The Media Co-op

Two days after Rachel Corrie was crushed by an Israeli military bulldozer while trying to protect a Palestinian home from demolition on March 16 2003, her friends and colleagues gathered to remember her on the spot she was killed in Rafah, Gaza Strip. This is a video record of that event, flimed by members of ISM Vancouver.

But Rachel would be the first to say that her death was not exceptional, and that we must also remember each of the 3262 Palestinian civilians killed in the Gaza Strip by Israel's Occupation Forces since September 2000 (including more than 600 children) as documented by the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights in Gaza http://www.pchrgaza.org .

While Rachel's death caused headlines around the world, no one outside Rafah heard about the killing of Samir, also on March 16, 2003. He was shot on his porch by an Israeli sniper when he went outside after dinner to have a cigarette. Samir was a city street cleaner who supported his entire family in a region with more than 60% unemployment. Samir's shaheed (martyr) ceremony took place at his very modest house with family and a few friends. His elderly father was clutching his broken heart in despair and his sister was in a numb state of shock. Samir has become just another forgotten statistic among the thousands of Palestinian civilians killed by Israeli occupation forces.

• Video

'No Olympics on Stolen Native Land' was a central slogan for those organizing in resistance to the 2010 Olympics. This piece looks at different interpretations of the anti-Olympics movement, and what the future might hold.

All interviews and speeches were recorded during the anti-Olympics convergence in Vancouver in February, 2010.

Interviews include: Harsha Walia, Olympics Resistance Network, Melissa Elliot, Six Nations, Toghestiy (Warner Naziel), Wet'suwet'en, Art Manuel, Secwepemc Nation.

Music by Compassion Gorilla.

Produced with assistance from Citizen Shift.

• 2010 Olympics

7 years ago today, a 23 year old American activist with the International Solidarity Movement, Rachel Corrie, was murdered by Israeli Defense Forces in Palestine. The US government has done nothing to address this issue and it wasn't until last week that the Corrie Family is having their voices heard in the so-called Israeli Courts of Law. 

The above video is from youtube and is an interview with Rachel shortly before her death. There is a lot of information and videos on what happened that day and I urge you all to read it, share it with friends and never let her memory, and the memories of other ISM workers who shared her same fate such as Tristan Anderson, be forgotten. (Tristan was shot point blank with a tear gas canister as he stood unarmed a year ago. He remains in critical condition with severe brain damage today) 

Of course, we must never forget the plight of the Palestinian people and stand in solidarity with them as they fight for basic human rights against the Israeli Defense Forces and the shameful governments that support them such as the United States and Canada. 

Rachel Corrie R.I.P. 

• Dominion Stories

“No planner worth their salt would make a planning decision without consulting the public first,” says Maureen Ryan, a senior planner with HRM.  But in January of this year, when HRM presented their plan for spending $3 million dollars on the Halifax North Common, the 'consultation' was little more than an information session, where residents had the opportunity to submit written comments. 

Even if a meaningful consultation had taken place, some citizens, academics, and community planners agree that consultation is not enough.  They say the planning process, especially for a public space like the Halifax Common, can and should be done in a collaborative and participatory manner.   

“We need to develop a vision together first,” says Kate MacKay of the Cities and Environment Unit, a team of community planners that has helped dozens of First Nations communities develop their own community visions.  “The vision has to be tangible and action oriented.”  The community vision can then inform decisions, such as how the Halifax Common should be used.

“Community visions develop genuine engagement,” says MacKay.  “They are locally focused and focus on capacity building.  This is more important than ever.  We have so much local talent.”

Most public input opportunities consist of a presentation of sorts followed by an opportunity to ask questions or make comments.  Letters can also be sent to councillors and newspapers.

 “You go to the forums, speak your few minutes, write your letters, - and then you have no idea who gets them or what happens to that information,” says Pam deNicola, a long-time activist for the protection of farmlands and watershed in her West Haunts community.

Most opportunities for input are one-way and one-time-only; there is rarely space for dialogue or for ideas and concerns to evolve.  

“At the basic level, people need to feel heard,” says Maureen Ryan, who is heading up a design process that goes against the trend of meaningless consultation.  Ryan is senior planner on the Fall River Community Vision project. “[Participants] need to know their input was taken into account in decision making.”

Community Visions are a lengthy process offered through HRM's Community Planning department.  The goal is to work closely with residents to develop a plan for the aesthetic, economic, and physical direction for their community.   This vision then becomes their policy document.

“These people [residents of Fall River] are very capable,” says Ryan, who believes it’s not the job of planners to make the design decisions for a community. “Planners are here to help determine financial and technical feasibility of their ideas, and to ensure residents have the community development skills to carry out their projects.”

The Imagine Bloomfield Society used similar process to create a vision for the Bloomfield Centre when the future of the centre was in jeopardy.  The project and process were resident-directed and every attempt was made to involve as many residents as possible.  Instead of seeking feedback on a particular vision, the Society asked people to contribute their own vision. 

The outcome?  Imagine Bloomfield created a feasibility study and gave it to HRM.  Shortly after, HRM hired a consultant to do a feasibility study, which came to essentially the same conclusion.  “We could have done it for $25,000 instead of the $75,000 they gave the consultant!” laughs Susanna Fuller, a member of the Imagine Bloomfield Board of Directors.  “The lesson is that the public can come up with an alternative solution.  Plus, you end up with a stronger community.”

Ryan echoes the benefits for the Fall River community,  “It's huge!  We have an engaged community.  People are working together to create their own festival, and database of volunteers.  People are re-energized, and celebrating the good work of the community as a whole.”

The Fall River and Bloomfield processes are both examples of participatory design.  One of the key benefits of participatory design is that it allows conflicting stakeholders to work through problems:  by engaging with each other participants have the opportunity to expand their perspective and change viewpoints. 

“There certainly is a case for participatory design,” says Jill Grant, professor at Dalhousie's School of Planning.  “[Examples show] it works best at the small scale, where people are working on a local problem.  At that scale, residents [can] see the impacts of their actions and take responsibility.”  

Of course, there are downsides to participatory design processes.  First, they take time.  Developing a design or plan can take years, and politics tend to work in shorter time period.  Also, they take a lot of volunteer time from citizens, and many people do not have a plethora of spare time to offer unpaid.  Finally, collaborative design necessitates flexibility – a person might think they have the best idea, but then it combines with another, goes off on a tangent, meets new material, and blooms unrecognisable – not easy for everybody.

Which brings us back to the Halifax Common.  Originally, it was a wetland, a scrubby floodplain for Freshwater Brook, where people could pasture their animals.  As the population increased and the area urbanized, notions of appropriate use and the politics of land management became more complex.   Today, it is a central park, thoroughfare, and, according to HRM’s new plan, will soon be $600 000 more mega-concert friendly.  HRM’s plan includes a hard, permanent sub-surface under some areas of the grass to it more adaptable to concerts and seating.

Some Halifax residents feel the Common’s focus should not be on Big Name shows that shut off the public space for concerts you need a ticket to get into, but there’s currently no space for meaningful dialogue on the subject. 

“What if the civic-minded could put their energy into construction rather than opposition and frustration?” wonders Fuller.  What if a collaborative design process had been used to create the Common plan?  “What combination of softball, community garden, stream restoration, concert venue, art installation, lounging, doggie heaven would Halifax come up with?  How far could the citizenry make $3 million go?”

East Vancouver, February 15, 2010.

The March 16-31 issue includes reports and photos from the rubble of Little Mountain, an update about the Cheam fisheries case, a dispatch about the Canada-Colombia free trade deal, budget notes, upcoming events, original art, and more!

Download a PDF of the eighth issue of Balaclava!

If you would like to distribute the print edition, submit an event, ad, or have a story idea for the next issue, please email vmc at mediacoop dot ca.

Anarchists and Social Struggles in Vancouver After the Olympics

By Oshipeya
March 15, 2010

“It don’t take a professor to see the oppressor got the whole treasure.”
- One Be Lo, from the song “Axis” from the album “S.O.N.O.G.R.A.M.”

I recently attended two public events in Vancouver that got me thinking more about anarchists and their role in social struggles in the wake of the anti-olympic convergence.

The first was a talk by anarchist writers Mark Leier and Robert Graham at the Vancouver Public Library on March 11, 2010. A small room was almost full with an audience of about 50 people of different ages.

Leier, director of Labour Studies at Simon Fraser University and former union organizer, deconstructed recent anarchist thought influenced by post-modernist and post-structuralist philosophy by presenting Bakunin’s arguments against idealism in the mid-1800s. Leier’s presentation was not so academic as one might think. He plainly presented in a humorous and engaging manner the relevance of Bakunin to today, that being an insistence on the truth and reality of exploitation, the basic unchanged nature of capitalism and the division of society into opposing social classes, in contrast to the extreme relativism of post-modern philosophy.

Bakunin said that although our understanding of truth and reality is always partial it is still possible to know or understand, at least partially, some essential things, such as the fact of class exploitation.  

This concept of the continued relevance of anarchist anti-capitalist analysis dovetailed nicely with part of Robert Graham’s presentation, in which he described the anarchist idea that a free society is possible at any time in history, regardless of the level of technological development.

