Glenn's little ugly blog

Photo by Leona Shanana

Here's a crazy idea: What if the city of Vancouver and VANOC had officially sanctioned dissenting views and activist events?

It would be a pretty strange and delicate move to make, but I wonder what it would look like if activist events had been included in the Olympic plans. Delicate because they would need to legitimately give the activists the space and respect to reach a real audience, without being deliberately pushed off into a corner somewhere.

Just imagine if VANOC had listened to protest groups and sat down with them to coordinate promotion and safety for their events. They could have included the protests and other activist events in the official event listings, bringing a bigger audience to the events, legitimized them, and made them a safer and more fun time.

I definitely don't mean an allowance for dissent through the use of "free-speech zones" or other schemes that hide protests so far away from the rest of the event that the activists are only talking to themselves. That's what usually happens, and only exacerbates the frustration felt by activists. I also don't mean a government-sanctioned PR presentation of some of these issues.

This idea is probably crazy, and neither group would have likely agreed to it, but sometimes crazy ideas work.

Communities that exist because of geographic boundaries (like a city or neighborhood) are composed of many different people who think and feel many different ways. The residents of Vancouver are not all patriotic sports fans who drink Coke and eat at McDonald's. Even making the slightest effort to present the fullness of Vancouver would have gone a long way to making the Olympics more interesting and true to who and what we really are.

I mean, the protests and events are going to happen anyway. Couldn't we make something more positive out of them?

Photo by NevynNoir

Today I took part for a while in a march to try to being some attention to the tragedy that is the Canadian Seal Slaughter. When the march turned into a vandalism spree by kids in masks, we rolled up our banners and went home.

I don't see much point in destructive protests. They don't really convince anyone of anything, except that you're willing to break things to be heard.

But what I'm interested in is why people become destructive as a means of protest.

There are probably quite a few reasons why marches like this turn violent. One quite obvious one would be that it's fun. The rush of adrenaline is exciting. It's the same as doing anything physical and dangerous, like playing hockey or football.

Quite probably many of the people who knocked over newspaper boxes and smashed windows today did it because it was exciting. They may have felt like they were doing something and standing up against a greater power. Many of us have respect for the underdog who takes on the mighty, against all odds. It's what most action movies are based on, not to mention sports movies and even a whole lot of our favorite history stories.

It's important to note here that I am not trying to justify anyone's actions or excuse them. I feel strongly that we are all personally responsible for the choices we make. I have had trouble trying to discuss this issue because people appear to feel that I am justifying the protesters' actions, but I'm not.

Calling their actions "infantile" is counter-productive, I think, because it simply continues what I see as a real root cause of the violence: not being heard.

There is a huge difference between being allowed to speak and being listened to. We have a great deal of freedom to speak our mind here in Canada, but what we don't have as ordinary citizens is much of a way to ensure that we are heard.

From the local level to the federal level, politics dismisses a great range of perspectives and voices. We are allowed to send our petition to the government, we are allowed to speak at city council meetings, but we are not made to feel that what are saying is truly heard or considered.

It would be strange for protesters to risk arrest for such large amounts of property damage, so I would assume they are acting out of personal conviction (unless they were planted by the police or VANOC to instigate confrontation, which is somewhat doubtful, although possible).

They may have been trying to intimidate people into agreeing with them, but considering the scale of the Olympics I would more readily think that they were trying to get their message out, and chose tactics that would send a message to the Olympic sponsors and organizers that would be heard. If you want to reach the heads of corporations, what is more effective than a message that costs money?

Again, I don't agree with the tactics, and I have nothing to say about the goals or objectives of the protesters. What I am interested in here is seeing some real discussion of the reasons for such actions. How are we all complicit in the vandalism and threats of violence? How are we complicit in systems which let people speak but don't give them a real voice to be heard?

Here are some links to coverage of today's madness:

• Miss604: Vancouver 2010 Protests on Day Two
• Straight: 2010 Heart Attack disrupts Vancouver on day two of Winter Olympics
• NowPublic: Vancouver Olympic Protest February 13 2010 Turns Violent
• Vancouver Sun: Seven people arrested in police protests

The circle (photo by Amanda Daniell)

Last Saturday I hosted my first Open Space event. It was a gathering of people from the Vancouver-area animal advocacy community. I've also written about the event on the Liberation BC blog.

Looking back after a week, the event seems to have been a success. I suppose the real success of the event will be if it has made the community stronger and if any benefits to the community come out of it. A big challenge will be developing from this single, possibly quite isolated event into a culture of collaboration.

It's nice to come together and be in a room with lots of people you pretty much agree with. You can talk openly about what you believe, you can really "talk shop" without boring anyone, and you feel understood.

Even if that's all this event did was let people feel good for a day, that itself is valuable. People working in this area often don't feel supported by friends, family, and co-workers, and coming together with like-minded people can serve as an important reminder that we are a community, that there are other people working on and caring about these issues.

But, an event like this becomes really valuable when new connections are made that carry on into the future. It becomes valuable if it opens up the web of connections and enables us to more easily and readily work together for common goals.

Looking over the feedback from the people who attended (about half of the people who attended responded to the online survey asking for feedback), they seem to have liked the Open Space format and being empowered to choose and lead their own discussions. I think that doesn't happen enough in any part of the animal advocacy movement. So often we go to conferences and hear from experts, we get asked to take action as part of some big organization's campaign, we are enlisted as supporters and we don't "own" any of the decisions.

If we can build collaboration into our local activist community, can it potentially make us stronger and more able to respond to the complex challenges that working on behalf of animals presents?

