miami and the new new left.

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
miami, two weeks ago. outside the free trade agreement of the americas summit, protestors were being teargassed and shot at with seven types of rubber bullets. the us constitution had been suspended prior to the protests, the city declared a 'natural disaster' zone. activists were detained for no apparent reason (myself, the token australian, and five kids from austin were followed from our hotel, and pulled over by eight cop cars. our group of 26 was surveilled the entire few days in the city). protestors have been brutalised in jail, with people of color particularly affected. the basic atmosphere was not conducive to protests, with even the permitted union march ending in the largest police assault of the day.

from democracy now: Miami Mayor Manny Diaz called the police actions last week a model for homeland security. FTAA officials called it extraordinary. Several cities sent law enforcement observers to the protests to study what some are now referring to as the 'Miami Model.'"

two questions: where to now for the seattle new new left, given the inefficacy of the protests, and the possible implementation of the model nationwide? and how much does the us attitude to protest differ to other ('northern' countries)? i'm convinced that the us is the only western nation that can so openly deploy repressive state apparatuses without public reprobation (though maybe the genoa experience demonstrated otherwise). i've never felt that the us was convincingly post enlightment, in a variety of ways.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:52 (twenty-one years ago)

How does the "Genoa experience" demonstrate anything about the U.S., considering that Genoa is in Italy?

hstencil, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:58 (twenty-one years ago)

no- i was using genoa as a counterexample, demonstrating that maybe the us isn't unique in repressing anti-globalisation protests. nuancing my argument, some.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 17:59 (twenty-one years ago)

it "maybe" demonstrated otherwise

x-post

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Hstencil, if you had read what Mr M said above, he was saying that the Genoa experience possibly demonstrates that other countries are similar to the USA. It does not demonstrate anything about the USA.

DV (dirtyvicar), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)

first thing: you've got to think up a better name fer yerselves than the "new new left."

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:06 (twenty-one years ago)

besides, miami is practically (pre-castro) havana anyway. why are y'all surprised that the cops down there act like banana-republicans?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:07 (twenty-one years ago)

"surprised"

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:08 (twenty-one years ago)

christ both sides of that brouhaha got exactly what they wanted from the other side (keep on truckin status quo)

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:10 (twenty-one years ago)

no; there have been prosecutions of the police officers involved in the extra-judicial repression in genoa. and there was a significant outcry in italy at the time as regards the unacceptability of these events occurring within a 'democracy'. whereas, in the us, there's been little coverage of what i felt was pretty overwhelming use of state terror (a protestor has died in hospital after being beaten by police). my use of genoa was prob. slightly messy, as i'm as interested in (lack of) reaction to miami, in that regard, as the specific police tactics (although that's also fascinating).

what's also pertinent is that many arrests, and the intense monitoring occurred pre protestors 'doing anything' that might be construed post hoc to support state violence.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:22 (twenty-one years ago)

"little coverage" - riight

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:24 (twenty-one years ago)

how about "come to the rally and you'll get anal sex"?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:25 (twenty-one years ago)

or "this time we're more interested in persuading people than in confirming our self righteousness really we swear"

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:26 (twenty-one years ago)

or "watch us complain when we get exactly the results we're looking for"

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:27 (twenty-one years ago)

hmmm, and my experiences in australia have definitely been that a more proportional response is used by police during protests. aka no one was gassed during the big anti war protests, even when a demo of 10 000 students/ school kids in sydney got 'out of hand'.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:28 (twenty-one years ago)

nu left, maybe?

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

"little coverage" - riight
thirty seconds on the nbc news that night.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:30 (twenty-one years ago)

here's an idea ... how 'bout some of those protestors studying economics, public policy, etc., getting decent grades and going on to work for a congressman or think tank ... and trying to effect trade policy that way, instead of at these "let's shoot our load" rallies that get nowhere?

which doesn't excuse policy brutality, of course. but has it ever occurred to people that there are more fruitful ways to change things than protests?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:31 (twenty-one years ago)

I was just looking at this article about the protests. The two surveys give pretty interesting results i.e. the cause of the protestors gets way more support then their actions.

