2024 Disrupt Land Forces

The process of reflection

This report is an assemblage of the voices and perspectives of around a hundred of the comrades who came to Disrupt Land Forces. Disrupt Land Forces, or DLF, was a mobilisation by thousands of anti-genocide activists against the Land Forces weapons expo held at Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre, or MCEC, in September 2024. There are contradictions and opposing takes throughout this report; an array of truths. Sometimes individuals’ experiences of the same event are aligned, sometimes they are totally disparate. The ethic of non-judgemental acceptance of radical difference, applied to tactics, messaging and visual style during the mobilisation, also applies here. We have tried to fairly and honestly represent all views, including those which conflict with our own. 

All quotes have been drawn from verbal and written feedback offered during DLF evaluation sessions held over September and October 2024. Many images have been de-identified, meaning that we have covered up any visible tatts or faces. This is sad for us, because our people are beautiful. Unfortunately, at the time of posting (January 2024), cops are still actively pursuing comrades who disrupted Land Forces with us, so … safety first. All voices have been de-identified, with pseudonyms reflecting their approximate ages, cultures and genders. Of course, nothing is as good as a conversation, and a written work cannot replace the interactive thinking of our feedback sessions. Words and writing are never neutral and we acknowledge that the perspectives of note-takers, writers and editors are an active presence throughout this work.

Criteria

While each session was different from the last, all were underpinned by an evaluation framework with three key criteria:

1. Effectiveness: We have achieved (some of) our tactical and strategic objectives. 

• Tactical: The weapons dealers and their event will have been disrupted. The passive community will have been disrupted.
• Strategic: Social license to hold weapons fairs in Straya has been smashed. We have boosted the movement wide campaign for an effective military embargo against Israel. The mobilisation has created a period of flux during which contracts are cancelled, and trade desks are closed.

2. Movement Capabilities: The movement is in a better position for the next round of organising.

• There has been a rapid development of knowledge, skills and capabilities for many new committed organisers.
• Comrades have been able to access organising or participating in many new tactics.

3. Sense of Power and Connectedness: People will have built power and relationships. 

• We will have better relationships and more relationships that can take the movement forward. 
• People’s sense of power and connectedness will have somehow held them in the face of repression and harm by the State.

Demands

This report provides a record of the monumental effort we made towards our goals. We offer here our learnings, hot takes and open questions, hoping these may be useful to others in the global movement for peace and justice. 

Principled participation, expansive vision

Vision

A collective vision for the Disrupt Land forces mobilisation was workshopped among core organisers during meetings in April and May ’24. At the public launch on June 21, we were able to present the following goals to the broader community:

• Create a week-long festival of resistance bringing diverse actionists and tactics into joined struggle against the arms trade
• Hold a mobilisation where frontline impacted voices and stories are central
• Make space for cultural, social, tactical and intellectual cross-pollination
• Connect new crews
• Make the harms dealers have a bad time
• Make us have a good time
• Stretch goal: 25 000 people encircle the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre and shut Land Forces down 

This vision was beautifully realised, except for the stretch goal of surrounding MCEC with 25 000 activists.

Media and cops ignored the qualifier stretch goal, deliberately misrepresenting and repeating this figure in alarmist terms ad nauseum. Lesson learned: don’t post stretch goals! Anything that can possibly be misrepresented or distorted, will be. 

All of the actual (non-stretch) goals expressed in our vision were achieved. The first four goals, about connecting, cross-pollinating, uniting and centering, were met and exceeded many times over.

Principles

Our ‘participants agreement’ was very simple. We asked that comrades agree to two rules:

• do no harm to life
• respect other activists

By ‘harm’ we mean physical, material harm. By ‘respect’ we mean a deep commitment to non-judgemental, open-hearted interpersonal communications and interactions, along with all the usual caveats against bigotry or discrimination. A detailed conflict resolution plan was formulated. In the event of immediate harm or intractable conflict, we proposed a ‘council of seniors’ be deployed, made up of people who have been activists longer than twenty years.  We asked that comrades self-manage as far as possible, drawing on affinity group or work team support if needed, and offered a formal community justice process as a last resort. No-one has used the last resort option so far.

We also offered the following principles to guide collaborators:

• No police. 
  • We don’t police each other’s tactics, messaging or appearance. We don’t repress each other.

• Ask don’t tell. 
  • Approach with curiosity not judgement. If you are heaps uncomfortable with another person’s tactics, ask them about what it means for them rather than telling them they are wrong.

• Say yes.
  •  It’s an experiment.  Say yes to new things. Try stuff out. Let’s find out what we can do together.

• Solidarity rules. 
  • Whatever divergences exist between us, we stay united as fuck. We don’t talk to cops, air our grievances in public or spill our secrets to the press.

These principles are harder than they sound. Because of the competitive education system most of us endured and the isolating society we live in, people who grew up in ‘the global north’ are hardwired to criticism and control. Surrendering the illusion of power that comes with policing and judging each other takes conscious effort. Foregrounding solidarity even when we don’t agree with another’s tactics is an underdeveloped skill on this continent. Bringing curiosity rather than condemnation to the table requires, again, a surrender of the colonising impulse to ‘lay down the law’. Saying yes gets harder and harder as the pressure of time starts to weigh in. Our commitment to saying yes, even when the event or tactic didn’t seem possible, kept the collaboration open to new initiatives and creations. We had to abandon the scarcity mindset and throw our trust towards abundance: yes, we can try, yes, there is enough, yes, we are many, yes, there is time. None of this comes ‘naturally’ to people trained under capitalism. It’s deep work.

