October 22
Who's
Violence?
An Internet discussion
on the October 22 March on Police Brutality where there was a police attack on
demonstrators.
In part written and
forwarded by Tom Louie
from October 23:
Some questions:
How is a "peaceful" march
consistent with chants of "Who let the pigs out?" and verbal violence
directed towards cops?
Did the rally organizers have any
contingency plans for what to do in case of trouble?
Were the security monitors trained in
stopping trouble or defusing confrontations?
Were there any plans for non-violent civil
disobedience? Or were people counting on doing stuff without being arrested?
Were there any clear instructions from the
stage once the trouble began?
How responsible is it for the stage emcees
to be inciting confrontation in an already volatile situation?
Did the majority of the marchers know
about the plans to march all the way around Parker Center and "surround
the cops"?
At the end of the parade, some people
tried to wave the approaching marchers towards a line of cops blocking off the
street instead of towards the rally area. Later on they filtered through the
crowd, trying to get protesters to surge back towards the same line of cops.
Was that all part of
the plan?
Who thinks it's fun to tease a dangerous
animal instead of staying the hell away from it?
Some of these questions aren't new. I also
asked them at the planning meetings for the DNC anti-police brutality protest.
I was answered with evasive replies, shrugged shoulders and buck-passing
diatribes against the cops.
RCP likes to avoid responsibility for
safety by saying that "you never know what the cops are going to do."
But isn't it possible to kind of predict how cops will react? Especially when
you get in their face, shout at them, give them the finger and go where they
say you can't go?
My trouble predictor has usually been
right. At least, it's been getting easier to predict trouble at RCP-dominated
protests.
After five years of working with
coalitions and mainstream groups, it seems the RCP made the decision this year
to go back to their old ways. Only now, instead of endangering other people's
rallies like in the early 90's, they can use their newfound
"respectability" to endanger everyone at their own rallies.
I saw this coming. I've heard RCP
activists excitedly discussing the need to fight back "if the cops attack
on October 22" (an attack that never happened until this year).
I also saw it coming right before this
protest, when the e-mail listserves were full of denunciations of the LAPD for
apparently going back on an oral agreement to extend the area of the march. On
the morning of the march, I asked someone if the rally organizers were going to
ask us to "re-take the streets." The nebulous answer I got was that
there were families of victims as well as little children in the march, and so
we would never intentionally put anyone in danger. BUT-here it comes
again!-"You never know what the cops will do." Riiiiiight.
Who the fuck was surprised when the shit
started flying? I sure wasn't. It was a straight setup, all the way. RCP wanted
this, they hoped for this, they planned this, they were secretly smirking when
people started getting hurt, and today they are just tickled pink that there's
a whole lot of
people nursing their
bruises and nursing new grievances against the cops.
Yesterday, an RCP friend (today an
ex-friend) tried to imply that I was a coward for leaving just in time and
encouraging others to leave. But a real coward is someone who uses the innocent
as cannon fodder and then shifts the blame.
Well, I've got some bad news, RCP-the
masses aren't buying it. You were doing pretty good the last five years, but
from this day forward you can expect a steady dwindling in participation and
attendance at your events.
BOYCOTT OCTOBER 22!!!
----Tom Louie
____________________________________________________________________________
from October 27:
While I am generally pretty quick to criticize the RCP,
your attack on them doesn't hold up.
The cops are not animals, they are people we should expect to act in a
humane way, and they are accountable for their attack, not those whose free
expression didn't have the tone you or the cops wanted. You were right to leave if you felt like the
group didn't reflect the same values as you, but even though I am not a RCP
member, I for one, still resonated with that tone and participated. I, also could see what was coming, and even
though I was beaten (again) and had my wrist broken by cops, I do not regret
having been there. I put the blame
squarely on the shoulders of the men with the guns and batons, not those who
were victimized.
-----sean
____________________________________________________________________________
from October 27:
Sean, I agree that cops are not animals,
but rather human beings with free will and responsibility.