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

tad you're assuming these people want to change anything

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:32 (twenty-one years ago)

well, the coverage in the miami media was pretty diverse. the local cbs/upn stations reported that police entirely instigated the violence, while the miami herald (owned by knight ridder, who donated $80 000 to the ftaa prior to the summit) didn't cover the story as well.

and, fuck, 'you don't know what you want' is a classic rightist strategy for delegitimising the left. i think there's a false binary involved, too, in the 'protest' versus 'legislative change'. as if people go to protests, and then don't engage with the issues in an everyday academic/ institutional sense.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:39 (twenty-one years ago)

and, fuck, 'you don't know what you want' is a classic rightist strategy for delegitimising the left.

how 'bout, "we know exactly what you want, and we think it's dumb/impractical/not likely to come about if you keep inviting people who are more interested in chanting brainless slogans and smashing windows"?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:41 (twenty-one years ago)

and something tells me that the folks at these rallies with che t-shirts and black bandanas ain't too keen on reading up on trade policy.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

or even voting!

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

i mean 'keep fighting the good fight' and all that but there's a point where the left must take responsibility for its own incompetence, particularly when it seems so deliberate

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:45 (twenty-one years ago)

or an explanation as to why reneging or rescinding a trade pact is less unilateralist than invading a country because the guy in the oval office feels like it?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:46 (twenty-one years ago)

believe it or not, i sympathize somewhat with the protestors at these things (the intelligent ones, anyway). it's the tactics that i don't like, as well as the lack of any coherent plan of action other than
"free trade sucks!"

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:47 (twenty-one years ago)

It's kind of odd how protests often appear as "us vs the state" but really what they are after is more governmental control, not less.

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:48 (twenty-one years ago)

i think charles has an interesting point...several actually...

what has been the level of press attention the events in miami have gotten in the states? has it made national news?

do the tactics of police ever make national news with regard to these protests? obviously with these events there is a double dynamic, of protestor strategies and police/government strategies, but it's the former that always makes the news (or the perceived results of the former).

i know everyone is tripping over themselves trying to seem more cynical and seen-it-all than the rest, but even though this media state of affairs is not news, its still interesting and will be more so as the curtailing of civil liberties and level of police violence/intimidation continue to grow...

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:50 (twenty-one years ago)

i don't think corporate and military control are delimited, like you're suggesting. obviously, things like water privatisation (which prompted massive uprisings in, say, bolivia, and derived from internat. instititional deregulatory structural readjustment) are enforced by state repression/ killings, when opposition is manifested to non neoliberal policies.
and something tells me that the folks at these rallies with che t-shirts and black bandanas ain't too keen on reading up on trade policy.
this is complete conjectural bullshit. of my friends on the 'anti-globalisation' left, i have two writing theses on fair trade as an alternative to the current framework, and one taking lsat exams this week so he can study trade law, of the people who immediately come to mind. my own thesis, which i'm about to start, is going to centre about a cultural studies based critique of globalisation (and not one arguing for the recuperation of the twentieth century nation state). one of the benefits of being able to going to university (thanks to social position) is that one is able to pursue these endevours, an opportunity denied the majority of the south.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 18:56 (twenty-one years ago)

writing theses is as nearly as weak kneed and ineffective a form of political action as protest

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:00 (twenty-one years ago)

for the sake of argument assuming you're remotely interested in 'results' or 'change'

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:01 (twenty-one years ago)

and wait'll yer friend studying to go to law school sees the pay differential b/w working for some public interest outfit and working for a big law firm.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:02 (twenty-one years ago)

most academic work is of marginal interest but james do you really think the academy has no place whatsoever in social change? that seems a really...wrong view IMO. you seem to be baiting in fact.

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:02 (twenty-one years ago)

You prefer direct donation?

