops from other jurisdictions, let alone the bejillions of riot clad CPD flatfoots amassed along every conceivable access street back to Michigan or State. Wonder what City budget line the cops will use to bury the expense they went to to shut town peaceful dissent along any major thoroughfare.
Also, around quarter to four, police thug Phil Cline communicated to protesters that the federal plaza rally would be shut down at 4PM instead of our permitted time of 5PM, arguing that the cops' 'paperwork' said 4PM and that anyone remaining would be arrested. The slimeball police graciously -- not -- agreed to give stage volunteers an extra 15 minutes to wrap up, which was irrelevant since the rally was very tightly organized and we were pretty much done anyway. Guess Cline couldn't wait to get back to the donuts, and an extra hour of 'legal' speech was just too much for the big boy to bear.
Re the tactical situation, in retrospect I'm amazed that the M19 Coalition didn't think to set up a cell phone text messaging system for protesters so people could have at least gotten breaking news about developments on the ground, a situation that should be remedied for all future actions, since cell phone contact is difficult and police in other jurisdictions routinely block phones anyway. Even if protesters in the streets were unable to get these communications, it would have allowed supporters away from the melee a chance to find out what was going on -- including many folks who were clearly cowed by police intimidation in the run-up to this action and never showed up at all -- including to the 'legal,' 'permitted' rally at the federal plaza.
And a note about the rally. The speakers overall were really great, Cynthia McKinney included -- the ONLY congressional representative who had the spine to show up.
Re the cop/corporate press vs. activist debate about the numbers: about a thousands people were in motion on Dearborn, a figure that the police have also put out there. Federal plaza holds around 5,000 people, but between 10 and 20% of the plaza was blocked off by barricades. The rest was full, and organizers agree that the 2,500 to 3,000 figure is pretty damned accurate.
The corporate press got a couple things wrong. First, there were not 100 Protest Warriors out. Nope, sorry, just not accurate. They had at best a couple dozen deluded right-wingers exercising THEIR free speech unmolested by the cops. And apparently the federal authorities also granted a permit for part of the plaza to these people, although they seem to have rethought the tactical utility of this position and moved across the street to stand behind the police barricades like the simpering cowards they are. Since their local 'leader' is a Chicago cop, I’m sure they enjoyed themselves jawing with their colleagues.
Second, it would just be so great if our colleagues in the corporate press could get some of the other salient facts straight -- including the fact that two years ago protesters marched down Lake Shore Drive with police permission. Don't take my word for it -- look at the extensive video showing police commander Risley waiving people onto LSD.
I also want to take a minute to thank a number of corporate reporters on the ground who made an effort to actually provide a measure of balance to this story. Perhaps most stunning was Fox's weekend coverage, I kid you not. But other outlets found ways to work in angles that flesh out the story, including one network affiliate that sent a camera crew to an 11AM assembly of VFW vets at Soldier Field, and included tape of a medal-bedecked Black veteran who choked back tears while saying this was a war for oil that was sacrificing soldiers for no good reason.
The coverage on Channel 66 was particularly amazing, with Latinos at both Oak and Michigan and the rally decrying both the war at home and the war abroad. I am personally awed at the courage these immigrants, many of whom have family members who are serving in the military (and some of whose loved ones have died in this war) showed in stepping up to speak truth to power. These people stuck their necks out at a time when every non-native-born U.S. resident faces deportation -- or worse -- for exercising this kind of moral backbone. Note to native-born U.S. residents who missed the protests: we should all take the lead of these fearless people.
Also, I think it bears noting that, for what it’s worth, a lot of the copper command staff also seem to think the City’s hard line on refusing to allow peaceful protest where the people are is pretty stupid. They also are not particularly enamoured of mayoral mouthpiece Sherry 'dog collar' Mecklenberg, who always seems to assert herself as the 'real' commander at these actions, undercutting the usual suspects' capacity to exercise the kind of ultimate authority they are used to. Note to cops: please sort out who you serve. Clearly it’s not the people of the city. Do you really like your master being 'Ms. Despot' Mecklenberg, the tool of Chicago mayor 'fuck the police contract' Richie Daley?
Massive shoutouts to members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, who provided security at the rally and whose members spoke powerfully and eloquently against this disastrous war. And major shoutouts to speakers who connected the dots, tying the war on civil liberties at home to the war on the world abroad, and linking together the whole 'permanent war' policy to a sweeping attack by our ruling elites on the rest of us.
The biggest shoutouts go to the protesters that had the courage to defy the 'law' and try to take the streets anyway. The law, of course, has nothing to do with what’s right, since the law has also been used to argue that Blacks are only 3/5 human, woman have no right to vote, and workers have no right to organize.
The day’s biggest fuck-head? Chicago mayor Richie Daley, at whose behest the cops shredded basic rights. Note that this grifting crook has once again placed commerce and his close personal relationship with the Bush administration ahead of the people who live in this city, and who’ve forked out over $2 billion dollars that could have been used to fund the CTA, affordable health care and housing, and the host of other human needs derailed by our government. Oh, but wait! Da Mare is a Democratic Party member! Er, how, how, how could a 'Democrat' do this? Note to local peace activists who continue to apologize for local elected officials: your disconnect serves only to undercut the movement, and set the stage for a further erosion of our rights. Not one of our elected officials had the courage to defy this autocracy and stand at Michigan and Oak. Not one. The liberal Democrat moniker is just another way of saying sell-out. If you're a no-show when it really matters, you've sold us out -- again.
A final recommendation: we should never, ever again participate in the sham that is the 'permit' process in Chicago. The deck is stacked against us, and only underscores that 'legal' and 'right' have nothing to do with each other. The permit battle was engaged at considerable cost in part at the behest of some of our more gentle souls who argued that it was critical to push the 'legal' route in trying to secure our civil liberties. Can you-all see the futility of this now, in a system where the thugs in power make -- and change -- the rules as they go along? We had no 'permit' for the Chicago Park District-run park at Bughouse square either, yet the police 'granted' us on-the-fly permission to assemble in this ghetto, a scenario that thankfully most protesters sought to circumvent.
Bear in mind, people: while the Bush administration is using our tax dollars to bankroll UNPERMITTED public protests by falangists in Beirut and their favored elites in Kiev, da mare and this regime -- nationally and locally -- are using our tax dollars to suppress exactly the same kind of public protest in this city and across the country. Time to take a stand. No mas.
And to that lady with her kid and stroller at Oak and Michigan who refused to back down until the bully clubs pushed her back: you and your baby are MY heroes.
Comments
Sherri "Dog Collar" Mecklenberg
20 Mar 2005
Yes, its true. Sherri was wearing the jacket of one of the cop commanders. She reminded me of Condi Rice pictured in the jackboots and sleek leather dress. When I last saw Mecklenbaby in the kangaroo courtroom of judge Hibbler, she was wearing stiletto highheel shoes to give her height. Guess she's at the top now without the heels.