Graham’s talk focused on the aftermath of Spanish Civil War and social revolution of 1936-1939, the site of the largest anarchist movement in history and the biggest defeat of the international anarchist movement. The federal structure of the anarchist union the CNT was discussed as well as the difficulties anarchists had in securing weapons in contrast to the Nazi-supplied Spanish fascists and the Stalin-backed Spanish communists.

Graham discussed the evolution of some anarchists’ thoughts on war, organization and sexual repression after the Spanish Civil War and the Second World War, in particular referencing Wilhelm Reich, Paul Goodman and the recently deceased Colin Ward.

A question from the audience about the anarchist position on armies brought up a discussion of the difference between the Spanish anarchist militias, their guerrilla warfare tactics and their anarchist form of organization and the structure of a traditional army. The anarchist Nestor Mahkno’s more traditional military formation in the Ukraine after the Russian Revolution of 1917 was also briefly addressed.

Leier was asked about diversity of tactics and the Heart Attack demonstration of February 13, likely because of his previous supportive response to it in the Georgia Straight newspaper, but didn’t get much into it in this particular venue other than to say that it’s difficult to know the impact of such events until 10 years later. This reminded myself  and others of our previous idea that the success, support of and solidarity with the black bloc and the Heart Attack demo was partly the result of the Seattle World Trade Organization (WTO) riots 10 years ago and the efforts of anarchists and black bloc participants since then to build understanding around the tactic and work in harmony with others in social struggles.

The talk was framed around Leier’s last published book, “Bakunin”, and Graham’s volume two of “Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas”.

The second event I attended was called “In Solidarity with Resistance: Challenging Police Brutality”, which took place at the Rhizome Café on March 13.

A Native presenter talked about her experience during the Oka Crisis/Uprising of 1990 and read a statement from another Native person about the low-intensity brutality of fishing regulation and enforcement against Natives on the Fraser River.

Native women from the Power of Women group spoke on police brutality against Natives and other poor people in the Downtown Eastside (DTES), as well as the anti-olympic tent city.

A member of No One Is Illegal spoke on the role of the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) and their place within the repressive framework of policing in Canada and during the Olympics.

A poet spoke of the riot police response to the Heart Attack demonstration and read out a few of her poems about the Heart Attack demonstration and the tent city.

A student activist spoke on the police reaction after the Heart Attack demo when they arrested and illegally tried to deport him to the United States for observing police harassment in the DTES and riding his bike on the sidewalk.

This event was also packed and support for the black bloc and Heart Attack demo was apparent there too, if not explicit.

These two events further confirmed for me that the black bloc, Heart Attack demo and anarchists in Vancouver in general are not so marginal or “controversial” as a very small number of socialists, social democrat activists and even other anarchists in Vancouver and Toronto have tried to portray them as on the internet or at two previous public events (at the VIVO and W2 art spaces).

The majority of the audience at the previous events vocally and through applause showed support for the black bloc anyway, demolishing attempts by a few socialist and social democrat speakers to present their own negative views on it as being more popular, reasonable or even intelligent.

The fussing of a tiny number of socialists and social democrats over the violent and confrontational tactics used in conjunction with the black bloc tactic and the public’s supposedly mostly horrified reaction, or the exaggeration of a humorous pieing as a significantly “violent” attack, instead show just how out of touch these particular activists are with the “public” they talk about, as well as the majority of the activist community of Vancouver.

Canadian popular culture loves violence, from hockey to television to movies to the internet to video games to music, in far more gratuitous and random forms than was displayed at the Heart Attack demo. During the Stanley Cup riot of 1994 in Vancouver, windows at the Hudson's Bay Company were also broken, that time by hockey fans.

As Mark Leier pointed out in the Georgia Straight article and his three books on Vancouver’s labour history, the debate around diversity of tactics in social struggles is nothing new in Vancouver. In the early 1900s it was the working class based anarcho-syndicalist Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), the biggest union in British Columbia at the time, pushing the envelope in terms of tactics, much to the chagrin of the middle class dominated socialists.

In the 30s and the depression, ironically it was the communists like Steve Brodie pushing for more confrontational tactics in the occupation of the post office and other buildings, and the unemployed ended up breaking far more windows, at the Woodwards building for instance, in rioting after the police evicted them than were broken at the Heart Attack demo decades later.  

All that being said, I believe that anarchists in Vancouver could have and could still better communicate their views to the wider public, particularly off the internet and on the streets and in other public places, using a variety of methods, especially now given the greater public attention generated by the media in reaction to the Heart Attack demonstration.
 

Links -

Short documentary on the Stanley Cup Riot with footage of broken windows at the Hudson's Bay Company at 9:00 minutes (thanks for the tip bineshii):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Il3UlV2ars&

Mark Leier’s interview in the media about the black bloc at the Heart Attack demo:

http://no2010.com/node/1353

No action is sufficient in itself, black bloc or otherwise, by Oshipeya:

http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/blog/oshipeya/3044

Team Anarchy Wins Three Games Against Team Olympics (on hockey the black bloc and violence in Canada):

http://www.anarchistnews.org/?q=node/10695

Mark Leier’s bio at Simon Fraser University:

http://cgi.sfu.ca/~wwwhist/cgi-bin/viewfaculty.php?view=19

Robert Graham’s anarchism blog:

http://robertgraham.wordpress.com/

One Be Lo's song “Axis” from the album “S.O.N.O.G.R.A.M.”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vffQIUXMZ2I

• 2010 Olympics

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Lincolnville residents left in dark over tire recycling and toxic soil 

March 15, 2010

The Concerned Citizens of the African Nova Scotian community of Lincolnville, in the Municipality of Guysborough, have for years been fighting against environmental racism regarding the placement of landfills in their community.

Residents are outraged that, yet again, they were not informed about possible new waste in their community, in the form of a tire recycling facility and waste soil.

“The Municipality has not been transparent and accountable regarding the landfill site for the last 4 years,” said Concerned Citizen James Desmond.

Guysborough Warden, Lloyd Hines, pushed for a review of the decision to award a tire recycling contract, covering all of Nova Scotia's waste tires, to another Municipality, Goodwood, in the Halifax Regional Municipality. As revealed in the Antigonish Casket on February 9th, Hines felt that the tires should go to the community “who is operating a second-generation landfill and is very experienced in these matters (and) was prepared to do it.”

Despite the fact that it was revealed on March 15th that the decision to go with Goodwood will stay, the Concerned Citizens have not been impressed at how the process unfolded.

“We were assured by Mr. Hines that they would keep the community informed about any further development around the landfill. No one was informed that Mr. Hines was going to continue to lobby for the tire recycling contract.”, explained Mr. Desmond. 

Residents are also concerned about how the community is being portrayed.

“(Mr. Hines) was also implying that the Guysborough community was in favour. What community was he referring to?”, commented Basil MacLellan, another Concerned Citizen

Residents of Goodwood have already expressed concern over fires and runoff waste resulting from a tire recycling facility

“If it’s a risk to Goodwood, including fire, there are risks to our area and that adds to what is already happening with the landfill. The number of methane fires that have taken place at the Guysborough site show that it’s not viable for the tires to go there,” described Mr. MacLellan.

“A representative of the Landfill previously stated to the Concerned Citizens that there would be no toxic waste going to the landfill site,” added Mr. Desmond.

Recently, the community of Lincolnville learned from the media about the Defence Department's plan to remove more than 58,000 tonnes contaminated soil at the former radar base in Cape Breton and have the material placed in a landfill. Mr. Desmond approached the Guysborough Landfill on the issue, stating concerns that Lincolnville residents would be burdened with the waste.

“They were asked about what landfill existed in Cape Breton, aware that Cape Breton waste heads for Guysborough. The response was that they would check into it. An issue of this magnitude should not take 3 weeks for a response,” said Mr. Desmond

“Imagine 58,000 tonnes of contaminated soil, that's like 100 jumbo jets in your backyard,” conveyed Denise Allen, supporter of the Concerned Citizens through the Save Lincolnville Campaign. “Governments are violating their own processes, making deals behind closed doors. They've done it with Africville and their doing it to Lincolnville,” continued Ms. Allen.

But even before these recent moves by the municipality, there were a host of unresolved issues already. It has been 4 years since the Concerned Citizens have asked for information about the 15,000 industrial bags of oil waste that went into the 1st generation landfill site. They have yet to receive an answer. Additionally, in compliance with the closure permit for the 1st generation site, all leachate is supposed to be treated. The Department of Environment claims that what is in the permit is not written in stone. But the overall problem has been the waste itself: the placing of the old landfill there in the 1970s, then adding a larger one beside it in 2006.  

“The recent news is one thing, the fact that residents have had to worry about even more waste. But the original siting of the landfill there in the first place, the original act of environmental racism is where this all started. And what about all the damage that has been done since? All that needs to be accounted for, and the community has not backed down from that point,” said Asaf Rashid, with the Nova Scotia Public Interest research Group, another proponent of the Save Lincolnville campaign.

“No waste should be going into the site without consultation with the community at large,” stated Mr. Desmond.

-30-

For more information, please contact:

James Desmond, Concerned Citizens of Lincolnville: (902) – 232 – 3041

They call him “the Hurricane.”

