Reclaim the Streets - what happened??

[nessuno]

In answer to free spirit about what the movement of movements acheived.

First, i am sure other people can add to what is written here. it is by no means a comprensive list.

I notice you joined Urban75 at the time of Genoa in 2001. I like to ask you what you thought of the demo....

For me Genoa achieved alot. I think the movement of movement coincided its rise with a wave of concern over the effects of Globalisation and climate change. A kind of globalisation that only benefited the west and America.

Looking back, i realise that the Genoa Social forum went on to be the blue print of the World Social Forum in Brazil. The formation of the European Social Forum has its roots in the GSF, WSF and the Florence social forum that hosted a 1.5 million demo in november 2001.

Bush's first visit to italy ended with the death of a protester whilst being treated as america's worst ever president. He would get a reputation as the 'climate devil of Kyoto'

Whilst the Movement struggled and died in the years after Genoa, so did Neo-conservativism. Bush's entry into the book of presidents with be Kyoto, 9-11, iraq,iraq and iraq.

The G8 was, by Genoa...caught in the spotlight. Forced by Africa, the Doha talks were enabled. Doha was/is an attempt to open the free market by removing subsidies thus enabling the southern hemaphere to trade. In later years, the world would see France and the US as protectionist and anti-free market. Doha reached boilling point at Cancun where a Korean farmer committed suicide. Cancun also saw the creation of the Cancun 47 southern hemesphere countries. This still threatens the collapse of the WTO....

By 2002, any veteran movement protester was instantly outnumbered by the number of peace protesters. Iraq was different to Vietnam in the sense that it took four years to build a peace movement in america where it took a matter of a few months. The existence of the internet amplified and massively enlargened the peace movement resident on the web at the same time. With Iraq almost over however, protest numbers have shrunk from 1.4 million to almost nothing. It is this that we are dealing with now.

RTS, Indymedia and a host of other protest groups could not of done it with out the internet. The web has come along way. the name movement of movements takes its name because it had used the web to join up parts of other movements. This is the first global NETsocial community (like urban75) to do this. The Genoa demo and its legacy has been witness to this.

South America could not have happened without Genoa. For the first time south american countries learnt about the G8, WTO and IMF/WB. months later, argentina would explode into revolution and then to suspend payments to the IMF/WB...Today most countries have elected left wing governments which are opposed to the Bush neocon polices. Genoa was the seed for this.

I could go on free spirit....

 

[The Black Hand]

*bows down before Attica's praxis*

Respect Incidentally, I cannot remember one off in London started by brew crew, they were generally too out of it or carrying their cans to do such things, or they were not there at all.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

its funny nessuno but i know people who got caught up in the shit storm of the diaz stuff in genoa who have basically gone back on what they were trying to achieve and have decided that the approach was basically wrong-headed, because essentially trying to meet violence with violence is not a rewarding game plan. people who got nearly beaten to death may not think of the events as a victory tbh.

 

[nessuno]

hmmm, interesting...

my response to free spirit was to list the achievements of what came out of Genoa. I certainly do not see genoa as a victory.

Apart from black block, and a few other italians, nobody i know who went to genoa ever thought that the movement could take on 22,000 police and army inside and around Genoa. Neither do i think 'closing down the G8' was a viable idea either. for starters, there was a 'shoot to kill' policy inside the red zone. The 800 US marines stationed around the Palace Ducal (plus italian snipers) would make sure the G8 would never be touched.

you are obviously thinking about Tute bianche because you saw them padded up as 'armoured activists'. I suggest you do some research into the history of Tute Bianche. Given the ability of the italian police (I cited carabineri commanders Mondelli and Bruno and state police commander Canterini) to cause extreme violence themselves, it was a wise idea to go protected.

Also, i seems that i am fighting the established propaganda on both sides of what happened at Genoa. I think in my post http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=240693 reports on the outcome of the trial of the 25 protesters which has just finished in December 2007. Mondelli and Bruno have been sent for trial at the Rome supreme court for disobeying orders and attacking Tute Bianche when he should of travelled on to North Genoa to deal with black block attacking the Marrassi prison (Canterini is still on trial for Diaz).

So i think your quote "trying to meet violence with violence is not a rewarding game plan" is misguided. Tute Bianche were being led by a police liason team and had permission to mount its demonstration right to the red zone fence.