Sherri Mecklenberg
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
For Chicagoans, it's important to remember that kissing White House butt is a hallowed tradition of the Daley machine .. no matter who is in office. In fact, the restrictive parade permit ordinance used to keep protesters off the Mag Mile this year was first deployed - and unsuccessfully challenged - during the 1996 Democratic National Convention. Da mare, who lobbied to have the DNC return to Chicago was particularly eager to dispel the lingering nasty reputation produced by the Chicago police riot during the 1968 DNC - during which peaceful Vietnam anti-war protesters were clubbed insensate outside of the convention at his father's direction. That meant keeping counter-convention protesters as far away as possible from the United Center, (site of the 1996 convention) and away from the delegate hotels and posh receptions on Michigan Ave.
These days, the Daley administration, ever mindful of the flow of federal funding from a White House and Congress in the hands of pro war conservatives - has added incentive to continue this tradition. And virtually no local politician has the nerve to buck the 5th Floor on this, despite the fact that a majority of Chicagoans oppose a war and occupation which has already cost city tax payers a staggering 2.1 billion dollars to date, inflicted over 1,500 US casualities, and left tens of thousands of Iraqis dead. Hence Alderman Moore's notable absence at the Oak and Michigan press conference. As always, functional spines remain in short supply within the ranks of the Chicago City Council.
That's why defending what remains of our constitutional rights is so critical at this time. Nobody else will do it for us. The bottom line here is use em, or lose them.
And mail Mayor Daley some chapstick.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
20 Mar 2005
Unsurprisingly, the machine continues to run this city, gentrifying thousands of working class people out of Chicago, busting their 'own' unions, and fattening their friends at the public trough. There is one interesting distinction in the approach between Daley I and Daley II -- the latter is much more deeply committed to catering expressly to the corporate elites. One unfortunate if unintended consequence of the Shakman consent decree is that da mare no longer exercises the kind of total domination over the majority of City workers his father did. Daley's response to this demise of total control over an enslaved patronage army has been to fire the disloyal army, to the great benefit of his cronies who pick up the contracts for the newly privatized work.
When Moore proffers his support, as he did again this year, and again lets the peace movement down, he serves this agenda -- the same agenda by the same crooked bosses that have cancelled constitutional rights in this city.
And who is Sherry Mecklenburg? She is the wire to the 5th floor, the hatchet girl that ensures that da mare's wishes are carried out, the on-site hack whose job it is to ensure that the top cop brass fix the set on the street to Daley's marching orders. It's interesting watching her call the shots on the ground, interesting watching how the police brass on-site takes it, interesting to watch how much they resent their own slavery to Sherry's onsite orders and da mare's machine, not that they'll ever break ranks, because like Joe, they're too wired in, reap too many benefits, have too much at stake.
Why the hostility to public protest? Because any indication that Daley does not have total domination of his streets suggests to the business class that Chicago might not be such a great place to site confabs like the G8. Those pesky protesters sort of screwed that up for Richie when they had the audacity to march with police permission on Lake Shore Drive two years ago.
What's really disappointing to me is the sector of the 'progressive' movement that plays in the electoral arena, but seems to have forgotten the reason to do this -- do get people in office who actually have utility to the rest of us. When it counts. When our basic rights are under assault. When people are being arrested for flyering -- flyering -- on Michigan Avenue.
Because that's what's really at stake here. Our core rights. No elected official's job, no illusory political back-channels, no slick dance for a largely unrealized benefit (not) is worth sacrificing our rights.
Ms. Mecklenberg is, of course, indifferent to the corrosion of the constitution, and happy with the master she serves.
But neither Mecklenburg or the unreliability of our 'friends' is really the core problem here. The core problem is not even our corrupt mayor -- as many mayors are in towns from Cicero to Cincinnati -- that is perfectly happy to comply with the extremist agenda of a federal administration bent on deploying a truly fascistic infrastructure throughout the country. Certainly Daley -- who kicked it up with Bush for St. Paddy's day this year, just another small marker of their affinity -- is more than hell-bent on securing those precious homeland security dollars. In fact, Daley and many pols of both parties are more than happy to blow with the prevailing winds in Washington because impediments like the Bill of Rights get in their local ways, too.
The core problem is the complete lack of accountability of a larger political system to the basic needs of the vast majority of Americans who are taking it on the chin. A cop camera on every corner, and no irritating homeless people or pesky peaceniks passing flyers on our central corridors, not in this town, no. And the consequences? $2.1 billion dollars less for housing, healthcare, education, public transportation, and the host of other needs that are being sacrificed to bankroll the imperial agenda of the Bush regime and their co-conspirators -- including da mare and anyone who lacks the backbone or the basic decency to challenge this rush to disaster.
Well, guess what? You don't force accountability or advance popular power by sitting down and shutting up.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
'What's really disappointing to me is the sector of the 'progressive' movement that plays in the electoral arena, but seems to have forgotten the reason to do this -- do get people in office who actually have utility to the rest of us. When it counts. When our basic rights are under assault. When people are being arrested for flyering -- flyering -- on Michigan Avenue.'
Take a deep breath or two, Chris, before you go lashing out and burning bridges with your allies. And I have no idea who your 'anonymous' critics are, but if I were you, I wouldn't get on their case for using 'handles,' since you frequently do the same thing yourself. Take their points seriously instead.
You can go over to Oak and Michigan and pass out flyers all day today, Chris. Just because we lost a tactical battle with the City and the cops on the afternoon of March 19 doesn't mean the Constitution has been suspended for good in Chicago. The problem was that your tactics for the day--and I speak as one who supported them and urged group after group of our folks to go over to Oak and Mich to see how far they could get in joining you-- were far from being the unified tactics of everyone who wanted to march against the war.
There were a good number who stayed in Bughouse Square or just went to the Plaza because they believed, rightly or wrongly, that Oak and Michigan was a side show and a diversion from what they really wanted to do that day. What's more, and I know this from listening to people in the week prior, that some number--who knows how many?--decided not to come at all because of the prospect of 'unpermitted' marches. We did our best to get them to come anyway, but the sentiment was real enough.
Joe Moore marched against the war that day, and encouraged everyone else among his constituents and on the council to do so as well. But he thought at least part of our tactics for the day was a diversion from what he saw as the main task of sending a message to Bush. You can disagree with him, but it seems silly to read him out over it.
The interfaith peace event at the Temple the following day, which filled the place, was also a powerful antiwar happening for those in attendence, but some seem to want to read them out because of pacifism and not putting Palestine front and center. They praised the Rev and others who got busted at Oak and Mich, and many of them--not all to be sure--marched the day before. So is our job to bring them in to the heart of our coalition, or to find hurdles we can put up to keep them and their reformist influence out?