Guatemalan coffee farmer Leocadio Juracan (his family name is close to the Spanish word for hurricance) has had a special relationship with many Nova Scotians for many years – though most don’t even know it.

His coffee-farming cooperative – part of the CCDA (Comite Campesino Del Altiplano in Spanish, or Highland Peasant Farmers’ Committee), has been delighting local palates with its fair-trade, shade-grown organic coffee for close to 9 years, through a partnership with Just Us! Coffee roasters in Wolfville.

When Juracan speaks to audiences in Wolfville, Halifax and Tatamagouche this, however, the agenda will include more than just light vs. dark roasts.

According to Kathryn Anderson, Maritimes Coordinator of the Maritimes Guatemala Breaking the Silence (BTS) Solidarity Network, a long-time partner of the CCDA, the organization currently faces “perhaps the greatest threat to its existence since its founding” in 1982.

In May of 2008, Juracan explains, after signing an agreement with Guatemalan president Alvaro Colom on a framework for rural development, the CCDA’s car was shot at six times while driving down a rural road. The car’s passengers narrowly escaped injury.

"CCDA coffee is about more than fair trade prices for local producers,” says Jackie McVicar, Coordinator of BTS Guatemala and former Intern with CCDA.  McVicar believes CCDA’s vehicle was targeted.  “CCDA coffee implies political advocacy and ongoing work in the struggle for labour justice and access to land for thousands of Guatemalan peasants. This work is happening at both the grassroots and national level.”

Authorities chalked up the shooting to “common crime,” however, an assessment that may seem reasonable in a country with one of the highest violent crime rates in Latin America. But since then, the organization has suffered through 2 robberies in which a total of $40,000 worth of coffee was stolen; its leaders have received threats of murder and violence by letter and by phone; and there is generally a “climate of terror” surrounding the CCDA, says Juracan.

“The robbery and threats the CCDA received reflect an attempt to destabilize the organization and delegitimize the work they are doing,” says McVicar.  “CCDA coffee isn't just about better wages, it's about changing structures of oppression."

In February, when the threats started to target Juracan’s children, he decided it was time to leave, at least for a while. With the help of some Canadian allies, he and his family discreetly left the country and found their way to Vancouver.

“If (the threats) had been just toward me,” Juracan says, “I would have kept on.”

A history of intimidation

The coffee grown by the CCDA – known as “Café Justicia” and sold to different roasters around the world – provides important capital for development projects, along with a fair wage for the farmers who tend it, says Juracan.

He lists home construction, a rural hospital, health promotion, training for midwives, teacher pay supplements, and educational scholarships as some of the CCDA’s ongoing projects.

But these “alternative” ways of doing things are threatening to some, explains Juracan.  “Guatemala is not a poor country,” he says. “There is a sector of society that is extremely rich, that has appropriated the wealth of the country and excluded the majority of the population.”

This “oligarchy” has a vested interest in business as usual, says Juracan. He dismisses the theory that threats and attacks against the CCDA are the work of common criminals, noting that they always take place immediately after the group takes any sort of public political stance – criticizing the government for lack of action on land reform, for example, an issue for which resolution is decades overdue; or condemning the murder of unionists. “We connect [the attacks against us] to political acts.”

Residual violence from Guatemala’s 36-year civil war may also be a factor. The conflict, which divided communities and killed over 250,000 (mostly victims of the military and government-backed paramilitary groups), left a legacy of violence that has been hard for the country to shake. It is perfectly plausible, according to Juracan, that his attackers would have connections to wartime paramilitary groups.

Biding time

Juracan and his family aimed to return to Guatemala after 2 or 3 months, hoping that their security situation would improve. In the few weeks since they arrived in Canada, however, “there is no encouraging news,” says the campesino. “There is more news of harassment and intimidation, hooded men roaming the community, gunshots at night.”

During his time in Canada, Juracan says he would like to “generate conditions for a return” to his home country. Many CCDA member continue to work hard in Guatemala for political change, and he plans to “strengthen solidarity” between his group and concerned Canadians. Consuming Café Justicia – available as Just Us! Coffee’s Breaking the Silence Blend in Nova Scotia – makes possible the CCDA’s ongoing social justice work, he adds.

Still, says Juracan, he would rather his stay be as short as possible. Being forced out of his country for doing the work he lives for was “quite difficult.”

“There’s no way to express how you feel."

On March 19 at 7:30pm, Jurican will be speaking at Just Us! Cafe on Spring Garden Rd.
 

No action is sufficient in itself, black bloc or otherwise

By Oshipeya
March 14, 2010

"No act is sufficient in itself, nor is its meaning so obvious that it would require no expression at all."
- Gilles Dauvé and Karl Nesic, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Autonomy

This article is a response to three other articles, “Breaking windows is not a revolutionary act” by Judy Rebick, “The State Is Not a Window” by Heatscore and “Thoughts on the anonymous communiqué from members of the Black Bloc” by Andrew Loewen.

It is true that the State is not a window, but neither is it just an abstract concept. Breaking windows is not a revolutionary act and neither is any other act if taken out of context and presented as an abstraction, ignoring the intentions and strategy of those who break the windows.

The State or Capital or colonialism cannot be attacked as abstractions. They can only be attacked in their material forms, their social relations and their institutions. It is not possible to attack all forms and material components of oppression at once, so they must be attacked in pieces at different times and locations.

Like oppressive systems, a social revolution is more than the sum of its parts, but neither can it exist without its parts working in relation to each other. A social revolution can be seen as an accumulation of diverse activities over a period of time. It is not a switch that can be flipped instantly. It can’t be understood in a purely abstract way or by ignoring the different particular factors and actions that compose it.

It is not always possible to fully understand the long-term impact, effects and interrelation of effects of different actions in regards to social movements and revolutionary struggle, just as it is difficult to understand “public opinion”, which is also an abstraction as well as a contradiction, in as much as the “public” is an abstraction and contradiction, made up of opposing social classes, other oppressive divisions and diverse real individuals.

The idea that breaking windows is a revolutionary act or that the State is a window or made up of windows was never presented by participants in the black bloc at the Heart Attack anti-olympic demonstration in Vancouver on February 13, 2010, or by its supporters. It is not possible to understand or build an analysis or argument around statements that were never made in the first place. The easiest way to not understand something is to take it out of context.

The black bloc at the Heart Attack demo also did not “come into the middle of a demonstration with black face masks and break up whatever takes their fancy when the vast majority of people involved don't want them to”, as Rebick falsely claims in her article.  The demonstration was publicly called as a “diversity of tactics” and “confrontational” demonstration to block traffic, “to clog the arteries of capital”. A prior spokes-council for the action was publicly announced. Of about 200 participants, about half, or 100 people, were using the black bloc tactic, while the other half mostly supported it or did not oppose it, staying with the march throughout and continuing on after most of the black bloc had dispersed.

The Heart Attack demo was only one of many during the anti-olympic convergence. Participants in the black bloc respected the wishes of others at demos that were called for as non-confrontational. This built support for the way the black bloc tactic was used at the Heart Attack demo. The previous day, the black bloc had taken part in a demo to block the torch route on Commercial Drive and the mass demo at the opening ceremonies and did not break windows. The tactic has also been used at many demos in Vancouver over the past 10 years, mostly without any window breaking. Participants in the black bloc also participate in many other activities. They are not only anonymous. The black bloc cannot exist or survive repression without some level of outside support. This support is built up before and after black bloc actions, over a long period of time.

The tactic is used to evade police surveillance. What it does beyond that is up to the participants. What has been shown in Vancouver for 10 years is that black bloc participants are not random intruders upon demos called by others, that they in fact seek to work with others rather than against them. This is why the black bloc at the Heart Attack demo had so much support from local activists and non-activists. Ironically, this particular black bloc was one of the most publicly and privately supported of all that have taken place in Canada or the United States in the past 10 years, since the Seattle World Trade Organization riots.  

Neither did the black bloc try to provoke a “police over-reaction” as Rebick contends. At the Heart Attack demo, the bloc only responded to police or bystander vigilante initiated attacks. The focus of the demo was blocking traffic, which was highly successful, with a dumpster and many newspaper boxes pulled into the streets and the police response of shutting down the Lions Gate Bridge for more than an hour (the bridge being one of only two routes to the north shore and Whistler Olympic venues from Vancouver). At the mass demo of several thousand people on February 12 at the opening ceremonies, the bloc only shoved against and threw projectiles at the police toward the end of the demo, after organizers publicly called for the bloc to move to the front line and warned other demonstrators to move to the back or disperse.

The breaking of corporate windows at the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) and the Toronto Dominion (TD) bank were complimentary actions to the overall Heart Attack march. They were not the main goal or component, although they were supported within and outside of the bloc. The HBC attack was for obvious reasons particularly supported by indigenous people. But the overall goal of blocking traffic during the first day of the Olympics was highly successful, perhaps more than could have been hoped for, since the direction of the march, heading toward and getting close to the Lions Gate Bridge, caused the police to shut it down for more than an hour. This kind of success is easy to objectively measure compared to the building of long-term wider support and the strengthening of social movements, which is equally important.