As i said in my other article, i will posting within the next three weeks the ultimate article on the Diaz case to date and all will become clear. What i can say is that the fate of the Diaz victims was sealed at Naples in March 2001 where Fini put the Diaz plan into its final stages of active planning. The events surrounding Diaz go much deeper than just the rioting that happened in the lead up to the raid. It did not matter whether the movement was going to be peaceful or not, Gianfranco Fini had made up his mind to launch the Diaz raid (with the assistance of US government) weeks before the G8.

If anything, Genoa was to be a trap for the movement violent or non-violent. Fini did not care if the streets of Genoa would be a battleground against black bloc or that loads of non-violent hippies got hurt. He wanted to crush the Genoa Social Forum, set up Berlusconi, defeat his left wing opponents and take the credit for policing the G8.

As for Diaz, I would love to know who you have spoken to who was there. can you name the people at Diaz who were advocating violence on violence at G8? Were you at Diaz? did you testify at the diaz trial to help the plaintiffs or did you run away?

so, please, please...lets get everybody away from the self revolving, self defeating roundabout on the subject of violence vs violence, ok? Fini arranged the G8 to be his bloodbath. the question of who started the violence in genoa has been proved in court. it was the police directed by Fini. It is only people like the Daily Mail (who love Fini) who continue to argue that the movement caused all the trouble at Genoa.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

Apart from black block, and a few other italians, nobody i know who went to genoa ever thought that the movement could take on 22,000 police and army inside and around Genoa. Neither do i think 'closing down the G8' was a viable idea either. for starters, there was a 'shoot to kill' policy inside the red zone. The 800 US marines stationed around the Palace Ducal (plus italian snipers) would make sure the G8 would never be touched.

you are obviously thinking about Tute bianche because you saw them padded up as 'armoured activists'. I suggest you do some research into the history of Tute Bianche. Given the ability of the italian police (I cited carabineri commanders Mondelli and Bruno and state police commander Canterini) to cause extreme violence themselves, it was a wise idea to go protected.

Also, i seems that i am fighting the established propaganda on both sides of what happened at Genoa. I think in my post http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=240693 reports on the outcome of the trial of the 25 protesters which has just finished in December 2007. Mondelli and Bruno have been sent for trial at the Rome supreme court for disobeying orders and attacking Tute Bianche when he should of travelled on to North Genoa to deal with black block attacking the Marrassi prison (Canterini is still on trial for Diaz).

So i think your quote "trying to meet violence with violence is not a rewarding game plan" is misguided. Tute Bianche were being led by a police liason team and had permission to mount its demonstration right to the red zone fence.

As i said in my other article, i will posting within the next three weeks the ultimate article on the Diaz case to date and all will become clear. What i can say is that the fate of the Diaz victims was sealed at Naples in March 2001 where Fini put the Diaz plan into its final stages of active planning. The events surrounding Diaz go much deeper than just the rioting that happened in the lead up to the raid. It did not matter whether the movement was going to be peaceful or not, Gianfranco Fini had made up his mind to launch the Diaz raid (with the assistance of US government) weeks before the G8.

If anything, Genoa was to be a trap for the movement violent or non-violent. Fini did not care if the streets of Genoa would be a battleground against black bloc or that loads of non-violent hippies got hurt. He wanted to crush the Genoa Social Forum, set up Berlusconi, defeat his left wing opponents and take the credit for policing the G8.

As for Diaz, I would love to know who you have spoken to who was there. can you name the people at Diaz who were advocating violence on violence at G8? Were you at Diaz? did you testify at the diaz trial to help the plaintiffs or did you run away?

so, please, please...lets get everybody away from the self revolving, self defeating roundabout on the subject of violence vs violence, ok? Fini arranged the G8 to be his bloodbath. the question of who started the violence in genoa has been proved in court. it was the police directed by Fini. It is only people like the Daily Mail (who love Fini) who continue to argue that the movement caused all the trouble at Genoa.

I know 2 of these people. And i would agree that the second half of my previous post probably was misguided, for similar reasons as those above. What i would amend that too is that at least one of the people concerned has questioned fundamentally about the approach of protestors because of what took place at genoa, what is possible and desireable in such situations, and what motivations lie behind people getting involved in such movements. I wouldn't want to comment further cos its not my place to in essence. Look forward to your update in due course.

