Since this thread doesn't seem to have much traffic, can I hijack it to ask some hopefully relevant questions?
1) What do you hope to get out of a big demonstration?
2) Do you think that the kind of demonstrations seen in the past are helpful to this goal?
I am guessing that there are two general answers question 1, along the lines of:
* To show people that the way that they live need not be accepted as inevitable and to get them thinking about this; and
* To persuade them that an "anarchist" (or other) lifestyle is preferable.
This then leads to MY answer to the second question:
* No, I don't think that, for example, the 2000 demonstration was remotely successful to these ends. In fact, I think it was actively harmful.
I think it constituted a Good Day Out for those involved and allowed the participants to enjoy the illusion that they were helping to "smash the state". However, I think that for those not involved, it came across as a bunch of petulant hippies with a big chip on their shoulder and who didn't really understand how the world works that just wanted to disrupt people. You think people are impressed that their office windows were put through or that their favourite shop was grafittied? Or do you think that this just put their backs up and turned them against the demonstrators?
Now don't get me wrong -- I don't think that those involved actually were a "bunch of petulant hippies (etc.)". But I think that is how it was perceived, because anybody not directly involved in the movement had the message entirely filtered through the mass media, and this is how it was interpreted for them. And this wasn't helped by the actions and events that were chosen as a demonstration.
If you want to win hearts and minds, this is not the way to do it.