The Battle in Seattle and Beyond

What does it take to create real and meaningful change in the 21st century? We hear an awful lot about it. The political conventions from which I and so many others are still recovering from were chock full of promises that being an optimist I am inclined to believe. Is it sheer numbers, rhetoric, commitment or is it simply the case of an idea whose time has come that is the real catalyst for change. I have spent the better part of the last decade and the entirety of the last two weeks asking myself that question.

In 1999 fifty thousand people, mostly Americans, from all walks of life, marched on the streets of Seattle protesting the policies World Trade Organization. The event was dubbed the "Battle in Seattle" and its organizers were clear in their mission -- to shut the talks down and focus the world's attention on policies that were in fact harming the poor, the sick, and the environment. After the world's attention shifted, I felt there was still more of a story to tell. How did David truly slay Goliath?

The hierarchical top-down nature of the Seattle administration was defeated from the start against a decentralized bottom up foe, which had spent six months organizing using a variety of tools including the relatively new Internet. After the riot-dust had settled, the Rand corporation, a conservative think Tank, was commissioned to do a tactical study of how the police were outsmarted. The book was known as 'Networks and Netwars" and gave me as a film-maker an insight into a Mayor, a police chief, and a Governor who were supremely ambushed by the leaderless consensus-based decision making of the activists, and then took a large shovel and began to dig themselves further into a nice giant hole.

In Denver and Minneapolis I watched as a coalition of veterans, students, activists and others stage a pair of anti-war rallies. In both cities, there were spirited speeches, and an energy in the air. It felt good to be participating and witnessing passionate activism but when I looked around and saw the concrete barriers that hemmed the protesters in and the hundreds of riot police caressing they're non-lethal weapons I had to wonder if we were shouting a slogan or asking a serious legitimate question, without knowing it. Once at the convention center, the demonstrators gave more impassioned speeches, and then it was over. "Mission accomplished" as the President would say.

But I was left with that big gaping question what was the point! Was anyone listening?

In Seattle as you see in my film, there was a clear tactical objective to shut something down. There was an inside/outside strategy that achieved its goal and crippled the talks by the end of the week. Organizers agitated from inside the talks while the demonstrators outside brought the corporate-led agenda of the WTO to the world's attention. Meanwhile tens of thousands of labor union marchers disobeyed orders to follow they're designated march route and joined the action downtown causing even more unexpected headaches for authorities.

What is the meaning of protest besides using your voice to draw attention to an issue -- or is it simply to do just that? Does protest now need to move to the next level to be more effective, like police tactics have, while still maintaining a non-violent approach? Should protest only be about highlighting an issue or should it be about forcing an issue?

Seattle was the first major mass mobilization on the streets of America since the democratic convention riots of 1968. But since those pre-millennium days in '99, demonstrations have increased dramatically worldwide.

On the night of John Mc Cain's speech an Iraq War Veteran managed to sneak inside the convention center and display a sign that said "McCain Votes Against Vets". All Republican eyes were drawn to this single voice of dissent, and most media outlets played the clip of the veteran holding up his sign and McCain appearing flustered for a moment. The crowd began chanting "USA, USA" to drown out this singular voice in the stands, who ironically had done more for the USA than most. McCain then regained his footing by joking with the crowd to ignore the static. But by that stage the point was made.

One individual took the spotlight for a moment at an event where the world was watching. He did it because he was tactical about his protest, deciding to infiltrate and subvert a carefully coordinated speech.

With an overwhelming police force ready to crush dissent at a moment's notice it may be time for new strategies to unfold where protesters issues are forced to be acknowledged by those that have the power to make the necessary changes.

One simple thing everyone can do to take action in the next few months would be to vote for an administration that might begin to listen to its citizens. The first thing it should do to make sure those voices are heard is to focus on dismantling the rampant media consolidation where four corporations own fifty percent of US media. Maybe then the news might begin to cover the issues in depth and begin asking the questions that need to be so urgently answered.

