VARIOUS CONTRIBUTORS
The first sight that greets you as you cross the Pont d'Europe bridge, between France and Germany, is a colourful array of tent on the right (French) bank of the Rhine. This was the campsite.
The first sight that greets you as you cross the Pont d'Europe bridge, between France and Germany, is a colourful array of tent on the right (French) bank of the Rhine. This was the campsite. As you entered, there were a series of improvised but elegant Geodesic Dome frames made out of cheap and easily available wooden rods and pegs. [...] These Domes housed, information centres, a welcome point (where you were given basic directions, and orientations), and spaces where people could put up posters, banners etc. There was also a tent for a round the clock legal team (in case of arrests or legal problems) and a full time medical team. The camp itself was organized in "Barrios", or 'neighbourhoods' each housing approximately 400-500 people. Thus, there was a Marburg Barrio, Barcelona Barrio, a Brandenburg Barrio and so on.
The idea was to coordinate the camp from the grass-roots level by means of the barrio's and the interbarrio. However, this soon proved dysfunctional. Communications were inadequate. Frequently, the various barrio's appeared to be discussing different items on the agenda, rather than discussing the same items across the camp. We feel the main reason for this was the lack of overall direction and coordination. There was an information point where information was gathered, but as it had a facilitating rather than a coordinating task, it proved too limited. The facilitating infrastructure, such as the kitchens, was a lot more efficient. Well-organised groups carrying out set tasks, such as these kitchens, radio, and indymedia are important to the smooth running of a camp. And they proved reasonably well equipped for their tasks. The main issue is how to establish the necessary cohesion to avoid these activities being carried out in isolation. We feel that in the future, without abandoning the fundamental basic-democratic structure, we should opt for a committee which manages or co- ordinates events - or whatever you'd like to call it - and which is given a mandate to take the necessary decisions. Even though this may seem to conflict with our basic-democratic principles, this is not necessarily the case: such a committee would be installed only to oversee that those tasks agreed on by everyone in advance are carried out effectively.
The presence of independent media on the camp has exploded in a spectacular way over the last few years. I am now sitting in the radio tent which has a 50 watt transmitter and netcasts simultaneously, 24 hours a day. There is a double DSL connection (landline), and a wireless WiFi network. The ASCII group [squat.net/ascii] from Amsterdam, together with lots of other net activist groups is offering public access terminals in a special tent. There are a great number of video groups, for instance AKKRAAK from Berlin and Organic Chaos [http:/ /www.organicchaos.org]. There will be a few workshops related to tactical media, net activism, and a debate how to link the freedom of movement with the freedom of communication [see: http://www.dsec.info]. The Austrian Publix Theatre Caravan/NoBorder is here as well with their impressive doubledecker bus [http:// zone.noborder.org/x11/templ/index.php]. The whole media zone here at the camp has been coined 'Sillicon Valley', a somewhat ironical/provocative term because there is some resistance amongst activists against the independent media initiatives. Anti-media elements have accused the net activists of 'sheltering' mainstream journalists. There is a fierce debate going on at the moment about the presence of cameras and microphones.
i really appreciate the economic feel of the whole thing; they go by a flexible-value-scheme. There is a propsed value for general participation - and a tin for money at every eating-place. Actually, the only difference to free software is that it is hyperflexible- value... may elaborate on that some other time. clearly, an athmosphere of freedom.
Actions
On Monday a successful demonstration against the residenzpflicht took place at the European Court, in which many sanspapiers participated. That same night three hotels belonging to the ACCOR chain were attacked and thrashed. On Tuesday night there was a demonstration in the centre of Strasbourg, instigated by the arrests that were made. A number of the demonstrators wore balaclava,s, walls were sprayed with slogans, and the police was said to have fired a tear gas grenade. Guided and protected by the Samba Band everybody managed to return to the camp safely. Many people claimed that from that Tuesday on and in reaction to the events leading up to it, there was a significant change in atmosphere. [...] There was a demonstration against the detention centre for illegal immigrants planned for Wednesday 24 July. But as no one was being held there are the time - apparently the refugees were transferred before the start of the No Border camp, of which No Border was aware - the demonstration did not proceed to this destination. However, a demonstration was held regardless, but without a clear purpose. Of the 500 protesters some 50 wore balaclava, s. Many slogans were sprayed, initially selectively, but later travel agents, solicitors firms and medical practices were also targeted. [...] During that same demonstration the police later intervened with tear gas and the windows of several banks were smashed. i do not like demonstrations in which people run. the police have been amazingly tolerant - so some of our black-bloc-kiddies must have thought that they could go ahead anyway they like. actually, the can! but, the missed the necessity of providing for enough strength and protection for the peaceful part of the demonstration, to protect them. you can't do 'illegal' actions, without proportionally providing for a strong bullwark of protection. people should be able to move at their own pace. people running is not good. (wl)
We feel that once again a limited number of people in Strasbourg managed to ruin things for the rest. This has nothing to do with the use of violence or being radical. Radical practice mean taking one's radical ideas a step further, which can just as easily be done in a completely pacifist way. To make radicalness worthy of imitation should be one of our primary aims. [...] In the course of the week in Strasbourg the number of slogans on buildings increased rapidly (people spraying buildings indiscriminately). In Wednesday's demonstration several people carried large sticks sporting something resembling a flag - frequently nothing more than a piece of multi-coloured cloth. These sticks were obviously brought along for very different purposes indeed. Nameplates, including one at a day nursery, and camera's, for example at the station, were vandalised. These actions were mainly carried out by a group of people wearing balaclava's throughout the demonstration and zigzagging through the Samba Band players, much to everyone's annoyance.