The Heart Attack march was one part of the overall movement against the Olympics, with the strategic goal of disrupting the games and their propaganda, so as to lessen their impacts and to create an unwelcome and unstable climate for such events to be proposed in the future. The Olympics are also not a temporary summit of world leaders such as the G8 or G20, but a years long massive infrastructure development project with permanent impacts, which consequently cause greater public opposition to the games and sympathy for protests and actions against them.  

The anti-olympic convergence was first called for by members of the indigenous sovereignty movement in Vancouver and British Columbia, and was first publicly announced at a Zapatista gathering in Mexico. Respect for diversity of tactics was a cornerstone from the beginning, and years of confrontational public and anonymous actions followed across the country building up to 2010. So if anything, those opposed to diversity of tactics or the black bloc are the intruders and outsiders to the anti-olympic movement and their numbers are a minority in comparison to those who use it, support it, are neutral or may disagree with it but do not oppose it.

The undercover police officers Rebick brings up, who were exposed at the Montebello protests against the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), were masked but not in black bloc and were exposed by the black bloc and not by a confused trade union leader who apparently could not understand the word “police” said to him in French by black bloc participants, as shown on a youtube video of the incident. Such infiltration is not done only to provoke violent action, which was already taking place at Montebello anyway, but also for surveillance and to target individuals for arrest. It may also be done to discredit the black bloc tactic and to add fuel to the fires of denouncement and bad-jacketing already built-up by activists. While many are quick to accuse black bloc participants of being police agents, without any evidence whatsoever to back up this assertion, the police practice of bad-jacketing, falsely accusing individuals of being police, is never brought up or denounced by the same activists who denounce or chastise the black bloc. Voluntary bad-jacketing done by activists is far more damaging to social movements overall than any actual police infiltration at any particular demonstration.

While any particular black bloc may be infiltrated by police for any number of police purposes, open activist groups are susceptible to long-term infiltration, in which police can attain positions of authority within the organization, as happened a few years ago to an anti-war group in California or for instance to the American Indian Movement, whose head of security was exposed as a Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) infiltrator in the 1970s.

While the particular statements of black bloc participants or its supporters around what constitutes violence or the corporate media’s predictable response and impact are open to criticism, as are particular actions of the black bloc (just as everything is open to criticism), such as vandalism against random vehicles or newspaper boxes, such critiques cannot logically be over generalized and made into guilt-by-association arguments against the black bloc itself or its other actions.

Contrary to Loewen’s statement, blocking traffic and breaking windows does directly harm corporations and is not merely symbolic. It’s not the amount of traffic disrupted or the amount of financial damage that makes an attack or action material rather than just symbolic. It is the nature of the action itself and the intentions and the strategy behind it. An action is only purely symbolic if it is intended as such. Corporations are also unlikely to make an insurance claim for broken windows given the deductible and the negative impact it would have on their insurance overall, and at any rate the cost would simply be passed on to an insurance corporation if they did. Nothing is without consequence.

Broken windows also have an impact beyond the window itself, since they must be repaired and their function of advertising displays in this case is disrupted, as is the image of the Hudson’s Bay Company itself. The action also inspires others opposed to the company and draws more attention in general to it and its contentious place in society. An open attack shows open hostility to the company itself, not merely an opposition to particular things it does or a desire to reform its excesses.

The meaning of these kinds of actions are obviously not only the domain of the corporate media but are also ours to define and communicate in whatever ways and places we choose, as this article itself displays, as do the many other statements in support of the black bloc of that day.

To end with I’ve provided a transcription of part of a speech made by indigenous elder Stella August of the Downtown Eastside Power of Women group addressed to the crowd at the February 20 rally for a national housing program in Vancouver where she talks about the black bloc at the Heart Attack demo and received cheers and applause from the crowd:

“Our young people who have broken the windows at these big stores with the Olympic costumes or whatever you want to call it, they’re not bad, they’re angry because of the rich people bringing the Olympics into our country when it wasn’t needed here. Those kids were not bad, they were only angry because of what they bring to our country, big time poverty. And I’m angry,  I’m very angry at these people that organize the Olympics to come to Canada, our beautiful country, our stolen land, our stolen Native land. They had to bring the Olympics here? And we’re still fighting for our land and we’re going to continue to fight until we get some answers. So remember, those kids that broke the windows, that were protesting, they’re not bad, they’re our people, they’re our children. We are the mothers, we are the grandmothers, we are the aunts, we are the sisters, we are the caregivers. Those kids were not bad when they broke that window. They were protesting because of what’s happening to our country and our city. All my relations.”
- Stella August

Links –

Stella August speech at the end of an audio program:

http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/audio/2869

Corporate news article about Stella August’s speech on the black bloc:

http://no2010.com/node/1362

SFU Labour History Director and anarchist writer Mark Leier’s interview in the media about the black bloc at the Heart Attack demo:

http://no2010.com/node/1353

Response to Derrick O'Keefe about the black bloc and Heart Attack demo,
By Oshipeya:

http://www.mediacoop.ca/blog/oshipeya/3029

Black Bloc vs. Liberal Shlock,
By Bineshii:

http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/10839

Breaking windows is not a revolutionary act,
By Judy Rebick:

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/judes/2010/02/breaking-windows-not-revol...

The State Is Not a Window,
By Heatscore:

http://linchpin.ca/English/State-Not-Window-Iconoclast

Thoughts on the anonymous communiqué from members of the Black Bloc,
by Andrew Loewen:

http://vancouver.mediacoop.ca/story/2790

A Contribution to the Critique of Political Autonomy.
by Gilles Dauvé and Karl Nesic:

http://troploin0.free.fr/ii/index.php/textes/16-a-contribution-to-the-cr...

• 2010 Olympics

Click on the above slideshow to view photos and captions.

From March 4th - 6th the annual Atlantic Canadian Organic Regional Network (ACORN) conference was held in Charlottetown, PEI. ACORN is a local organization which works to promote organic agriculture and support local organic farmers. The aim of the conference was to link up organic producers and consumers, as well as transfer knowledge to local farmers. The conference was organized into the following streams: livestock workshop, berry symposium workshop, crop/weed workshop, new growers series, soil series & gardening and greenhouse production.

Check out the ACORN website for transcripts of all the workshops. 

Rhetorical Militancy for a Rhetorical Mass Movement? If Only We Could
Make Them Like Us…

By John Garvey

The main purpose of this article is to address the questions of strategy
and tactics in the anarchist movement with specific reference to the roles
the Black Block tactic, and militant direct action play in our movement.

Addressing these questions now is particularly important due to the debate
that has re-erupted after the “Heart Attack” protest on Feb. 13 in
Vancouver and the upcoming G8/G20 protests in Toronto.

I take it for granted that militant direct action and revolutionary
violence are a necessary part of any movement that aims to be
revolutionary in practice, as well as in theory and rhetoric. I reject the
idea and practice of “revolutionary non-violence” as both theoretically
misleading and historically inaccurate.

This isn’t to say that non-violent political action doesn’t have a large
role to play in social movements. It is to say that social movements
should be both theoretically and practically prepared to accomplish their
goals through revolutionary violence if that is what will be most effective. That said,
we need to clarify what “diversity of tactics” means, and to continually
examine both the tactics we are using and our strategy in protests and in
movement building .

Let’s Keep Pushing: Physically and Analytically

At the peaceful protest in Vancouver on Feb. 12, after the black block had
been asked to take the front lines against the police by the elders who
were leading the march and to push through the police line in order to
reach the Olympic Stadium, there was a young woman who kept insisting that
we push through the police line. If everyone there had been willing to
push forward, if there had been greater unity, tactically speaking, we
probably could have done it and then we would have crashed the opening
ceremonies…Imagine that! Sadly, there simply wasn’t enough people who
were committed to pushing through the police lines to accomplish this.

All the attention that is currently focused on the issue of tactics and
strategy and violence and non-violence has created an opportunity for
those of us who want to see a militant movement to push back against the
idea that social movements are merely a leftish “loyal opposition.” It
is an opportunity to argue for a greater diversity of tactics than
currently exists as well and to continue subverting the hegemony of the
pacified, “non-violent” social activism that has pervaded the “radical
left” in Canada for the past 4 decades.

In the last 10 years the radical left in Canada has been able to push the
discussion called “diversity of tactics” far enough that it is a constant
theme in mass mobilizations here. At the least it is a discussion that
political activists of all stripes are familiar with, and many feel that
they have to engage with, either for or against.

In addition to all of this, the discussion around the “Heart Attack”
demonstration has created an opportunity for the anarchist movement to
engage in much needed discussion about strategy and tactics. Articles
like those by Mick Sweetman , David Rovics and others, while I strongly
disagree with many points they made, both involve anarchists thinking
strategically about anarchist movement.

Push? Burn? Build? Strategy in the anarchist movement?

It’s outside of the scope of this article (and of my ability) to address
all of the possible strategies for anarchist movement in Canada. Instead
I will only point out some of what seems to me to be particularly
important at this time.