Many of the issues people had with the event had to do with logistical elements of the event, such as the level of noise in the room and the length of breaks. The next time I plan one of these, I think I will make sure that there are breakout rooms, rather than having multiple small circles in the one large room. Also, I hadn't set aside an actual lunch break, but I think a break from intense discussion midway through the day would have helped everyone relax and renew their energy for the afternoon.

Some people expressed concern that the people leading the sessions may not have been experts or "qualified" to lead a discussion. My only answer to that would be that with complex questions, often passion and willingness to take the lead can be more important than expertise or knowledge.

Some of the attendee comments about what could be improved for next time included finding a solution to the noise level of the room, more breaks so that the day is less hectic and there is more time to absorb what was just discussed, more efforts to include minority communities, a shorter time frame, and putting attendees in contact with each other through a shared contact list or online forum. (A forum has been set up on the event website for anyone to use.)

I think that there were some people who were uncomfortable with the dispersion of control over the event. We all come to these sorts of events with our own ideas about what should happen, about what we want to get from it. But, not everyone is going to see it the same way as us. With a "normal" conference, we go to listen to people speak and we know the agenda before-hand. It has been set for us. Being uncomfortable with that normalcy being pulled away is completely normal – and actually healthy. Getting through the discomfort to where we are comfortable with being open to what happens, to exploring and listening, leads to a healthier and more vibrant community. And a stronger one too. But it is uncomfortable.

Of course I had my own agenda in organizing this event. I wanted to empower people to take the lead in their own activism and in working together towards becoming more effective individually and together, as a community. I deliberately framed the event as "animal advocacy" because I wanted it to be inclusive of all people working for animals – whether or not they agree on everything. My goal is not to get us all to agree, but to know and understand each other better and, if possible, find ways to work together.

One of the really interesting aspects of organizing this event was finding a way to create an open and inclusive event that empowers people to find their own voice and learn from each other while still meeting my own goals. It is difficult to resist the urge to control the event, to influence the sessions posted by the attendees, to exert some sort of structure to the agenda, to move sessions around to fit in with my own ideas of categories.

Now, going forward, how can we keep building community while working to become more effective and powerful? Many people want to do more events like this, and I'm going to be meeting with people in the next couple of weeks to talk about what they need and want. Some smaller, more focused events around specific issues might be interesting, or possibly a world cafe focused on animal rights and visions of goals. Really, the next steps should form out of what the community wants and needs, and the community really just means all of us.

If you have ideas or suggestions, please feel free to post them in the comments.

I just took a 3-day course with Charles Dobson, who wrote a fantastic book called The Troublemaker's Teaparty. The book is a distillation of his years of experience doing activism and public interest organizing.

There are chapters on choosing and running campaigns, running a group, media advocacy, and pretty much any area of grassroots work that you can think of. If you are doing any work in this area, this book needs to be on your bookshelf. It's almost impossible to underline the important parts, because almost every sentence is important!

If you'd like to check out what he has to say before buying the book, have a look at The Citizen's Handbook. The Troublemaker's Teaparty is essentially the revised and updated edition of the older Citizen's Handbook.

Either book will likely be of value to Americans, but it is focused on grassroots activism in Canada, so there are some significant cultural differences. Any US organizations that are trying to work across the border in Canada should probably pick up a copy if only to be aware of the different tactics that are effective in Canada.

On one of my favorite albums, "Blazing Arrow", Blackalicious raps:

Passion
The will to win, the spark within
Passion
The strength within the hearts of men
Passion
The drive to press, to strive for best, to rise
You've just arrived the quest is driven through
Passion
To play through pain and love the game
Passion
To break the chain and blaze the flame
Passion
The fight for rights to love your life, to rise
You've just arrived the quest is driven through
Passion

Being an activist is hard. Devoting my life to a cause that may not be won during my lifetime is incredibly hard.

It's so easy to give up, to spend time doing enjoyable things like hiking, watching movies, reading, or traveling. Staying healthy and leading a balanced lifestyle is important – but I think that it's very easy to avoid the work of activism by indulging in pleasurable activities.

Of course, our passions don't all lead to the same place. Some people are passionate about the outdoors and others are passionate about art or writing. But our passions can always be used to fuel activism – such as environmental activism for people who are passionate about the outdoors.

Paul Rogat Loeb wrote one of the best books I've ever read about activism: The Soul of a Citizen. When I'm feeling overwhelmed by the daunting task of working for animal rights for the rest of my life I grab my copy, flip it open to a random spot, and read for a while. I can usually find something in there that inspires me.

For instance, Paul Loeb writes about Susan B. Anthony, who fought for her whole life so that women could vote. She never saw a victory, and died unsuccessful. Did she feel like she was a failure? Maybe, but that's really unimportant. What is important is that 14 years after her death women were granted the right to vote in the United States (4 years earlier here in Canada). That victory could not have happened without all of her work.

Can you imagine how much passion she had for her cause? And what if she, and all of the other women (and men) who worked for so long, had given up?

One of the biggest lessons I learned from Soul of a Citizen is that we all play a part in a movement – and we may not see what that role is or the value in it at the time. But it's vitally important that we keep working at it, since all of our efforts combine to produce eventual victory.

Keeping our passion alive so that we can continue to work towards animal liberation without burning out is very important. The issues that face us have faced millions of other activists before us, and are not enough to stop us. We are working together, whether we know it or not, towards a better future. Just keep on standing up and speaking out, keep the passion burning, and never give in.