What Marxists, Social-Democrats and all other activists (including the self-described
non-violent Anarchists) who have been attending these gatherings have to come to
terms with is that "violent" Anarchists, including the Black Bloc types, are not
going away. Anarchist tactics varied greatly at Quebec from that at Seattle- there
wasn't the same lust for property destruction. In retrospect, it seems that Seattle's
property destruction tactic- and it is a tactic, not a simple lust for chaos as some
progressives and most of the media would have it- has had an impact that has struck a
deep chord among many people of their early 20's and 30's. What it demonstrated was
something proactive- and in that, it can be seen as the part of the action in Seattle
that has had the enduring effect of being a launching pad for much of what exists
today. It is my belief that property destruction is a counter-productive phenomenon
and not one that will bring people to devote themselves to a radical movement. Yet it
was the very people in Quebec who identified with the property destruction phenomenon
in Seattle who tore down that goddamned chain link Wall. Let us stop and think for a
moment here: Do we even have the right to refuse to tear it down?
What was this Wall, if not a direct symbol of all that is wrong with Canada, with
North America, with the FTAA and the kind of world they are trying to build in their
own image? What does it mean when the "democrats" start building walls and erecting
lines of police to keep the people out? It means they have a level of fear of the
masses' revolt, for one. It means, more importantly, that only we can truly speak for
democracy as well. If we had gone to this demonstration against their murderous plans
and allowed them to decide what forms of resistance were to be used against their
system- while the greatest gift of a target for the propaganda of the deed was put in
place- then that would have been a missed opportunity, and "criminally negligent" on
the part of all of us who want a better world. That Wall was the driving force for
many to come to Quebec and denounce the proceedings of the FTAA negotiations. Tearing
down that fence has been called a wrong act by the corporate media, and yet the
overwhelming mass of the people do not condemn the action. History provides glimpses
of space whereby the actions and words of the ruling class in North America differ
vastly from what people know to be true- and that phenomenon has rarely become
clearer to people than right after this whole event. The ruling class trots out this
line about "democratic, non-violent dissent", etc. This is usually their talisman; it
has worked so well so many times for them. But this time it did not- and the looks on
the faces of those hearing it was something else.
There was a situation where one of the `Black Bloc' types (who was actually dressed
all in Red and had a French accent) was in a tear gas-cleared area of the street,
down on one knee. I ran out to check on what was up, and found him to be simply
tucking in his pants into his socks. He mentioned that he was worried about the
little tear gas holders, less toxic but also less predictable (they tend to bound
around, sending off sparks of fire like wound up tops). No big deal, but then THUD-
"What hit me?" he asked. We looked around, not able to see much, except this thing
that looked like a small baby bottle. On closer examination, we realised it was a
"rubber" (really solid plastic/teflon) bullet. The size of these things is quite
something- roughly an inch less than the height/length of a pop can, and the width of
your average pill bottle. I picked one up a little later. These caused several
injuries over the two days. The starkest event with these projectiles I saw was a
young communist-dressed fellow (decked out in a hammer and sickle T-shirt) give a two
handed peace sign to the police line at the fence area. He was alone, and around ten
feet from the cops. One simply lowered the gun and shot him in the right of his
chest, whereby he collapsed instantly to the ground. Several people immediately ran
to him and helped him off the street, as he slowly came to- with a perfectly round
welt on his chest that he clutched at. He swore and screamed at the police line, and
then, after several photos of his injuries taken by all media, slowly proceeded back
into the crowds to "get back into the action". He collapsed a few minutes later and
went to the medical clinic. If the man I described was the same one described to me
upon my trip to the clinic several hours later, he was sent to the hospital with
broken ribs. If it was not the same man, then someone else went off with broken ribs.
I assume this happened several times over the two days to many other people. I never
saw this particular man again.
As I mentioned earlier, sometimes what reality is and how reality is described by
the media are extremely different matters- and in these cases, the population can
often tell. I believe it was Mao who said that, to paraphrase from memory, the rank
and file are always to the left of the leadership, and the masses are always to the
left of the rank and file. What is happening right now- and what we risk
extinguishing by prattling on and on about morality and/or the practicality of the
Anarchists- is that the deep-seated anger in the people brought on by this grotesque,
inhuman and unliveable society has been unleashed. This anger has been tapped into,
right at this moment, in a very serious way- and it seems extremely complemented by
the realisation that these same Anarchists, enamoured Maoists, independent radicals
and others (I even met a post-modernist in a gas mask)- have also set free. The most
important realisation, the political lesson- the one we must find ways to continue to
push- is that yes, we can resist these butchers. They are human, they can be stood up
to and that it is indeed proper for people to fight back. The slogan I heard at least
a thousand times during the rally has, for the time being at least, been transferred
into a heart felt notion for so many who both participated and those who watched. A
better world IS possible!! Taking hold of this beautiful consciousness and
celebrating it is not the same as believing that one can throw rocks all the way to
overthrowing capitalism- nor is it indicative of a notion that we can do without the
organised working class. It is to simply embrace that rock as symbolic of our
rejection of the ruling-class and their blood-drenched Imperialist system.