Real discussion and debate about strategy is pretty limited in the
anarchist movement (and the radical left) in Canada. Given the need for us
to think before we act , this should be a significant concern to everyone
in the movement. There is more debate around tactics, but it is often
stilted due the offhand acceptance of ideas and concepts (such as
“diversity of tactics”) rather than critical interaction with them. A
fair bit of the discussion that does exist conflates strategies with
different anarchist tendencies: anarchist-communists argue for building
class power through worker and community assemblies; green anarchists
denounce workerism and industrial capitalism and argue for sustainability.

The anarchist movement (and the radical left) needs to reprioritize
theorizing and strategizing. This is a point that INCITE!, among others,
have made. They also emphasize the resources that the Right has put into
their theorizing, and they assert that this has played and important role
in the right wing resurgence of the last 30 years . To be clear, this
theorizing needs to be tightly connected to movement practices, should be
informed by them, and should inform them.

I believe that the politics that are delineated by the combination of
anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and anti-oppression are a good starting
place for the anarchist movement. I would also argue that an essential
part of anti-oppressive practice is a commitment to anti-authoritarianism.
The first three principles are all part of the politics outlined by the
journal Upping the Anti in their first editorial. In that editorial they
also flag the fact that this starting place is purely oppositional, and
the need for the radical left to find “conceptual and practical
alternatives to the system [and] strategies for getting there. ”

In addition to this we need to be clear about what we mean when we use the
terms anti-capitalism, anti-imperialism and anti-oppression. Like the
phrase “diversity of tactics” any and all of these terms can become devoid
of meaning if we are simply repeating them. All three of these politics, as
well as the connections and contradictions between them, need to be
clarified.

One of the reasons that the theoretical framework of anti-capitalism,
anti-imperialism and anti-oppression seems useful to me is the possibility
this framework has for building common ground on the radical left in
Canada.
In his excellent article , Joel Olson states that the anarchist movement
needs to move beyond Infoshops and Insurrection to movement building, and
to prioritize struggles against certain forms of oppression as more
relevant or strategic than others. Regrettably, he doesn’t define the
exactly what is involved in movement building.

It seems to me that we want, at the least, to be part of an anarchist
movement, as well as of autonomous social movements, that address the
triple oppressions of race, class and gender. Building this kind of
movement means that anarchists need to focus on issues that address these
oppressions, such as, for example, organizing against anti-police violence
and the prison-industrial complex.

Focusing on these three oppressions would involve updating anarchist
theory and practice to take into account the most vibrant movement of the
past 5 decades: anti-racist and anti-colonial movements, the feminist,
anti-nuclear, queer and environmental movements. The anarchist movement
needs to take this into account. The classical anarchist tradition with
its relatively exclusive focus on class does not adequately address the
issues of these movements and the theory and practice that has come out of
them.

Finally, on the subject of insurrection, mass anarchism and revolutionary
violence, it is mistake to separate building a mass movement with building
a movement that also engages in militant direct action and has the
capacity to engage in revolutionary violence. That is to say, a mass
anarchist movement, if it is to be more than rhetorically revolutionary
will need to be capable of defending itself from state and corporate
repression, and will need the capacity to engage in offensive strikes
against state and corporate power. Numbers will not be enough, and we
can’t rely exclusively on the General Strike, as important as mass strikes
will be in any confrontations with Canadian capitalism and the Canadian
state.

The long history of the Canadian state using violence, up to and including
murder, to break strikes in the 19th and early 20th centuries provides a
clear example of what the state will do when revolutionary unions and
workers threaten the status quo. Similarly, US state repression of the
Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement provides a more
recent example of the lengths to which the state will go to protect itself
from threats, as well as offering up another revolutionary model than
revolutionary unionism. In both cases revolutionary movements at the time
were required to defend themselves, and, for different reasons, they were
incapable of doing so. We need to be conscious of this history and to be
planning how to defend ourselves, our allies and our movements.

Not Now (Not Ever): Diversity of Tactics and the Black Block

The first thing that needs to be said in this debate is that we can’t
simply substitute the phrase “respect for a diversity of tactics” for
actual and critical discussion for any and all tactics used at and outside
of protests . As others have pointed out, honest criticism of certain
tactics can’t focus exclusively on the black block, as opposed to, for
example, signing petitions, and lobbying politicians . That said,
attempting to silence people who engage in respectful criticisms of the
black block and other tactics is wrong both at a moral and a political
level.

This article isn’t going to trace all of the points and counter-points
that have been made for and against a “diversity of tactics.” Instead it
will be quickly and one-sidedly respond to some criticisms of the black
block made by people inside of and outside of the anarchist movement.

Some of the debate around “diversity of tactics” has become somewhat
stylized, so that we already know in advance what people will say on
“both” sides of the issue. This condemnation or support for a diversity
of tactics usually falls along a few binaries: violent/non-violent,
illegitimate/legitimate, illegal/legal and ineffective/effective . The
Black Block is often coded as violent, illegitimate, illegal and
ineffective. These different binaries, and others could be added, are
also often, but not always, considered reinforcing: violent protest =
illegitimate protest = ineffective protest.

People also often make references made to the civil rights movement,
emphasizing that it was non-violent and effective. It’s effectiveness is
usually linked to, they say, it’s perceived legitimacy with large numbers
of people and the use of the tactic of civil disobedience.

To take up the side of the people who support violence and the black block
tactic (which I do) I offer this quote:

“while the American civil rights movement is often credited with the use
of non-violent means, the abolition of legalised segregation in the
United States was in fact accomplished through a series of what were
clearly violent state interventions, most notably sending in the National
Guard to oversee the desegregation of schools in southern states. ”

The point being that no matter how non-violent the civil rights movement
was and how large, it was it was relying on state violence to enforce
desegregation. So, people who use this example to valorize non-violence
are often being contradictory.

In any case, and for better or for worse (for worse, I think) the civil
rights movement all too often gets used in order to make political points
by different sides in arguments over diversity of tactics.

This is only a very superficially look at how these binaries play out in
two arguments. The larger point that I am trying to make is that in order
to make a militant movement we need to break down these mutually
re-enforcing binaries.

Moving along, it is also common for people to assert that militant actions
dissuade people from joining the movement. The evidence for this is
usually purely anecdotal and/or personal in nature. This lack of
foundation means that, at the exact same time, the opposite argument, that
militant action brings people into the movement, is also made. Given
this, it seems likely that militant actions and militant tactics by
themselves don’t necessarily do either of these things and that the result
of using militant tactics and engaging in militant actions depends on the
“who, what, when, where, and how” of an action, on the context of an
action. So, for example, the fire bombing of three porn stores that
distributed pornography that eroticized violence against women by the
Vancouver 5 didn’t result in the collapse of the feminist movement in
Vancouver, or of the campaign that existed to shut these outlets down. In
fact, these actions were an effective contribution to the campaign, and
were widely supported by large numbers of activists . However, and I
realize this is obvious, but bear with me, if there hadn’t already been a
mass feminist movement and a significant campaign specifically targeting
the chain, then the response likely would have been entirely different.
Which is to restate that the effect of militant tactics and actions
depends on the context in which they are undertaken. Excluding militant
direct action, and demonizing the people who do it is and will continue to
be divisive and if it were accomplished would significantly shrink the
movement, not expand it.

Finally, I want to talk about the issue of police infiltration. Some of
the criticisms about the black block, and of militant tactics are that it
is a tactic that is easily used by the police and the police use it to
discredit the anarchist movement (or whichever movement the person making
the point belongs to). This argument isn’t very convincing. Arguments
about whether an action or tactic discredits or benefits the movement
often has more to do with the personal opinion of the author (ahem) than
anything else. If it discredits the movement, then it does so regardless
of who throws the stones. Personally, I don’t think that it does. It may
be true that a police agent threw the first stone, but this is the sort of
thing that we’ll ever be able to prove. And, in fact, relying for
argument on accusations that are impossible to prove is evidently and
concretely an action that hurts the movement .

Further, I would argue that one of the likely goals of the police is to
discredit a tactic, the black block tactic, as well as to discredit any
and all forms of militant direct action. Truthfully, I believe that they
are content to discredit groups and movements regardless of what tactics
they are using. To the extent they (re)act in a rational manner, the
police and organizations like CSIS will try and discredit any tactic,
movement, group, etc. which they perceive as a threat to the status quo.
In the case of the anarchist movement, this means to the extent that it
threatens to become a mass revolutionary movement. It isn’t helpful to
isolate the Black Block tactic as the only way in which the police can
infiltrate our movement. Any above ground or open organization can be easily infiltrated by the
police. Any strategy and/or tactic that said organization chooses or uses
is open to manipulation by police agents. And, to the extent that we are
going to organize openly there is not much we can do about it except to
ensure that the strategy and tactics that we decide on will be effective
in building the type of anarchist movement that we want.

Sticks and Stones May Break my Bones, but Words Will Never Hurt Me

“For those who came here to peacefully make their point, I welcome them
here because I want them to be integrated into the long-term debate. For
those who came here to break windows and hurt small businesses or stop
people from going to meetings and having their say, I condemn them. And
I’m sorry that the mayor, the governor, and the police officers and others
have had to go through this. We need to make a clear distinction between
that which we condemn and that which we won’t.” - Bill Clinton

This quote illuminates a similarity between Bill Clinton’s politics and
certain statements made by anarchists in the recent debate about strategy
and tactics with regards to property destruction. It is also helpful in
highlighting the fact that “the establishment” actually doesn’t like
property destruction, contrary to the point being made by people who
accuse the Black Block of doing the will of the police.

