G8 Genoa Report Page

ZeroZero in Genoa. And there wasn't a huge amount of smoking to be done but either, but its still taken a good 8 months to sort out a page! Genoa was the largest European anti-capitalist demonstration seen for years. At the same time as being one of the most successful, it was one of the scariest and saddest, with infiltration by Italian police, the use of live bullets and the death of a comrade, and a dispicable attack on sleeping protestors by Italian police at the Diaz School which resulted in dozens being hospitalised and tortured by fascist Italian police. Here are a number of articles, photos and links that can aid understanding the demonstrations and repression. The Italian, UK and International Independent Media Centres plus A-Infos will have a huge range of materials if more are needed.

CONTENTS

Why we oppose the G8

Fascism in Genoa by Starhawk - Good overview of the actions of the Italian authorities by a well known activist

Russian Impressions of the Genoa mobilisation

Controversy - Tactics and Ideology and the Black Block

Carlo Giulliani - Will a death in the family breathe life into the movement?

One Year On - Article from Schnews

A Response to Liberal Thinking - An attack on an article published in the Ecologist.

Interview with Luca Casarini, Spokesperson for the "Tute Bianche"

Website Links

________________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
http://www.ainfos.ca/
________________________________________________

I'm running as fast as my asthmatic lungs will allow in the midst of what can only be called a mob. My friend from back home and I hold hands so that we won't loose each other, but I'm holding him back a little. He's in much better shape than I am and he'd probably be out of range of the tear gas by now if it wasn't for me.

A phalanx of riot cops is getting closer and I let go of my friend's hand, so that at least one of us can get away. He darts ahead of me onto a side street. I'm small, and now I'm by myself, so I'm not attracting much attention from the cops. I raise my hands in the air to show that I'm giving in, and let the cops push me in the direction that they are pushing all of us -- conventional protester and black clad rioter alike -- down a blocked side street.

Probably there is no way out of this alley; it's a trap, but the tear gas is too thick at this point for me to resist. I'm fumbling for my gas mask, but I'm going where I'm being told to go. I'm aware that some folks I've been marching with are being picked out of the crowd and thrown to the ground. Folks are trying to pull people out of the hands of the cops. One guy gets yanked back from the police line and runs; he gets away, but the friend I came here with is tackled. The last time I see him that day he's face down on the cement, two big undercover cops straddling him. Like most of the folks around me, I run.

We're retreating, but only as much as we have to. And in a few minutes we'll find our group again and advance back toward the area that the cops have declared off limits to all but a small group of extremely wealthy, extremely powerful, mostly white, mostly men.

If words like "advance" sound militaristic in tone, that's probably because I'm a part of a group that at least appears paramilitary. Our clothes are uniform issue and intentionally menacing: black bandanas, ragged black army surplus pants, black hooded sweatshirts (with optional red and black flag or slogan-covered patches) and shiny black boots (or for the vegans in the crowd, battered black converse).

I'm part of a loosely affiliated international group of individuals known as the Black Bloc. We don't have a party platform, and you don't have to sign anything or go to any meetings to join us. We show up at all kinds of demonstrations, from actions to free Mumia Abu Jamal, to protests against the sanctions in Iraq, and at just about every meeting of international financial and political organizations from the WTO to the G8. Although most anarchists would never wear black bandanas over their faces or break windows at McDonalds, almost all of us are anarchists.

Most folks I know who have used Black Bloc tactics have day jobs working for nonprofits. Some are school teachers, labor organizers or students. Some don't have full-time jobs, but instead spend most of their time working for change in their communities. They start urban garden projects and bike libraries; they cook food for Food Not Bombs and other groups. These are thinking and caring folks who, if they did not have radical political and social agendas, would be compared with nuns, monks, and others who live their lives in service.

There is a fair amount of diversity in who we are and what we believe. I've known folks in the Black Bloc who come from as far south as Mexico City and as far north as Montreal. I think that the stereotype is correct that we are mostly young and mostly white, although I wouldn't agree that we are mostly men. When I'm dressed from head to toe in baggy black clothes, and my face is covered up, most people think I'm a man too. The behavior of Black Bloc protesters is not associated with women, so reporters often assume we are all guys.

People associated with a Black Bloc may just march with the rest of the group, showing our solidarity with each other and bringing visibility to anarchists, or we may step up the mood of the protest, escalating the atmosphere and encouraging others to ask for more than just reforms to a corrupt system. Spray painting of political messages, destroying property of corporations and creating road blocks out of found materials are all common tactics of a Black Bloc.

The Black Bloc is a fairly recent phenomenon, probably first seen in the U.S. in the early '90s and evolving out of protest tactics in Germany in the '80s. The Black Bloc may be in part a response to the large-scale repression of activist groups by the FBI during the '60s, '70s and '80s. It is impossible at this point to form a radical activist group without the fear of infiltration and disruption by the police and. for some, taking militant direct action in the streets with very little planning and working only with small networks of friends are the only meaningful forms of protest available.