The trouble is, RCP doesn't seem to
recognize them as human. The O22 rallies have consistently adopted a very
hateful tone which demonizes and dehumanizes the cops themselves, instead of
criticizing the system which causes employees of the state to commit hateful
acts. I have become increasingly uncomfortable with "Hate Cops Day,"
i.e. October 22.
Politically, what is this
supposed to accomplish? If you view all cops as evil and brutal, it doesn't
make sense to be taunting them at every opportunity, giving them the finger,
etc. That's why I used the "dangerous animal" metaphor. Heck, to
listen to the rhetoric of RCP/O22, you'd think
cops were all Orcs and
Ringwraiths straight outta Mordor, and just as unworthy of any civility or
kindness, and just as incapable of rehabilitation.
I also think it is reprehensible to invite
innocent people (including little children) to such a volatile rally and not
make every arrangement for their safety. If you like to fight and shout, fine,
but at least tell people that you're going to have a fighting and shouting
rally and not try to hide
behind people who
weren't expecting trouble.
I also blame the cops, but not only the
cops, for what happened. I think the taunts and insults had the effect of
making them relish their bloody work. That's why they were laughing when they
started their attack. I support
Ralph Cole and Cheyenne Guerra and Ben Ehrenreich, and I wish the best for the
ACLU and Jim Lafferty if they decide to sue, but I cannot in good conscience
support October 22.
As for "blaming the victim," I
wonder how many RCPers got their asses kicked that day? They've always been
first to start something, first to run away and first to exploit the anger and
grief of those who got hurt.
----Tom Louie
____________________________________________________________________________
from October 28:
I too, don't regret having been there. I will be at future O22 rallies. I think the burden
does fall on the cops. I don't think in the current context, that the cops'
humanity or sensitivities are all that important, because they are consciously
operating as the first line of defense of a brutal, criminal system. I agree
however that demonstrations should place the blame more squarely on that
system. I agree that the RCP seeks to dominate and confine the politics of the
movement against police brutality and abuse of power to suit their own
organizational strategies and hierarchies. I agree that the RCP (and PLP as
well) like to provoke confrontations in which others take the heat and they
reap the rewards. I think people have the right to resist, to defend
themselves; but I also think the RCP and O22 as a whole were remiss in not
better organizing the rally at Parker Center to make it harder for the police
to initiate violence - by keeping people together and moving, by maintaining a
clear security presence that would have deterred the police and protected
vulnerable members of the demonstration if and when the police attacked, and by
having helped and encouraged people to form affinity groups in building for the
march or on the line of march itself. Instead, the unity and cohesion of the
demonstration deteriorated drastically as soon as we hit Parker Center. This
was idiocy and irresponsibility on the part of the organizers if unintentional,
or opportunism if intentional, because that was clearly the place at which the
demonstration would be most vulnerable - in a confined area, isolated from the
general public, on the cops' own turf and where the police had their strongest
forces massed.
By rights, O22/RCP should have had a clearly drawn up
plan of proceeding, with a well-prepared team of security people - not to be
peace police but to reflect and protect the unity of the protest participants
as a whole. That plan should have been clearly communicated to everyone
participating. If O22 wanted people to march around Parker Center, then the
sound truck should have led the way, for example. Trying simultaneously to send
people around the corner and to begin the rally was a recipe for disaster which
invited the police to launch their attack. We are very lucky that there were
not more casualties and arrests.
I think it is essential for there to be an alternate
mechanism to organize against the role police play in this racist, imperialist
system besides O22. It is noteworthy that this demo was significantly smaller
than either the O2 rally last year or the August 16 Coalition for Justice march
during the DNC. Many people are being turned off to October 22, just like Tom
is, though perhaps not as vocally. I think the predominant reason however is
not the "tone" but the disconnect between the RCP's rhetoric and
reality, the way in which the tone and the marching orders are handed down
without political input or transformation, in short the RCP's hegemonic
domination of O22 nationally and in locales in which it is in a position to do
so. But the alternative to the RCP
cannot propose a pacifist approach to this problem. In the context of a campaign for community control of the police,
organized community self-defense against police violence needs to emerge.
-----Michael Novick