ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

Where Were the Peacekeepers?

Dear ETS!,

I spent much of bloody Tuesday biking around downtown watching events. I'm ambivalent about targeting the WTO, but I marched and carried an anti-WTO sign, being a "team player." There are lots of issues, but one that I haven't seen addressed well is the protest organizers' degree of responsibility for the vandalism.

One knows, when organizing these things, that there will be creeps who will want to damage property--break windows, spray paint, upturn dumpsters, etc. In the old days (ten years ago) when I spent a lot of time organizing civil disobedience with CISPES, we always had "peacekeepers" trained to defuse situations. But they would wear armbands and be clearly designated as part of the organization responsible for the protest actions/planning. I think the clear designation is extremely important, and it was completely lacking on Nov. 30.

I know that the organizers did make some provision for peacekeeping in advance of the week's protest, but there was no visible designation of who they were. And this is not a fine point. Most people who come to these things were not at the meetings, and you don't know who's in touch with the organizers when you show up. Without the clear designations, ad hoc groupings happen, but are chaotic.

I watched people climb poles taking down the city's smarmy WTO banners--and they were cheered by the crowd. I saw people spray-painting often-idiotic tags sometimes cheered, usually just watched. In one case I saw a man confront a painter, but, again this "peacekeeper"--if he was such--was to all appearances just a guy standing around, and most people--myself included--just watched. The painting continued to its idiotic conclusion. Since the guy confronting the painter was not clearly with the organizers, the scene is just a confusing argument, and most people are far less likely to back the sensible individual than the sensible organizer.

I saw, as reported, a couple of cases of somebody saying the right things. When Niketown was being trashed, a woman spoke up loudly and clearly in one of the better demonstrations of peacekeeping I've ever seen. She may have kept worse from occurring. But she had no designation as to whether she was speaking for the organization or just being a good samaritan, and I think that really weakens the effect of the act. In that chaotic situation, vandals can think that they are part of the action--there's nobody speaking for the action organization, saying they aren't.

I realize many people on our side bristle at the controlling attitude I'm suggesting. The situation seemed to be changing ten years ago. I helped organize the successful blockade of the Federal Building at the outbreak of the Gulf "war." We had clearly designated peacekeepers and non-violence trainers--I was both. But I was often sneered at by participants. Many of the blockaders just hated us "Peace Pigs." And now they just don't have them: they have "undercover" peacekeepers. And we end up with blocks of trashed storefronts and a lot of really stupid graffiti. And not just Nike and McDonalds--you've seen it--it was fairly indiscriminate. Even the fountain at Westlake Park.

Maybe the vandalism would have happened anyway, it's hard to say. But I would venture to guess there'd have been less. And, more importantly, the organized protesters would have clearly disassociated themselves from it. They organized the event, and did not do all they could with respect to "crowd control." The organizers these days seem to be truly anarchistic in the sense that they hate any clear organization. But it is an organization, and you can't have it both ways. You invite people to an event, you have some responsibility to ensure that it becomes the event you invited people to. If what you're planning is for chaos, let people know. If not, you have to actually do what you can to control the situation. I think that means you need clearly identified organizers and peacekeepers.

Not that I'm too concerned about the cost of the damage. But to me, the important aspect of demos is the power to affect the millions who see it through the media lens. And this kind of thing does not play well in Peoria! I feel like my team dropped the ball--or refused to pick it up in the first place.

Michael Cosgrove, Seattle

Defending the AFL-CIO March

Dear ETS!,

I wish to comment on Rick Giombetti's article "Youth Lead the Charge on the Front." After participating in the WTO protests throughout the week--as a peacekeeper in two marches and participant in one other--I wish to keep the solidarity strong amongst the various groups that participated to shut down the WTO. If so, we have a world to win, and our unity can help get us to it!

No one group, be it labor, environment, youth, etc., can or should claim themselves as the vanguard against the WTO. It may not be meant as a divisive tactic, but it surely can be used as one. Here are some examples of divisiveness I saw in the article that I hope Mr. Giombetti avoids in the future (if he believes the coalition should continue to have solidarity).

1. Making such a point of "us" versus "them" in comparing the DNC '68 convention in Chicago to the WTO in Seattle. Why compare and compete? What does one have to do with another, save for trying to one-up the folks who were active during the '60s?

2. Calling the AFL-CIO a "no show" for the 11/30 march. No show of what? Because the march had a planned route, and most stuck to it, Mr. Giombetti is so critical? Perhaps if he knew the organizing that went into trying to assure the safety of the marchers (our peacekeeping training was done by Reverend James Orange--who was with Dr. King the day he was shot in Memphis). His oft-repeated statement was: "we're here (as peacekeepers) to make sure everyone gets home safe." This meant that we didn't just stand and watch if people left the march route; we kept people ON the march route if possible.

I was stationed at 4th Ave. and Pine St., turning people east on Pine from 4th (as they were coming from Memorial Stadium). About 1% of the marchers would ask why we were turning them, instead of allowing them to continue up 4th (where there were many people in the street as well). We would tell them that the AFL-CIO-planned route went up Pine, and that if they left the route we were not going to be responsible for their safety. Most people would then say "ok, thanks" and continue up Pine. About 1% of those folks would then decide to break from the route and take their chances. We didn't stop anyone who chose to leave the march. Our job was to allow folks to make an INFORMED decision, rather than blindly follow the march without knowing why or where.

3. Berating Jesse Jackson. Why attack him? What did he do against our efforts to stop the WTO? So he wasn't in Seattle--big deal. Just because he wasn't here doesn't make him an enemy of mine. We have enough division on the left without exacerbating things by attacking folks who are your allies (for the most part). Unless one is under the impression that you do not align yourself with anyone unless they are 100% in agreement with your views. Of course, that's a very lonely--and powerless--position.

In short, I hope Mr. Giombetti will consider in the future whether his remarks (A) bring unity or (B) bring divisiveness, when he is writing them. (Hint: we need as much unity as possible!)

Todd Tollefson, Seattle

How To Protest Via E-mail

Maria,

Could you provide your readers with the e-mail addresses of significant people and organizations to whom we could write and express our views?

Seattle's mayor, police chief, et. al. ought to hear from people everywhere about their ill-considered management of the WTO protests.

Roland Dion, San Diego, CA

M.T. replies: I don't really think that e-mail protests work, but who am I to stop you from trying? So, here's one website that gives you links to all city departments and city officials, from the mayor and the chief of police to city council members: http://www.pan.ci.seattle.wa.us/html/citizen/. Have fun!