Here's a clip from Battle In Seattle:

Stuart Townsend is the writer and director of Battle in Seattle. The film begins its nationwide run on September 19th.

Comments

[ellawensmom]

Really, really hot, AND intelligent.
Charlize is so lucky...

[ingenue]

Very well-research and factful movie

[kb]

I saw this film at the Cleveland Film Festival and it's very powerful. Loved it!

It also has a great story line involving a husband and wife played by actors Woody Harrelson and Charlize Theron.

[Owlygirl]

Stuart I can't wait to see this. You did a bang up job looks like. You're also very informed and I appreciate that. Thanks for educating us on the topic.

[PlanetKansas]

Protests and revolutions are over rated. Their members are subject to nostalgia and idealism, and the establishment they are trying to overthrow scorns them. Their members are well meaning, but few have spent to time to think through the consequences of what would happen if they actually succeeded.

Hanna Arendt's "On Revolution" surveys all of the revolutions over the past 250 years and concludes that each new government ended up a similar version of the last one. Once the government order is overthrown, the very bureaucracies that kept the taxes collected, maintain public order, generate electricty and collect garbage, must stay in place if anything expects to be accomplished . A government is defined by its bureacracy, and the bureacracies that run the government must survive to get anything done.

Bush failed to see this when he dismantled the Sunni bureacracy and disbanded the army after the fall of Bagdad, and the chaos continues to this day. Putin's Russia has many of the same charactoristics of communist Russia, and digging a bit deeper, there are still relics of Czarist rule in the KGB.

There are sublter routes to effect change, by working directly with the bureaucracy to change it, but it takes time and patience. Roosevelt and Reagan had significant impact on how the government was delivered to the people. To me, Obama has all of the skills, temperment, education, and talent to create a third revolution, a man like this comes about only once in a generation.

[kathy001]

When the bureaucracies stop listening to the people and stop working for the people then further action must be taken. Large-scale protests are often the only way to reach enough of the public to make an impact. This is especially true in view of the news media's negligence and yellow journalism, that is currently running rampant.

While I completely agree with your statement about Obama, he isn't in office yet and, up to this point, it seems the people have had no one to stand for them with the Washington bureaucracy until they make a big enough stink about it that the people in Washington are embarrassed for their failure to step up to the plate.

[situationcritical]

I'm going to see this film.

And I'm not even going to mention how great you were as The Vampire Lestat.

[DjangoBlock]

There has just been a new clip released by Battle in Seattle on their site - www.battleinseattlemovie.com/join

It's an intense little piece that shows protesters (Andre Benjamin, Michelle Rodriguez, Martin Henderson, and Jennifer Carpenter) locking down the entrance to the Paramount Theater on the first day of the protest.

Also, not sure if anyone knows this but they've created a second site caled Who Controls the World that tries to accurately compile a lot of information about the WTO, etc. There are some great NEW interviews with people like Lori Wallach and Jerry Mander. it's www.whocontrolstheworld.com if anyone is interested in checking i out.

[ajax2]

Mr. Townsend, I hope you used some of the tape "Showdown in Seattle" produced by indymedia.org. It's priceless.
Also as an accidental observer at the WTO protest, I couldn't help believing that the security forces were using provocateurs to start or inflame the violence.

[SweetJudith]

My husband and I are most definitely going to this movie!
Fantastic job Stuart!!!
Peace!

[ouroborous]

Odd. I view the WTO riots in Seattle (since I lived here at the time) as nothing less than a colossal failure. Far from getting the "message" across, the world came to view the protesters (rioters) as spoiled children breaking things for the fun of it.

Sadly, most of the protesters seemed to have a much more serious agenda, but that message was lost in the scuffle.