 

[nessuno]

i am sorry paula...i am very fatigued and still dealing with my injuries for Diaz.

Both the trials have been an enourmous burden that we must carry. I was a bit sharp with you. i am sorry. I know Sam, Dan and Norman very well. I know all of them are non-violent protesters (two were from UNISON). I was with them all in Genoa in January 2006 when we all testified at Diaz.

I spent longer in Genoa and at diaz than most other people. I got to know the italians very well at the Genoa Social Forum and I do know that there was never the view that actually trying to take on 22,000 cops was a viable idea. I think no-one realised until they actually arrived in the city in the days before G8 on the sheer scale of miltary and police buildup.

I am sure that if anyone on that friday morning in Genova who still had the view that taking on the state was a winnable situation, myself, dan or norman would of argued the issue or walked away.

anyway back to the RTS question....

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

no worries, i think its good that you're still raising the profile of the incident and what the cops/carbineri/etc got away with. so, like say, make sure you let us know how things pan out.

RTS question? the question for me is whether there is the will amongst the youth, the imaginative, the committed, the dynamic to create anything getting towards anything similar? i simply don't see it atm. which makes me feel a bit sad and old. where has the energy gone?

 

[emanymton]

Wasn't there one about a month after J18, outside Euston station? Police van set alight.

Haven’t read the whole thread yet (and it’s an old question) but sod it.
This sounds like the demo that was organised to coincide with the one in Seattle.

 

[butchersapron]

That is the one. Pathetically worked.

 

[Paulie Tandoori]

the thing at euston was embarassingly awful.

 

[emanymton]

Made a good front page photo for the tabloids.

 

[free spirit]

First, i am sure other people can add to what is written here. it is by no means a comprensive list.

I notice you joined Urban75 at the time of Genoa in 2001. I like to ask you what you thought of the demo....

For me Genoa achieved alot. I think the movement of movement coincided its rise with a wave of concern over the effects of Globalisation and climate change. A kind of globalisation that only benefited the west and America.

Looking back, i realise that the Genoa Social forum went on to be the blue print of the World Social Forum in Brazil. The formation of the European Social Forum has its roots in the GSF, WSF and the Florence social forum that hosted a 1.5 million demo in november 2001.

Bush's first visit to italy ended with the death of a protester whilst being treated as america's worst ever president. He would get a reputation as the 'climate devil of Kyoto'

Whilst the Movement struggled and died in the years after Genoa, so did Neo-conservativism. Bush's entry into the book of presidents with be Kyoto, 9-11, iraq,iraq and iraq.

The G8 was, by Genoa...caught in the spotlight. Forced by Africa, the Doha talks were enabled. Doha was/is an attempt to open the free market by removing subsidies thus enabling the southern hemaphere to trade. In later years, the world would see France and the US as protectionist and anti-free market. Doha reached boilling point at Cancun where a Korean farmer committed suicide. Cancun also saw the creation of the Cancun 47 southern hemesphere countries. This still threatens the collapse of the WTO....

By 2002, any veteran movement protester was instantly outnumbered by the number of peace protesters. Iraq was different to Vietnam in the sense that it took four years to build a peace movement in america where it took a matter of a few months. The existence of the internet amplified and massively enlargened the peace movement resident on the web at the same time. With Iraq almost over however, protest numbers have shrunk from 1.4 million to almost nothing. It is this that we are dealing with now.

RTS, Indymedia and a host of other protest groups could not of done it with out the internet. The web has come along way. the name movement of movements takes its name because it had used the web to join up parts of other movements. This is the first global NETsocial community (like urban75) to do this. The Genoa demo and its legacy has been witness to this.

South America could not have happened without Genoa. For the first time south american countries learnt about the G8, WTO and IMF/WB. months later, argentina would explode into revolution and then to suspend payments to the IMF/WB...Today most countries have elected left wing governments which are opposed to the Bush neocon polices. Genoa was the seed for this.