Although there is no consensus among us on what we all believe, I think I can safely say that we have a few ideas in common. The first is the basic anarchist philosophy that we do not need or want governments or laws to decide our actions. Instead, we imagine a society where there is true liberty for all, where work and play are shared by everyone and where those in need are taken care of by the voluntary and mutual aid of their communities. Beyond this vision of an ideal society, we believe that public space is for everyone. We have a right to go where we want, when we want and governments should not have the right to control our movements, especially in order to hold secret meetings of groups like the WTO, which make decisions that affect millions.

We believe that destroying the property of oppressive and exploitative corporations like The Gap is an acceptable and useful protest tactic. We believe that we have the right to defend ourselves when we are in physical danger from tear gas, batons, armored personnel carriers and other law enforcement technology. We reject the idea that police should be allowed to control our actions at all. Looking at Rodney King, Amadu Dialo, Abner Ruima, the Ramparts scandal in Los Angeles and the Riders in Oakland, many of us conclude that abuse by the police is not only endemic, it is inherent.

We live in a society that is racist and homophobic and sexist and unless that is taken out of our society, it cannot be taken out of the cops who enforce the rules of our society. In an even larger view, we live in a society that has agreed to give some people the right to control what others do. This creates a power imbalance that cannot be remedied even with reforms of the police. It is not just that police abuse their power, we believe that the existence of police is an abuse of power. Most of us believe that if cops are in the way of where we want to go or what we want to do, we have a right to directly confront them. Some of us extend this idea to include the acceptability of physically attacking cops. I have to emphasize that this is controversial even within the Black Bloc, but also explain that many of us believe in armed revolution, and within that context, attacking the cops doesn't seem out of place.

There have been hours of debate in both the mainstream and left-wing press about the Black Bloc. For the most part, the media seem to agree that the Black Bloc is bad. The mainstream media's current consensus is that the Black Bloc is bad and extremely dangerous. The progressive media's most common line is that the Black Bloc is bad, but at least their aren't many of us. Everyone seems to call Black Bloc protesters violent. Violence is a tricky concept. I'm not totally clear what actions are violent, and what are not. And when is a violent action considered self defense? I believe that using the word violent to describe breaking the window of a Nike store takes meaning away from the word. Nike makes shoes out of toxic chemicals in poor countries using exploitative labor practices. Then they sell the shoes for vastly inflated prices to poor black kids from the first world. In my view, this takes resources out of poor communities on both sides of the globe, increasing poverty and suffering. I think poverty and suffering could well be described as violent, or at least as creating violence.

What violence does breaking a window at Nike Town cause? It makes a loud noise; maybe that is what is considered violent. It creates broken glass, which could hurt people, although most of the time those surrounding the window are only Black Bloc protesters who are aware of the risks of broken glass. It costs a giant multi-billion dollar corporation money to replace their window. Is that violent? It is true that some underpaid Nike employee will have to clean up a mess, which is unfortunate, but a local glass installer will get a little extra income too.

As a protest tactic, the usefulness of property destruction is limited but important. It brings the media to the scene and it sends a message that seemingly impervious corporations are not impervious. People at the protest, and those at home watching on TV, can see that a little brick, in the hands of a motivated individual, can break down a symbolic wall. A broken window at Nike Town is not threatening to peoples safety, but I hope it sends a message that I don't just want Nike to improve their actions, I want them to shut down and I'm not afraid to say it.

The biggest complaint that the left has expressed about the Black Bloc is that we make the rest of the protesters look bad. It is understandably frustrating for organizers who have spent months planning a demonstration when a group of scary looking young people get all of the news coverage by lighting things on fire. Yet what is missing in this critique is an acknowledgement that the corporate media never covers the real content of demonstrations. Militant demonstration and peaceful protest alike are rarely covered by the media at all, let alone in any depth. Although I too wish that the media would cover all styles of protest, or, more importantly, the underlying issues inspiring the protest, I'm also aware that militant tactics do get media attention. And I think that is a good thing.

I started my activist work during the Gulf War, and learned early that sheer numbers of people at demonstrations are rarely enough to bring the media out. During the war I spent weeks organizing demonstrations against the war. In one case, thousands showed up to demonstrate. But again and again, the newspapers and television ignored us. It was a major contrast the first time I saw someone break a window at a demonstration and suddenly we were all on the six o'clock news. The militant mood of anti-globalization protests in the last couple years has undeniably contributed to the level of attention that globalization is now getting in the media. And although the Black Bloc is not the only reason for this, (a myriad of creative, innovative strategies have helped to bring the fickle eye of the media in the direction of the left), I believe that George Bush II felt compelled to directly address the protesters at the G8 summit in Genoa because of the media coverage that our movement is finally getting.

A second complaint that I have heard from the left, and in particular from other, non-Black Bloc protesters, is that they don't like our masks. I've been yelled at by protester and cop alike to take off my mask. This idea is impossible for most of us. What we are doing is illegal. We believe in militant, direct action protest tactics. We are well aware that police photograph and videotape demonstrations, even when they are legally disallowed from doing so. To take off our masks will put us in direct danger of the police.