The organising 

DLF was an open-source collaborative mobilisation initiated by Wage Peace / Disrupt Wars. Wildly disparate collectivities across the antimilitarist movement were invited to participate in any way possible, to protest in whatever ways felt powerful and meaningful to them. We asked only that comrades agree to our two rules: no harm to life, and respect other activists.

 A plethora of Palestine action groups, along with Filipino, West Papuan, Latin American and East African solidarity contingents came on board. Climate activists from Extinction Rebellion and direct action groups put their shoulders to the wheel. The Quakers became a central supporting pillar, offering both the means to rent the Mission to Seafarers for our home base, and running speak out actions every day during the Expo.  Anti-genocide affinities traveled from Kaurna, Ngambri, Ngunnawal, Awabakal, Worimi, Jagera, Djadjawarrung, Bundjalung, and Gadigal country to mobilise with us. Artists offered music, graphics, animations, sculptures and drawing; so much incredible art was created. Hundreds upon hundreds of people answered the call to disrupt the business of genocide.

Minister for Foreign Genocides

Earth care not Warfare

Stop Killing Kids (and everyone)

Imagining the mobilisation began in January 2024 with an open meeting at Camp Sovereignty attended by around 70 people. Outreach to allies began early, with approaches to collectives within the anti-militarist movement to sound out capacity and interest. Gathering our networks and resources intensified through April and May; by June we were ready for a public launch of the Disrupt Land Forces 2024 mobilisation. We met at Black Spark in Northcote, shared delicious West Papuan food and settled in. 

Speakers from nine different impacted communities held the crowd in thrall as they addressed the realities of militarism and invoked powerful intersectional solidarity. A ‘blue sky’ brainstorm followed, where comrades were invited to propose disruptive and creative tactics as though anything were possible.  Tactics arising included traditional actions such as flyering and banner drops, disruptive tactics such as blocks and lock-ons, and one person imagined surrounding the entire MCEC with barbed wire. (As it happened, the police implemented that tactic for us.) Our priorities were articulated, our strength was asserted, our creativity and commitment were affirmed; we were launched.

Several senior elders supported and guided us all year and we felt very held by those people. Each DLF mobilisation was significantly mentored by local and invited First Nations leaders, and each was launched with a truth telling ceremony about the Frontier Wars. For DLF 24, Uncle Robbie Thorpe invited a number of radical Blak leaders from the West and the North, and hundreds gathered at the sacred fire at Camp Sovereignty to hear them. All of us acknowledge that the fight against militarism is in its essence a fight for land back and justice for Indigenous peoples, starting with the colonised lands of this continent (aka Australia).

At the second public meeting we enjoyed an Indonesian vegan feast, then proposed and ratified an organising structure and established teams to work within it. The structure we proposed was this:

Teams were set up on the spot. Energy and excitement were overflowing; teams had to move into the kitchen and the yard to hear each other speak over the hubbub. Around 150 people came, and almost all had joined one or more organising teams by the time we left. Wage Peace / Disrupt Wars had taken the organising lead up to this point. From that night on, we merged into a broad, horizontal organising structure with dispersed decision-making hubs.

The structure was designed around a Core Organising Group or COG, a system that had worked well for us during DLF 21 and 22. For DLF 24 we developed a greatly expanded model. In previous DLF mobilisations, all we had was the COG; working teams were only established when the mobilisation began. This time round, we had literally hundreds of people keen to offer organising capacity. It was awesome.  

The COG was open to all, on the understanding that COG membership entailed a commitment of at least 5 hours per week in the pre-DLF period, progressing to full time work during the mobilisation. Twenty people joined. We were ‘the bottom line’, the people who were prepared to step up to any work that teams were not able to cover. The COG for DLF 24 included senior activists, others who had never organised before, a wide range of ages, genders, cultures and abilities, all united to make the best antiwar mobilisation possible. By September we were a cute af activist family.

The COG managed logistics, ensuring that all other teams had the resources they needed, and served as the communications hub. Each work team was asked to delegate one person to the COG; a spokescouncil model. Work teams were empowered to self-organise ie to make their own decisions about the work, using the COG space to seek collaboration and coordination. Decisions that impacted the entire mobilisation were discussed in the COG, however most of the decision making happened within the teams. 

Surrounding the COG was the ‘Collaboration’ space, where delegates from each of the collectives participating in the mobilisation were invited to share info and ideas, seek support and co-organise events. This pool of anti-genocide activists was a great resource for the teams. People could road test an idea, image or message in a space populated by over a hundred anti-militarist comrades. We held open the possibility that affinity groups might take action independently of the DLF network, adding elements of surprise and disruption during the mobilisation. Many autonomous affinity groups were also represented in the Collaboration space.

The bike is the mobilisation. The COG, or front cog, powers the Collaboration, the rear cog. The Collaboration drives the Community, the wheel. Autonomous affinity groups, represented as ninjas, provide extra power, the wind at our back. The bike is a riderless, collectively powered machine sprinting towards our goal, to Disrupt Land Forces. 

The COG, Collaboration and Work Teams model functioned like a well-oiled bicycle. Of course, there was cross-over and double up, but mostly there was a massive amount of connection, learning and creativity. 