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:03 (twenty-one years ago)

except when academics act as expert advisers to gov't, or thesis graduates end up working at ngos, or in the field of public policy. uni=part of the public field of discourse. i'm unclear as to your alternatives to sitting on yer arse.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:03 (twenty-one years ago)

"the seattle new new left"?

donut bitch (donut), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:03 (twenty-one years ago)

(my comment was to blount)

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Canada hates them stinking left handed hippies too. Well at least the grateful dead protesters anyways.

Mr Noodles (Mr Noodles), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:06 (twenty-one years ago)

i don't think corporate and military control are delimited, like you're suggesting

I'm more mentioning it as a critique of how violent protests give the appearence of favoring anarchy which gains more opposition then support. Neither side (if you want to paint this as socialism vs capitalism) is very clean when it comes to using force to get their way.

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:07 (twenty-one years ago)

i think it has some place, but it doesn't seem that far removed the ego gratification that's at the heart of most present day protests (I mean now even most protestors admit they do it more for themselves ie. as a pep rally than as a means toward change)(I know that's why I go to them - I'm not dumb enough to think it's an effective method of political action anymore). devoting half the time spent on a thesis to gotv would yield twenty times the results - but then you wouldn't get the precious byline.

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:07 (twenty-one years ago)

there are theses and there are theses james

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:08 (twenty-one years ago)

dont presume your cynicism is shared by others at the protests btw

amateur!st (amateurist), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:09 (twenty-one years ago)

maybe it should be ... then maybe they'd do something more constructive with themselves.

i've written a number of "theses" too -- one of 'em on the negative effects of repeal of the state death tax credit on state budgets -- i even got A's on 'em. helluva lot of effect they had.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:12 (twenty-one years ago)

protest=for the media, the only demonstration that resistance exists, in the first instance. protesting on any issue creates alternative communities to those constructed through everyday engagement.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:13 (twenty-one years ago)

gotv = get out the vote? It's not really an either/or thing.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:13 (twenty-one years ago)

protest=for the media, the only demonstration that resistance exists

So you're saying the whole thing is essentially being staged on a stage, for no other reason than that?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:13 (twenty-one years ago)

if protests=for the media than the left's lack of media savviness is just another sign of it's deliberate incompetence

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:14 (twenty-one years ago)

but if, as you say, the media ignores protests altogether then that would make them even MORE pointless. and what makes the protest more "worthy" of being covered by the media in the first place than something else? just because you and yer friends were there?

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:15 (twenty-one years ago)

no- read my second sentence. i think that there's a level of desperation in the decision to call a protest; on its horizons is disempowerment of a section of the population. the decision to protest is designed to counteract that.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 19:15 (twenty-one years ago)

america is

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:10 (twenty-one years ago)

andrew, to be fair there IS a war in iraq and the economy's still shit. with those events in mind, it isn't unreasonable for the press to lead off the news with stories on those events and later report on protests.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:11 (twenty-one years ago)

i mean if it's jaded enough to be basically ignoring the war at this point in favor of paris hilton and michael jackson are you really gonna tell me bumping this to first item on the network news (it's already been above the fold page one in the newspapers) is gonna provoke enough outrage to result in anything?

x-post

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, there's always the option of hectoring someone who's asking whether we should be worried about repression of political beliefs and the right to assemble, and demanding to know what his qualifications are before granting him the right to have an opinion - you know, the kind of divisive shit that splintered the left in the 60s so effectively that Republicans didn't have to lift a finger.

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Success I think would maybe have been a speaker being truly featured on an non-CSPAN outlet, without being gassed or shot. I'd say it's a push vs the chance of being gassed or shot only on a non-CSPAN outlet.

Hunter (Hunter), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:13 (twenty-one years ago)

i coulda sworn it was the left writing off the working man in favor of charles' 'educated' classes that made it so the republicans didn't have to lift a finger

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Tad: Sure, but I suspect/hope that something on "America is preparing to fuck over some more countries/Guess where your job's going next year" would interest some people. This is purely in answer to your question, rather than James' (I'm stuffing both into "this" in my previous post).