So here's the question I think we all have to wrestle with: Compared to LA of SF or other cities, why is Chicago having relatively smaller demos? Why aren't we making some better breakthoughs?
Do we really think trashing the liberal peace people and elected officials who speak against the war will help us grow? Do we need to get more ant-imperialist in our line and list more countries and struggles to make us grow in effectiveness? Do we need to hit Jan Schakowsky harder on Israel and pooh-pooh her vote against war funding to get even more folks to come out and join us? Is it all the CAWI pro-voting reformists fault, and if we decisively defeat their pernicious influence, along with the wimps of the UFPJ nationally, then things will really take off in the right direction? Is this where you really want to go?
Or do we think we might find some answers in a different direction. I don't pretend to know the answers, but it's time for a broader, more strategic discussion than whether matters of tactics are matters of principle, and the 'correct anti-imperialist line' was to go down Dearborn rather than 'the sellout line' of going down Clark on March 19.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
(the flip side of this flyer details just how much Illinois tax payers have paid so far for the war and occupation, and more importantly cites the tens of thousands of US and Iraqi lives lost )
Still, a surprising number who wanted to march despite the police threats made their way over join the feeder marches blocked on Dearborn and Oak, for the march down Dearborn to Federal Plaza rally, - scoring what the Sun-Times described as a 'small victory' against police efforts to herd them down Clark St again this year.
As for Alderman Joe Moore, no one pressed him to march in an unpermitted march or rally and risk arrest, after it became clear that the originally scheduled rally at Oak and Michigan would be precluded by the police, -- but to simply speak at a press conference on the sidewalk. His deplorable collapse of nerve was on public display Saturday, and it was a tragic farce - particularly from one of our 'allies.'
Am planning on sending Joe some chapstick as well.
But kudos to Rev Paul Jakes, Rev. Dan Dale, legendary peace activist Brad Lyttle, Andy Thayer, Bill Davis of VVAW, military mom Pat Vogel, Chris G, and the over 150 people - including many CAWI activists -who had the intestinal fortitude to gather for that press conference, and speak out against the the war and political repression at home, despite the police intimidation they had to endure.
And as Chris noted, a special shoutout to the lady with a stroller whose courage put politicians like Moore to shame.
PS: And in an interesting (and ironic) twist, a Boston City Councilor, Chuck Turner, urged everyone at the close of their M-19 mass rally in Boston Common to join an unpermitted march originally planned by a group of young anarchists. The march snaked through the streets of downtown Boston before returning to the rally site. (read all about it at Boston IMC)
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
Sorry, but the rights battle did nothing to undercut our corporate press coverage, for people who are concerned about that. Far from it. Many of the reporters I talked to before M19 were deeply discomfited by the city's outrageous threat to arrest people for holding a press conference. And the media coverage was a bit stunning, with one of the best segments coming from the local Fox affiliate.
In short, we got vastly better press coverage this year than last year. And overall the corporate press took a much more 'connect-the-dots' approach to their coverage, which was great. I especially liked the network segment that included an interview with the African American vet at Soldier Field, saying exactly the same thing the vets were saying at federal plaza. Joe Moore's concerns that the Oak and Michigan flap would make the larger issue a sideshow were exactly dead wrong. The press recognizes that these two issues are intimately connected. Why can't others?
The numbers were down, by half. Part of this is politics -- particularly the politics of a small but not uninfluential segment of the liberal peace sector that is extremely uncomfortable with the inclusion of some issues and individuals in this movement, like Palestinians. But numbers were down not just in Chicago but across the country. So to blame lower turnout on Chicago activists who are too absorbed with the issue of imperialism is simply a dodge.
In part turnout is off because the peace movement is still rebuilding after being shunted for a year to the 'Anybody But Bush' effort, an electoral strategy that failed abysmally. And let's be blunt.
In part turnout was off because some people are afraid. I know this because people have told me they're afraid. They have reason to be.
And some people are sufficiently disgusted with the 'groundrules' the authorities hand them that they simply will not bother to show up. If you tell people that they will go to jail if they do not gather in an approved protest pit, why the hell should they show up? Who wants to cosign that? Sort of like asking people to vote for the 'pretty pro war' candidate instead of the 'totally pro war' candidate. End result? People won't vote.
And here's the thing. If you want to talk about messaging, the local peace movement did not have a bad day on Saturday. Not a perfect day. But not a bad day. Are you really sure that people didn't want to participate in the effort at Oak and Michigan because they thought it might detract from the larger message? Or could it be over the long term that some of our friends are afraid themselves to show up? Or at the very least don't grasp the messaging opportunities that the growing assault on civil liberties presents for the entire movement?
But in the end, it's not about press hits or messaging opportunites, and that's what some of our liberal friends really don't get. It really is about civil liberties, Carl. Brad Lyttle is 77 years old. He has a serious heart condition. He was arrested for trying to walk down Michigan Avenue with a sign. With a sign.
Same thing with Pat Vogel, who's kid came back from Iraq convinced the war was wrong, and convinced his mom, too.
Or check in with Dan Dale, also arrested for trying, as an individual, to walk down a street with a sign. A sign.
This is not trivial. This is real. And if this is allowed to pass, 'incidents' of this type will grow. Down that trajectory lies disaster, real disaster.
I just hope our friends like Joe come to realize that.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
The two goals are not mutually exclusive. It's not an either-or proposition. The crowd saw that on Saturday, and spontaneously found its own solution.
While one contingent was blocked on Dearborn, the rest just decided to stop waiting, and made for Clark street. This freaked the cops at first, because they had the bulk of their force on Dearborn, and had just agreed to allow the march on Dearborn.
Those who were inclined to focus on the anti-war message marched on Clark. Those who were inclined to emphasize both the anti-war message and the first amendment issue marched on Dearborn.
While some expressed concern that our march was "split", the fact was that we split the police too, took two streets, instead of one, and had a bigger impact as a result.
The Clark street march was so lightly garrisoned that the few police who were there were very nervous at first. But they relaxed once they figured out the people on Clark (mostly) were there, not to confront them, but rather to confront the war.
There was a home for those who wanted to focus solely on the war, and a home for those who also wanted to deal with the first amendment issue. We began, and finished, at the same places. And there was plenty of intermingling between the two groups.
For what it's worth, I wouldn't insist on either group having the final say-so on which issues get addressed. The world is wide, the latitude for diversity is unlimited and, together, we have a greater impact.
Those who wanted to confront the police got their chance. And those who didn't want to confront the police got their chance. All in all, it worked very well.
If I had any suggestion for improvement, it was that turnout probably was somewhat suppressed by people who did not want to risk arrest. I knew a lot of people who didn't want to come because the papers were saying it was "illegal." For every one I talked into coming, I suspect there were many more who were afraid to. You had to read the papers closely to figure out that there was a "legal" alternative.