The masks serve another, symbolic purpose as well. Although there are certainly those who wish to advance their own positions or gain popularity within the militant anarchist community, the Black Bloc maintains an ideal of putting the group before the individual. We rarely give interviews to the press (and those of us who do are generally frowned upon or regarded with suspicion). We act as a group because safety is in numbers and more can be accomplished by a group than by individuals, but also because we do not believe in this struggle for the advancement of any one individual. We don't want stars or spokespeople. I think the anonymity of the Black Bloc is in part a response to the problems that young activists see when we look back at the civil rights, anti-war, feminist and anti-nuclear movements. Dependence on charismatic leaders has not only led to infighting and hierarchy within the left, but has given the FBI and police easy targets who, if killed or arrested, leave their movements without direction. Anarchists resist hierarchy, and hope to create a movement that is difficult for police to infiltrate or destroy.

Some of the critiques of the Black Bloc by the left come from our own acceptance of the values of our corrupt society. There is outcry when some kids move a dumpster into the street and light it on fire. Most people conclude the protesters are doing this to give themselves a thrill, and I can't deny that there is a thrilling rush of adrenaline each time I risk myself in this way. But how many of us forgive ourselves for occasionally buying a T-Shirt from The Gap, even though we know that our dollars are going directly to a corporation that violently exploits their workers? Why is occasional "shopping therapy" more acceptable than finding joy in an act of militant protest that may be limited in its usefulness? I would argue that even if Black Bloc protests only served to enrich the lives of those who do them, they are still better for the world than spending money at the multiplex, getting drunk or other culturally sanctioned forms of entertainment or relaxation.

I have my own criticisms of what I'm doing and of the efficacy of my protest tactics. Property destruction, spray painting and looking menacing on TV is clearly not enough to bring on a revolution. The Black Bloc won't change the world. I dislike the feeling of danger or at least the fear of danger at protests for those who do not want to be in danger -- particularly for the kids, pregnant women and older folks I see there. I really hate the annoying use of pseudo-military jargon like "communiqu" and "bloc" by my "comrades." But mostly I hate hearing myself and my friends trashed by every mainstream organizing group from the AFL-CIO to Global Exchange and in every left-wing rag from Mother Jones to the beloved Indymedia.org. Although this is not true for everyone in the Black Bloc, I respect the strategies of most other left-wing groups. At demonstrations I attempt to use Black Bloc actions to protect non-violent protesters or to draw police attention away from them. When this is not possible, I try to just stay out of the way of other protesters.

Despite my concerns, I think that Black Bloc actions are a worthwhile form of protest. And as I watch the increasingly deadly force with which the police enforce the law at demonstrations around the world (three protesters were shot dead at an anti-WTO demonstration in Papua New Guinea in June, two protesters were shot dead at an anti-globalization demonstration in Venezuela last year, and Carlo Giulliani, a 23 year old, was killed by police during the G8 summit in Genoa), I find it increasingly ironic that my actions are labeled as violent and dangerous while even the left seems to think that the police are "just doing their jobs."

I will continue to participate in protest in this way, and anyone who cares to is welcome to join me. Bricks are easy to find and targets are as close as your local McDonalds.

Seattle may have been some sort of watershed, but Carlo's killing in Genoa is a turning point for the anti-capitalist movement (if we can call it that). How we play it from here will have repercussions far beyond the blood-stained streets of Northern Italy. It was no freak cub-cop overreaction that left one mother mourning and several others preparing to, as the sun hit the sea on Friday night, but a deliberate act of terror - in the most basic sense of the word.

The snowball thats been gaining weight and speed as it rolled through Geneva, Prague and Gothenburg has become far too jagged a spike in the side of those steering the planetary carve up. So bullets meet brains and young people are shot dead for daring to think there can be another way.

The message from the worlds authorities is clear: go back to your homes, do not meddle in what doesn't concern you, return to your televisions, to smoking dope and stealing traffic cones and leave the intricacies of global economics alone because if you don't we will kill you. The same way we killed Carlo Giuliani.

For decades, the poorest of the planet's families from Asia, Africa and Latin America have been burying the fathers, the sisters and the first born sons who have dared to confront the forces of global capitalism. But Carlo's death spells something different. For the first time the global elite has begun to kill the children of its own people. Dissent will no longer be tolerated. The whip of economic dictatorship is finally cracking at home.

But where we go from here is still up for grabs. The globalisers would dearly love to see us run scared, or split our ranks with paranoid accusations of 'whose side are you on?'. Tactical difference should not be confused with police-collusion and counter-revolutionary activity... or vice-versa. True enough, there were cops in ski-masks leading the more excitable and naive among Genoa's young bloods on attacks on corner shops, bus stops and post offices. But the agitators can be addressed. If everyone who takes any action knows why they are taking it and what sort of action they think is necessary to achieve their goal, then the police will not be able to steer the crowds, the meetings, the discussion groups or 'the movement' as a whole. The problem is less one of infiltration, more one of focus.

The more liberal elements of groups such as the Genoa Social Forum (GSF) or Prague's INPEG, need to understand, that just because they have the ear of the newspapers, it doesn't mean they speak with the voice of the people. The reformist agenda of these groups, who call for more legislation, more institutions and stronger government control over the runaway capitalist train, is an entire philosophy away from the genuine participatory democracy sought by many.