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:18 (twenty-one years ago)

explain this "write-off" operation in detail, cinniblount, it sounds fascinating

it's the wet-dream of the status quo that smart people like you make arguments like the one you're makng here. Miami police behavior DID provoke outrage - in charles m, on this board - and you slammed him for it, calling him a poseur, not a REAL activist/organizer like you - i mean c'mon that is crap!!

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:19 (twenty-one years ago)

The world's not full of jaded internet junkies, you know.

give it three years, or at least another national American election.

Jeremy the Kingfish (Kingfish), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:20 (twenty-one years ago)

ok i'm really not arsed wading into all this i'm more cynical/hipper than you dick waving,but a few points

the anti-war protests that took place a while ago did have some effect,in that (and this is only an anecdotal observation) it certainly led people to question the war more than they would have when they saw millions of people all over the world objecting to something they might not have thought much about otherwise

the recent london protest (attended by 200,000 according to the irish times,100,000 according to the police and a "few hundred" according to fox news,similarly drew attention to some issues,and these kind of things at the very least do get people discussing the issues raised,which has to be a good thing...

robin (robin), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:22 (twenty-one years ago)

"we should anticipate the police repressing our freedom to assemble and so we should therefore choose not to excercise this freedom"
what the fuck?

robin (robin), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:23 (twenty-one years ago)

"are you being sarcastic dude"
"...i don't even know anymore"

robin (robin), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:24 (twenty-one years ago)

explain this "write-off" operation in detail, cinniblount, it sounds fascinating - you're right tracer, the democrats have the nascar dad vote sealed up, have for the past thirty years, I don't know what I'm (or Howard Dean is) thinking.

ts: the 99 seattle protests vs. clinton's 98 gotv efforts (which got more press? which got more results?)

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:25 (twenty-one years ago)

charles m built blount's criticism into his question: e.g. where to now for political dissent, what with hijacking or focus-shifting or outright suppression of protestors' messages via violence? cinniblount you ought to be glad someone's finally paying attention to your devastating critiques of modern political organizing strategy. you'd rather mock his vocabulary instead tho? what did charles m ever do to you man??

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:25 (twenty-one years ago)

i don't think Presidential election strategy ever had much to do with the fragmentation of the left in the 60s, blount

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:27 (twenty-one years ago)

you don't?

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:29 (twenty-one years ago)

were you ever gonna provide that best case scenario btw?

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:30 (twenty-one years ago)

For fucks sake there's a lot of ignorance on this thread.

I guess all those old nuns and steelworkers are smug ignorant professional protesting college students or something.

Why don't you actually learn something about the people you're "criticizing" before making ridiculous generalizations about them?

http://www.ftaaimc.org

I guess "NASCAR Dads" must mean any "Dad" who is not in a union.

Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:34 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah, i apologize, the left has definitely done a great job via protests of getting the message out and persuading people to come around. the results speak volumes. and the left definitely hasn't lost the white working class male vote. or it doesn't need it. whichever. you tell me. partylines r us.

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:42 (twenty-one years ago)

blount if you answer charles m's 2 questions - or even attempt to - i'll answer you about the best-case scenario of "the miami protestors" (hint: Andrew Farrell already answered it)

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 20:52 (twenty-one years ago)

as to whether I really think presidential election strategies had no bearing on the collpase of the left, well, they probably did a bit. But far more destructive than that was the kind of backbiting and purity tests you dole out here.

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Blount, could you not speak in ridiculous generalizations? You misrepresent the protesters as "the left" and as if they are not "the people" being affected by trade agreements.

This was a protest about trade. It did not involve the United States alone. I must have imagined seeing all of those union endorsements, too.

The March to Miami -- where trade ministers will meet -- began Sept. 26 in Seattle. Since then, a busload of labor leaders has crossed the country, stopping in 15 cities for anti-FTAA rallies.