I’m happy I was involved. I learnt so much. It was my first time organising and I felt inspired by all the amazing people. I connected with lots of new activists and learnt heaps of new skills.

Sandy, 16

The collaboration was super inspiring and amazing. We were able to connect with groups that aren’t always easy to talk and connect to.

Kyra, 27

It felt like more was possible than at other protests. 

Tati, 28

War crimes start here.

War crimes start here.

Our emphasis on decentralisation and our resistance to allowing the COG to act as a ‘management committee’ meant that some people felt alienated from ‘decision making’. 

PASA [Philippines Australia Solidarity Association] felt that organising structures were not available to us… it was not clear how PASA would fit in and where the decision making would be for them.

Carl, 61

Most of the decision making took place within work teams. The teams were empowered to act as they saw fit, within the framework of the mobilisation principles, towards our goals. Once the mobilisation was underway, however, we implemented a quick decision-making process within the COG (5 to agree with no dissent = pass) so that we could respond rapidly when needed. This process was rarely engaged, partly because the DIY ethic of the mobilisation was heartily embraced by comrades, partly because work teams handled most issues autonomously.

The DLF organising model is great. Even under duress, it worked beautifully.

Turtle, 60

The part that didn’t work was the participation of the affinity groups, represented as ninjas on the diagram. We left it open to the ninjas to communicate with the COG about their plans, or to act entirely independently. None of them communicated any plans with the COG. We had socialised the idea that blocking the bump in was the ideal action for affinity groups to take. Only one group succeeded, when the Lizard car was deployed on the Westgate exit ramp on Saturday 8^th, delaying deliveries to Land Forces for hours. 

Lizard Car held Westgate off-ramp to the Melbourne Convention Centre for 2 hours on Saturday 7 September, delaying dozens of deliveries and causing set-up to run late.

During evaluations, we asked ourselves why was there no communication from affinity groups to the COG? Why did the affinity groups not take action during the bump in? There were a few autonomous interventions, at the port, at ALP offices and on the Westgate, but as a movement we did not manage to significantly block the bump in. The war mongers bumped in the big guns (tanks, missiles, killer robots) between midnight and dawn on Saturday 7th, unopposed. We wondered if we might create a ‘ninja liaison’ group next time, to attend in person meetings and handle face to face communications. Closer connections may have facilitated a more collaborative involvement. We don’t know why affinity groups did not achieve more independent actions, we only know that we did not feel that wind at our backs as we were cycling towards our goal.

Will this be the Lizard’s last deployment? The story of Lizard car began on Arabunna country, where Roxby Downs and the Olympic Dam are poisoning country. This action was taken in honour of the late Uncle Kevin Buzzacott.

“The colony must fall.”

Read on:

• Part 2 – Mobilising
• Part 3 – Resisting
• Part 4 – Enduring

To comment on, edit or add to this report, email disruptwars@proton.me

The picket

The picket called for 6am on Wednesday September 11, the opening day of Land Forces, was the event that attracted the biggest crowd, and for many comrades defined their experience of the DLF mobilisation. The police brutality unleashed upon us on that morning was overwhelming and was accompanied by over 75 random, highly aggressive arrests. Police raids and further arrests are still occurring at the time of writing (December 24). 

Over the course of that Wednesday morning, activists tried out an array of tactics to block, disrupt and dispirit the weapons dealers entering the expo. Many comrades described the morning as chaotic, confusing, frustrating and ultimately disappointing. Others report a sense of elation, especially in the early period of the picket, and describe the energy of the scene as electric, amazing, empowering.  People attempted to address the vicious policing they were encountering and to stay active: to disrupt traffic, hold spaces, keep themselves and friends safe and to open movement opportunities for others. It was complex and dangerous terrain. Some people felt distressed or concerned by an apparent lack of coordination or clarity on the ground within the community of gathered activists. A major source of discontent for many comrades was the realisation that Socialist Alternative, or Salt, were ‘in charge’ as the group leading the event. 

I thought it was highly unfortunate that Socialist Alternative were in control at the crucial 6am beginning of the Wednesday blockade. I don’t know how that happened or if it could have been avoided but I think it should be prevented in future if at all possible.

Anna 26

One aspect of direct action that people need to learn about is that it requires a high level of trust between comrades for it to be successful. It is particularly crucial that comrades are able to trust the people leading the action. It was not appropriate that Salt had exclusive leadership over the 6am Wednesday direct action. They are the least trusted political grouping on the Australian far left. 

Carmen 23

DLF organisers have heard and reflected on these criticisms in our own spaces and with community in our evaluation sessions. We want to offer here some notes about Salt’s participation in the mobilisation, an iteration of the ways we tried to mitigate harm, and some thoughts about how we could have done better. 

By the time of our launch of the Disrupt Land Forces mobilisation on June 21^st, Salt was already organising in the space and had announced a picket and rally for Wednesday September 11. We do not control the space of protest, nor would we attempt to. Our way of working is to provide resources for different communities to work together, to encourage collaboration and also to remain open to the possibility of independent / autonomous actions. We do not see ourselves as the bosses or the managers of the mobilisation, more as hosts or facilitators. DLF collaborators had no power to require another group or person to NOT deploy a tactic or run an event. Still, it was not ideal that the necessary coordination for such a large singular tactic shifted away from the collaboration to the organisers of that event.