Instead of calling for the deployment of "non-violent methods of restraining and defusing violent behaviour" for those who fail to adhere to "the political and ethical parameters of our mass actions" (Walden Bello I expected so much more from you), perhaps the up-in-arms brigade should be questioning their own attempted coup of the global resistance movement. Both INPEG and the GSF produced documents laying down "rules" for "participation" in what were illegal blockades of international meetings. The GSF tactical manifesto was insulting to the resistance history of many of it's signatory groups. The anarchists were perhaps the only people (police included) who took to the streets with honest intentions, both about their goals and what they were prepared to do to achieve them. The anarchists have long been aware that power (be it economic or governmental) is the problem - not who holds it - and needs, therefore, to be removed altogether. The Black Bloc do not "detract from 'the message'"- they have a different message. And unlike the liberals and the hierarchical groups of the organised left who would, at best, replace those in power with their own institutions manned by their own people, and at worst, settle for seat at the G-8 table, the anarchist's message is not a lunge for the throne shrouded in the smoke screen language of 'justice' and 'liberty'. The anarchists recognise that a power wielding state is no better than a power wielding corporation, and they are well aware that the police are the front-line defence for both.

This is not to dispel organisation. Organisation is imperative. Co-operation and communication between the disparate groups involved in the resistance is key. But an insurrectionary pseudo-government (complete with pseudo-police if Walden gets his way)? Hmmm... two legs good, four legs bad time already.

The strength of this movement/loose-amalgamation-of-people-who-ain't-taking-any-more-shit, has always been its leaderless fluidity, its constantly changing strategy, its unpredictable tactics and targets. This is why the authorities (until now) have found it so hard to get a handle on what we were up to - we weren't following patterns or playing by any discernible rules. Now, as we witnessed in Genoa, the Man has caught up. Infiltration is the price of protesting-by-numbers. Though Italy was an ideal venue for us to mobilise an unprecedented number of insurrectionaries, it was also a touch for the global authorities who could mobilise one of the West's most corrupt, right wing and violent state security forces. Recent history has shown the Italian security services are prepared to stoop to anything in order to undermine subversive movements. Genoa proved they haven't lost their touch.

James Anon made the point on Indymedia.org that if the non violent protesters came up with something that worked maybe more people would adopt their tactics. (http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=55463&group=webcast) However, non violence should not be confused with not rocking the boat - as often appears to be the case. Those who feel the 'violent anarchists' are curbing their successes should maybe look at how successful their own tactics are. It is no coincidence that Tony Blair "welcomes" peaceful calls for debt reform - the communiqus are duly issued, the lip service paid, and then..... nothing changes, and the global carve up getting mapped in the Oval office doesn't miss a step.

Maybe time within the 'movement' would be better spent skipping the anarchist witch-hunt and focusing on our common enemies. One of the more eye opening moments in Genoa came when the non-violent protesters and the Black Bloc crossed paths. At around three o'clock on July 20th, an anarchist bloc had tried to cross the Piazza Manin en route to the red zone, the non-violent white handed pacifists in the square, refused to let them pass. Discussions between the two groups were interrupted by a vicious police attack during which the white hand protesters sat down hands aloft and took a severe beating without fighting back (as is their prerogative). However an hour later when three masked youths walked back through the square the (understandably upset) pacifists threw first a stick, then a bottle, then a rock at them. They saw the Black Bloc as the cause for their pain. No violence had been directed at the police wielding the boots, the clubs and the teargas, but strict pacifist adherence could be suspended in order to attack anyone (without authority) who had not stuck to "their" tactical code. Perhaps this pacifist submission to authority says more about the the authoritarian nature of the society they seek, than about their abhorrence of the Black Bloc's tactics.

The more reasoned voices of Italy's Ya Basta collective are already admitting the error of attacking the brick throwers (there is something twisted about an elite Tutte Bianchi hit squad in Subcommandante Marcos t-shirts beating people with crash helmets for wearing bandannas over their faces). However, the security services will no doubt be fuelling the fire of division and will embrace the peace-policers (as they did in the US during the anti Vietnam protests of the 1960s) who, they hope in turn, will return the anti-capitalist front-line to the letters pages of the Washington Post.

The rats inside the global red zone want us to crawl back to our workplaces, to the fear of unemployment and to the gratitude for an irregular playtime. But we can say no. We can say: we do not care how well protected you are with your armies, your police, your banks or your brands, because we have had enough and we will not run from your guns.

Theses would-be leaders can scuttle off to Qatar or cruise ships or Rocky Mountain retreats, but we know their meetings have little impact on the real decisions made elsewhere. Perhaps we in the West should follow the example of India's farmers who removed Monsanto's headquarters brick by brick and took it away. If we don't like Bush's missile defence plans, we could go to Flyingdales and take it away brick by brick, bullet by bullet. We have the ability to take capitalism out piece by piece, pound by pound. We could pick a company, say Balfour Beatty, and put them out of business. A thousand actions at a thousand sites dismantling every facet of their insidious business. Would their shareholders bail them out? Unlikely. Then we could move on and up. When we can co-ordinate our actions as millions of people, then maybe we can dismantle the oil industry, the arms industry, the jail industryS the government industry?