Leaders from the Steelworkers; AFL-CIO; Sierra Club; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; Coalition of Black Trade Unionists; Alliance for Sustainable Jobs and the Environment; Public Citizens Global Watch; Teamsters; and National Family Farm Coalition are supporting the rallies.

Friday's Iron Range rally -- billed as an old-fashioned populist workers' rally -- includes U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton, USWA District 11 Director David Foster, Larry Weiss of the Minnesota Fair Trade Coalition, Curtis Bush of Witness for Peace and Rev. Kristin Foster of Messiah Lutheran Church in Mountain Iron.

And I had no idea that Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale were such raging "leftists" that they drove the "white male working class" vote away.

Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:20 (twenty-one years ago)

How does being against the WTO differ from being an isolationist?

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:25 (twenty-one years ago)

It's about fair trade, with fair environmental, labor and health standards, that's how.

Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:35 (twenty-one years ago)

"against the WTO" is a pretty inaccurate way to describe what the march was for, bnw - no doubt some people had signs saying "down with the WTO" but the goal here is to create a fairer organization. George W would be on the front-line of anti-WTO protests if that happened, of course

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:45 (twenty-one years ago)

ah, i did formulate the (open) question in the hope that people outside my immediate group would be able to express views on these questions. my basic premise has been, post these demos, that the seattle model isn't going to work in the future.

i was personally surprised- not so much that demo ended like it did (though police directly aiming at peoples heads with 22s is unprecedented in recent history), but the way the city was prepared to try to preempt dissent in such an extreme way. and, while most of the kids who i was with also found this worrying, i feel like, empirically, this level of oppression is not representative of any kind of free expression. i mean, y'all have the first amendment, and yet we, with an almost british constitution (ie. much unwritten), have substantially more freedom to express our views publically. and my cultural studies shorthand is just that- i'm not attempting to be exclusionary, but this forum has mechanisms of selection, related to access (but not the least derived from your conceptions of community), which would seem to preclude a reach out to those who you accuse me of negating, here. there is a continued dialogue in the university, bourgeois left about these issues: its ridiculous to assume that activists haven't considered issues of vanguardism and personal background. i feel like the left in the states is moving further and further from socialism, particularly in relation to countries with a socialist orientation, like australia. if anything, most of the kids in miami were propounding radical autonomism or anarchism, rather than 'leninism'. but, whatever personal politics, people are still committed to making the best of a current bad situation in the west. no one is really expecting the dissolution of capitalism, tomorrow.

oohh, and for an anti globalisation, pro world parliament, pro world regulation view, try george monbiot. i don't personally agree with him, but he kinda demonstrates that globalism can exist in a different framework. that's why the basic slogan is 'another world is possible.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:52 (twenty-one years ago)

where to now for the seattle new new left, given the inefficacy of the protests, and the possible implementation of the model nationwide? - i don't really have an answer i'm satisfied with for this. non-violent protests are the way to go but the protests are already non-violent and have nevertheless been painted differently by the media becuz of a handful of extremists (this misrepresentation being the result more of sensationalism than any 'doing their master's bidding'), with this misrepresentation in turn giving certain police figures the cover to pursue extreme ott countermeasures. the movement by and large needs an effective leader it can organize behind, that can instill some degree of discipline, and that can effectively handle him/herself on television cuz they need to go on the talking heads shows but they most especially need to go on the rightwing talkshow, to take the issue to them, even if it's just to be another shouting voice (as much as I hate that american politics has become voices shouting past each other), if only to get that viewpoint out there, and they need to anticipate any attempts at being painted as 'anti-american' by the right by painting their stance as pro-american, after all americans are losing their jobs and national sovereignty, including american sovereignty, is being eroded by the wto, an inherently undemocratic institution. as resistant as the american public has been to placing it's security in the hands of an international organization that doesn't answer to them (nate's loonie street corner anti-un protestor to thread) it shoudn't be too hard to provoke their ire at the prospect and reality of them losing their job over a wto ruling. and as much as it reeks of xenophobia and isolationism, it may be wise to revive 'made in the usa'. i do think protests do do some good (they can bring attention to an issue, raise questions even if only via 'why are those people so angry?'), but i would shift attention more toward the worst corporate offenders, holding them responsible for the conditions of all their workers, whether they're 'independently contracted' or not, and work towards passage of laws holding these companies responsible, plus attacking corporations works with american attitudes (less resistance) while attacking america (which is what andrew's 'best case scenario' involves) works against them. also, and this is most u+k, more effort should be made towards informing american workers of their rights and unionizing them. the american workforce is by and large not organized.
in the shorter term they need to make sure the 'miami model' is disgraced instead of emulated by continuing to demand an investigation, bringing lawsuits, and finding a clip of unequivocal unprovoked police brutality it can burn into the american conciousness the way the rodney king clip did or the nathaniel jones clip is now. they need to make diaz regret his gloating as much as bush does the 'mission accomplished' banner. buy airtime if neccessary (and if possible i should add).