I could go on free spirit....

erm - I think you may have picked up the wrong end of the stick as to where I'm coming from on this. Although I wasn't in genoa, I'm fully aware of what went on and supportive of the aims of the 'movement of movements' as you put it, and was involved in the anti g8 stuff in the UK in 1997 (organising coachload from newcastle to brum for rts), J18 (helped run a week of actions in newcastle plus an affinity group doing autonomous actions in london prior to the big rts) & 2005 Gleneagles (2 weeks onsite setting up and helping run the dissent campsite). We're on the same side

I've also got no problem with the white overall movement / taute blanche's ideas and methods - actually i've a hell of a lot of respect for them - that's different to people hiding among the crowd lobbing badly aimed bottles.

now that I've got that bit out of the way though, I feel I need to correct you on part of what you're saying that I believe is inaccurate.

Saying that for the first time south american countries learnt about the g8, WTO, IMF/WB from Genoa is just plain wrong, disrespectful of the South Americans, and completely rewrites the actual real history of the 'movement of movements.

I'd really suggest that if you're going to write about the movement, you need to study it's history a bit more first.

It wasn't in the acridmist of Seattle's tear gas that this global movement was born, but inthe humid mist of the Chiapas jungle, in Southern Mexico on New Years Day 1994 the day. This was the day the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into effect, a day when two thousand indigenous peoples from several groups came out from the mountainsand forests. Masked, armed and calling themselves Zapatistas, their battle cry was "Ya Basta" - "Enough is Enough". An extraordinary popular uprising, which was to help change the landscape of global resistance, had begun. Using a jungle battered laptop computer and intermediaries to get the discs to an internetconnected computer, the Zapatistas were able to bypass the media censorship of the Mexican state and communicate directly. People everywhere soon heard of the uprising.

[source=PGA history]

the first international gathering of activists that went on to form People's Global Action was in 1996 in the jungle of Chiapas, Mexico with 6000 people showing up - this formed the basis of the model for the largescale social forums that was then exported to Europe, rather then the other way round.

sure Genoa, Seattle, J18 etc all helped to reinforce the belief of the South Americans that change was possible, and that they weren't alone and had support they could call on in the north, but to claim that South America could not have happened without Genoa is just wrongheaded IMO.

this movement is so different precisely because it's not about the north imposing their solutions on the south, it's about the southern movements taking the lead and being supported by groups on the north.

 

[free spirit]

damn my memory, it appears birmingham and the first global protest against the G8 following a PGA call for action was in May 1998 (not 1997 like I said), with the main g8 meeting and protest in geneva, I think maybe it was the finance ministers meeting seperately just outside birmingham or something like that.

 

[free spirit]

shit it's been a long time since i looked at the people's global action website - I've gone and got all nostalgic, almost forgot the last 7 years had happened and started believing the 'another world is possible', 'we are everywhere' stuff again.

methinks a long trip to south america could be in order to go see what's going on for myself. I've been meaning to do this since the late 90's, about time I got round to it.

 

[chilango]

Mexico is in North America.


Point stands though.

 

[free spirit]

Mexico is in North America.


Point stands though.

hmm well geographically I guess. I was going to say that the Zapatista's identified most with the indigenous populations of central and southern america, but that's doing them a diservice, their message from the start really was an international one focussed particularly on downtrodden indigenous people largely in the global south, but also at all those being fucked over by neoliberal globalisation policies.

To all who struggle for human values of democracy, liberty and justice.
To all who force themselves to resist the world crime known as "Neoliberalism" and aim for humanity and hope to be better, be synonymous of future.
To all individuals, groups, collectives, movements, social, civic and political organizations, neighborhood associations, cooperatives, all the lefts known and to be known; non-governmental organizations, groups in solidarity with struggles of the world people, bands, tribes, intellectuals, indigenous people, students, musicians, workers, artists, teachers, peasants, cultural groups, youth movements, alternative communication media, ecologists, tenants, lesbians, homosexuals, feminists, pacifists.
To all human beings without a home, without land, without work, without food, without health, without education, without freedom, without justice, without independence, without democracy, without peace, without tomorrow.
To all who, with no matter to colors, race or borders, make of hope a weapon and a shield.
And calls together to the First Intercontinental Gathering for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism.

[source=The Zapatista's "[SIZE=2]First Declaration of La Realidad for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism"][/SIZE]

the real beauty of the way the Zapatistas organised this was the fact that they managed to bring together groups of indigenous people from all over the world who were fighting the impacts of neoliberalist policies in their own ommmunities and in their own way under one umbrella, but with a bottom up approach rather than the usual leftist top down 'we know best' approach. So they had movements like the 'movement of ogani people' from Nigeria, 'Movement Sans Terra' from Brazil, the Indian Farmers movement that I forget the name of, and loads of other's coming together to discuss how to support each others struggles and unite to fight the neoliberalist agenda together with representatives of european and north American movements like RTS / Earth First etc.