The mass street actions we have been able to mount and the dedication, planning and application of those on the streets has shown us that we have the wherewithal to make decisions and carry them out regardless of what the state may think or threaten. If we put this dynamic to work away from the mega-summits we can become a threat again. But we need to be imaginative and we need to stay ahead of the beast. Where we choose to go from here is crucial to whether we are in the process of sparking serious global change or whether we are merely in the death throes of another cycle of resistance.

If we don't want corporate activity in our neighbourhoods, lets chuck the corporations out. If we don't want the police or the government flexing their muscle in our neighbourhoods, lets stop recognising their bogus authority and encourage others to do the same. Lets link our communities together - not through state or business initiatives - but through people who share a common struggle. If we believe in making changes and creating something better, and if we are prepared to take the risks and put in the time, then lets do it. Lets not let Carlo's death be in vain. Because when one of us catches a bullet, a club or jail sentence, a little bit of all of us dies. But together we are alive and together we can, and we will, win.

See also The Case for Confrontation, by the same author: http://uk.indymedia.org/display.php3?article_id=673

Statement by the father of Carlo Giuliani, the 23-year-old Italian protester who was murdered by the police last Friday in Genoa.

Press reports initially described Carlo as "homeless and unemployed, with a criminal background." Carlo's father is an official of the CGIL, the large, Communist-affiliated trade union federation. "Carlo was the exact opposite of what people have written about him. He was a boy of great generosity who was opposed to injustice. He read, he studied, he discussed, and he protested for his ideas. He always cared about others. And he always worked, if irregularly. He worked in the jobs that all young people are forced to take--in the black economy, without any security, without any rights.

"The press said he had a criminal record. When he was 17 the police misidentified him as a criminal. He was accused of 'aggression against a public official.' But the judge laughed the case out of court and cleared him of the charges. "Carlo didn't accept the notion that eight leaders of the world should decide the life and death of hundreds of thousands of people. Here in Genoa you do not need to go far to see the victims of their policies. Come back after the G8 have gone and you will see the desperation of those who are left in hunger, those who are forced to flee their own countries and settle here, forced to survive without any dignity in the alleyways that surround the harbor.

"On Friday's demonstration Carlo wore a balaclava, yes. But you cannot equate the throwing of a fire extinguisher with a gunshot to the head. "In some ways we didn't understand each other. I am a member of the Democratic Left (former Communist Party)--well, I was, our branch has been closed for months. There won't be his liveliness in our house anymore. We won't have his jokes about football. And we won't have our political discussions anymore. But maybe now is the time for new people to open up new branches so we can carry on discussing."

Genoa: One Year On

It's a year since the G8 summit in Genoa (See SchNEWS 314/5), when the Italian city became a militarised zone, with police cruising round in armoured cars and the city centre ringed with a 15ft steel fence. The 250,000 people who marched through the streets opposing the eight most powerful leaders in the world faced massive police repression, with over 6,000 tear gas canisters fired by cops who also used live ammunition with which they killed Carlo Giuliani.

One year on, up to 100,000 took the streets of Genoa on Saturday 20th to remember Carlo Giuliani - much more than the 30-40,000 expected, which shows the anti-capitalist movement is still alive and well after September 11th. At 5:27 p.m., the time that Giuliani was shot by a young police trainee (Officer Plannica) trapped in a paramilitary police jeep, the crowds broke into a prolonged cheer and released hundreds of coloured balloons into the sky. "This is not a funeral. We wanted to have a celebration of life, of the right to live and of so many rights that are denied in the world and in Italy," said Giuliani's father in the piazza where his son was shot.

But as a final sickening note to Carlo's murder, Officer Plannica sold his story for 30,000 euros (20,000) to one of Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi's TV channels, claiming he was not guilty of murder or manslaughter. The worst aspect of pre-meditated police violence a year ago was a raid on the Indymedia Centre and Diaz School where some protestors were staying. During the raid 93 people were arrested with 63 put in hospital, but none of those arrested have been charged with any offence. This year a press conference by many people beaten and arrested at the Diaz School called for deputy prime minister Gianfranco Fini, leader of the fascist National Alliance party, to be held accountable for the brutal raid. During the raid police produced two molotov cocktails as evidence that the School was a base for violent protesters. Since then it has emerged that these molotovs were in fact recovered seven hours earlier hidden in Genoa city centre, with a policeman confessing that he planted the explosives: "I brought the molotov cocktail to the Diaz school. I obeyed the order of one of my superiors." His superior, Pietro Troiani, from a mobile police unit in Rome, is already being investigated after another colleague accused him of providing false information to justify the raids.

The Italian Government has come under fire for failing to prosecute those responsible for police brutality against demonstrators and Amnesty International has criticised the police. MPs in Rome are calling for another enquiry. 77 police officers are under investigation, including the one who shot Carlo Giuliani. Genoa police chief Gianni De Gennaro was demoted after admitting some of his men might have used "excessive force."