Perhaps, in the future, we make it a little clearer with our PR that both alternatives are available?
There is no reason, as I see it, why we can't have our cake and eat it too. The crowd was very wise on Saturday, and found their own solution to a problem nobody else could really solve.
We should listen to the wisdom of the crowd.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
I agree it's politics, in at least two ways: first, Bush won his election, giving him some energy; second Bush held his election in Iraq with all the carnage surrounding it, sowing confusion in the short run.
These events have created both a more militant pro-Bush minority alongside a mass majority sentiment in the country that's fed up with the war and think it was a mistake, but a good number of them think that the US can't just get out, but somehow has to clean up the mess its made and thus are reluctant to join the ranks of active opposition.
We know this is a delusion, that the US occupation is the cause of the problem, not part of the solution. But we still find it echoed, even in the debates on CAWI's own e-groups, in the debates in the more moderate and mainstream churches and in the families with members deployed to Iraq, and certainly in the ranks of the GIs themselves.
To me, and most of us, I hope, finding the path to dispelling those delusions is the critical task in front of us that we need to think more creatively about. Mike McConnell and the AFSC's 'Eyes Wide open' boots project is part of the answer, Lilah Lipscomb's Gold Star Mothers vs War is part of the answer, Code Pink's spotlighting the costs of war and Tom Hayden's spotlighting the evil of torture are too. Certainly building Iraq Vets Vs the War.
We have to find some ways to breach the walls between those passively disgusted with the war but who still see themselves as patriotic, and those actively engaged in opposition to the war. I don't think we unleash the energy of those who have yet to become active by sniping at elected officials who have come out against the war, especially when those officials are held in high regard by them, even if those same officials don't follow our lead on every point.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
San Francisco: 10,000 plus - estimate from SF Bay IMC.
LA: 20,000 (ANSWER) - Hollywood, 2,000 estimate from LA IMC
NYC: 4000-10000 ( Harlem - Central Park) The Troops Out Now! action was the largest event in NYC, but a series of decentralized actions, including a die in at Times Square organized by the War Resisters League generated tremendous media coverage.
Seattle: 5-8000
Fayettteville: 4000
Minneapolis: 1,500
Pittsburgh: 3000
Chicago 2500-3000
Boston: Between 2-5,000
Miami: 1000
Milwaukee: 300
Nashville: 300
Houston: 2-300
Urbana-Champagin: several hundred
Check out US-IMC for additional reports at:
indymedia.us/en/index.shtml
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
And on this note, let me submit that it was hardly the militancy of the slogans that kept endorsing groups from taking up this work. We all consensed on the slogans with a pleasant lack of acrimony. What's so controversial about "Bring the Troops Home Now"? "Civil Liberties at Home, Self-Determination Abroad"? "No to War & Occupation"? Let's compare these presumably over-radical slogans to the slogans UFPJ mounted in Fayetteville: "Show REAL Support for the Troops: Bring Them Home Now!" "Money for Jobs and Education, NOT for War and Occupations!" "The world STILL says No to War in Iraq."
OK, now help me get this. You're not suggesting that turnout was down because Chicagoans, including the liberal local peace projects, uniformly supported adding the issue of civil liberties to our slogans, are you? I'd submit that many Chicagoans, faced with last-minute emails that basically gave them two alternatives -- a police approved protest pit on a Clark St. dead zone vs. the fear-mongering suggestion that YOU WOULD GO TO JAIL if you actually showed up to march where the people were -- decided to take a pass. Obviously that intimidation tactic worked on at least one alderman who shall not be named. Some of us might consider providing our base with a less disempowering frame next year.
Second, the fact remains that our sitting mayor -- whose administration seems hell-bent on outpacing Tammany Hall in the sheer scope of its corruption -- will spare no taxpayer-funded travel dollar to fly to Dubya's DC events, where he touts his utility to the current regime. Dubya certainly knows that Daley is committed to making his city a safe space from public protest when it really matters. Makes one wonder just how long it will take the Republican-appointed U.S. attorney to take a stab at hooking the big tuna instead of scooping at the minnows. I'd like to see more allegedly Democratic Party elected officials raising cain about the Daley/Bush love fest. Cripes, we had more principled opposition to Daley I in the mid-seventies than we do today. Then again, our aldermen weren't pulling down $85,000 a year in taxpayer-funded salaries back in 1973. Guess that's a powerful incentive to shut the hell up.
This is so not the Chicago of my youth, when we could have counted on the rest of the sharks in the pool to start circling around their bleeding leader, and not to throw air kisses in his direction, either.
Third, the peace movement nationally still has a lot of regrouping to do in the wake of a year of defanging to support the slightly leass pro-war candidate. And the ruling regime has been deft about using the 'elections' in Iraq as yet another dodge to more immediate accountability. Perhaps we should have pushed protests marking the second anniverary of the war back six months or so, when the insurgency against U.S. occupation will still be raging, Iraqis and U.S. military personnel will still be dying, and the rolling fraud that is this administration's international spin machine will be looking for yet another pr strategy to dodge the metaphorical bullet. Unfortunately, I don't currently know any peace activists with the power to alter the prevailing rules of physics and literally time-shift. We sent a powerful message out to Chicagoans on March 19 that there are plenty of folks who still oppose this war, and for a change we were able to get out some messaging that actually explains why. Personally, I'd have preferred to have been able to deliver that message where there were actually people around to hear it, instead of having to rely on the television news to titrate same. That remains my preference. Just attached to those pesky free speech rights, I guess.
Fourth, having said nothing about Jan Schakowsky in this thread to date, let me note that Jan spoke powerfully on Sunday about how wrong it is that the current regime remains hell-bent on turning our young people into killing machines in places like Iraq. If only Jan could apply that same logic to the situation at Senn, where she continues to support a military academy. This is a logical disconnect, and a truly dopey contradiction. I leave it to Jan's peacenik inner circle to continue to struggle with her on this issue, and to urge her to change her position.
Fifth, the fact remains that a young mother and her baby showed more stand-up gumption than even our most outspoken anti-war alderman in connecting the war on the world abroad to the war on civil liberties at home. A 77-year-old pacifist went to jail for trying to carry a peace sign on Michigan Ave. on Saturday, while every single one of our elected officials remaained silent on this issue when it really mattered.
Silence will not stop the attack on civil liberties. It merely sets the ground for these attacks to continue to expand. Don't take my word for it. Examine the historical record.
Me, I'm with that 77-year-old pactifist, and that baby and her mom. At least they grasp what's at stake, and care enough to do something about it. Perhaps our quiescent 'pro-peace' aldermen could do them both the courtesy to start working within the City Council to get Ordinance 10-8-330 -- first passed by da mare to suppress protest in 1996 at Democrat Bill Clinton's reannointment, and used by da mare most recently to abolish constitutional rights on Michigan Avenue -- changed to restore our constitutional rights.
