The WOMBLES have lost their way. Four years ago they protected fellow activists, now they attack them. The group has become everything it rejected in 2000 - authoritarian and hierarchical. The storming of the ESF meeting was politically naive. Read on to see why I think so.
The WOMBLES have lost their way.
In early 2000, when the WOMBLES first broke into the wider public consciousness, the group was young, and full of energy and humour. They were portrayed as samurai-sword wielding terrorists by papers like the Daily Mail, yet it was clear even from the Daily Mail's coverage that this was untrue. Like Italian activists Tute Bianca, the WOMBLES wore white overalls and padded up to protect other demonstrators from police violence. Their courage was respected even by activists who didn’t agree totally with their approach or politics.
But how things have changed over four years. Rather than work with other activists, the WOMBLES have purposely cut themselves off from the mass of the anti-war and anti-capitalist movement. They’ve shed their overalls and padding and their sense of humour has gone too. And instead of protecting them from police violence, the WOMBLES have started attacking other activists themselves.
The recent events at the ESF were a graphic demonstration on an international stage of how much things have changed. A masked group stormed into a meeting and broke it up. This was an incredibly naïve move politically. To have a gang in hoods break up an anti-fascist meeting and assault black and Jewish people was a gift for people like Lee Jasper. He used his national profile to paint the WOMBLES as a bunch of racists.
The reasons for storming the meeting were confused. A stated aim was to prevent Ken Livingstone from speaking - but he wasn't even at the meeting! And to try and portray Livingstone as pro-war was ridiculous. He has condemned the Iraq war, he refused to meet George Bush when he visited the UK and organised another event for anti-war activists instead.
The WOMBLES also claimed that they broke up the meeting to protest at being excluded from the London ESF. However, they had announced months before that they were boycotting the event, and in fact set up their own event to run in competition. The ESF didn't exclude the WOMBLES - they excluded themselves.
The WOMBLES even claimed to be upholding the principles of the WSF even though on their website they reject the WSF as reformist and capitalist.
They invaded the meeting like it was the annual conference of BP or Shell, and treated other activists with contempt – as if we were all fat cat shareholders, enemies. Even the Babels group are distancing themselves from the invasion, and write on Indymedia that the reading of the Babels statement and the storming of the meeting was 'a coincidence.'
The WOMBLES accuse others of being authoritarian and hierarchical, yet they acted in the most authoritarian way in breaking up the meeting and imposed their views in a hierarchical way on other activists in the room. They claim that others hijacked the ESF, when in fact it was they who did the hijacking.
The WOMBLES seem to be incapable of working with anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly share their views. They claim to agree things by consensus, yet this only seems to be if you agree with them in the first place.
I expect I will be denounced as ‘SWP’ or a ‘trot’ simply for stating my view. However, the people who make up the anti-war and anti-capitalist movement hold all sorts of views. The way to change views held by fellow activists is by reasoned argument, not by violence.
In early 2000, when the WOMBLES first broke into the wider public consciousness, the group was young, and full of energy and humour. They were portrayed as samurai-sword wielding terrorists by papers like the Daily Mail, yet it was clear even from the Daily Mail's coverage that this was untrue. Like Italian activists Tute Bianca, the WOMBLES wore white overalls and padded up to protect other demonstrators from police violence. Their courage was respected even by activists who didn’t agree totally with their approach or politics.
But how things have changed over four years. Rather than work with other activists, the WOMBLES have purposely cut themselves off from the mass of the anti-war and anti-capitalist movement. They’ve shed their overalls and padding and their sense of humour has gone too. And instead of protecting them from police violence, the WOMBLES have started attacking other activists themselves.
The recent events at the ESF were a graphic demonstration on an international stage of how much things have changed. A masked group stormed into a meeting and broke it up. This was an incredibly naïve move politically. To have a gang in hoods break up an anti-fascist meeting and assault black and Jewish people was a gift for people like Lee Jasper. He used his national profile to paint the WOMBLES as a bunch of racists.
The reasons for storming the meeting were confused. A stated aim was to prevent Ken Livingstone from speaking - but he wasn't even at the meeting! And to try and portray Livingstone as pro-war was ridiculous. He has condemned the Iraq war, he refused to meet George Bush when he visited the UK and organised another event for anti-war activists instead.
The WOMBLES also claimed that they broke up the meeting to protest at being excluded from the London ESF. However, they had announced months before that they were boycotting the event, and in fact set up their own event to run in competition. The ESF didn't exclude the WOMBLES - they excluded themselves.
The WOMBLES even claimed to be upholding the principles of the WSF even though on their website they reject the WSF as reformist and capitalist.
They invaded the meeting like it was the annual conference of BP or Shell, and treated other activists with contempt – as if we were all fat cat shareholders, enemies. Even the Babels group are distancing themselves from the invasion, and write on Indymedia that the reading of the Babels statement and the storming of the meeting was 'a coincidence.'
The WOMBLES accuse others of being authoritarian and hierarchical, yet they acted in the most authoritarian way in breaking up the meeting and imposed their views in a hierarchical way on other activists in the room. They claim that others hijacked the ESF, when in fact it was they who did the hijacking.
The WOMBLES seem to be incapable of working with anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly share their views. They claim to agree things by consensus, yet this only seems to be if you agree with them in the first place.
I expect I will be denounced as ‘SWP’ or a ‘trot’ simply for stating my view. However, the people who make up the anti-war and anti-capitalist movement hold all sorts of views. The way to change views held by fellow activists is by reasoned argument, not by violence.
Comments
Display the following 14 comments