Pulling together 4-6000 people from 44 different countries to travel to the jungles of Chiapas to discuss the formation of a new global movement of movements against neoliberalist globalisation was no minor achievement, and the fact that this movement of movements went on to blossom into PGA, launch a wave of huge global protests everytime the wto / G8 met, and act as the launchpad for the wave of leftist, pro-indigenous people / anti neoliberalist governments to sweep through south america is, to me, a stunning achievement.

We do these people a huge diservice if we do not recognise the true history and development processes of the momement - we also jeapardise it's continued success as it allows the traditional left in europe and america to jump in and try to dominate things in the way that the SWP did with their Globalise Resistance garbage that did more damage to the movement in this country than anything else IMO.

 

[chilango]

hmm well geographically I guess. I was going to say that the Zapatista's identified most with the indigenous populations of central and southern america, but that's doing them a diservice, their message from the start really was an international one focussed particularly on downtrodden indigenous people largely in the global south, but also at all those being fucked over by neoliberal globalisation policies.

[source=The Zapatista's "[SIZE=2]First Declaration of La Realidad for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism"][/SIZE]

the real beauty of the way the Zapatistas organised this was the fact that they managed to bring together groups of indigenous people from all over the world who were fighting the impacts of neoliberalist policies in their own ommmunities and in their own way under one umbrella, but with a bottom up approach rather than the usual leftist top down 'we know best' approach. So they had movements like the 'movement of ogani people' from Nigeria, 'Movement Sans Terra' from Brazil, the Indian Farmers movement that I forget the name of, and loads of other's coming together to discuss how to support each others struggles and unite to fight the neoliberalist agenda together with representatives of european and north American movements like RTS / Earth First etc.

Pulling together 4-6000 people from 44 different countries to travel to the jungles of Chiapas to discuss the formation of a new global movement of movements against neoliberalist globalisation was no minor achievement, and the fact that this movement of movements went on to blossom into PGA, launch a wave of huge global protests everytime the wto / G8 met, and act as the launchpad for the wave of leftist, pro-indigenous people / anti neoliberalist governments to sweep through south america is, to me, a stunning achievement.

We do these people a huge diservice if we do not recognise the true history and development processes of the momement - we also jeapardise it's continued success as it allows the traditional left in europe and america to jump in and try to dominate things in the way that the SWP did with their Globalise Resistance garbage that did more damage to the movement in this country than anything else IMO.

Quite.

Its annoying when the left posit Seattle as the start point.

The background of the Zapatistas is very interesting. There was a fairly hefty change in ideas at some point during their "cold accumulation of forces" prior to 1994 that has never been completly explained...

 

[free spirit]

Quite.

Its annoying when the left posit Seattle as the start point.

The background of the Zapatistas is very interesting. There was a fairly hefty change in ideas at some point during their "cold accumulation of forces" prior to 1994 that has never been completly explained...

exactly - actually it has been explained, but I'm fucked if I can remember where I read it / who i discussed it with etc as it was around the late 90's, actually I've got vague recollections of having a really good book about the zapatista's 1994 uprising that went right into the history - I think it was a writer who'd actually hooked up with the zapatista's the year before the uprising and spent a good couple of years with them. I must have lent it to someone though (this may be it, not sure)

essentially IIRC the EZLN formed when a group of hardcore marxist revolutionaries (i forget exactly what ideology) headed to chiapas to try stir up an armed marxist revolution among the indigenous people in the area in the mid 80's sometime. They were spectacularly unsuccessful in recruiting people to start with as their marxist ideology had fuck all relevance to the problems of the indigenous people, or their traditional cultures of decision making etc. After a while the marxist revolutionaries realised this, and began to learn from the indigenous people's and to adapt their ideology to incorporate much of the traditional methods of decision making which IIRC were based around collective concensus decision making by the wntire village, listening to all points on an issue even if it took days to reach a decision etc, and a very bottom up approach with a leader expected to be more of a spokesperson for the group once a decision has been taken rather than to lead the group and attempt to impose their will onto the group.