Salt attended the June 21 meeting launching the mobilisation and appeared willing to work collaboratively on the mobilisation. Post-meeting, however, collaboration was limited to one Salt organiser communicating with one DLF organiser. We asked several times for Salt to meet with us, both inviting them to our meetings and offering to go to theirs. This was turned down. We sent suggestions about managing police tactics; these were ignored. 

What should we have done? What did we do? 

As we got closer to Land Forces we became increasingly nervous about the prospect of police violence during the Wednesday morning event. Our more senior organisers were very worried. We convened a meeting of DLF organisers to consider how to mitigate the harm we predicted would be inflicted during the picket. As one comrade commented,

The picket needed a lot more tactical thought, planning and an effective strategy and what was sought to be achieved, both in terms of physical disruption as well educationally for people who were not there. 

Kara, 28

DLF organisers did not take on the role of planning an effective strategy for the Wednesday picket; it was not ‘our’ event. We did, however, give the event some tactical thought, with a harm minimisation lens. We suggested that people deploy in pods of 10-15 people, that pods approach from multiple directions, stay away from the crowd, avoid police lines, take care of each other and remain alert to threats and opportunities. We hoped that by mobilising in groups dispersed out across the zone, and by steering clear of police lines, pods might find ways to be disruptive without experiencing riot cop and police horse charges, chemical and projectile weapons and baton beatings. Many people tried out the pod idea, with varied success; this tactic is discussed below.

There are a couple of things we identified, in retrospect, that may have enabled the movement to make better decisions about the picket.  We could have made it much clearer that the Wednesday picket was a Students for Palestine aka Salt event. We could have organised our own event on the Wednesday morning, at the other end of MCEC, giving people a choice about which group to work with. We could have organised to go to a weapons corporation that morning, staying completely away from MCEC. We regret that we did not identify these possibilities ahead of time. We were all dismayed to see our worst fears realised and exceeded on the ground. As one person noted

There was significant discord between Salt and the anarchist groups organising. It seemed like a strange coalition to lead an action this important, when these groups can’t effectively communicate with each other or have a united approach. Salt was splitting the crowd in their usual way, which meant the risk for remaining people was even more amplified. 

Kara, 28

Many activists were critical of Salt’s leadership during the picket, while others criticised the use of the term ‘picket’ for the event.

I was horrified by the brutality. I’m so angry at Salt. They should not have called it a picket.

Phaedra, 36

Salt should not have been allowed to run the main rally.

Alba, 62

Salt set the blockade up for failure. Their entire strategy consisted of yelling at people to run in a particular direction with no explanation. All that running and yelling did not achieve anything. It did not educate anyone. It did not build trust or solidarity. It just threw things into confusion. There wasn’t even a proper sound system, only megaphones. I don’t know if Salt brought a proper PA or not but the megaphones were not loud or clear enough to properly convey instructions. The incoherent yelling mainly just raised tensions. 

Sami, 37 

There was no PA system or other effective way to communicate with protesters.

Colin, 66

In terms of commitment, I rate today [Wednesday 11] at 10/10. For leadership, minus 50. There was no leadership.

Tariq, 47

DLF organisers had not planned for a picket but had tried to socialise a strategy of disrupting the bump in rather than blockading the building during the expo. We knew the police would have the building locked down and were concerned about how vicious the police would become if we challenged their control of the space. Understandably, people were drawn to confront the weapons dealers face to face, and the picket drew thousands of activists. The successes and failures of tactics used that morning gave rise to fruitful discussions in the evaluation sessions. The lack of orientation and communication was mentioned by many. Then, amid the chaos, there were moments of elation:

You were bloody marvellous.

Hannah, 75, who watched it on TV.

We made good work on the gate at the front entrance and broke it down. If we had had the whole crew (like we had at 7am) we actually could have stormed in and vandalised it before they start arresting everyone.

Piotr, 51

I loved the moment that the fence was taken down.

Marta, 32

I ended up on the bridge with a small group, yelling at delegates. Being part of a collective action felt very important.

Eddy, 24

Taking Wurunderi Way was amazing. The energy was incredible. There was real power, I can’t describe it, it was … incredible.

Sally, 60

The Crown and DFO were actually important pinch points because of the disruption to non-involved parties. Closing down DFO was a significant disruption.

Zazi, 33

After I was arrested I could hear the police on the radio talking about all the different challenges they were facing from us and that was empowering. It made me aware that I was a part of something much bigger. 

Lily, 28

It was overwhelming but I felt connected to the other attendees, I felt we had each other’s backs, I felt secure enough to find my voice, lead chants for the first time ever, and check on people who were having a tougher time. I am proud of everyone who participated. I am excited to think of creative measures to have a bigger impact.

Percy, 33

There is a question and a tension arising from the picket experience about authority or leadership. What sort of authority is required to move a section of the crowd, who may be difficult to move and are likely to be following “someone with a megaphone”? What happens if someone sees a real opportunity? How do they build the authority to move a part of the crowd or encourage the movement of part of the crowd? At one point Zazi wanted to move people from the bridge around to the Whiteman Corner but didn’t feel like she had the authority to do so. Would ‘picket captains’ be the answer to these questions? Would we need a ‘quick decision team’, where a small group is empowered to lead a crowd into opportunities and away from threats?  How do we organise a flat but not leaderless structure, where people are cooperating in large sets or groups and some people are given the ‘authority’ to move sections of the crowd? Organisers reflected on these questions at length; the conversation is ongoing.

