From: Michelle
Subject: RE: WTO diaries
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 17:42:42 -0800

Matt-

I read quite a bit of your web page, not all, and do have some comments if you are interested.

First, I think you make an untrue, or poorly written, comment on "WTO Day One: Additional Thoughts." You write that the violent acts were not random but instead a direct reaction to the hurt and humiliation at being gassed, etc. While in some cases, cases I saw first hand, this may have been true, I think that in general it was not true at all.

Yes, the majority of the people were very peaceful with the few bad apples to ruin it. Many of those bad apples were perhaps peaceful protesters acting out of defense, but many were formed anarchy groups whose ONLY goal was to vandalize. There were many quotes from such people saying "fuck peaceful protesting, that will not end capitalism...etc etc etc." I saw MANY people walking around spray painting and trashing things BEFORE the tear gas started flying. I SPOKE with people who admitted they did not even know all the facts of the protest and that this was just their chance to be lawless! These people I speak of were NOT the majority (peaceful) by far, as I stated before. But...they WERE there, and they WERE the majority of the vandalizers. The people who became more violent as the day progressed were not all just doing it out of defensive anger against unjust police actions. Many had their own agendas and you should note that more clearly. With such people the cops DID have to eventually step in and take some control. Nothing less should have been expected. That is what we PAY them for, to protect civil peace and property. I'm not defending the methods or actions of the police as they were poorly thought out and even more poorly executed (and the following days were no better) but they DID need to do something. Would you expect any less of your police force? I did see many very unjust actions on the police side of things, but I'm just letting you know that you should write with more balance and admit that there were poor actions on the protestors side as well.

AND...even if you were right, and the violent actions were JUST direct reactions to only unjust actions and provoking by the police, you should not write about it as though you are defending it. You make it sound like "those poor poor protesters were just defending themselves!" As though that justifies their actions. Those protestors should not take on the job of "peaceful protesting" if they can not stick to it. It is one of the toughest tasks of all time. Those protestors who perhaps did just react out of defense, along with the many who just wanted the violence, do not have any justification in the world that should be made. Those actions are not justifiable in ANY way, and should not be written as though they were. No excuses should be made. There are none. Period. We are NOT oppressed here so much that there could EVER EVER EVER be an excuse for such harsh actions on the protestors' side. The people who acted like that simply lowered themselves to the level of the police, or even lower.

Just imagine, for a moment if you will, the message the world would have received if 50,000 people, 50,000, had congregated to protest WTO, and then left Seattle with out a single broken window, a single spray painted building, damaged garbage bin or looted store, etc. That message would have been a millions times stronger, gained more support, and been more respected far and wide allowing for even greater support of the protestors ideas.

Last, but not least, I would just like to say that I think the protesting was wonderful, and needed to happen. I supported it fully and was down there all day Tuesday. It was an important message to make awareness of WTO, and the protestors succeeded. But, on the other hand, we do have to be realistic. How long can you justify "peaceful" protesting when it is shutting a city down? People really thought that our government was not going to have to do something about that? Yes, perhaps they could have done it better, and the following days of not allowing any protesting at all, and tear gassing residential neighborhoods, was a bunch of crap. But...once again, did people really think they could shut down the city and the police and government would not have to take action?

Anyhow, I would like to say you make a lot of very good points on your website as well, and these were just some things I felt I would offer up.

thanks.

m

--------------

Mattro replies:

Hi Michelle, thanks for contributing to the discussion.

Obviously, I can only speak for myself and what I saw at the WTO street demonstrations. I certainly don't mean to be overly general about what I experienced there.

Though it does appear the anarchists were there specifically to vandalize, as far as I could tell, they kept themselves in check up until the tear-gassing. Prior to that, they were actually living up to a loosely agreed upon non-violence pledge they'd made with the Direct Action Network (the main organizers of Tuesday morning's events). Whether or not to consider graffitti a "violent" act depends on your world view. Some might say it's free speech. My main problem with graffitti is that most of it has no artistic merit.

I'll be clear: I don't agree with the anarchist's methods, in fact I regret their vandalism, their graffitti and condemn them for having NO self control (something they pretend to want for everyone... self governance). But I do understand WHY they did what they did. There is nothing wrong with understanding their perspective. I know I HATED being tear-gassed for peacefully assembling in public streets belonging to a nation that pretends to cherish freedom but then stomps it into the dirt when it becomes inconvenient. If I was an 18 year old male today I can't promise that I wouldn't smash things up under tear gas circumstances. Thankfully I'm older and wiser and am able to contain my rage when it rears its ugly head.

