By Heatscore
Iconoclast

Both the corporate and alternative media have been abuzz over the actions of the several hundred participants of a black bloc contingent that smashed the windows of a Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) retail store and TD bank, as part of the “Heart Attack” mobilization on February 13th, during the Anti-Olympic Convergence in Vancouver.

By Jeff Shantz
State Repression Columnist

Only a few days into the Olympic spectacle and much talk had turned to black blocs and a few broken insured Hudson Bay Company windows. Yet much of the discussion has been framed within a strange liberal duality of choices between militant demonstrations (said to be offensive to working class observers) and supposedly “peaceful” symbolic protests, like the march the night of the opening ceremonies (which is presented as more palatable to working class audiences). As if the actions of the demonstrators are the real question and determine the structure of events. Anyone who has ever been on a picket line might find this a bit strange —working class folks have never been involved in dust ups with the cops?— and it has me reflecting not so much on the specific actions in Vancouver as on the broader context for policing and protests.

I don't have time to respond right now to Black Blocs, 'Violence' and the Possibilities of Action by Adam Lewis of the AW@L group, on the recent black bloc tactic in Vancouver as well as the debates on violence vs. non-violence. However, I would encourage people to read it even though I have a lot of disagreements with it as I think it's a thoughtful and well-written contribution to the discussion.

By Mick Sweetman

First off, it's been interesting to read the many responses, some in agreement, some in disagreement, and a lot with a mix of both, to my blog post “We need a mass movement not a black bloc”.

I'm glad that my post has resonated with people and contributed to the larger debate on strategy, tactics, and politics in the anarchist movement and on the left generally. That kind of lively public debate is healthy for a movement to honestly evaluate both our successes and our shortcomings as a movement. Public critique in our movements should not be suppressed in a misguided attempt to enforce “solidarity” between activists and sweep our disagreements under the carpet. Sometimes that means we have to talk frankly about the movements we're in and address what we see as mistakes.

By Mick Sweetman

As I sat in an activist meeting at a union's downtown Toronto office on Saturday afternoon, discussing such exciting things as what type of brochure we should produce for the upcoming International Women's Day, a text message flashed onto my cell phone from the Vancouver Media Co-op.

“BREAKING VMC VIDEO: Anarchists Smash Windows @ the Bay”

I sighed, shook my head, and blurted out a single word in frustration, “Idiots.”

Why was I so frustrated by this almost predictable news from across the country? It's because I've seen it before and knew exactly what the backlash against not only the anti-Olympic protests but also against anarchism itself would be.