Repression
What we witnessed was no more than standard police performance, a 'logical' and predictable reaction to activities originating from the camp taking place in town. In labelling this 'repression', one should realise that this is a time-honoured form of repression which has always been deployed in response to actions and which is in no way unique. This tale of increasing repression is forever being repeated in certain circles following actions, even when these allegations can barely be substantiated. In Strasbourg a rumour was circulated that a couple of dozen riot police were housed in the Hotel Mercure adjacent to the camp, suggesting that they had been posted there expressly with us in mind. However, according to the hotel staff the police had been stationed there for over six months. Following the electoral victory of the right last year, they had to make good on their promise of boosting the police force. Police was transferred from outside Strasbourg, but as there was no space to house them yet, part of the hotel was rented for them. It often seems as if a number of people are eager to label anything and everything 'repression' merely to underline their own radicalness and the bestial nature of the state in order to facilitate thinking in terms of 'good' and 'evil'. However, this does not alter the fact that compared to some ten years ago we have indeed witnessed a general curbing of the freedom to demonstrate and tougher sentencing with regard to political action.
The Schengen Information System
d.sec/ themes/basic { The struggles for freedom of movement and freedom of communication are beginning to interact. To take the solidarity further, we need an understanding of how both freedoms are being controlled. Demystifying the SIS and visualising virtual borders could be a practical starting point. We need to know how IT tools are supporting virtual borders, and how we can use them for our own purposes.}
The Schengen Information System (SIS) is the central database that tracks migrants, refugees, travellers, asylum seekers and others who come to Europe. It s electronic monitoing apparatus, has turned all of the towns, cities and country side of the Schengen states (France, Germany, Italy, the Benelux states) into one vast border zone that carries with it the illusion of the 'vanishing border'. It is true, that once you enter, say, France, you can pass seemingly effortlessly into any other Schengen state. But what lies behind this apparent ease of movement (if you have the right papers) is the fact that the entire area is now one big networked border check post, and you can be tracked, traced, and checked, anywhere. One of the most interesting groups of people that I came across at the no border camp at strasbourg, was the group that called itself D.Sec [http://dsec.info] In conversations with some of the people of this group, what I found most interesting was their very concrete understanding of the fact that the freedom of movement and freedom of information are related things. That the immigration systems database was a border control system, and hacking the database was as much about freeing information as it was about helping people move by letting them know how much they were being watched, how and where. to my mind, this is one of the clearest instances of political hacking that I know, and it is not about a "Denial of Service" attack, or about some kind of cyber graffiti or website defacement. It is far more fundamental than these kinds of actions that are basically designed as being more or less effective spectacles in cyberspace. d.Sec is about getting to the core of the "politics" of information systems, and that is why I think it breaks significant new ground in the tactical media milieu. Here was an event complete with its own dramaturgy and theatre, 'researchers' dressed in orange and white lab technicians garb, complete with accessible high tech, but easy to use, and inexpensive tools (laptops, digi cams and mobile phones) technical competence of a high order, a clear political objective - (freeing the database) and an utterly confused police which could make no sense of a group of silent, serious looking technicians who seemed to raise no slogans, make no disturbance, speak in no "language of protest" that they could recognize. It was in some ways quite fitting that this recognition of the very political fact of information, of the drawing of links between the freeing of information, and the breaking of borders was taking place at Strasbourg. Strasbourg was the place where Gutenberg pioneered the printing press. And there is a statue commemorating his "freeing of information" close to the city centre. In an earlier visit to Strasbourg some years ago, I was pleased to discover, at the base of this memorial to Gutenberg, a series of bronze plaques, other pioneers of free speech, the printed word and the freedom of expression and information. Amongst this is depicted (Along with the thinkers of the enlightenment, the statesmen of the American revolution, and anti slavery activists) a figure of Ram Mohan Roy (misspelt as Rah Mohan Roy), radical theologian, an early enthusiast of the printing press, liberal thinker and founder of the reformist sect called the Brahmo Samaj in nineteenth century India. Ram Mohan Roy, in the last phase of his life, spent some years in Europe, in England. During this time, he expressed a desire to vist France, to facilitate the people of France on the occasion of an anniversary of the revolution of 1789. He was however, asked to procure a visa by the French authorities. Much incensed by this, "uncivilised" demand, he wrote an eloquent and furious letter, in which he implied that the visa, was a violation of the principles of liberty (of movement), of equality (amongst peoples) and the possibility of fraternity (because it effectively prevented people from fraternizing). I am not sure about this, but my hunch is that this is probably the first recorded protest against visas and border controls in the world. By a strange (or not so strange) twist of history. The demonstration that passed the tiny, barely noticable bas relief figure of Ram Mohan Roy in Strasbourg, was echoing his anger, almost two centuries later. What was remarkable was the fact that they like him, (and perhaps like Gutenberg before him) were equally aware of the fact that the control over information is one of the keys to the hold that power has over people, and that their protest was as much against border controls in physical space as it was against borders in virtual space. This again made me think that it is meaningless to single out the internet as 'New Media'. In its own time, the Printing Press was as much 'new' or 'tactical' media as the internet and computers are today. And just as the explosion of 'illicit', subversive, dissident, anti clerical or even ribald literature that accompanied the proliferation of printing presses in the late eighteenth century prior to and during the revolution of 1789, creating a critical mass of free thinking, so too, the tactical media initiatives of our times could be contributing to a new critical mass of the freedom of thought in our times. The fact that the database was at the heart of power, makes it impossible to think of a technological articulation of info politics as being always radical. It is as central to power as it is to those who oppose power. To either romanticize new technologies of information and communication as being the standard bearers of the coming revolution, or to paint them in the dystopic colours of state and political control is to forget the fact that it is what we 'do' with information that makes it political, this way or that. The computer can be the appliance of the border guard, and it can be the instrument of the border crosser, a lot depends on who uses, which software to which end, how, and why.