The knowledge related to experiential street protesting is greatly underestimated; we need to find ways to draw on that knowledge better.

We never got to have the discussion or workshop or thinking space about how to split up the crowd as necessary and take different spaces. 

With whom would we need to discuss that beforehand? Would we set up a consultative group of some kind? 

Celia, 59

Clearing that big intersection was a priority of the government.  Training and preparation were necessary to hold that big intersection, and to move people from one place to another. 

Jason, 42

A lack of clear organisation and direction meant that more injuries and arrests took place, but I was impressed with the occupation. It was clear that police orders were to clear that intersection. The Public Order Response unit was able to make advances, and I think it’s clear that with more organisation we could’ve held that intersection better.

Colin, 66

I think DLF marshals are needed, who hold people to account to “do no harm” but also stay on chats and help marshal us to spread out.

Zazi, 33

One person suggested linking arms to create a human wall. This was tried by some comrades at the picket, but did not slow down the steroid fueled riot police charges. It’s worth considering all tactics, however; where we don’t succeed, we can learn, where we succeed, we can also learn. 

The advantage of traditional blockade tactics of linking arms in lines three deep or more is that it builds a solid, united bunch of people. Sometimes that kind of solid human wall is enough to repel police violence. And even if that bunch of people get brutalised by police, at least they have had the experience of having gone through it together, not as isolated individuals running in every direction. 

Mark, 34

This was our first attempt of addressing a big event – disrupting that MCEC space – for most of us. So there were things we really learned. 

Carl, 22

Other aspects of the picket are considered in sections on the violence and pods. A mobilisation is a multi-activity, multi-tactic event built upon a base of community to drive a campaign forward. Many people’s experience of the week-long mobilisation was limited to the Wednesday morning tactic, which may indicate a limited imagination about “mobilisations” as intensive strategic periods of action. The mobilisation ran from Sunday 8 through to Friday 13, including First Nations truth telling, frontline stories, workshops, marches, a motorcade, speak outs, a vigil, a rally, a canoe intervention, a zombie dance event and a smoking ceremony. There were moments of radical honesty, joyful community, connection and staunch resistance throughout the week. We want to honour the strong feelings comrades have expressed about the picket and also hold the beauty and power of the whole of the mobilisation in view. As we go through arrest support and court processes, we hope to consolidate our commitment to everyone impacted and strengthen bonds of solidarity. 

The pods

A tactic we invited people to try during the picket was to mobilise in groups of 10-15 humans, or ‘pods’. We suggested that each pod self-organise with an appointed ‘watcher’ who would look out for threats and opportunities. We asked pods to approach MCEC from a distance, from dispersed locations, and to avoid police lines. A couple of hundred people tried the tactic of mobilising in pods, with some success and much failure.

We workshopped moving and acting as a pod over the weekend at Seafarers, emphasising care, noticing strengths and staying attuned to vulnerabilities in the pod. Workshoppers identified the very young, the elderly, people of colour, anyone whose movement is compromised, and very tall men as among those who might need particular care within their pod. (Police and other thugs often pick on tall men). 

The crew from Ngunnawal country arrived and activated as a pod throughout the mobilisation. 

This model worked really well for us. We went to the training at Seafarers and that helped us think about how to move as a group, how to ensure everyone is safe. Our pod is still connected and organising together now. 

It would have been good to have a way to communicate horizontally, across all the pods. Maybe in future each pod can have a burner phone, all connected together in a Signal chat, so that we can give on site updates, call out for help, say where we are and stuff.

Misha, 28

Pods becoming affinity groups and affinity groups becoming pods was the goal DLF organisers were aiming for, and the Ngunnawal crew had a great experience of pod-forming. Misha identifies a key issue regarding communications, however. With pods dispersed all over the protest space, how can we coordinate and draw on our collective power when we need to? We had hoped that the Telegram chat would serve that purpose but it didn’t. The absence of horizontal – or vertical – communication was especially hard on the people at the picket, where both our effectiveness and our safety were compromised.

A number of people felt that pod mobilisation was a good idea that had capacity to grow, and that it was worth trying further. 

The pod idea was okay. It didn’t work because it really was not fulfilled or expressed possibly.

Iain, 26

It’s going to take time, building community and practicing those skills in small groups, how to move and behave and take initiatives. It will take education and time and practice.

Maz, 57

I was welcomed to an anonymous autonomous pod. We were able to decide who is and isn’t arrestable, we shared PPE and legal aid details. We stuck together for the first few hours of 11/9. I eventually felt empowered enough to break off from them and engage with strangers in the crowd. 

Percy, 33

We should stick with the pod idea. Come and practice! and we’ll have it nailed in the future. 

Marigold, 54

We needed a way to communicate between the pods. Each pod needs to be in relationship with the other pods. Maybe each pod could have a colour, a flag, a way to identify. Maybe each pod could have a comms person to join an in-action spokes council.

Zazi, 33

Small groups could be effective while bulk of police were busy with the big group.

Vlad, 51

Various people felt that the pod idea had failed, overwhelmed by the large crowd, the megaphones and ultimately by the police violence.

The pod idea didn’t work because people in smaller groups got left vulnerable.  People got kettled in small numbers.

Lily, 28

It takes time to know people in a pod.  Frankly, it didn’t work.