In fact, I would say that this pattern has replayed itself in almost every single protest since then: once things turn more "organized" (read: anarchic, oddly) the world stops paying attention and just sees a bunch of spoiled trustafarians lobbing bricks through windows. This may be a false image, but *this is what people see*.

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I might even theorize that some of the recent violence at protests isn't by the protesters themselves, but by Republican-planted agent provocateurs. But, since I have no way to PROVE this...

I think we would be much better to mimic the civil rights era marches which were organized, huge, on-message, and, for the most part, peaceful. And we must police our own; if fellow protesters start getting out of hand, WE need to rein them in before the police use them as an excuse to do what they wanted all along, and shut us ALL down.

[JasText]

Ouroborous (cool tag by the way-the Great Worm), you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist... I have friends who went to the G8 protests in Padova and Prague, and the violence was inexplicable *unless* there were provocateurs in the crowd, not aligned with any of the peaceful or issue-based groups. Not to mention that the local po-leese were nervous as hell after what happened in Seattle and DC.

The civil rights movement as well as the anti-Vietnam war movement were both heavily infiltrated by FBI and other government operatives, to spy as well as create dissension and division in the ranks. This has been well-documented, but the best literary description is in Thomas Pynchon's wonderful Vineland. Alice Walker's essays also describe some of this. A large, fired-up protesting crowd has always been an opportunity for troublemakers to heave a few rocks; these are usually people who have no interest whatsoever in the issue at hand, and organisers must be extra vigilant to keep an eye out for these types... as well as, sadly, the moles in their own organisations.

[ouroborous]

I think you may have a point. I just wish there was some way to PROVE it. If I were trying to disrupt a legitimate protest, and I had no moral scruples whatsoever, I would do exactly what you say: plant some agents in the crowd to stir up violence. Given that most people will "go along with the herd" rather than confront bad apples, this would be enough to get the whole thing shut down.

One thing that dismays me, however, is how unserious so many protesters seem today. While there are always a handful who are focused, on-message, and serious, many of the "protests" I see here in Seattle seem to be mostly about getting high/drunk and getting laid. This make it really difficult for me to take them seriously, no matter how much I may agree with their supposed message.

There's nothing wrong with being young and wanting to have fun. But folks need to realize that all of this is playing out on the public theater, and an anarchy or party mindset will NOT win converts or soften opposition.

If protest movements are to survive well into the 21st century (and beyond), they must find a way and the will to police their own.

[tompoe]

"McCain Votes Against Vets"

This has to be one of the most understated phrases, yet. Go back five years, ten years, fifteen years, and you will be hard pressed to find two instances where McCain voted with vets. This POW, suffering from PTSD, has almost without exception voted against any and all veterans issues bills. Why? It's pathetically obvious. He suffered, and that suffering has caused him to feel he belongs to an exclusive club of veterans. As it is with clubs, there is the process of Boundary Maintenance, as it is called, at work. McCain's PTSD has manifested in his singular dedicatiion to make sure every veteran suffers as he has in order to belong to his exclusive "real" veterans club.

What we have to fear, is, if McCain wins the election, what other decisions will his untreated PTSD impact? He needs medical treatment, not an election win.

[seadlh]

Yeah, great. Just a shame that to make your anti-free trade movie, you took LA money and talent and went to shoot it in Vancouver instead of, oh I don't know, shooting it in Seattle where it actually occurred, with, mmmm, maybe some Seattle talent.

[pfitzner]

I'm sure the Hollywood moguls weren't lining up to bankroll this project, and it could be shot cheaper in Canada, a place with a long record of being good to film producers.
Other than the use of "they're" for "their", well done, and points well made.
And, my dear, the face! The FACE!

[henrythefifth]

Great job Stuart! Can't wait to see the movie. People, get out and see it! The more of us who go, the more cities it will expand to!

[Brad Listi - Huffpost Blogger]

To read a recent interview with Stuart conducted by the Huffington Post, please click visit this link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-listi/we-are-winning-an-intervi_b_126676.html