That would definitely help ameliorate the abiding sense of betrayal many feel at the hands of the alderman who must not be named.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
However, the demonstration was still successful in getting several thousand folks back onto the streets to oppose the war and occupation. Folks should remember that the antiwar movement is still in recovery from a period—especially during the 2004 election—in which large protests were few and far between. During this time, a lot of folks who had opposed the invasion of Iraq grew defensive around key points such as self-determination for Iraq, etc.
We should take whatever momentum we got from Saturday’s protest and use it in our efforts to rebuild the struggle against the war in our neighborhoods, campuses and unions. For example, building the anti-recruitment efforts at University of Illinois-Chicago, in Albany Park, at Senn High School.
The focus among a small number of people in the Chicago antiwar movement on where exactly folks marched or did not march on Saturday, and singling out certain groups, etc. is absolutely counter-productive to the effort of rebuilding the antiwar movement in Chicago.
First of all, it is entirely unrealistic given the confusion among many folks who attempted to assemble at Oak and Michigan and were unsure as to whether they would be able to march at all until they happened on the feeder march, etc. Certainly, we did not set out, nor did we, "split" the march. Why on earth would we?
Regardless of what our organization did or didn’t do on Saturday, we think it is a mistake to be singling out any individual or organization. Roughly 1,000 people ended up marching down Clark Street. Attacking folks for marching down Clark instead of marching one block to the east is obviously absurd.
Not only that, singling out individuals and groups to be treated as though they violated the antiwar movement over a minor issue following a day of confusion, is particularly destructive and divisive. It is especially so given the current political climate of attacks on the left, civil liberties and the witch-hunts against Arabs and Muslims, left-wing professors and folks such as Lynn Stewart. These are, presumably, the things this protest was supposed to oppose.
The folks who attack other organizations in this manner need to ask themselves, who is it that benefits from splits and finger pointing in our movement.
Aside from destructiveness, all this avoids the real issue. While we all wanted to march down Michigan Avenue, we did not win that fight. While it may have been good to push the issue, the simple fact is the strength of the antiwar movement is not quite there yet.
We have work to do to get to the point where we can mobilize the forces we need, not only to march down Michigan Avenue, but to STOP THE WAR.
The antiwar movement is going to have to set aside petty differences and work together in order to build that sort of movement. Our focus should be to build the largest possible movement that agrees on the fundamental demands of Saturday’s protest: Bringing the troops home now, ending the occupations of Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and Haiti, defending our civil liberties.
That movement, by necessity, is going to include the 1,000 people—both individuals and members of different antiwar organizations—who marched down Clark Street.
Finally, our organization formally requests that Chicago Indymedia remove the sectarian attack on our organization—and others—from the lead article on the March 19 protests.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
Actually, I like to define 'outreach' as going to new people, making new friends and influencing them to come our way, especially people who are upset about the war, but might not agree with us on other issues or overall analysis. (Maybe it's because Dale Carnegie and I have a 6th Great Grandfather in common (that's both true and a joke!)).
And I'm sure Joe Moore doesn't mind being named in your criticisms. He's a big boy and can take the heat. And I love Brad Lytle. It was reading about him and the Quebec-to-Guatanamo CNVA peace walk he organized back when I was a student in the eary 1960s that inspired me to go on my very first peace action during the Cuba missile crisis.
And we all thought the slogans were just fine, and that the war and the threat to civil liberties are clearly linked, even if the cops behaved like Brownie scouts and let us do whatever we wanted M19.
It was the 'framing' that was a problem, framing that we didn't have that much control over. You're on target there, too. There were just too many people who wanted a peace march, would have preferred Mich Ave, but didn't particularly care which street it went down, but did not want to confront or fight with the cops over it in any case, at least not this time.
My point is, given this lay of the land and the relationship of forces, we took the tactical struggle over where we could assemble and pushed it as far as it could go. We still lost the skirmish and had to retreat. We learned some things in the process.
But let's blame Bush, the Patriot Act, Da Mare, Cop Commanders and Trainers with fantasies of Seattle on the brain, poodle judges and wimpy news media. Let's not blame each other. We can continue to discuss this as we move forward, but let's not get stuck or unduly divided on it.
I'll say one thing for Jan S, though. It took far more courage for her and Danny Davis to vote 'No' on funding the war than anything related to Senn, which we nonetheless continue to urge her to change her stand on. But even more, we need to put some heat on Luis, Bobby Rush, JJJ and a few others on voting 'No' on the war and war funding itself. It might help to retire Henry Hyde and defeat his GOP would-be successor in the next electoral round, too.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
21 Mar 2005
1. We should keep in mind that whatever the flaws or shortcomings, the day was a victory for the anti-war movement. That the coaltion and it's member organizations were able to mobilize at least 3000 to hit the streets, despite the unprecedented level of intimidation and opposition is no small accomplishment. I didn't speak to anyone who marched on any street, who didn't feel empowered. As I walked back to my car at the end of the day, I was stopped at least 4 times by people in the street who congratulated us for having protested or expressed their opposition to the war.
2. Of course, there were weaknesses. There were things that could have been better. Turnout is important. I tend to agree that organizing might have been stronger. My own group could have done better and I was surprised by some places where I didn't see as much about the march as I expected.
But fundamentally--rather than pointing the finger at the group or section of the movement that is at fault--let's put the blame where it belongs: the City and the police (and all the other bourgeoise institutions that make it extremely difficult for people to protest). Many people WERE intimidated or confused by the police and the city. Again, I think it's a victory that 3000 people came out anyway. But while the police were not entirely successful in preventing protest, there actions had an effect. How much is hard to say--I know of people I've talked to, but I assume there are many others.
3. I also think that 3000 may be a low estimate for the whole day because there was never one time and place where everyone was together. A lot of people left after the marches got to Fed. Plaza. Some people never were able to find anybody and gave up. Some came directly to Federal Plaza without marching at all.
4. Finally, about the marchers on Clark Street: I don't think it's correct to dismiss everyone there as capitulating to the city. Sure, the people who risked arrest--and got arrested--deserve our solidarity and praise. But do we really want to imply that there were NO legitimate reasons for anyone to NOT want to risk arrest? That's a pretty narrow anti-war movement.
But even more importantly, at the point when people left Bughouse for Clark street, there was no other choice. I was there. We couldn't get to the group on Dearborn. (Unless we had been able to break through a line of horses. Given that a significant number there were people with kids, older people, or immigrants--that just was not going to happen.) At that point, it made perfect sense to march down Clark Street. Would it have been better to get on the el or some different route to Fed. Plaza? I doubt it. I saw at least two groups of people try to make a break from Clark to Dearborn, only to be--literally--thrown back by the cops.