Ahmed, 40

People will follow the megaphone.

Yiannis, 35

Once things got really hectic it was impossible to stay connected as a group of ten, it was more like groups of 2 or 3. That was all we could manage, to look out for one or two other people.

Sandy, 16

We need a leadership team for a group 1000+ people, not a DIY into pods. People did not stick to their pods, if they formed one that day. We all congregated together which I think is safer and it’s what people are used to.

 I found the pod idea to be useful to group stragglers so they don’t feel alone, and they have someone to look to and look after, and loners are less likely to quit and head home. 

We should keep doing this pod idea but make it localised, like “Mernda line pod”.

Anna, 26

We tried a new thing and this has generated learnings. Did the pod idea work? Not really. Might it work? With more preparation and a solid internodal communication system, maybe? Having one person from each pod tasked with communications, and networked with all the other pods, was one idea circulated. Other suggestions included using a spokescouncil system during pod mobilisations, using flags to call a council or to signal other initiatives, preparing pods more thoroughly and in a coordinated way, using large rallies to practice mobilising as pods, forming into pods a month before a mobilisation, basing pods on locality and developing an overall strategy for pod deployment.  Most comrades felt that mobilising as pods could be fabulous, but that we need to practice and modify the design. For now, we are keeping pods on the table of possible tactics for future mobilisations.

Read more:

• Part 1 – Organising
• Part 2 – Mobilising
• Part 4 – Enduring

To comment on, edit or add to this report, email disruptwars@proton.me

The violence

When spray paint on a window is diagnosed as ‘violent’ in public discourse but the beheading of toddlers is constituted as legitimate ‘defense’, we feel that the term ‘violence’ has lost its meaning. Regarding protest, the ‘peaceful’ versus ‘violence’ frame is a narrative trap set for us by mainstream power holders. The more we use time and energy disputing what is and isn’t ‘violence’ amongst ourselves the more successful their trap has been. At DLF we choose not to step into this trap. 

Rather than ‘peaceful’ versus ‘violent’ we use a frame of ‘harm’ and ‘care’ in our organising. We foster an ethic of community care and we centre this in all our spaces. We ask that comrades ‘do no harm to life’. We ask that comrades engage with each other with maximum respect and – stretch goal – in a spirit of revolutionary love. Even at our most vulnerable, such as during the extreme policing of the Land Forces expo, we saw a community praxis of care that was extraordinary. The way people stepped up to protect, assist and look after each other during the police assaults of September 11 gives us hope for our future.  

Many of the acts police referred to as ‘protester violence’ were in reality part of a spectrum of care that was selfless, tireless and ultimately very effective. Leaning in to the protester tactics described by media outlets as ‘violent’ we discover acts designed to protect community from police attacks. People placed their bodies or bread crates up against the horses to prevent trampling or enable safe movement. Rubbish bins were set on fire to deter a police charge with those horses. None of us hurt a horse or another human. Not one. Throwing soft projectiles like eggs or tomatoes, verbal heckling, setting fires and using our bodies as a barricade to protect our comrades are tactics some people don’t relate to, and this was reflected in our evaluation sessions. Our ethic is one of non-judgement of other people’s tactics; discussion is great, cancellation not so much. We only note, here, that none of these tactics caused harm to life. Any injuries to police were self-inflicted, with officers accidentally spraying each other, hitting each other and falling over themselves.

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

Meanwhile, deals to displace First Nations peoples, destroy their lands and murder en masse were going ahead inside the weapons expo. The most egregious harm at Land Forces was the genocidal commerce taking place within the concrete box that is MCEC. 

The police brutality on Wed 11 Sept showed how determined the State of Victoria was to enable this lucrative murder trade to take place.

Sasha, 64 

We forced the State to show its hand. Its hand looks like 2000 paramilitary goons firing projectiles, trampling and beating us. This is the reality of militarism, revealed in its all its gory expenditure.

Caroline, 55

The structural harm playing out inside the Land Forces expo was complemented by the material harm police inflicted upon our people. Police used batons, capsicum spray, hard foam bullets and stun grenades to attack activists who were seated or who had fallen down, who were in wheelchairs, holding children, administering first aid to other activists, or who were simply present at the protest. Some of us felt that police used the Land Forces event to conduct a real time training session, to ‘road test’ weapons and combat-style policing.

 A disheartening and gross feeling was the reality that we kinda became part of the expo with the deployment of those weapons, we became an on the ground showcase of crowd control.

Rose, 30

Police used it as training practice, deploying their riot squads and projectiles.

Napi, 32 

There is no way in which we contributed to the assaults. I was on the road and I saw different groups doing different things. I stand by everyone’s actions. They put on all those extra cops so that they could use military weapons and practice against civilians. Even with all the attacks against us, it was incredible and amazing to be there. I’m proud of our people. 

Marigold, 54

The brutal actions of police at Land Forces left hundreds injured and everyone shaken. The anger and grief continue to rise in us two months later. September 11 has become a watershed for repression and also for resistance. We have had many conversations and will have many more to evaluate the tactics used on that day. Activist aftercare continues, with emotional, material and legal support crews all held in the powerful embrace of the grassroots antimilitarist movement.

The violence was horrendous. It was hard to notice how much it affected me until the next week.

Sebastian, 23

I’m really angry about the terrible cop violence.