and how much does the us attitude to protest differ to other ('northern' countries)? america is incredibly more media saturated than other countries so denting the media is incredibly more difficult. a story that floods the zone is the only one that can be said to truly have an impact on the national 'conciousness', and frankly another 'protestors vs. police' clash, even if this one is different from previous ones, isn't that kind of story. to an extent the media think they already did this story with seattle in 99, to an extent they know the american public won't find it entertaining and television news (which is how most americans get their news) is nearly as much about entertainment as it is about journalism now. this is hardly limited to leftist protest movements either - the only times I can recall operation rescue and it's ilk (who are probably larger than the us anti-wto movement, or at least more vigilant) getting any kind of media attention was in connection to the wave of abortion clinic assasinations in the early to mid nineties.

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:53 (twenty-one years ago)

globalism= creating an extra layer of world regulation. the antithesis of isolationism.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:54 (twenty-one years ago)

For. Against.

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 21:57 (twenty-one years ago)

y'all need some more paragraph breaks, please.

Jeremy the Kingfish (Kingfish), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:01 (twenty-one years ago)

blount now that's what i'm talkin about!!

I totally disagree about sovereignty angle; using right-wing rhetoric to win the argument = you have lost the argument (if u are a leftist)

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:03 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah, i kinda agree there but the current american political landscape allows for so much hypocrisy and flipflopping that i really don't think it would be hard for someone to argue against the wto in terms of it eroding national sovereignty one minute and then argue for a more internationalist approach in american foreign policy the next.

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:08 (twenty-one years ago)

while attacking america (which is what andrew's 'best case scenario' involves

Er, which one's this? My suggestion about how FT appears on the news seems pretty much in line with yours.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:11 (twenty-one years ago)

eh, half of this - "America is preparing to fuck over some more countries/Guess where your job's going next year" - though i think i misread it now

cinniblount (James Blount), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:13 (twenty-one years ago)

When Labor Unions are objecting because of losing jobs to foreign countries, it sounds a bit isolationist to me. Does global regulation include upholding steel tarriffs and subsidized farming?

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:17 (twenty-one years ago)

the keep-jobs-american (or british or whatever) has always been a disastrous rhetorical strategy for the left (as has any kind of pre-emptive patriotism actually)

labour unions shd of course be in close global liaison w.their equivs in EVERY OTHER COUNTRY organising to ensure that global management link-ups aren't shafting them

mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:23 (twenty-one years ago)

i have an honest question about free speech (off topice now so it may not be answered):

can we assume that wreaking havoc in a major city is not protected speech but simply gathering, chanting, marching is?

so, in other words, the minute someone breaks a window, free speech is out the window?

ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:26 (twenty-one years ago)

God forbid anyone should fear losing their job.

What was that about smug sheltered ivy league protesters again?

Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:35 (twenty-one years ago)

Well you are defining the smug part of the equation pretty well.

bnw (bnw), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:36 (twenty-one years ago)

smug, a. Indicative of, characterized by, complacency or conscious respectability.