Were the marchers on Clark Street a bunch of wimps cowering before the ruling class or the sellouts who chose the Democratic Party over the March 19 Committee? Hardly. It was a loud, spirited march of people who were there for the same main reason as the rest of the marchers--to protest the war and occupation. I wasn't ever ABLE to get to Oak and Michigan so I won't presume to tell anyone what happened there or what was in the minds of the people there. That was a weakness--and a small victory for the cops--that the march was kept fragmented. I wish that people who weren't on Clark street would refrain from declaring what the march was like or what the motives of the marchers were.
I actually tried 3 different times on Saturday to join a feeder march, or the main group on Dearborn and was physically prevented by the ridiculous level of police force. Ultimately my choice--and I think the choice of many on Clark street was to march there OR not at all. In fact my understanding is that before I got to Bughouse at about 1:00, MOST of those there DID join with people on Dearborn Street. I heard from people who got to Oak street after the march had moved to Dearborn and they were told just go to Federal Plaza. Wouldn't it have been better for them to have joined the group on Clark street? Let's not pose the two marches against eachother as if it's a political conflict in the movement. Tha's what the police and the city would love to see. If they divided us physically, they shouldn't be able to divide us politically.
5. Celebrate our victories, learn from our mistakes, and let's come back stronger and more united in the next battle for free speech and against war!
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
22 Mar 2005
That the ISO, which did endorse and participate in the M-19 coalition also decided to march down Clark is another matter. This was their organizational decision, and it was an appalling and public capitulation to police demands...with little justification. They were not trapped in Bughouse Square with no exit out except Clark, but on Dearborn with the other feeder marchers.
There were also alternatives for those worried about arrest. Indeed, the M-19 Coalition distributed 7000 flyers urging folks who wished to avoid arrest if the attempt to rally or hold a press conference at Oak and Michigan met with a dispersal order, to take stacks of informational anti-war flyers, avoid Clark St, make their way down to the rally anyway that seemed doable and hand out flyers wherever possible. And many who arrived independently of the feeder march at Dearborn did just that, seeing this as a safe alternative which did not require surrendering to the CPD's dictates for a heavily escorted march through the dead zone on Clark.
As it turned out, the ISO's gratuitous concession was meaningless, since the majority of those remaining in the combined feeder marches who still wanted to march were able to negotiate a return down Dearborn, once it became clear that State was unfeasible without mass arrests. While most were understandably unhappy with this outcome, it was as the Sun-Times noted, a 'small victory' over the police efforts to enforce their demands.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
22 Mar 2005
Too much is being made of this. Despite any pre-set plans, there wasn't much coherent leadership between various locations and compontents of the action that day. The people I spoke to afterwards who came down Clark, and there were quite a number of them, said they were just tired of standing around, felt they had a good action, and had no idea they were supposedly violating any consensus they never heard of or felt they were capitulating to anyone. They were just marching down a city street, shouting slogans and carrying banners, to join an antiwar rally. Could some groups have tried to make use of this to score points against others? Probably, but let's just not play that game. Enough monday morning quarterbacking on this one. We've more important things to talk about.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
22 Mar 2005
When the people hit Clark, it was no longer the "approved" route. At that point, the cops had "given" Dearborn to the march. It was the people on Clark who were breaking the rules at that point, not the Dearborn marchers.
The cops will always be more organized than we are. They are paid, and trained, and have a strict hierarchical structure, with sanctions for those who disobey. We will never be able to enforce that kind of disipline on our people, and we shouldn't even try.
We should accept the fact that "organizing" anti-war protests is like herding cats. People will listen if given a clear message but, when it comes down to it, people will do as they wish.
And that's the way it should be. We can't, and should not, even if we could, impose our will on people who disagree with us on tactics.
We should accept the ambiguity. learn to live with the uncertainty, and respect the freedom of autonomous individulas to do as they see fit.
It is a little odd to hear anarchists complaining that peaceniks didn't follow orders.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
22 Mar 2005
Second, I want to be very clear that the problem Saturday was certainly NOT slogans, and that many of our messaging difficulties arose around the effort to be as honest as possible with peace activists about the 'legal' situation on the ground. No question that the City's endless threats of arrest had a chilling effect on turnout.
I wholeheartedly agree with Davidson's call for expanded 'outreach' and good old-fashioned organizing. I would argue that the organizing approach should continue to focus on models that stress bottom-up democratic participation rather than the old, corrosive Alinsky-styled top-down 'leader' models.
I vigorously dispute the inference that one of the ways to do this is to 'mainstream' messaging. There was nothing not 'mainstream' and completely appropriate about Saturday's slogans. But the suggestion has been raised in this thread that inclusion of issues like Palestine may detract from basebuilding.
This is lethal, dead-wrong pseudo-logic. There is a split in one segment of the anti-war movement -- among people who oppose the war but are unwilling to tolerate criticism of Israeli policies in the Occupied Territories, and in some cases are unwilling to entertain even the most basic rights of Palestinians.
Many of those people elected not to attend Saturday's rally, which was co-MC'd by a Palestinian American activist. Others who did attend were ripped off about what they perceived as a pro-Arab spin from the stage.
We need to continue to struggle with these people, as groups like the Jewish American peace project Not In My Name are doing. We do not need to accommodate the incipient racism of some of these individuals by striking the issue of U.S. supported occupation in Palestine from our toolkit. Far from it. We need to redouble our efforts to explain to people that the U.S. policy of support for occupation abroad IN MANY DIFFERENT PLACES is a piece of whole cloth, intrinsically intertwined with an economic and political agenda that drives policy in the United States, as well. Palestine, like it or not, is front and center because of its central relation to dynamics in a larger region that is a core target of imperial expansion for the U.S. regime. And frankly, Palestine must also be front and center because what U.S. dollars directly bankroll in that land is an atrocity on its own -- and a key reason so many Arab and Muslim people view the U.S. with justified hostility.
Many many different voices spoke out from the stage on Saturday, from military veterans and their family members to activists who urge a more aggressive effort to challenge attacks on our constitutional rights. People of color also spoke out on a range of intertwined issues, from attacks on public education and affordable housing to U.S. militarism in lands from Vieques to Haiti. Palestine is front and center in the issue of the U.S. government thrust to empire, and the issue cannot and will not be ghettoized or stripped from the discourse to accommodate a handful of individuals who should instead be struggling with their own internal racism.
That would be like stripping the issue of women's equality from the movement against the Vietnam war, because it 'detracted' from the anti-war message. Folks in the grassroots appreciate and relate to the inherent honesty in a connect-the-dots analysis. That approach undoubtedly makes a few people uncomfortable because they dislike confronting the contradiction in their own uncritical support for a brutal U.S. backed regime. We should continue to help them face that contradiction, instead of co-signing their blindsidedness by striking the issue from our vocabulary.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
22 Mar 2005
aLSO their ranks were really staggered with tons of holes in them. with more spontaneity and spunk, breakaways could have happened either east OR west from Clark....but i think you need a good marching band to spur that sort of charge. otherwise, it's like the Pied Piper...
