NEW YORK CITY, February 15th--Although MIM Notes attended the demonstration against the war with Iraq in New York City, we have no idea how many people attended. All that we know for certain is that it spanned more city blocks than any rally ever attended--thanks to police tactics addressed in another story on this page. Undoubtedly, the demonstration was one of the largest in New York history. A reasonable estimate would probably require a satellite photo.
We handed out 2500 copies of the February 15 MIM Notes. The crowd reaction was quite favorable, many saying "oh, good." One young womyn stopped to look at the graphic of Bush speaking and laughed.
One anti-communist passed by and said, "Maoist? Oh great, Mao would have shot us all." In actual fact, Mao (the leader of China from 1949 to 1976) sponsored many demonstrations of millions against U.S. wars. While Huey Newton attended those demonstrations in China, he said he felt safe in front of police unlike the situation in the united $tates.
Our critic tried to raise a counterfactual situation. China under Mao never occupied part of Iraqi airspace and threatened it with war as part of getting leverage over Iraq's oil resources and Saudi Arabia. Thus there are two ways to avoid having to repress anti-war movements: one is to avoid the predatory wars that cause the demonstrations to begin with, which was Mao's solution, the solution of socialism to remove most of the economic causes of war. The other is the approach that the united $tates uses, which is to say it does not repress anyone when it in fact does.
On the way up First Ave., demonstrators chanted "This is what democracy looks like" at intersections especially choked by police. Some demonstrators carried a black- painted coffin with the words "democracy" and "free speech" on the side.
Throughout the day, demonstrators chanted slogans that the streets are theirs, and implicitly not the city government's. There were countless confrontations between police and demonstrators. No one arriving at the demonstration had a clear picture of how to arrive at the rally or where to go. There were no maps and the police simply lined too many blocks for anyone to get the overall picture.
It was possible to march in certain areas just because of the size of the
areas cordoned off, but most blocks were actually closed. Typical was one
demonstrator being hassled by police: "I'm just trying to get a sandwich," he
One of the most often seen leaflets at the rally was about civil rights in
the streets. Legal monitors appeared to take notes and inform people of
their "rights." One page of a leaflet titled "Know Your Rights" was most
useful. It pointed out that people had rights on the sidewalks, but that the
police had the authority to close streets under the current judges'
interpretation of the law.
In fact, what judges occasionally say is of little use in the streets where
officers take matters in their own hands through ignorance or malice all the
time. However, the American Civil Liberties Union did leave the phone number
for the New York Complaint Review Board, 1-800-341-2272. The New York Civil Liberties Union passed out the leaflets.
At some point, the U.$. population is going to have to ask itself why more
than 200 years after the Bill of Rights passed police still think they have
the right to stop people carrying paper signs on sidewalks (see story on page
6). While the ACLU tries to support civilian police review boards, at some
point the public will gain enough experience that it will know that the
system simply cannot deliver what it promised in the "Bill of Rights,"
especially the First Amendment--except for the people who never try
their "free speech" rights by disagreeing with the government.
Today the government spends billions on repression, instead of organizing the
global economy for economic harmony and prosperity. It simply does not know
how and does not care to know how to solve the underlying problems leading to
repression, which is why the united $tates has more people in prison
percentage-wise than any other country. That is why the libertarian world pointed to by the ACLU does not and cannot exist.
Something that most Amerikkkans have to get used to is the fact that
chanting "free speech" does not make it appear in practice. The First
Amendment is as clear as day and part of the highest law to which all other
laws are supposed to be subordinate, but the courts and police create
fabrications to get around it. There was some irony in seeing ACLU pamphlets
dropped from the sky and all over the ground as police cleared streets and
prevented demonstrators from associating.
The real question is the question of political power. It's impossible to have
free speech while some people have strong motivations to kill others in wars
for profit. If there are governments willing to kill for oil, of course those
same governments are willing to repress free speech for oil, if need be. Just
as the united $tates required a horrible repression of plantation owners to
get over slavery, the united $tates cannot have real free speech until it
addresses the underlying motivations that the rich and rulers have for
promising and not delivering free speech. In contrast to the hypocritical
U.$. government, MIM says openly that we will have to repress some people to
create conditions necessary for freedom of speech some day.