At the same time, the marxist revolutionaries were able to bring their understanding of economics, capitalism, neoliberalism etc combined with internationalism and an understanding of what works and an understanding of how to link up with and mobilise civil society in support of a cause.

The EZLN armed wing was formed following concensus decision making meetings in the villages with each village deciding whether or not they wanted to participate in the armed uprising, meaning that when the uprising took place it had the full support of vast swathes of the local population, rather than the more traditional leftist model of a small group of armed men starting an armed insurrection in the hope that the local people will then see the light and join in (ie. cuba).

The fact that they picked new years day 1994, the day the NAFTA agreement came into force, to launch the uprising was undoubtably down to the influence of the marxist revolutionaries ideas and understanding of the impact such a free trade agreement would have, but the methodology and decision making process etc were decidedly not marxist, drawing more from traditional indigenous ideas.

from memory.

 

[chilango]

exactly - actually it has been explained, but I'm fucked if I can remember where I read it / who i discussed it with etc as it was around the late 90's, actually I've got vague recollections of having a really good book about the zapatista's 1994 uprising that went right into the history - I think it was a writer who'd actually hooked up with the zapatista's the year before the uprising and spent a good couple of years with them. I must have lent it to someone though (this may be it, not sure)

essentially IIRC the EZLN formed when a group of hardcore marxist revolutionaries (i forget exactly what ideology) headed to chiapas to try stir up an armed marxist revolution among the indigenous people in the area in the mid 80's sometime. They were spectacularly unsuccessful in recruiting people to start with as their marxist ideology had fuck all relevance to the problems of the indigenous people, or their traditional cultures of decision making etc. After a while the marxist revolutionaries realised this, and began to learn from the indigenous people's and to adapt their ideology to incorporate much of the traditional methods of decision making which IIRC were based around collective concensus decision making by the wntire village, listening to all points on an issue even if it took days to reach a decision etc, and a very bottom up approach with a leader expected to be more of a spokesperson for the group once a decision has been taken rather than to lead the group and attempt to impose their will onto the group.

At the same time, the marxist revolutionaries were able to bring their understanding of economics, capitalism, neoliberalism etc combined with internationalism and an understanding of what works and an understanding of how to link up with and mobilise civil society in support of a cause.

The EZLN armed wing was formed following concensus decision making meetings in the villages with each village deciding whether or not they wanted to participate in the armed uprising, meaning that when the uprising took place it had the full support of vast swathes of the local population, rather than the more traditional leftist model of a small group of armed men starting an armed insurrection in the hope that the local people will then see the light and join in (ie. cuba).

The fact that they picked new years day 1994, the day the NAFTA agreement came into force, to launch the uprising was undoubtably down to the influence of the marxist revolutionaries ideas and understanding of the impact such a free trade agreement would have, but the methodology and decision making process etc were decidedly not marxist, drawing more from traditional indigenous ideas.

from memory.

The core of the EZLN from what I've read were a handful of survivors/refugees from a Maoist (ish) group the FALN (iirc) who headed into Chiapas for safety basically.

Guerilla groups have been active in Mexico since the 60s. Sometimes on a large scale (in the 70s particularly Lucio Cabañas' Party of the Poor) at the mo the EPR and its offshoots are pretty active.

Yet, the EZLN somehow, (the legend is the one you recount above) ditched the militarism and leninist politics to become what we know today.

You read much on APPO?

An interesting recent story, that is still playing out...

 

[free spirit]

yeah - FALN rings a bell.

APPO - erm I've sort of been keeping a vague eye on the situation from afar without really getting round to looking into it in detail. IIRC there's links between APPO and EZLN - as in key people in APPO would have been to some of the EZLN meetings / been active in Cancun etc.

 

[Taxamo Welf]

APPO and EZLN totally different entities. Wikipedia is your friend - in fact it is your freind on your questions about the zaps too

also narconews.

 

[chilango]

APPO and EZLN totally different entities. Wikipedia is your friend - in fact it is your freind on your questions about the zaps too

also narconews.

APPO and EZLN howver both part of a "revolutionary wave" in Mexico...the EZLN themselves did their "other campaign" attended Atenco, itself a precursor to what happened in Oaxaca. Linked in networky way exactly as the EZLN are trying to encourage.