Ahmed, 28

The police violence was really scary for me and my friends, it was overwhelming. I feel sad about it. I was worried that the violence on Wednesday may have deterred people from turning up. I don’t think it will deter people from turning up but it may encourage people to be more strategic about how they turn up, and how to reduce harm. 

The heavy repression felt overwhelming. There were so many cops. They want us to feel that it’s not worth it, they are punishing us so that we give up. Being at the Seafarers was an amazing counter to that repression. The the coming together of community is beautiful.

Sandy, 16

Going into the mobilisation, DLF organisers knew that police would attack us at the Picket event on September 11. People did not expect the array of weaponry and military tactics police deployed, however; nobody expected the coordinated shield advances, baton charges, grenades and shootings that occurred. We were appalled as we watched and experienced the police harming our community over and over again. Organisers had attempted to mitigate police harm by suggesting deployment in ‘pods’ and to stay away from police lines. The pod tactic was somewhat successful (see part 3 of this report), however the level of cop brutality set the agenda for both the picket and its representation. The mainstream media, predictably, normalised the militarised policing operation while dehumanising us.  Back in the real world, dealing with the extreme policing and heightened surveillance took and continues to take a lot of activist time and energy. This is an intended effect of policing-as-repression. 

Organisers considered engaging in liaison with police prior to the mobilisation but decided to leave that decision up to the various event organisers. A few comrades suggested that marshals or police liaison people may have been effective in mitigating police attacks on September 11.  

Not doing liaison contributed to this over reaction by the cops on the Wednesday. Police liaison is an obligation. You have to carry the police with the movement; change has to include police. To walk away from it is dangerous. They got to use the event to try out crowd control weaponry. 

Duncan, 82

Some responses to this point:

In other pickets I have seen police liaisons get pepper sprayed. Their ability to mitigate police attacks is very limited.

Bella, 44

I think police liaisons can be very helpful but in some circumstances like Wednesday it would have made no difference to the brutality, it just would have made the police liaisons vulnerable.

Yiannis, 35

DLF organisers liaised with police about one event, the Motorcade on Monday 9^th, hoping that liaising would mitigate police harassment along the route. Our liaison was completely fruitless. Police harassed and humbugged every single set of wheels on the road or off it. All our liaison achieved was to give them a heads up about the route, resulting in heavy police guards at all the weapons corporations of inner city Naarm. A police liaison / bunny buddy was the first person to be arrested during the mobilisation, in relation to the Lizard car block of the Westgate Bridge. We do not believe that deploying police liaisons or marshals would have led to a reduction in police brutality. 

There are upsides to the harmful repression we experienced. First, the multiple expressions of mutual aid both on site and ever since September 11 have created and cemented bonds within our community and demonstrated how beautifully we are able to support each other.  The practice of care as solidarity was exemplary throughout the DLF mobilisation; more on this below. Secondly, our picket forced the state to reveal its commitment to corporatism and militarism through its vicious defence of the Land Forces expo. Last and not least, the deployment of thousands of militarised police in the centre of Naarm was in itself highly disruptive. 

Working smarter, not harder, is the challenge we face at future arms expos and other large targets. The successes and failures of the four hour picket on Wednesday 11^th are fertile ground for activist learning and planning. We will never outgun the police, nor would we try to. We can, however, outsmart them, and we frequently do.

After the brutality of Wednesday September 11, it felt like we had more traumatised people than we had arms to hold them. At that point, we hoped that others in the broader community would step up to care for the injured and distressed; many did. One comrade asked,

How could we have even bigger arms to catch all the people who were in distress? We didn’t quite manage to hold all the people. 

We needed to prepare people for the repression. At other mobilisations we have held sessions to prepare people. Maybe that would have helped.

Celia, 59

As often happens after an episode of police brutality or state repression, some people looked for a person or collective to blame, holding other activists responsible for the harm instead of directing anger at the authors of the harm, the police. This was extremely disheartening for DLF organisers, who were ourselves injured, arrested and distressed by the police overkill. We invite community to reflect on our responses to brutality, study ways of resisting repression, and use crisis as an opportunity to double down on solidarity. We expect state repression to increase as climate impacts worsen and wealth disparity passes ever more ridiculous extremes. Let’s be ready to hold each other. We are going to need those ‘even bigger arms’ to survive end stage capitalism.

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

The care

A core goal of DLF was to foment communities of care. We met and exceeded this goal. The level and degree of care offered by everyone to everyone was the most heartening and hopeful facet of the mobilisation. Deep respect and radical altruism were present on the streets, at rallies, at Camp Sovereignty, in our homes and at our basecamp at the Mission to Seafarers. We welcomed new activists and established campaigners alike to eat, learn and mobilise together. We worked together to solve problems with humility and grace. It was a joy to be in our spaces. It is affirming to see that despite the shit and violence and chaos of the world, we know how to put community care into practice and foreground revolutionary love. 

I found it easy to connect with people. It was easy to come in as a sort of individual.

Drew, 50

Seafarers was an amazing space, where relationship building was enabled and happened.

Cass, 22

Seafarers felt like home, our community’s home. I loved being there.

Tati, 28

People were peaceful and caring and contained. Seeing that sense of community has really affected me.  It’s what I want to be doing. It has drawn me into wanting to be doing this, making this work my focus.

Sebastian, 23

The kitchen! Every time I entered the kitchen a different crew was in there chopping and cleaning and stirring. 