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
23 Mar 2005
It's also my hunch that some the groups who consciously chose Clark also weighed the possibility that just such a break out attempt might occur if the march returned southbound on Dearborn, and result in arrests. So they played it safe instead.
Beyond the issue of keeping faith with the M-19 consensus not to march down Clark St under any circumstances, this was the practical difference between Clark and Dearborn, -- it was one block closer to State - and beyond to Michigan.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
23 Mar 2005
It's a crock only if you guage your effectiveness by your confrontation of the cops. The Clark street people weren't there to confront the cops. Sure, there was more confrontation on Dearborn, but that was the permitted march at that point. The Clark Street people were there to march. And they marched where they wanted to, and not where the cops told them to.
You should have seen the Deputy Chief freak out when the march hit Clark. He was sitting in a car on Clark, supervising the Dearborn negotiations by car radio. He jumped out of his car, red in the face, and started squawking orders for reinforcements into a Bike cops' radio. He said that it had just been agreed that the march would be on Dearborn, and was visibly upset when the crowd hit Clark.
But there wasn't much he could do. He had lost control of the Clark march. He had most of his troops on Dearborn, and only a skeleton crew on Clark.
It was odd to see the more militant people on Clark try to break out for Dearborn. I suppose they didn't realize that they were trying to leave the un-permitted march for the permitted march.
Yes, there is a strange irony here. The people who wanted confrontation were in fact taking the permitted march. And the people who didn't want confrontation actually ended up, spontaneously, taking the un-permitted route.
The band, and the bikers, have experience with un-permitted street demonstrations. They saw an opportunity, and they took it. No, they did not confront the cops, for the most part. But that's not what they came for. They came to protest the war, and to demonstrate their right to go where they wanted to.
And I thought that was the whole purpose of Saturday's march.
Clark may have been green when the day started. But it was red when the people hit Clark.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
23 Mar 2005
I don't say that what you are proposing about the dearborn march isn't true, but i saw with my own eyes the state troopers running to catch up with the marchers on clark street, and leaving tons of holes on both the east AND the west sides of the clark street march. were you even at that march?
see ya in the streets.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
23 Mar 2005
And then the anarchists blame CCAWR for marching on Dearborn--TWO BLOCKS--away from the supposed "good" street to march on--Mich. Ave.
Who the hell needs the Chicago cops to divide us, when we're all so willing to do it ourselves?
And you wonder why the demo was smaller this year?
What the fuck ever happened to respecting a "diversity of tactics?" Or does that not count to anarchists when it's CCAWR....or to CCAWR when it's CAWI and the ISO and the PL (and Neighbors for Peace and every other group that marched down Clark?)?
And if anarchists or CCAWR or anyone else didn't like the way these marches split, here's a novel idea: PUT OUT A PLAN AND A REAL ROUTE NEXT TIME! Don't just leave the decision in the hands of one or two people to make on the spur of the moment. Have a real team of identifiable people empowered to lead the thing, to negotiate with the police. Have a team of marshalls to relay information and keep the crowd together.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
23 Mar 2005
Yeah, mirrors reverse all the signs, but they look pretty much the same as the image reflected unless you look really closely. In the end, an image and its reflection are effectively identical. We should refuse to let our opposition determine our image.
Nothing confuses a "with us or against us" guy like subtlety, and heterodoxy. If you saw the look on the Deputy Chief's face when the "nice" people went for the un-permitted march on Clark, you'd understand that.
We didn't achieve exactly what we set out to achieve, but we got something even better. Saturday was a victory.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
23 Mar 2005
Well, J, just in case you were out of town, or just not following developments aroun M-19 too closely, the City of Chicago demanded that protesters abandon any effort to march down Michigan and instead comply with the city's alternative proposal for a rally at Bug House Square and a march route down Clark weeks ago.
The M-19 Coalition vowed not to comply with the city's demand to march down Clark St under any circumstances. The appeal for an emergency injuction against the City in Federal court alleged accurately that the City's proposal for Clark St was meant to exile protesters into a dead zone, and did not provide comparable exposure to the public. - hence the M-19 Coalition's bottomline about refusing to accept this outrageous demand.
When it became clear that the CPD was determined to prevent a Michigan Ave. march, the M-19 Coalition called for a press conference at Oak and Michigan shortly before noon to condemn the suspension of constitutional liberties in Chicago, and distributed a flyer on the spot calling on folks concerned about arrest to make their way to Federal Plaza anyway they could if ordered to disperse - except Clark St - and exercise their First Amendment rights to flyer along the way. The flip side of this flyer also contained info on the economic impact of the war in Iraq on Chicago, and the devastating human costs to the Iraqi people. This appeal was targeted at those folks who began arriving at the Oak St/Michigan location for the proposed noon rally, independently of the combined feeder march on Dearborn.
During the negotiations with the stalled feeder march at Oak and Michigan, police reinterated the demand that protesters march down Clark, or Dearborn, but rejected demands for State St and threatened mass arrests if marchers refused to comply. Stalemate. Meanwhile, some groups including those trapped inside Bughouse Square, blocked from joining the marchers on Dearborn, decided to move out onto Clark, the only available exit from the Square. This was not the case for the Dearborn marchers, but nevertheless precipitated a move from some groups in the Dearborn march to follow, for a variety of reasons. Eagerness to get to the rally, frustration, and the growing fear of arrest, as the futile negotiations at the head of the march ground on
The CPD command staff at Dearborn and Oak, while initially surprised by the breakway, made no effort to redeploy detachments of riot police being held in reserve two blocks north of the Oak and Dearborn intersection to intercept the Clark St. marchers - quite accurately assessing that these protesters only wanted to get to Federal Plaza for the rally with minimum fuss, and would be no trouble. They did however, scramble to dispatch state police to block traffic and prevent these marchers from moving east - either to rejoin protesters on Dearborn or points beyond.
The point has already been made that police were far more concerned about those remaining on Deaborn still locked in stalemated negotiations around demands for State St - the street next to Michigan with the heaviest traffic flow in the Loop. And it's here the cops drew the final line, all too conscious that the corporate media was hovering, waiting for a confrontation.
When it became clear that the police would not budge on State, the remaining protesters after considerable discussion, decided to return down Dearborn as well - but with a contingency plan of trying to move onto State if the opportunity presented itself. No one was happy with this decision. But by doing so at the very minimum, they could keep faith with the overall M-19 committement to avoid Clark St. Unfortunately, the opportunity to slip east to State was blocked by police, anticipating this move. Both marches end up returning to Federal Plaza via largely deserted streets. (a fact the Chicago Tribune was at pains to point out)
So what happened to those folks who arrived at Oak and Michigan who were turned back by the police, but were not part of the drama at Oak and Dearborn? Many headed down via multiple routes - including Rush, State, and in several cases, Michigan Ave, individually or in small groups, flyering along the way. In fact, about 7000 anti-war flyers were distributed this way to people who might not have been exposed to any anti-war message at all if this hadn't happened.