I have to disagree with you about the media and the public perception derived from it. We all would've LOVED to have a 100% blissful protest that made even Mr. Nordstrom smile. But, I have been to DOZENS of peaceful protests like that with huge crowds where everything went like clockwork (no damage, no blood, etc). Unfortunately NONE of them made the news. If we can thank the anarchists for anything (and again, their actions WERE deplorable), it is that they probably quadrupled the amount of TV air time dedicated to the WTO protests. Our media is convinced violence is the key to higher ratings and the anarchists used this media inclination to their advantage. It's too bad they weren't smart enough to fake the violence somehow to bait the media.

Also, I am not entirely convinced no good can ever come from violence. I happen to believe the American Revolution was a good thing, as was the Civil War which, among other things, ended slavery. Both of these historic events were VERY violent. Was violence warranted in Seattle, 1999? No absolutely not. Using our beautiful loud voices and blocking out the WTO delegates was more than enough to get our message out. However, if certain people don't get the message that the common man is pissed at the rich minority for hording the world's resources and for exploiting those who actually do all the work... well, we have a right as humans to solve our problems "by any means necessary" including violence. These WTO, World Bank, and IMF knuckleheads don't really feel THAT threatened by peaceful protestors.

That said, the things I am most proud of concerning the WTO protests (and I hope these footnotes will tag along in the history books):

  • No one was killed.
  • There wasn't a major bodily injury (in spite of the Police effort to inflict harm)!
  • No building was torched.
  • All the vandalized shops were up and running again in under a week.

If what happened on Tuesday was indeed a "riot" it sure was a mild one!

Riot Lite!

--------------

From: Michelle
Subject: RE: WTO diaries
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2000 16:28:12 -0800

Sorry for not replying sooner, very very very busy!

I thought, by reading your reply, that I should clarify, back, that I do actually agree that there can be good from violence and that violent acts are sometimes necessary. As you pointed out, and I know, there are times when a person or society has no other course of action. My point was, simply, that this was NOT that case and we are NOT so oppressed, yet, on this issue, or in this country, to warrant violent actions and such things just are not justifiable. Especially when this is the first real protest against the WTO. They, as anybody, deserve the time to acknowledge the issues and make changes. If they do not, THEN perhaps justifications can begin to be made for protesters stepping up their actions.

I disagree with you on the comment that "...we have a right as humans to solve our problems "by any means necessary"..." Thank goodness the KKK and other such factions, and ways of thinking, are not allowed such power. As a race, who is HOPEFULLY trying to evolve to more mature ways of thinking, we must acknowledge that we all have different limitations, ideas and values. While I WILL say that many values seem 'obviously' more right than others to me that is still just my opinion and way of thinking: and I am not the only human on the world, nor are my ideas the best and only way to do things. In America we are spoiled and self centered about our freedom...we think that it comes without limitations in all cases and regardless of who else it effects. Lets be realistic, one can not live in a society and have such thinking. We need to always keep that in mind. Freedom and our rights our wonderful, and we deserve them, but NOTHING is without limitation when it comes to how you effect other people: hence the reason we have every right to force changes on WTO: and hence the reason protesters do not have the right to do so "by any means necessary". Luckily WTO, too, does not have the power to solve their problems (protesters) "by any means necessary" or we would then see a TRUE clamp down on our freedoms and give all the 'freedom' whiners something real to complain about. Democracy works better over dictatorships because a group of people must decide together what is best for everyone; and unfortunately not everyone is always going to be happy with the choices. YES, the powers-that-be in corporations have an unwarranted and undesirable amount of power and definitely we need to do something about it and I do not deny that or the protesters ideas in anyway...but "by any means necessary" is NOT the answer in 99% of all cases, including this one. Such righteous thinking is what has led to many terrible things in our world's history and must be kept in balance just as all things in life should be. I doubt you meant the comment that strongly, but that is how it comes off to me when reading your reply so I felt the need to reply strongly to it.

And lastly, there was already tons of media attention, plenty, by the pre worrying of people over the prospects of 50,000 protesters in Seattle. Other protests that you have been to...were they this size or magnitude with all the hype up to the events start? This had plenty of attention with out a bunch of dumb-ass vandalizers and we did not need their type there. They did not need to "bait" the media when we already had the media's attention. I agree with you: they were deplorable. I would like to add that I feel we have nothing to thank them for. They did nothing of value in my opinion...that is, though, just my opinion I suppose.

You make some good points, and I do acknowledge them.

cheers

M

add your comments