Nour, 27

We built nice connections with new people, full of care and nurturing.

Sandy, 16

The kitchen team managed to feed a hundred people twice a day for seven days. Meals were tasty, nutritious, plentiful and 100% vegan. DLF organisers prioritise eating together as a foundation of all other work. Sharing food energises and bonds us. Sharing food during meetings and mobilisations is normal in much of the global south and across diasporic communities in the north. We want to normalise sharing food as a protest essential here in Straya. The kitchen team did a vast amount of work prior to and during the mobilisation. Their work anchored us in daily shared spaces of rest, recovery and sociality. The kitchen team deserve every kind of celebration.

Another team we need to single out for major gratitude is Naarm Frontline Medics. This crew was already beloved by the movement, having shown up again and again to care for people injured by police. When the police went ballistic on September 11, Frontline Medics were there to hold, treat and comfort us. Here, we quote from the Medics’ own reflections on the mobilisation.

We were involved from the very start, so we had very established relationships and were able to help with decisions and thinking things through. This was a great thing for us. There was some well organised decon [decontamination]; the medics appreciated being brought in early. And it’s good to see a genuine commitment to aftercare and reflection. 

On the Wednesday there was a second self-organising group of medics not doing real well in the space. We’ve encouraged [Salt] medics to get training but the collaboration is poor. One thing we learnt is that the best thing for us medics is to not change our plans when there is a clash between others and our own organised crew. 

There were some real problems with the way the other medic team was working.  A big thing was people were spraying saline on peoples’ faces, which spreads the OC spray as the water washes it down the body (potentially hitting incredibly sensitive areas).  You need to wipe OC off, not squirt it away.

People were also spraying peoples’ eyes without properly opening them, which spreads the OC around the eyes more and also pushes it around the face.

And another big thing is that we always encourage people to remove casualties from the area where they were hit, to reduce the trauma and also prevent further harm from taking place.  But too many people were left at the front, very close to horses and violent cops, instead of being moved a little further back for safer care.

There’s more, but those are the big things that can have a really negative impact on protesters and create additional work for medics.

Cam 44, representing Naarm Frontline Medics

The care team were limited in number but boundless in their offerings. The main role played by the care team was collecting arrested people from custody and taking them wherever they needed to go. We can’t overstate the importance of this work. Exiting the cop shop to find a friendly face offering hugs, treats, a lift and a chance to vent or cry mitigates the harm of being detained and sets us up to recover well.  Some of the care team mobilised at our events also:

I was acting as part of the care team. I didn’t really process what was happening emotionally at the time, but reflecting later it was very powerful to have been standing in front of police lines handing out snacks and water, and making sure everyone had the watch house number. It felt like it sent a strong message to the police as well as providing community care.

Naomi 37

Whatever else we did or didn’t manage to do, our caring praxis was exemplary. Some of the care was coordinated, through the kitchen, medics or care team. Then there were multiple spontaneous acts of care. Picking up an injured person, showing another activist a new skill, ensuring that wheelchair users were not trampled by cops, sharing all that we own and all that we know: these actions show us who we really are and what we are capable of. This was a major success story of the DLF mobilisation.

Acknowledgements

This written work was made on Gadubanud, Wadawurrung and Wurundjeri lands. We acknowledge the sovereignty of First Peoples on this continent. We lament the harm caused by ‘the British Empire’, its military invasion and its continuing colonisation. We are grateful for the support and radical perspectives of Senior Elders on this continent. We thank Mob in Naarm and across this beautiful, tortured land for staunch, ongoing resistance to genocide. Always was, always will be Aboriginal land.

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

Organising the Disrupt Land Forces mobilisation involved hundreds of carers, cooks, creatives and co-conspirators. Visual and performing artists gave freely, coders and writers used their words, people took time off work, some people even skipped school to join our resistance community. We aimed to spark communal connections, to prompt interrogation of militarism on this continent and to smash the social license of the weapons industry.

We aimed high and we reached higher. Our resistance was represented by media outlets all over the globe – Japan, the UK, Colombia, Lebanon, Argentina, the US, India, France, etc etc – and dominated national news here in the colony called Straya. The weapons trade survives on secrecy. The harms dealers do not want their existence or their fortunes exposed to public scrutiny. Thanks to our resistance, every social or traditional media reader in Straya learnt that a large weapons sales event was taking place in Naarm, and that thousands came out to vehemently oppose it.

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

Media coverage is one type of ‘success’. The torrent of learning, listening, dialogue and exchange that flowed from our June 21 launch has not stopped flowing. Bonds forged in shared struggle and resistance work will endure far beyond the bank balance of a weapons dealer. The anti-genocide movement in Naarm were joined by activists from many other towns and cities; we were a national mobilisation. The astonishing warmth of the space we held at the Seafarers was, for many, the highlight of Disrupt Land Forces. To be at Seafarers was to experience a constant state of becoming, transforming, creating and exchanging. Our temporary mutual aid community established trust quickly and held it firmly. The speed with which we developed this solidarity economy is possibly a more significant ‘success’ than any of our ‘actions’. Seafarers gave us a glimpse of life beyond capitalism. It is a world worth fighting for.

No Caption

No Caption

No Caption

Read more:

• Part 1 – Organising
• Part 2 – Mobilising
• Part 3 – Resisting

To comment on, edit or add to this report, email disruptwars@proton.me