I live in steel country, so I'd say NOT.

Kerry (dymaxia), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:45 (twenty-one years ago)

"labour unions shd of course be in close global liaison etc" - i do think this is true BUT it of course assumes that unions
i. exist in every other country anyway, and
ii. have access to the same kinds of communications networks that global management do

most local battlers-for-jobs-and-conditions don't remotely have the resources for this kind of strategic awareness sadly

mark s (mark s), Wednesday, 3 December 2003 22:49 (twenty-one years ago)

wreaking havoc= the city was shut down by the police prior to the day. businesses were advised not to open, despite the fact that everyone protesting was acutely aware that the city centre is full of minority shops, and small businesses.

can we assume that wreaking havoc in a major city is not protected speech but simply gathering, chanting, marching is?
'marching peacefully' is hardly protected in the us: much of the rationale behind the police actions in the city was that any unpermitted demonstration is illegal, and that people should thus be dealt with accordingly. disproportionate crowd control (aka the ensemble of guns, tazer shields etc) was justified using this rhetoric. i've been to loads of actions in australia which were both unpermitted, and didn't have the same outcomes. in the days before, groups of more than eight were prohibited from fraternising.

and, as for white college kids being the only ones protesting, the citizen's trade campaign and the aclu have extensively documented brutalisation of people of colour and immigrants arrested on November 20th. i have the email, but i won't post it up, because it's too long, unless people request it.

charles m, Wednesday, 3 December 2003 23:00 (twenty-one years ago)

seven years pass...

Angry voters oust Miami-Dade mayor in special vote a.k.a. angry billionaire buys out political process

Voters in Miami-Dade, one of the most populous U.S. counties, removed Mayor Carlos Alvarez from office in a special vote on Tuesday triggered by popular anger over a hike in property taxes.

With 707 of 829 precincts reporting, official results showed 88 percent of voters backed the effort to oust the once-popular mayor, who is his second four-year term.

It was the biggest such ouster, or recall, of an elected official before the end of his official term since California voters tossed out Democratic Governor Gray Davis in 2003.

A Republican, Alvarez was first elected mayor in 2004 and re-elected in 2008. County commissioners can now either appoint an executive to serve out his term through late 2012 or call a special election.

The Miami-Dade recall bid, spearheaded by a billionaire anti-tax crusader, is the latest in a growing number of similar such attempts across the country to remove officials from office by voters angered by everything from taxes to the salaries of elected officials and union rights.

Miami-Dade County, which includes Miami, is home to about 2.5 million people.

The Cuban-born Alvarez came under criticism last year when Miami-Dade, saddled with record high 12 percent unemployment and the same budget deficits faced by many local and state governments, introduced a property tax increase to help fund vital services including police and public schools.

Stockhausen's Ekranoplan Quartet (Elvis Telecom), Wednesday, 16 March 2011 04:01 (fourteen years ago)

Alvarez was a sleazebag.

Rich Lolwry (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 16 March 2011 12:42 (fourteen years ago)

I kinda support all recall efforts even against politicians I more or less like, because it's healthy for the electorate to be reminded that you actually don't have to put up with the guy you elected if he sucks

five gone cats from Boston (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Wednesday, 16 March 2011 13:41 (fourteen years ago)

the recall of commissioner natacha seijas is way more important imo. she was seen as entrenched in a way that alvarez was not.

elan, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 23:19 (fourteen years ago)

sorry, VILE natacha seijas

elan, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 23:19 (fourteen years ago)

Voters have only themselves to blame (and I include myself) for not doing their homework. Alvarez sucked in 2008 yet he won comfortably.

My own take on the matter.

Rich Lolwry (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 16 March 2011 23:25 (fourteen years ago)

hats off to charles m above for remaining calm and agreeable in the face of ilx at its very worst

NI, Friday, 25 March 2011 11:20 (fourteen years ago)

come to the rally and you'll get anal sex

might have worked on South Beach

Rich Lolwry (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 25 March 2011 11:20 (fourteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.