In Italy the cops may be blatantly fascist, but in Britain the situation isn't much different. Two people arrested at a demo outside the London Italian Embassy last February recently had their charges dropped. Police at the demo had punched and kicked protestors and one cop (PC D343) was heard to say "I don't give a fuck about the law". That's because, like in Italy, the police can get away with being violent towards protestors and never get punished.

* Indymedia have produced a video, Genoa Red Zone. Copies from http://www.cultureshop.org
* Read "On Fire: Genoa and the Anti-Capitalist Movement" published by AK Press for 3 quid a go.

This is a response written by one of ZeroZero's webmasters to an article published in the Ecologist (September 2001 issue). This article by Paul Kingsnorth, stated that the movement "must split" between the militants and "reformers" so it can continue. It claimed the Black Block was inherently "fascist" and colluded with the "police" and got a number of other issues either wrong, or painted in a questionable light.

Paul Kingsnorth makes some good points in his article about the protests against the G8 in Genoa. He mentions the militarisation and repression of the Italian authorities, the workshops which advanced alternatives to economic globalisation and the need to see the protests in the context of a worldwide movement against economic-globalisation rather than from a 'Northern' or 'Western' perspective.

He seems to have been daydreaming a little in Genoa however. Namely, he seems to have missed the point that this movement is based upon the power of people taking action on the streets, not negotiating, reforming or sitting around. From June 18th, Seattle, Gothenburg to Genoa and later in September Washington DC, the demands for a world based on need, not greed, have been made by those risking it against increasingly hostile reaction from the corporate elite and individual nation state. This can be the only explanation for Kingsworth's naive willingness to fall for propaganda which states that 'fluffy' or 'peaceful' protesters are good, and more radical or 'Black Bloc' ones are bad.

Using this rather neat dichotomy, he labels the Pink and Silver group 'determinedly peaceful'. Had Kingsnorth been present in the planning meetings for the Pink and Silver group, he would have realised that this group was far from determinedly peaceful. Sure the idea of theatrical costumes, singing and samba music sound peaceful, but Pink and Silver as the name suggests had two halves: Pink was pacifist and Silver more tactically responsive. Despite consensus that the group was to try and avoid conflict, these two halves were those that wanted a pacificist approach, and those that were more willing to respond to violence - to allow people to both defend themselves from attack by the military police and to allow people to escape from injury and violence.

The Pink and Silver group spent an entire day in seemingly endless discussion about this very issue, and this was only resolved when an understanding was reached that those who wanted a pacifist approach could have one, and those that wanted to respond could try and respond tactically in a space away from the pacifists. This misunderstanding seems to underline the failure of the article written. It failed to see protest in itself - planned, executed and analysed - as a tool for change. By joining a group which he had very little understanding about, he showed that he felt protesting on the streets was secondary to whatever campaigning activities he was undertaking. No doubt he failed to notice the affinity group structure and spokecouncil system which was in theory the decision making apparatus of the group.

With a failure to understand the group he chose to join 'for the day', Kingsworth then goes on to blame Black Bloc protesters for the brutal assault on the GSF headquarters . For someone to fall for Italian state propaganda after declaring the Italian authorities 'fascist' in nature (if not in reality) is almost unbelievable.
There are two points to make about the Black Bloc. Firstly, the Black Bloc is a tactic, one that uses small affinity groups to undertake direct action against specific targets. Secondly, the Italian state infiltrated Black Bloc groups and joined in the direct actions by attacking cars, people's houses and small shops . The police infiltration was an attempt to give an excuse to the Italian authorities to crack down and attempt to split the movement in two. Both aims seem to have worked, seeing that Kingsworth equates Black Bloc with 'old', redundant socialist parties (a view I also find quite questionable) and a belief that the police attack on the GSF was legitimate because of Black Bloc actions.

The Black Bloc is neither old nor outdated and certainly not responsible for increasing state repression in every country touched by the movement against economic globalisation. Although Kingsworth appears to be in favour of direct action in the countryside, and against direct action on the streets, he doesn't even mention that many of the questionable actions undertaken were actually by the police. To criticise the Black Bloc without having interviewed or participated in their actions is flawed in concept and doomed to failure; particularly when a bunch of hyped up policemen were hell bent on causing mayhem both in uniform and disguised as protesters . Even more questionable is the attempt to equate the Black Block with Statists - whilst I cannot speak on behalf of any Black Bloc participant, I would be surprised if more than a minority were Statists. By misunderstanding that this movement is based on action, not reform, on protest not negotiation, Kingsworth misunderstands both this movement and the politics of street protest.

If people want to remove themselves from the movement, by 'placing' themsleves inside liberal-green-thinktanks then they can do so. What these people will find is that the movement and action against summits, corporations and those who rule on behalf of a tiny minority will continue. A big question mark needs to be placed over the actions of Kingsnorth himself as well - what was he doing with the White Overalls or at least near the death of Carlo Giuliani when he started off the day with the Pink and Silvers? It sounds suspiciously like he was running around looking for action. Although he found it, his attempts to flit from one area of Genoa to the next has resulted in a superficial analysis and plain misunderstanding of street tactics; street tactics, which despite much discussion and other activities, are becoming more and more central to this movement against economic globalisation.