Some political differences however. The old left still have an influence in Oaxaca, of sorts, the PCM (m-l) though tiny tend to make thier presence known in Oaxaca and in the "other campaign".

Probably have similar roots n all.

Whilst the EZLN attempt to break out of Chiapas, APPO (and the many similar initiatives) represent the manifestation of this desire....

Narconews is reccomended, though a little selective.

 

[free spirit]

APPO and EZLN totally different entities. Wikipedia is your friend - in fact it is your freind on your questions about the zaps too

also narconews.

where did either of us say APPO and EZLN are the same, I said there were links between the 2 groups - by which I mean both idealogical and actual physical links in terms of people involved in APPO who've also participated in stuff like the Zapatista caravan, and the EZLN inspired National Indigenous Congresses.

seeing as you mention wiki - this quote from wiki backs up what I'm saying

Included in the resolutions of the APPO are a recognition of indigenous rights and autonomy, gender equality, political accountability, opposition to neoliberalism and Plan Puebla Panamá, a demand for an alternative education, and collectively-run media, amongst others.
The Popular Assembly of Oaxaca takes as inspiration indigenous political practices called 'usos y costumbres' (traditional usages and customs) that have been incorporated into the municipal level government of Oaxaca. These practices stand apart from standard electoral politics in that the assembly structure does not include secret voting procedures, but rather open meetings to make decisions.
"'The executive branch' (the authorities) is charged with accomplishing the tasks the assembly gives it. The municipal president, foremost among the authorities, leads (as the Zapatistas’ phrase explains) by obeying. For the population of Oaxaca, the idea of governing by consensus remains part of the common cultural heritage. Therefore, as APPO was convoked, the modest people who comprise 80% of Oaxaca’s population, recognized it immediately. And they support it, despite the obvious difficulties of convening authorities from around the state. Since these authorities receive no pay, a trip to the capital city is not easy. But it’s happening."[5]

ah yes, here's the route of the Zapatista Caravan - note that it spends 3 days travelling through Oaxaca.

I'm also pretty sure that the Zapatista's sent a delegation to assist in Oaxaca when it was kicking off in 2006, unfortunately the documentation on the pga site is in spanish (?) so I can't tell exactly what it's saying.

 

[free spirit]

Here we go, I thought I could remember the Zapatista's calling for global action in support of APPO and the people of Oaxaca...

The Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca greets with joy the initiative that the EZLN has taken calling to a great world-wide mobilization in solidarity with our people. A great attack against the democratic forces of the mother country it is plan today by the extreme right positioned in the political class , and symptom of that attack is the state of emergency that is lived in Oaxaca, the capital of the resistance.

Communiqué of the Indigenous Revolutionary Clandestine Committee -
General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
Mexico.

December 2 of 2006

To the people of Mexico:
To the people of the world:

Brothers and Sisters:

The attack that our brothers, the people of Oaxaca suffered and suffer
cannot be ignored by those who fight for freedom, justice and democracy
in all corners of the planet.

This is why, the EZLN calls on all honest people, in Mexico and the
world, to initiate, starting now, continual actions of solidarity and
support to the Oaxacan people, with the following demands:

[source]

 

[Taxamo Welf]

yes.... I'm not denying aaaany of that.

Links is one thing, but it is worth stressing the APPO is a different entity; your talking about a popular assembly in a city that includes everyone from indigenous groups and anarchists to political parties. Compared to well, the zaps. No you didn't say they were the same, i'm pointing out how different they are

There was some talk of dissapointment with the lack of Zapatista involvement in the oaxaca revolt, but another comrade said this was horseshit... I don't know who to believe really. The Zaps seemed to have been on some utterly pointless jolly around the country at the time, and i know they stopped off and sent people etc but from my uninformed viewpoint i feel they should have just quite the silly fucking tour and rallied all to oaxaca.

Now they are on the backfoot in their *own* territory

anyway, i'll be in chiapas in 2 moths so i'll tell you then

 

[Taxamo Welf]

also, statements statements. People lurrrve these kinds things in mexico. Order a beer and you get a salutation of solidarity with it.

 

[chilango]

yes.... I'm not denying aaaany of that.

