What follows is a recent dialogue between boring anarco types with nothing better to talk about (the names have been changed, honest!) [Jan '97]
Harry Hack: 'I get the feeling that I'm gonna get a lot of stick - nonetheless direct action has to be knocked off its pedestal of revolutionary right-on-ness -'
Tinkerbell: 'Why?'
HH: '"One demo does not a successful campaign make" ... nor do the stunts of non violent direct action. Direct action has a host of problems among them.'
Tinkerbell: 'Stunts are only one form of DA'
Nobby: 'DA does not have to mean masked up people trashing a machine; it is any action that an individual or group undertakes without any mediation from those in authority'
HH: 'Yeah but what about elitism ?- who can take part in these actions - who has the time? who'll look after the kids while the participants are banged up? who can afford being nicked? is the action worth the time taken? what else could be done when we're sat up a tree?'
Tinkerbell: 'DA isn't up a tree. DA is anything from putting up a sticker to ...'
Nobby: 'Why is it elitist? People are free to choose what they want to do. Individual or small group DA can complement mass action.'
HH: 'To be effective, a degree of clandestine organisation is necessary - not in itself a bad thing but problematic in building an open, growing movement which is the context that the current wave of DA is being used in. For actions like mass pickets, clandestine organisation is often more confusing more than anything else. Clandestine activity in an armed struggle, or in reprisal actions, is necessary - but our movement is not at the size at which such actions become necessary or useful. Economic warfare campaigns like the ALF's are a different ball game.'
Tinkerbell: 'But the green movement has an interest in the economic effects of our actions - eg. hitting Costain's in the profits.'
HH: 'Stunts [for which clandestine organisation is necessary] may be useful as part of some larger campaign - but more often than not substitute for hard work on the ground.'
Nobby: 'You're equating stunts with DA'
*HH: And what about trust in the filth [cops / bailiffs / security] - we put ourselves in vulnerable positions and then complain when we get a kicking ...'
Tinkerbell: 'if you're vulnerable at the same time then that's the price of being able to directly contest what's going on - realistically, how often are we in a position where ...'
HH: 'Better to choose when to attack when numbers and terrain are on our side [eg riots].'
HH: 'And trust in the media is a bad idea - particularly when stunts are reduced to media actions as the actual effect on the particular project we're fighting against is minimal. There are problems here with media specialists and movement gurus.'
Tinkerbell: 'Good point!'
HH: 'Greenpeace [International] started off as a group engaged in direct action ... and look at the bloated bureaucratic state its ended up in ... not the best advertisement for direct action.'
Tinkerbell: 'This is a different thing! Greenpeace decided to emphasise elitist forms of DA and passive forms of support - anyway Greenpeace is a cheap shot - it's not DA as I know it'
HH: 'Direct action has many forms however - and certainly, when linked to strong industrial or community campaigns [e.g. in support of the Liverpool Dockers, or against the M11] it can highlight and strengthen the campaign. But then we have to face the question of how do we build communities and industries of resistance, where direct action, with mass participation can really challenge the state and capitalism. Without mass participation DA is a delusion - a new variety of an 'in game'. This process is hard. There are no shortcuts. Racism, sexism, domestic violence, homophobia and machismo have to be confronted. Organisation in the communities and workplaces left to rot by the trade unions and so called community organisations needs to be built anew in forms that don't fuck people over. Knowledges and skills have to be shared to empower millions of working class people. The people who are excluded from the 'scene' as surely as they are excluded from the 'benefits' of capitalism need to be reached out to and learnt from. Most of which is unglamorous as fuck and gives little opportunity for sitting round and claiming personal 'good revolutionary points.' But given the choice between voting and this - which one will you choose?'
Nobby: 'What a f***ing rant!'