Of course, you managed to get your view from the very worst event of the day.

One way to influence how groups organize is to get involved in the organizing process. I'm not sure if you've done that or not, but a lot of groups organizing operate on consensus, where everyone has a say in the final decision. Rather than complaining in a public forum about how other people aren't doing what you want them to, it might make more sense to get involved and be a part of the actions you'd like to see. This was far from the only event of the weekend, which you may or may not be aware of. Just my opinion, take it for what you will.

Mike: Organize, don't complain. Showing up with a fancy video camera does not constitute organizing.

Local organizers made a deliberate choice not to hold a mass mobilization because THEY DON'T WORK ANYMORE. The cops have outgunned us so we need to go back to the drawing boards to devise new and innovative strategies and tactics. last night, 50 people were at Wolfowitz's doorstep, screaming and chanting. Tonight more DIRECT ACTION tactics will take place. Mass mobilizations are passive and ineffective. Its time we step it up a notch and lay it to them in other ways.

Four pics, two of the chicks, one that shows how small the group was.

AP went out of it's way to show the small turnout of less than 20.

Of course, maybe there's a small turnout because it simply isn't a very compelling argument. The World Bank and IMF protests are and were about 10 years too late, coming on the tail end of reforms to address the very issues that the protests raised. Both organizations have been steadily improving their awareness of the environmental and social damage that international development can cause if done poorly, and as a whole they have lowered poverty rates and increased the health and lifespan of communities and workers around the globe.

There remains a pressing need to bring greater democratic accountability to any global agencies that wield as much influence and resources as they do, but I rarely hear that point well articulated at these events.

And then there's the ridiculous irony that so many of these protests are front-lined by individuals claiming to be anarchists. News flash: a great number of World Bank and IMF initiatives are aimed at reducing state-owned enterprises that are providing dismal services and are run by authoritarian regimes. And at the public policy level, the typical initiative is to make government more responsive to democratic change and to push more power down to the municiple/community level.

it's over. i went to the critical mass. there were only 15 people there. the afternoon protest also had about 15 people. the wolfowitz protest had 30 people tops. 5 years ago there were 1000's of people. no one cares anymore. i am going to sell my bicycle and buy an suv and re join society.

what is going on today (sunday)?

imf/wb protester arrested for possession of a electric cattle prod "stun gun" what was he going to do with that?

How is this posting not a personal attack, complete with images of those Mr. Flugennock is attacking/trashing?

One more mass mobe, with too few experienced people and too many misunderstandings, won't make much of a difference.

Last September the MGJ feeder march had 3,000 people; the breakaway march had c. 1,000 people. But too many of the people involved were unfamiliar with the city, too few had maps, too many though the police had opened fire, etc.

We have many people getting involved and showing up at mass protests, but they are showing up without the needed skills, and if they don't pick up these skills at mass protests (and who does?) then they should pick up these skills at other events like the Farragut Squares planned.

Some needed steps don't make pretty pictures.

Correction:

"too many *thought* the police had opened fire." don't ask me why they thought that.

This was a "direct action only" mobilization! Instead of a 3000 person march past empty buildings, we focussed on keeping delegates awake, breaking up their parties, and keeping them away from corporate lobbyists by forcig upgraded security.

Ten years too late? I was at my first IMF protest in 1998, and 2000 was 6 years ago! The IMF and World Bank are only pursuing refroms trying to save their own asses now that so many people and nations oppose them.

If "Anti-globalization" is a failure, how do you explain half of South America deciding to make a sharp left turn and reject the "Washigton Consensus." I'm sure Bechtel executives expelled from Bolivia consider us all "too" sucessful!

<i>how do you explain half of South America deciding to make a sharp left turn</i>

Half of South America is not taking a sharp turn left, at least not in any substantive way that meshes with what we think of as the left with basic social and economic justice, freedom from state repression, and democratic community empowerment. What we have in South America is a new group of demagogues taking power by using vilifying the United States and the Bush regime as a way to justify their decidedly undemocratic and repressive policies. It's no different than Bush's co-opting of 9/11 and use of straw men and fear to do the same here in the United States. Just because a regime says that it's leftst and attacks the US doesn't actually make it leftist or any friend of the peace and social justice movement.

The fact is that the forces of globalization: growing free markets and lowering trade barriers, coupled with the greater personal and cultural interaction that comes with opening trade and borders and improving transportation inrastructure, is alive and well in South (and Central) America.

Moreover, with it we're seeing a rise in wealth (yes, across the population), lower infant mortality, longer lifespan, and greater literacy and education levels. I'm not saying heavy critique and addressing the potentials social hardships that can come from rapid economic change isn't required. But you don't get anywhere constructive if you only tell half (or less) of the story, and the fact is that the forces of globalization have helped with many of the issues and values that we are concerned with on the left.

It's not just a matter of protest tactics, it's a matter of being more reasoned and thoughtful in what we advocate and oppose. Something to consider: many, *many* of the people in the World Bank--and yes, including people in positions of power within the institution--are working their with the same goals that you are protesting about outside. They work at the WB because they are interested in poverty reduction, improved health care, and raised access to education in the areas of the world in greatest need.

All of which is to say: put a little more critical thought into who you declare your enemies and allies.