Granted, the reasons that Bill Clinton, and Democrats who support him, and
anarchists oppose property destruction are different. Still, I feel like
it says something when you’ve got Bill Clinton on your side.

Tactics that are easily reconciled with establishment views of political
legitimacy risk being relatively easily appropriated and co-opted. If,
however, the argument isn’t against property destruction, per se, but
against property destruction at this time, this means that the question of
when property destruction will be acceptable needs to be answered: if not
now, when? The argument goes that at some point in the future the
anarchist movement will begin to engage in mass militant direct action
that will destabilize Canadian capitalism and its state. I think that
this is an impractical argument:

“You have to build the consciousness, you have to build the psychology,
you have to build the experiential base, and you have to build the
theoretical base… ”

A movement that has refrained from engaging in revolutionary violence and
militant direct action won’t have done any of these things and will
necessarily have to start from scratch. That puts us behind the game, not
in front of it. This is particularly so in the Canadian context given the
extent to which pacifism has and continues to influence movements for
social justice.

This isn’t to leave the Black Block off of the theoretical hook:

“…If you are going to go up against [the repressive apparatus of the
state,] of if you’re going to do serious damage to the structure of
things, it isn’t going to happen in some sort of frontal confrontation
with whatever deployment of force the state makes. So it is symbolic [in
a sense.]….[The Black Block] might want to ditch the uniforms…put on a
phony beard….And it is just this level of tactical evolution they’ve
refused. ”

The Black Block tactic is one tactic, no more and no less. To me there
shouldn’t really be any controversy about using it. If blocking up and
breaking windows at a demonstration accomplishes something, people should
do it. And if the Black Block is used by rote, if the tactic is used in
an entirely ritualized fashion so that it becomes the anti-capitalist
version of “family-friendly” liberal demonstrations with politicians like
Iggy and Jack Layton as the main attraction, this needs to be criticized.

That said, the Black Block should also not become the limit of our
militancy. Taking the Black Block, or any one tactic as the limit of the
meaning “diversity of tactics” is a contradiction in terms. Our tactics
should only be dictated by what will be most effective in reaching our
goals.

What if, for example, one of the affinity groups at the “Heart Attack”
Demo had chosen instead to torch a Hudson’s Bay Company outlet on the
outskirts of Vancouver, or in another city? This would have resulted in
significantly more financial damage to the HBC. It could also move the
debate around tactics further forward and reduce the criticism of the
Black Block, as people who want to condemn militancy would probably focus
on arson rather than window breaking.

In Conclusion: Militancy and Mass Movement

Sometimes it seems like critics of the Black Block are drawing a
comparison between it and insurrectionary anarchism’s “propaganda by the
deed”. For the most part I think that this comparison is not accurate.
While some members of the Black Block may draw inspiration from this
history, the tactic itself is incompatible with it in a number of ways,
the clearest being that it depends on and is designed for mass action. It
is a tactic that is used at relatively large demonstrations, and that is
more effective the larger the size of the demonstration and of the Block
itself. And it is important to remember that a large number of people who
use the tactic and/or who support the tactic are not insurrectionary
anarchists. It is a mistake to make generalizations about the politics of
people who use the Black Block tactic, and it is a mistake to make a
division between the Black Block and a mass movement.

The anarchist movement needs to be a militant mass movement. The
militancy shouldn’t begin at some hypothetical point in the future, but
needs to be, for very practical reasons, part of our current practice.
The idea that the Black Block and militant tactics, in themselves, ruin
the potential for a mass movement is an assertion is simply not true.
Instead, tactics need to be seen in context. Out tactics need to be
dictated by well thought out strategies. I’m not making an argument
against militant direct action right now, however, quite the contrary.
Our movement needs to become increasingly militant as of yesterday or even
two weeks ago. What I am suggesting is that people who have the courage,
the desire and the ability to take more militant actions think carefully
about all of the possible consequences of their actions. The rule of
thumb seems to be that militant actions shouldn’t be taking in isolation
but need to be part of a larger campaign and movement.

The lack of discussion around strategy in the anarchist movement creates
is one of our weaknesses. It results in divisive arguments around
militancy and the Black Block. It also results in a lack of much needed
clarity about what actions we need to take in order to build a mass
movement.

For example, is the theoretical position of opposing all forms of
oppression really a disadvantage when it comes to movement building? Does
it prevent us from organizing effectively due to the fact that the
movement is going in so many directions at the same time? If so, what
should we be focusing on? What does this mean for organizing around
issues that are deprioritized? What is to be done?

• 2010 Olympics

Cheam argues indigenous sovereignty in court

by Oshipeya
March 12, 2010

On March 9, 2010, several indigenous people from the Cheam reserve of the Pilalt/Sto:lo people appeared in court in Chilliwack, British Columbia, to face charges related to defiance of government fishing regulations and to present evidence of their sovereign indigenous right to fish. Several people from Vancouver, indigenous and supporters, travelled to Chilliwack to show support and build solidarity, which the Cheam people said they appreciated.

One person from Cheam was taken into custody in the court room in the morning on another fishing charge and was to be released on probation and conditional discharge afterwards.

Evidence was presented by a Cheam member, without the presence of a lawyer, of indigenous traditions, family ties and teachings handed down through the generations regarding fishing in the area. The immensely destructive impact of residential schools on indigenous traditions was also presented.

A solidarity message from people of the Katzie reserve and information on their salmon sovereignty blockade of the Golden Ears Bridge on February 13 as part of the anti-Olympic convergence was also shared with the Cheam people at the courthouse and was well received.

The judge put the trial over to May 25, setting aside three days for evidence to be presented by Cheam members. More support and solidarity then is requested.

A short background pamphlet on the Cheam struggle can be found here:

http://12thandclark.wordpress.com/files/2010/01/cheamreportback.pdf

• 2010 Olympics

Service providers, artists, musicians, writers, speakers, broadcasters and everyone in between gathered at St. Matthews Church on February 23 to provide the people-power for a nationwide radio broadcast on homelessness. “We shared delicious food, engaged in good conversation, and most importantly we listened” said one volunteer. The small gym felt inviting, full of tables and chairs, free food and hot drinks, and a large listening circle centered on the radio.

For eight years running the all night “Homelessness Marathon” has added its voice to the dialogue on homelessness. The night’s events in the Saint Matthews Church gymnasium were organized by CKDU 88.1 fm, in partnership with thirty-five other campus and community radio stations. After listening to the on-air interviews and conducting a few of my own, the messages that resonated most clearly were calling for compassion and solidarity in the struggle to end homelessness.

 “We are attempting to examine the roots of homelessness and point out the structural inequalities that exist in the current economic system”, said Capp Larsen an organizer with the Out of the Cold Shelter who spoke about grass roots responses to poverty. “We live in a society where housing is a commodity, landlords gain profit from rental housing. Until we struggle against housing as a for-profit commodity we will have homelessness.”

Patti Clappison spoke about her experience and political philosophies about mental heath and poverty during one of the live on-air discussions. Patti asked listeners to understand the strength it takes to be homeless. “People persevere, it takes so much strength just to wake-up, to endure judgement, collect bottles and cans just to get a coffee and doughnut.” She explained that structural barriers have been erected to exclude homeless people from accessing social support. “Pendleton Place used to exist as a wet/dry shelter but now shelters don’t let them in. Where are the homeless to go when they get turned away?” 

Ann Duffy has been a neighbourhood advocate for the past 20 years throughout HRM. Ann recognizes that a solution to homelessness can be found by simply building more affordable housing. “The solution to homelessness is that the Feds and the Province need to get the money to build housing.”

Into the week hours of the morning, musicians packed into the makeshift studio to perform a wide variety of improvised music.  Selwyn Sharples and Beau LaBute took part in the live on-air jam. After playing they offered a few words about the connections between improvised music and homelessness. “Jamming is the most basic connection, collaborating and survival, all people need each other,” said Selwyn. “Working together and working in unknown terrain is a celebration of commonality and connectivity.”

We are “working on the skill of listening to one another,” said Beau. Jokingly he added, “We should get the politicians to jam with us.”

Halifax, Thursday, March 11, 2010 – The corporate sponsor of this week’s Brier, biotechnology company Monsanto, is under intense scrutiny from environmental, consumer and farmer groups in Nova Scotia, and across Canada and the world.

“Many curling fans might be shocked to learn that the Brier sponsor Monsanto is at the centre of farmer and consumer battles over genetically engineered seeds and increasing corporate control in farming,” said Marla MacLeod of Ecology Action Centre, a Nova Scotia-wide environmental group. “We are saddened that the great Brier championship is now associated with this relentlessly controversial company,” said MacLeod.

Earlier this year, the Curling Association of Canada signed a multi-year sponsorship agreement with Monsanto that includes championships through to 2013. Monsanto has sponsored the Brier since 2006. This week’s Brier runs until Sunday March 14 in Halifax.

Monsanto is the largest seed company in the world and owns approximately 86% of all the genetically engineered (GE) seeds sown across the globe.  GE corn, canola, soy and sugar beet (white) are grown in Canada and Monsanto dominates the market in all four crops.