The progressive view to take is that different individuals have different tactics. Some reformists will happily sit down for a champagne lunch to discuss issues - others decide that attacking the very mechanisms of corporate rule through property damage and those that defend it are a more appropriate tactic. We should not be divided, particularly not willingly - to be so would be to give in to the pressure of those we are against. We need the unity and strength to bring down capitalism, and if this means uniting with Marxists or those who take action on the streets, then this is what we should do.

Originally published in Spanish by the MRG de Reus, Catalunya, edited by SERPAL, Alternative Press Service, and in Italian by Il Manifesto(Italy - August 3, 2001, trans. irlandesa).

"When you see a carabinieri's armored car closing in on you, you either escape or you react in the same way as if a weapon were being pointed at you. We, in Genoa, on the Via Tolemaide, built barricades in order to protect our safety. For three hours we had to react to the police attacks, we and many others. Carlo died defending himself from the attacks by the carabinieri. At the same time, he was there along with thousands of men and women, in order to affirm that another world is possible."

Luca Casarini, spokesperson for the network of social centers of the northeast, charismatic figure of the Tute Bianche, one of the "central promoters" of the Social Forum of Genoa (FSG), does not speak in half measures about the events in Genoa: "There is an enormous difference between someone who builds a barricade in order to defend himself, and someone who decides to militarily suppress a broad organized movement like this one, against economic globalization. The former is affirming his right to change a reality that produces poverty and exploitation. The latter is defending the G8, an illegitimate body that is trying to make decisions about the world, ignoring the hopes and desires for a better life held by those who inhabit it."

Luca Casarini: What we bore witness to in Genoa was the end of political mediation between the movements and the institutions. I think about the month when the FSG dealt directly with the government: during that time the center-left opposition didn't say anything significant. Or I think about the implosion of a party like the DS...

Il M: Speaking about death is sad, after what happened to Carlo.

Yes, the institutional left died in Genoa. Try and imagine how embarrassing it was for the center-left, who prepared the meeting for the G8, and afterwards found itself face to face with the images of brutal beatings and of Carlo dead on the asphalt. They stammered and they grew silent. Even so, the preparation for the G8 summit was theirs. It infuriated us to read the statements by Luciano Violante, saying that the FSG should distance themselves from the violent ones in the red zone [...]

We have tried to analyze the question of world government. We have talked about the imperial perspective of world government. It all means an erosion of national sovereignty. Not its end, but its erosion and its redirection towards a global, imperial system. In Genoa we have seen that perspective manifest itself in the form of war. How we should confront that form which the imperial perspective is adopting is a question for which we were not prepared.

Il Manifesto: It appears to me that the Tute Bianche have also reached their end.

LC: End? That's a bit strong to say it like that. Exhausted maybe, we have undoubtedly concluded a phase. The Tute Bianche were an experiment that sought to make the idea of conflict legitimate once again. Think about the FSG. There we were, the Catholics and us, Arci and Cobas, Rete Lilliput, Drop the Debt and the Fiom. A potent mix. We functioned as the central driving force, without that meaning that anyone was imposing their own priorities. As Tute Bianche we have traveled a long path, questioning ourselves about what we have accomplished. A positive experience, but one which seems inadequate to me now for confronting the imperial system we have facing us, in which politics are the continuation of war, and not the reverse, like Karl von Clausewitz wrote. Think about the Balkans, Palestine, Africa.

A lot of people predicted that a delicate phase would be beginning this autumn for the social struggles [...] Many factors are leading me to the conclusion that the civil disobedience phase is played out. Now it's necessary to move on to social disobedience. It's necessary to verify the crisis of all the components of the FSG, which doesn't mean paralysis, but recognizing the limits of their methods of analysis, their perspectives and their political agenda. To go on creating social forums in all the cities is positive. Forming alliances is fundamental. Although I prefer to think not about alliances, but about a social process by which the movement turns into a magnetic pole for all kinds of figures and social realities which are different from us. Think about what happened in Genoa with the lawyers and volunteer doctors. The lawyers were obviously democratic, even though apart from the FSG. But after a lot of discussion, they decided to put on t-shirts that! said "Union of Democratic Lawyers" and to join in the demonstrations. These same lawyers talked with other lawyers in Genoa when the police attacks got worse, in order to write a very strong document about the government's behavior, which they directed to the Union delle Camere Penali. Or think about the experience of the nurses and doctors who came to the aid of the people who had been beaten, and who were ultimately themselves beaten up by the forces of order. That's two examples of the kinds of networks which are being built, attracted by the movement's issues. And they do so from the perspective of their own specific work, which they put at the movement's disposal. This doesn't mean that everything is going smoothly. We find ourselves facing a difficult, hard, reality, which has to be understood and analyzed once again. It's not about fascism, but a change in the form of the State, which confirms a profound transformation in the methods of producing wealth and subjectivity. And all of that on a global scale. I think about what happened on the streets of Genoa: it seemed more like a riot than a demonstration. This must be understood, analyzed. I'm not talking about the Black Bloc obviously, but about those who had to exercise resistance. The so-called Black Bloc is a phenomena which should not be criminalized. It's people who believe that, in order to fight capitalism, it's enough to destroy a shop window. That's what their "Smash Capitalism" is about. We think along different lines. We think about a social process of transformation, through which the "network of networks" becomes a magnetic pole which facilitates the creation of other social networks.

