Sadly, The Times Have Stopped A-Changin'...

Just because it is demanded of the masked anarchists that they take off their masks is no guarantee that they’ll listen. See below.

Well, see, the problem is that these movements aren’t big unified groups of people operating under a common banner or even a single group of coordinators/marshals/whathaveyou. The anti-globalization movement is a loose confederation of groups and parties and organizations. There was a lot of pre-protest organization going on before Seattle and Washington and Quebec, meaning many of the larger groups (including mine) got together to discuss tactics, strategies, and how to handle things in general. That doesn’t mean we can control the individuals who aren’t affiliated with any of the groups and who don’t feel they need to listen to someone they don’t agree with. Hell, even groups that did show up to coordinate used the “let’s hear it for the individual” attitude to justify doing whatever the hell they felt like at the protest.

Having said that, the anarchistic elements didn’t get a warm-hearted reception when they pulled stunts like smashing a McDonald’s front window to hell in Seattle. Most of these were met with shouts of “peaceful protest” from the crowd or stony silence.

Don’t lump us in with people who use tactics we don’t plan on using and who won’t listen to our arguments as to why they shouldn’t be used. If the protests were the result of one big organization rather than several, it would be a lot less violent.

Movements are what get things done. The eight-hour day wouldn’t have been won without a movement. The Scottsboro Boys would have dangled from trees and been another historical statistic without a movement. Hell, civil freakin’ rights would still be a pipe dream without a movement. Long live movements!

Absolutely not. Successful widespread movements are based on the connection of issues. They then cease to become economic or political movements and become social movements. While I’m not disagreeing that this is what happened in the 60s (I can imagine what the 70s would have been like if the civil rights, women’s rights, and antiwar movements had started connecting their issues), I’m disagreeing with your assessment of what a widespread movement means and requires for its existence.