“Curling is being used to soften the image of a company that takes farmers in Canada to court for alleged patent infringement, for saving seeds,” said Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN). Monsanto now puts farmers that it sues onto an “Unauthorized Grower List” which prohibits them from buying Monsanto products in the future. “The Curling Association should not be providing a platform for Monsanto’s corporate public relations,” said Sharratt.

Monsanto’s GE seeds are causing havoc for many farmers in Canada. Saskatchewan organic grain farmers tried to establish a class action lawsuit to seek compensation from Monsanto and another corporation for loss of organic canola due to GE contamination. A Private Members Bill – Bill C-474 - will be debated in the House of Commons on Wednesday March 17, to address the issue of export market harm caused by GE seeds.

Groups across the country are engaged in various struggles to stop Monsanto’s GE seeds from harming farmers’ livelihoods and the environment. Just last week, farm groups and consumers from across Canada wrote to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to try to stop the lifting of an injunction on planting Monsanto’s GE alfalfa. “The release of Monsanto’s GE alfalfa would be an immediate threat to organic food and farming in Canada,” said Cammie Harbottle, Youth Vice President of the National Farmer Union and a farmer in Nova Scotia.

“We don’t want the great sport of curling marred by association with the harm that can be caused by genetically engineered seeds,” said MacLeod.
-30-

For more information: Marla MacLeod, Ecology Action Centre, 902 442 1077; Lucy Sharratt, Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, 613 241 2267 ext.6 or cell 613 263 9511; Cammie Harbottle, National Farmers Union, 306 652 9465. For background on Monsanto: www.cban.ca/Monsanto

Halifax, Thursday, March 11, 2010 – The corporate sponsor of this week’s Brier, biotechnology company Monsanto, is under intense scrutiny from environmental, consumer and farmer groups in Nova Scotia, and across Canada and the world.

“Many curling fans might be shocked to learn that the Brier sponsor Monsanto is at the centre of farmer and consumer battles over genetically engineered seeds and increasing corporate control in farming,” said Marla MacLeod of Ecology Action Centre, a Nova Scotia-wide environmental group. “We are saddened that the great Brier championship is now associated with this relentlessly controversial company,” said MacLeod.

Earlier this year, the Curling Association of Canada signed a multi-year sponsorship agreement with Monsanto that includes championships through to 2013. Monsanto has sponsored the Brier since 2006. This week’s Brier runs until Sunday March 14 in Halifax.

Monsanto is the largest seed company in the world and owns approximately 86% of all the genetically engineered (GE) seeds sown across the globe.  GE corn, canola, soy and sugar beet (white) are grown in Canada and Monsanto dominates the market in all four crops.

“Curling is being used to soften the image of a company that takes farmers in Canada to court for alleged patent infringement, for saving seeds,” said Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN). Monsanto now puts farmers that it sues onto an “Unauthorized Grower List” which prohibits them from buying Monsanto products in the future. “The Curling Association should not be providing a platform for Monsanto’s corporate public relations,” said Sharratt.

Monsanto’s GE seeds are causing havoc for many farmers in Canada. Saskatchewan organic grain farmers tried to establish a class action lawsuit to seek compensation from Monsanto and another corporation for loss of organic canola due to GE contamination. A Private Members Bill – Bill C-474 - will be debated in the House of Commons on Wednesday March 17, to address the issue of export market harm caused by GE seeds.

Groups across the country are engaged in various struggles to stop Monsanto’s GE seeds from harming farmers’ livelihoods and the environment. Just last week, farm groups and consumers from across Canada wrote to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to try to stop the lifting of an injunction on planting Monsanto’s GE alfalfa. “The release of Monsanto’s GE alfalfa would be an immediate threat to organic food and farming in Canada,” said Cammie Harbottle, Youth Vice President of the National Farmer Union and a farmer in Nova Scotia.

“We don’t want the great sport of curling marred by association with the harm that can be caused by genetically engineered seeds,” said MacLeod.
-30-

For more information: Marla MacLeod, Ecology Action Centre, 902 442 1077; Lucy Sharratt, Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, 613 241 2267 ext.6 or cell 613 263 9511; Cammie Harbottle, National Farmers Union, 306 652 9465. For background on Monsanto: www.cban.ca/Monsanto

[para leer la version en Espanol haz click aqui: http://toronto.mediacoop.ca/story/3034]

On March 9th, 25 protesters held a vigil for community leaders in Latin America killed by mining companies, across the street from one of the largest mining conferences in the world, the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) convention. They held up photos of several Central American activist who were killed for their role in opposing Canadian mining companies. At the End of the vigil they marched through the convention centre chanting anti-mining slogans.

“We are gathered here to try to speak for the people who don't have a voice inside this convention” said Rosa Noyola, from the Latin American Solidarity Network. She then proceed to name community leaders who had been killed for opposing mining projects, and named the companies she felt were responsible for their deaths. “we are extremely worried for the lives of the leaders and communities that are victims of the policy of complicity and demand an investigation into these murders and a stop to these atrocities.”

Large photos of murdered community leaders from El Salvador, Mexico and Guatemala were held up by the activists. During speeches they spoke out against Canadian mining companies including Blackfire, Pacific Rim, and Barrick Gold.

“Over 70% of mining companies are based out of Canada. This indicates that our government has made Canada a place of impunity as they are unwilling to hold these companies accountable for their actions.” said Susan Caxaj, a member of Community Solidarity Response Toronto, the group that organized the event. 

"Today, Gold Corp is scheduled to give a talk on ensuring free prior and informed consent for local communities. What kind of world do we live in where a company like Gold Corp provides counsel to other mining companies on how to protect the human rights of local communities? We are talking about a company who has repeatedly shown that they have little respect for local communities' human rights - particularly, their right to say no."

The PDAC convention was held in the Metro Toronto Convention Center, the same venue that will hold the G20 summit next June. The convention had thousands of attendees. Those who saw the vigil mostly look baffled. Their opinions of it were mixed. “Its horrible when anyone is killed, mining has a bad repor with people around the world” said one. Another was less supportive “I don't think has killed half as many people as the Iraq war”

One member of the vigil had been holding up signs across from the convention center since the convention began on Friday March 5th. He said that on Sunday March 7th he was “Joined by 40 flag-waving members of USW Local 6500, Sudbury, on strike against Vale Inco.”

Vigil held on the 9th lasted for one and a half hours. When it was over, most of the participants marched into the convention center chanting “Canadian Mining Blood on Your Hands!” When they realized that they were not being stopped by security they rode up three flights of escalators and made their way from the South Building of the convention center on Bremner St. to the North Building on Front St. Passing several hundred conference attendees as they marched. After reaching Front Street the small but vocal group dispersed.    

Andrew Chung's lengthy article about the impoverished Port-au-Prince neighborhood of Bel Air ("Princes of Bel Air", Toronto Star March 7, 2010) makes three key claims about Haiti:

1) Deposed Haitian president Jean Bertrand Aristide was a corrupt and thuggish leader.

Chung describes Bel Air as a "slum with the reputation for gang violence, pro-Aristide thuggery, and, like Cité Soleil, danger, especially after dark" and describes Aristide as "populist but corrupt ". Chung claims that

"Guns have played an outsized role in Bel Air. Apart from the thugs and drug gangs, there were the feared chimères, armed militias loyal to Aristide, a soft-spoken former Catholic priest. Guns are why the U.N. labelled Bel Air a 'red zone.'"

Chung's characterization of Aristide is stated as if it were common knowledge. No evidence is offered to substantiate it aside from an assertion by one Bel Air resident, apparently on the payroll of a Canadian funded NGO, who says that Aristide armed his supporters. [1]

Chung's article ignores, perhaps out of ignorance, several court cases that should have made him extremely skeptical about his assumptions about Aristide.

Aristide's most prominent allies – former Prime Minster Yvon Neptune, So Ann, the late Father Gerard Jean Juste were subjected to lengthy, illegal, and very dangerous prison terms after the coup of 2004. Canada oversaw the Haitian judiciary as these arrests were made. Less prominent Aristide loyalists such as Rene Civil, Ronald Dauphin, Amanus Mayette were also imprisoned without trial. [2]

Allegations against Aristide and his supporters have never been in short supply – especially those spread by the Canadian funded "human rights group" – RNDDH. However, a funny thing happened when these cases above were, very belatedly, tested in courts that were stacked against the accused by the Canadian backed Latortue dictatorship. Every single case that went to trial was thrown out because not a shred of evidence materialized.

Allegations of Aristide's corruption have not been tested in court but not from lack of effort .Aristide's personal residence was ransacked after the coup of 2004 and lawsuits against him were initiated but quietly abandoned after it was clear they were a waste of time. [3]

As for the "guns" that Chung writes about so ominously, Canadian author Peter Hallward, in his 2007 book "Damming the Flood: Haiti, Aristide and the politics of containment", made a very thorough investigation of the claims that Chung regurgitates and found them to be wild exaggerations and outright lies used to justify the violent consolidation of the coup. Hallward wrote

"It is not hard to find a gun in Haiti, and no-one denies that some Aristide supporters had guns. What has always been just as obvious to anyone in Cite Soleil or Bel Air is that their enemies have bigger guns, more of them, and more ways to get hold of them....after 1994 military and FRAPH personnel were never disarmed, and they had powerful friends both in the moneyed hills above Port-au-Prince and across the border in the Dominican Republic..,."[4]

Hallward made the further point that it Aristide enemies who had always had the most to gain from violence.