In the final analysis, these folks -- in their ones and twos, moving under the cop radar screen -- may have had the most success in getting the word out. And without having to comply with City demands to march down a depopulated corridor.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
24 Mar 2005
I was in town, and I knew the drill, and I was right in the thick of events on Saturday. I was at Oak & Michigan, marched down Oak, stood at Dearborn & Oak, Bughouse Square, marched down Clark, and was at the Federal Plaza. I have figured out ways to get around these events without getting hemmed in by cops. I was also standing about two feet away from the Deputy Chief as he freaked out when the crowd went down Clark.
But you and I really don't disagree much on how it happened. Yeah, the people on Clark were not the people who were inclined to mess with the cops so, despite the fact that they caught the cops unawares, and were marching in what was then a red zone, the cops really had no choice but to let it happen, and figured they had to leave the bulk of their troops on Dearborn, where people were inclined to confront the cops. But it did happen against the will of the cops. It is a basic rule of Chicago politics that, if you show people you are going to do what you want whether they like it or not, they will give you respect. The crowd on Clark was totally leaderless, and spontaneously took an opportunity left open by the cops.
In doing this, the crowd on Clark achieved the two goals that the organizers of this event had set for this march, i.e., (1) protesting the war, and
(2) doing so where they wanted to. You are right that they were not interested in confronting the cops, and the cops knew this, and that was part of what let them get away with it. But confronting the cops was not a stated goal of this demonstration. The people on Dearborn, who did want to confront the cops, effectively provided the distraction necessary for the Clark people to do what they wanted.
I think that the participation of the Band and the Rat Patrol was crucial to this coup. The Band has experience with spontaneity, and the Rat Patrol are veteran Critical Mass people. Those two groups have a lot of experience with un-permitted street demonstrations. They also have experience with spontaneous, improvised, consensus-driven operation.
I have, on many occasions, seen these groups take to the streets as they saw fit, despite the opposition of the City, and carry off very successful street actions. They have no leaders, they have no strict plan. They react to events as they occur, improvise, cooperate, and take any opportunity offered.
The Clark Street march was exactly what this march was supposed to be about. It is only if confrontation with the cops is considered a goal (which was never one of the stated goals of the march) that you can criticize the Clark Street people.
Come to a Critical Mass event some time. See how people can take control of their streets, and go where they want to. I have been down Michigan Avenue with CM. If we did it like CM, we could have gone wherever we wanted to.
The Clark street march was not what we wanted before the day started. But, in classic bottom-up, improvisational, spontaneous consensus-drive style, the people on Clark accomplished exactly what we set out to accomplish that day.
I don't belong to CM, or the Band. But I have seen, on many occasions, their success with operations like this. I think we have a lot to learn from them.
They know how to pull off street demonstrations. They were the only groups on Saturday which managed to achieve the two goals set out by the organizers (that's not to take anything away from the others on Clark, including the ISO -- I don't belong to that either -- who improvised their responses, and got what they wanted.)
I don't belong to any of those groups. I'm not a leader, not an organizer. I can take no credit whatsoever for the success they achieved (except for the credit that belongs to every person on Clark.) I'm not trying to sing my own praises, or push any ideology.
I'm just trying to say that Saturday was a success, that the people on Clark pulled off a brilliant street action. They accomplished the goals established by the organizers. And they did it without leaders, without organization, without any specific ideology.
Anton, I'm just suggesting we give some credit where credit is due, and recognize the success we achieved on Saturday. I learned a lot from watching that crowd take control of the street. And I think we can all learn from that.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
25 Mar 2005
And I'll say it again. After recovering from the surprise, they were more than content to see you go march on down Clark, although it did create some initial deployment problems for them - particularly with closing east west traffic routes. But not many. (incidentally, the Deputy Superintendent was not calling the shots on Saturday.)They did not dispatch the CPD tac units being held in reserve after you, but the Illinois state police, because simply put, they were not particularly worried that you'd deviate from that route.
But then again, why would they be upset? After all, you guys just did what the M-19 Coalition vowed publically never to do during a press conference an hour before that had been dispersed by police batons, - which is to under no circumstance agree to repeat the march route imposed upon us by sheer force last year. Little wonder the Trib used the word "capitulate' in the description of these marches. Hardly a brilliant street action.
Like it or not, the cops saw this as a clear tactical and political victory - particuarly since it decreased their concerns about managing the shrunken Dearborn contingent - whom they suspected would try again for either State or Michigan, if they returned down Dearborn.
No doubt many in the Clark march undoubtedly felt good about being able to safely march. And being together with few cops around can be empowering. But marching just for the sake of marching wasn't the goal of the M-19 action. If it had been, there would have been no problem accquirng police permission to march down Clark at all..since what they offered from the beginning since the permit fight broke out. The goal, as CG stated in an earlier post, was to have an anti-war march where people actually were on a Saturday afternoon in the Loop and get the anti-war message out. And reassert our right to march down a street that some 700 people were arrested on two years earlier for exercising just that right. To their credit, at least the Dearborn contingent tried to make some contingency plans for moving back to State - the second busiest street in the Loop - even if they failed to realize them.
But there was also an fallback alternative for folks who did not wish to risk arrest, but still wanted to get an anti-war message out across the Loop before the 2 PM rally. You might take the time to actually read one of the 7000 flyers the M-19 coalition distributed at Oak and Michigan with a recommendation on how to react to a cop dispersal order, avoid arrest, and avoid being herded down Clark.
As it turned out many folks who wanted to avoid a confrontation who arrived at Oak and Michigan acted on the recommendations made in this flyer, and made their own way down to the Federal Plaza rally, leafleting shoppers along the way, -- rather than repeat the Clark St. route - for just that reason. Still, some of them were threatened with arrest for just handing these suckers out. But as I said, they may have had the biggest success in getting an anti-war, pro civil liberties message out there.
BTW the All American Anti-War Marching Band was actually prevented by the CPD on two occasions from actually leaving Bughouse Square to the east. They exited the Square down Clark because that was the only exit open to them. No doubt they also didn't want to get caught up in any shit that might have gone down, as did many CAWI folks - but their options had already been limited by the police. That was not the case with folks who left Dearborn to join them.
PS - I've been riding CM since its inception in Chicago, and will be in the next ride. Black IndyFab frame.
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
25 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
26 Mar 2005
Re: People Protest War, Despite Cancellation of Constitutional Rights
26 Mar 2005