Il M: I think that it makes sense to state that, after Genoa, nothing is like it was before. For you, what has changed?

LC: I would propose that you go back to the events of Friday the 20th and Saturday the 21st. Or, better, to the photograph in the Carta weekly, which you, Il Manifesto, also published. It was a photograph by Tano D'Amico which showed that already, in Via Tolemaide, long before Carlo was assassinated, the carabinieri had taken their pistols out of their holsters in order to take aim at us. That bears witness to a military perspective, which is the manner in which the government confronted the mobilizations against the G8. The carabinieri charged violently. We resisted, and I claim that resistance as a political act. Nonetheless, if we adopt the military perspective of confrontation, that would mean madness and political suicide. All the forces of order were in Genoa, the army, the secret service agencies of the eight most powerful countries in the world in economic and military terms. Our movement has no way of taking on that military power. They would destroy us in a matter of months. We must, therefore, find a third path, which would bear witness to the rejection of globalization, but also to symbolic gestures such as destroying a bank.

IM: There are those who aver that Via Tolemaide was a trap you fell
into...

LC: Were we naive? Perhaps. But I see it differently. As Tute Bianche, we have signed a pact with the FSG, and we respect it. At the preparatory meeting for the "disobedience" event (Friday, the 20th), at no time did we conceal our intention to violate the red zone. We made it quite clear what instruments we'd be utilizing. We would not be carrying sticks or attack instruments. We would not even be dressing as white monkeys, a decision we reached after a lengthy discussion among ourselves in the Carlini Stadium. I believe it was a good decision because, when one is immersed in an intricate reality like this movement, the important element is not the claiming of a membership, but the "contamination" between different groups which, despite everything, maintain a common objective. If we were naive in Genoa, then this was our naivete: we remained faithful to the pact, respecting those thought in a different way than we did but who wanted us to remain faithful to an objective. If, at the end of the day, it was a trap, it was set in order to strike at the movement.

In the past there have been those who have written that the Tute Bianche played with traps. That our confrontations with the police were a joke. There were those who went to the extreme of saying that we agreed with the police. It's never been like that. For two, three years we have been dedicated to thinking long and hard about how to work conflict without it turning destructive. We decided to utilize new techniques: we announced publicly what we were trying to do, always warning that, if the police charged us, we would defend ourselves with shields and padded protective gear. That was our rule, because we felt that it was essential to create conflict and consensus about the objectives we had set. In Genoa we expected that things would be more or less the same as always. But they deceived us. We remember the FSG's meetings with Scajola and Ruggiero: they didn't respect any of the agreements we reached. The police used firearms, although they said they would not do so. Our right to demonstrate, which Ruggiero recognized as being inalienable, was crushed under the wheels of the police armored vehicles.

IM: And now what?

LC: For me it is essential to begin again, starting from what has been called the "Carlini laboratory." Intense experience. It has taught me a lot. For example, how to build a public space where the multitude isn't just a word, but a shared construction, a political construction of the "disobedients."

A group of comrades who were arrested at the Diaz school in Genoa has set up http://home.link-m.de/art/gbolzaneto/.

This is from http://home.link-m.de/art/gbolzaneto/ "this homepage has been installed in order to serve as a site where everyone who was arrested at Diaz-school (and all others who were deported to the police station Bolzaneto) can coordinate their activities. Moreover we want to use this site for public information. If you have any news or information which you want to publish e.g. on legal aspects just contact us at the adress you can find under "contact"."

Latest on Diaz:

> ________________________________________________
> A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
> http://www.ainfos.ca/
> ________________________________________________
>
> G8. Blitz at the Diaz school, 48 more policemen under investigation
>
>
> The investigating magistrates in the Genoa events have issued
> 48 investigation notices to members of the Roman division under
> its commander Vincenzo Canterini and his vice Michelangelo Fournier.
> The investigation regards the night-time blitz on the Diaz school
> last summer which ended up with about 60 people injured and 93
> arrests.
>
> The police are being accused of being accessories to beatings and
> of not trying to stop the actions, with their status as "public
> official" counting heavily against them.
>
> That brings the total number of members of the Rome riot squad under
> investigation to 77, of all ranks.
>
> Source: RAInews

http://www.lahaine.f2s.com/Internacional/secgenova_eng.htm

UPDATE: * Gianfranco Fini, the Italian Foreign Minister, well known fascist, and director of police operations at last years Genoa protests, is
speaking in London on the 22nd. He'd love to see you!! Meet 8am onwards outside Claridge's Hotel, 53 Brook Street, London, W1