In 2005, years before Hallward's book was published, Yves Engler and Anthony Fenton effectively exposed Canada's role in Haiti in a very concise book ("Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority"). Chung is hardly alone among Canadian journalists who write about Haiti in apparent ignorance that a serious challenge to the Canadian government's narrative has been available for years. [5]

2) Conditions in Bel Air were improving because of Canada's involvement in Haiti.

Chung assures us that

"….the point to remember is that Bel Air was making progress, with Canada's help in funding a number of innovative social projects there… The earthquake has shattered everything."

In reality, the point to remember is that Canada backed the coup that ousted Aristide's democratically elected government in 2004 and that led to a human rights catastrophe. Canadian troops secured the airport as US troops flew Aristide out of Haiti – against his will says Aristide. Calls for a formal investigation by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and the African Union were dismissed and effectively blocked by Canada and the US.

Chung simplifies all this by merely writing that Aristide "fled a mounting armed rebellion".

The coup led to the murder of thousands of Aristide partisans according to various human rights reports and a scientific study published in the Lancet medical journal. [6] Chung wrote that

"After Aristide was forced out, long-standing social problems in Bel Air boiled over. Bel Air became known for its barricades and burning tire demonstrations against the police. Anti-Aristide rebels hunted his partisans."

By neglecting to mention that Aristide was "forced out" with Canada's help, he obscures Canada's contribution to the bloodbath that followed. Additionally, it was the UN (led by the US, Canada and France) that took over Haiti in 2004 – not local "anti-Aristide rebels". The "hunting" of Aristide partisans, which included murder and arbitrary imprisonment, was carried out by the Haitian Nation Police backed by UN troops. Armed vigilantes, such as the Lame Ti Manchèt gang, often worked with the police to perpetrator massacres like the one that took place at a soccer match on August 20 of 2005. [7]

3) The young men of Bel Air pose a grave, violent threat – a ticking bomb that Canada hopes to diffuse.

Support for Aristide in Bel Air is acknowledged by Chung - not as evidence that his assumptions are wrong - but to insinuate how dangerous Haiti's poor young men remain.

A young Aristide supporter named Woosny Grangé is cited to reveal the "bitterness" that lack lingers in Bel Air – along with a frightening lack of appreciation for the work done by the Canada and the UN.

"Will the new princes of Bel Air be the gang members of old?" Chung asks.

He ends the article with the following quote:

"A little spark can bring a bomb to Bel Air."

In lieu of evidence for his assertions, Chung provides descriptive passages that convey the sights and sounds of Bel Air. Local color is used as a cheap substitute for depth in a one dimensional piece of propaganda.

History shows that the most dangerous people in Haiti are not the poor, but, among others, Haitian businessmen who financed coups in 1991 and 2004 and who urge the UN and the police to be even more brutal; the UN troops and Haitian police who have terrorized places like Bel Air and Cite Soleil; and Canadian officials always ready with money, excuses and lies in support of criminal polices.

SUGGESTED ACTION(S)

1) If you haven't already, make a donation to one the relief organizations recommended by the Canada Haiti Action Network (CHAN)
http://canadahaitiaction.ca/

2) Send polite, non-abusive emails to the following
( copy all letters and replies to Joe@canuckmedeiamonitor.org )

Toronto Star
lettertoed@thestar.ca

Andrew Chung
achung@thestar.ca

3) Forward this alert far and wide

NOTES

[1] Chung's article is at
http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/articl...of-bel-air?bn=1

Chung says the Bel Air resident who claims Aristide armed his supporters receives a "stipend" to produce artwork as part of an "innovative program". The provider of the stipend is most likely Viva Rio, a Brazil an NGO funded by Canada whom Chung praises in his article.

[2] The website of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti (IJDH) has detailed information on these cases.
http://www.ijdh.org/

Also see HaitiAnlysis.com and HaitiAction.net

[3] See Steve Lendman's "Targeting Aristide in Exile"
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/news/1/59...-in-exile-.html

[4] page 170-71 "Damming the Flood" by Peter Hallward

FRAPH was a death squad responsible for the murder of thousands after the first coup that ousted Aristide in 1991. Its founder, Emmanuel Constant, was on the CIA payroll and lived freely in the US for years, protected from accountability for his crimes Haiti by both Clinton and Bush administrations.

[5] I have yet to correspond with corporate journalist who has read either book.

See the CMM alert "Benighted Journalists Assail Haiti"
http://canuckmediamonitor.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=350

[6] Athena R Kolbe, Royce A Hutson. Human rights abuse and other criminal violations in Port-au-Prince, Haiti: a random survey of households. Lancet 2006; 368:864-873; http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/a...692118/abstract

[7] See this article by Jeb Sprague for details on the soccer match massacre and other crimes by Lame Ti Manchèt

http://www.haitianalysis.com/2007/1/26/hai...photojournalist

The Conservatives tabled the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement in Parliament today, reviving a deal many thought better left for dead.

Renewed interest in the deal comes weeks after an Amnesty International report found Indigenous peoples in Colombia are at risk of being exterminated by state forces, right wing paramilitary groups and guerrilla organizations.

But Canadian officials are ignoring Amnesty's report, focusing instead on economic aspects of the deal.

“International trade is critical to our economic recovery," said Minister of International Trade Peter Van Loan in a press release. “As we move beyond stimulus spending and diversify opportunities for Canadian business abroad, this free trade agreement will help Canadians prosper," he said.

Van Loan's comments come though there is little data supporting the notion that economic benefits will flow to Canadians as the result of an FTA with Colombia.

The Canada-Colombia deal will open market access for certain Canadian commodities, flooding the Colombian market with Canadian wheat, barley and other grains. The key provisions of the deal relate to the security of Canadian investments in the mining and oil and gas sector.

The agreement, which was being fast-tracked in parliament as Bill C-23, was sidelined when Prime Minister Stephen Harper prorogued parliament. Critics of the Canada-Colombia FTA are urging Micheal Ignatieff, the leader of the official opposition, to vote against the deal, now dubbed C-2, in parliament.

“Ignatieff has only one choice if he truly cares about human rights and democracy, and that’s to keep the Colombia free trade agreement off the parliamentary agenda until a human rights impact assessment can be carried out," said Stuart Trew, the trade campaigner with the Council of Canadians.

Unfortunatly, the Liberals have wavered in their opposition to the deal, straying from an election promise by former leader Stépane Dion that they wouldn't sign off on the deal until the human rights situation in Colombia improved.

“Far from creating a legitimate economy, as Liberal MPs have been suggesting in defence of the Colombia free trade agreement, the deal before Parliament would increase the chances that Canadian companies invested in agriculture, mining and resource extraction in sensitive areas will be doing business with murderers, drug traffickers and arms smugglers,” said Trew in a press release.

News of the tabling of the agreement comes together with the newest gruesome figures relating to murders of union members last year. Colombia's National Labour School reports that 45 unionists were killed in 2009.

"In the face of these serious, ongoing abuses it is unacceptable that Ottawa would even be talking to the Colombian government, let alone fast-tracking an agreement," said Paul Moist, president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, in a press release.

In February, Amnesty spokesperson Kathy Price said the situation of Indigenous peoples in Colombia is nothing short of an emergency. At least 114 Indigenous people were murdered last year, while thousands more were subject to threats, abuse, torture and displacement.

• Free Trade & Gateway Projects

Post-secondary students took to the streets on February 17 to protest statements by the Quebec Minister of Education, Michelle Courchesne, indicating that heightened tuition rates are in the offing.

Courchesne ignited the fury of students by saying that tuition hikes may soon go beyond the $50 per semester increases that students are paying until 2012.

In an interview with the Montreal newspaper La Presse, she said that a "consensus" is emerging in favour of the de-freeze in Quebec.

"When I speak of consensus, I exclude students," she remarked. "But ... more and more, the importance of increasing tuition rates is becoming apparent."

Students soon organized demonstrations opposing the Minister's statements at universities including McGill, Concordia and the Université de Québec à Montréal.  

Less than a week later, a group of high-profile public figures declared themselves in favour of the deregulation of tuition. The sixteen signatories of their "pact" included ex-Premier Lucien Bouchard, and the ex-president of the Montreal Chamber of Commerce, among others.

While the pressure to de-freeze tuition is quickly rising, students are simultaneously facing a host of other issues, ranging from the environmental sustainability of campuses to the deregulation of military-funded research. 
How effectively are major student organizations responding to their concerns? 

The latter question will guide my writing over the next few weeks as I conduct research for the Quebec branch of the CFS.

On this blog, I will post a series of reports that will attempt to identify key issues concerning students in Canada, and especially in Montreal, where I am based.

These reports will also aim to assess how effectively major student organizations are responding to the concerns of students.

I encourage readers to leave comments on this blog or to email me at davidgkoch (at) gmail.com.