We finally agreed, through a collective and democratic process, that the banner that united the scores of organizations and thousands of individuals was a strict commitment to nonviolence, defined to include no property destruction. After that collaborative and democratic process, a small number of protesters who had boycotted those meetings took it upon themselves to break that solidarity. In the most sectarian way, they put their small numbers up against a mass movement. We think it was totally unfair for a small, unrepresentative group to use a massive, peaceful protest as a venue for destructive actions that went against the wishes of the vast majority of protesters. We are far less concerned about the glass that they broke than about the sense of collective unity that they attempted but failed to shatter.
Some people say it was the window-smashing that made the protest a hot media story.
I completely disagree. It was the nonviolent protest that stopped the WTO meeting in its tracks, and that was the big news. Many of the protest organizers were on national news shows talking about the real issue the undemocratic, dangerous nature of the WTO until the window-smashing diverted the media's attention. Changing the structure and rules of the global economy will require a mass movement based on messages of compassion, justice, and equality, as well as collaborative and democratic processes. And while it is crucial to debate tactics, it is the struggle against the WTO and its corporate beneficiaries not internal struggles that should command our greatest attention, commitment, and passion.