When I got exceedingly tired from running back and forth dodging tear gas, I would
wander through the more carnival-like settings of further away from the front. This
roughly means two blocks or more, depending on how far I went and what the police
were doing with their gas that minute. While I did that, I could let my guard down a
little and get into discussions with random people about what they thought of the
whole thing. Of course, the usual denunciations of the police were forthcoming all
the time. I had dressed nothing like the "Black Bloc" (or their Red counter-parts) on
either day- and yet the reactions I was hearing from people were almost never along
the lines of two types of activists, but instead several types of dissent. The areas
where the violence was were described as just that- where you had to physically risk
yourselves in battle. That wasn't the case in Seattle. People had not gone into the
Quebec demonstration thinking that it would be an entirely peaceful affair, since the
organisers had not said so, nor had the demonstration. As such, people were not
wandering around Quebec trying to convince others that "those people don't really
represent all of us", etc. Moreover, the few who have taken that line (such as the
leader of the federal NDP, Alexa McDonough) really sounded all irrelevant after the
days' events were completed. In a battle zone, and all of Quebec became one very
quickly, there are only two sides. The people who say they are on the third level
quickly shrink to idiocy and have little place for themselves in popular
consciousness. New Democratic officialdom, as represented by Ms. McDonough, sounded
like the good cop to people who had been in the demonstrations when we returned to
the University. The sound of one minister explaining to another why the people had
revolted- and her explanations of how to prevent further outbursts- didn't sit well
with people who were trying to wash tear gas out of their hair.
People are not particularly excited about defending the police very often, nor are
many (some are, to be sure) upset at the actions of protesters in defiance of the
police. That has been seen as often appropriate. It is the window breaking stuff that
many are not into. Unfortunately, it will be a while before this Anarchistic tactic
is changed, in my view. Rather than worry ourselves about what is wrong with the
window breakers, we must simply move beyond it and refuse- categorically- to condemn
it. Radicals who are standing by condemning these folks condemn themselves to
isolation and irrelevancy. There was a group of men from the CUPE union who carried
their union banners in unison with the Black and Red Flags at the front. Evidently,
the chord struck of total resistance has hit home with some unionists- who have
chosen to side with the "Black Bloc" when the only options they feel exist are of
total solidarity or condemnation. And imagining for the moment this false dichotomy
were real, good for them and their choice.
Personally, as I was doing my part to defy the police violence by occupying territory
they wanted me to vacate, I felt as if I were trusting my life with these comrades
with the Black outfits on. I certainly wasn't comfortable laying it all on the line
in front of these sadistic cops with someone next to me sitting down and closing
their eyes. Call me crazy, and I see the propaganda value in it, but these people
looked like sacrificial lambs- and I'm not really into martyrdom. As much as can be
said about the respect I felt for a fellow combatant, I felt it about those who were
ready to fight. I wish I could stress that further. When the plastic bullets started
to fly and the tear gas choked the entire city, it wasn't in "response" to "violence"
. However, it was the "violent" who kept clearing away the tear gas
canisters -throwing them on roofs, throwing them back at police, etc.- who helped
others the most, save for the street medics.
The street medics were a very amazing and committed bunch. The clinic was some 8-10
blocks from where the main Ren� L�vesque Boulevard fighting was happening. By late
day one, I had already been in the clinic and the fighting was only two blocks from
it. Nursing my own injuries, I had returned home "only" at midnight to sleep on the
floor at the University. The next day I was to discover the police had rolled
through the neighbourhood of the clinic (which was supposed to be a "safe zone") with
huge amounts of gas. This was to be but a prelude for what would happen the evening
of the 21st. The clinic had been a very strong source of pride for us, and was
staffed almost exclusively with Americans who had somehow made it across the border
(This was only apparent when they tried to pronounce the street names in Quebec, and
it turned out they were from all over the East Coast of the US).
Many of you by now know that the clinic was shut down by the police on Saturday at
gunpoint, where the police then marched people -both the medics and the patients-
through the streets and back into the clouds of tear gas that some asthmatics had
gone there to avoid. The significance of closing the clinic needs to be understood as
a political act, and as a simple chess board military-style move on the part of the
Quebec police. The political act was to demoralise the people. So long as we knew
that there were people of our own doing what they could to take care of our injured,
people could fight harder against the tear gas-stained street repression. Our own
could take pride and security in knowing that they would be treated later on if they
were hurt. On the second day, I can roughly guess where I was when the clinic was
shut down. I was near the museum after coming across a pair of close friends from
Vancouver. A man came running up and asked for a medic. I asked why, what happened-
he returned that a man had been hit squarely in the face with a tear gas canister and
was in desperate need of help, and that there were no medics nearby. Throughout the
rest of the time I had been there up until that point, anyone needing
assistance -beyond flushing tear gas out of the eyes and throat-- was attended to by
our medics within seconds. This injured man's predicament was likely the first result
of the police action.
The action to close the clinic went far beyond simple psychological warfare on the
part of the police. So long as it remained open, injured activists had a place to go
to receive treatment without fearing being prosecuted or persecuted by the state. Now
I'll give a personal anecdote of my injuries that illustrates it clearly. My personal
decision for how to react to the repression at the front lines took the shape of
steeled defiance. As I mentioned, I had been given a Red Flag on the march from Laval
that I carried proudly. After I had joined the fracas at the fallen Wall, I shortly
decided to follow a personal no-rock policy. What I ended up deciding upon instead
was to be among the first to re-emerge into the open areas that the police gas had
recently cleared to defiantly stand with my flag and a clenched fist. It was both for
my benefit and as a message to the police line- it was to say, simply, "you will not
chase me from here". Whatever impact one person can have I don't know, but it was all
I could do- I felt a responsibility to remain and would have had a hard time with
myself had I not stayed. This act- wandering out into open spaces with a Red Flag and
a clenched fist to the police- in retrospect was bound to get me larger lumps than I
got. I was "lucky".
(end part 2)
-------------------------------------------
Macdonald Stainsby
----
In the contradiction lies the hope.
--Bertholt Brecht