Links is one thing, but it is worth stressing the APPO is a different entity; your talking about a popular assembly in a city that includes everyone from indigenous groups and anarchists to political parties. Compared to well, the zaps. No you didn't say they were the same, i'm pointing out how different they are

There was some talk of dissapointment with the lack of Zapatista involvement in the oaxaca revolt, but another comrade said this was horseshit... I don't know who to believe really. The Zaps seemed to have been on some utterly pointless jolly around the country at the time, and i know they stopped off and sent people etc but from my uninformed viewpoint i feel they should have just quite the silly fucking tour and rallied all to oaxaca.

Now they are on the backfoot in their *own* territory

anyway, i'll be in chiapas in 2 moths so i'll tell you then

I{ll be in Chiapas meself in about 3...

Was in Oaxaca last month...all was calm.

 

[free spirit]

yes.... I'm not denying aaaany of that.

cool, just thought it was a bit of an odd way to jump into the debate.

Links is one thing, but it is worth stressing the APPO is a different entity; your talking about a popular assembly in a city that includes everyone from indigenous groups and anarchists to political parties. Compared to well, the zaps. No you didn't say they were the same, i'm pointing out how different they are

There was some talk of dissapointment with the lack of Zapatista involvement in the oaxaca revolt, but another comrade said this was horseshit... I don't know who to believe really. The Zaps seemed to have been on some utterly pointless jolly around the country at the time, and i know they stopped off and sent people etc but from my uninformed viewpoint i feel they should have just quite the silly fucking tour and rallied all to oaxaca.

Now they are on the backfoot in their *own* territory

IMO (from a long distance away), people who'd expected the Zapatista's to do much more than send a delegation to support the Oaxaca revolt, and call for international action in support probably haven't really quite understood the realities of the situation the Zapatista's themselves were in, or their ethos and methodology.

The year long 'Other Campaign' was also a bit more than just a silly fucking tour - it was a campaign to spread the Zapatista message, to other indigenous groups across mexico, act as inspiration for them to rise up themselves and promote links between the different regional indigenous groups. That way they could hope to be able to force a national solution as the government couldn't use the army to repress all of mexico at once in the way they were in Chiapas.

I think the army still had 60,000 odd troops in chiapas at the time of the oaxaca uprising, and there would have been a legitimate fear that had the Zapatista's sent a significant number of armed people to Oaxaca, that the army would have used this as an excuse to attack the Zapatista areas in Chiapas while the Zapatista's were weak.

anyway, that's just my take on things, and I'm a long way away...

anyway, i'll be in chiapas in 2 moths so i'll tell you then

nice one - check your pm's, got some mates I've lost track of who last i heard were in chiapas working with the zapatistas... just removed their names from public display to protect the not so innocent

 

[chilango]

The year long 'Other Campaign' was also a bit more than just a silly fucking tour - it was a campaign to spread the Zapatista message, to other indigenous groups across mexico, act as inspiration for them to rise up themselves and promote links between the different regional indigenous groups. That way they could hope to be able to force a national solution as the government couldn't use the army to repress all of mexico at once in the way they were in Chiapas.

I think the army still had 60,000 odd troops in chiapas at the time of the oaxaca uprising, and there would have been a legitimate fear that had the Zapatista's sent a significant number of armed people to Oaxaca, that the army would have used this as an excuse to attack the Zapatista areas in Chiapas while the Zapatista's were weak.

Quite.

Part of the EZLN's big shift prior to 1994 was a move away from the military vanguard idea. To parachute into Oaxaca would've been contrary to that. Besides I doubt the EZLN has the military capacity for a full on urban battle...as would've happenned. The govt here was perfectly happy to escalate the situation into full on conflict...a conflict it wouldve won...remember they were facing a huge wave of protest against the fraudulent election, the middle classes here were terrified of "revolution" and would've backed any onslaught the govt chose to unleash in Oaxaca or in Chiapas.

The other campaign was a very importnat move, there are many many isolated movemts, insurgencies, popular assemblies etc all working pretty indepently and the state here is picking them off one by one. An attempt to coordinate them all was a smart move.

Sadly, I don't think the EZLN are strong enough anymore to have pulled it off.

 

[giuseppegirardi]

Shoplifting fits in with Rts politics so could everyone start shoplifting in central London its not stealing as your not depriving the owners of the goods so we could start off in Harrods then to South Kensington Sloane Square High street Kensington Shoplifting everything so could everyone shoplift every saturday