Justin Elliott’s latest report on OWS deserves careful reading. He begins with a photograph that appears to show a protester tackling a cop. The photograph appeared on the front page of the Washington Post.
The photographer says the photograph was not representative of what he saw of the protest. Indeed, without knowing the context, we can’t say for sure what the photograph is showing us. And Elliott stresses over and over again that the enormous majority of OWSers are committed to nonviolent protest.
However,
I’ve observed elements in Zuccotti Park who seem set on unnecessary confrontations with police in ways that go beyond civil disobedience. Around 11 p.m. on Oct. 10, for example, a small band of about 60 or 70 protesters set out on an impromptu march toward Wall Street. This was not endorsed by the general assembly; there didn’t appear to be any plan. There was no apparent media presence besides myself and one other reporter.
The group seemed to be led by a few over-excited young guys wearing Anonymous masks or bandanas over their faces and included many people bearing red-and-black anarchist flags. (A couple photos from the march are here.) The marchers were much younger on average than those sleeping in the park. Some of them appeared to be well under 18 and simply along for the thrill. Marchers walked aimlessly through the streets around Zuccotti, banging on the roll-down metal gates that protect storefronts after hours. At one point, for no apparent reason, a young man wearing red and black broke a large wooden police barrier and threw it in front of a car stopped at an intersection on Beaver Street. No police officers witnessed this moment; I’m certain he would have been arrested had the NYPD been around.
Eventually the march attracted a large contingent of police officers who occasionally ventured into the crowd to threaten people with arrest for wearing masks. The group ultimately wound its way back to the park without any major incidents. But I could imagine these adventurist types causing problems for Occupy Wall Street down the line.
“When you have such a grassroots movement, those people are going to come,†said Ted Actie, one of the early participants in Occupy, when I asked him about the incident. “You can’t do anything about it. We can tell the media that’s not Occupy Wall Street. 99 percent of it is non-violent.â€
Yes, you can do something about it. You can have leaders. You can have ground rules. You can make it clear that those people who are unwilling to accept the rules will be expelled from the movement. It’s been done.
It’s always a minority of over-excited young guys, you know. That was true of most of the antiwar demonstrations during the Vietnam era. Most of the people in most of the demonstrations were nonviolent. It was just a minority of over-excited young guys (and a few young women, but mostly guys) who committed acts of violence, but the violence is what everyone remembers now.
This same unwillingness to take direction, to show respect to the cause and one’s fellow demonstrators by not being an attention whore, is also at least 60 percent of what went wrong during the Iraq war demonstrations.
I think OWS has been incredibly lucky so far. The media gods have mostly smiled on it. But, children, it’s not good enough to tell media “that’s not Occupy Wall Street” when you aren’t willing to draw any other parameters around Occupy Wall Street, other than being a bunch of people occupying a public plaza. And when the violent ones are identifiable as “elements in Zuccotti Park” even by someone like Elliott, who is sympathetic to the cause, don’t expect media or anyone else to believe you when you say “that’s not Occupy Wall Street.”
My suggestion is to at least ask everyone who is staying on the plaza to sign a pledge to take direction from the group and commit no acts of violence. Then, be willing to confront and denounce anyone who doesn’t abide by the rules. Otherwise, those few over-exicted young guys will sink OWS just as they’ve sunk nearly every other leftie demonstration since MLK died.
maha,
I couldn’t agree with you more.
And there’s nothing stopping people, if they’re willing, or even want, to get arrested, get arrested.
In NC when I was involved there we had , as we had with NYPIRG back in the late 70’s-early 80’s, classes on civil disobedience every couple of weeks so that folks could get trained on peaceful resistance, and a peaceful way to make your point by getting arrested.
Sign a pledge: No violence, period ! Unless attacked first with deady force. That’s DEADLY force, not a vacant cop car sitting there, or a policeman looking at you crosswise.
Hold people to the pledge.
If you don’t follow it – goodbye! We won’t speak well of you after you’re gone because we’lll assume you were a Conservative ratfucker. Sorrry, but we can only go by actions, and if you can’t follow the rules, you are out, and forever thought of as a ratfucking scumbag.
No, “Sorry about that…
No, “If’s and’s and but’s…”
If the movement means something to you, follow the rules!
If you can’t, how am I supposed to decide whether you’re just an asshole, or a ratfucker.
And why should I have to do that? You knew the rules. I’ll just assume you’re a ratfucking asshole and be done with you, focusing my time on the people who really care about the movement.
Police yourselves. Believe me, there are a lot of people out there hoping you’re too weak to do that. And they WILL take advantage. You can bet your life on that.
A few years ago a study was done which revealed that the majority of al-Qaeda foot soldiers joined because they were lonely, yes, lonely. (I’d add bored and/or to give themselves an ‘identity.’)
I suspect those whom Elliott observed in the Park were there for similar reasons. If true, it should not be at all that difficult to rout them out – after all, it’s not like their leaving would violate or compromise any cause for which they were fighting.
They might be more willing to listen to your suggestion if you stopped referring to them as “children”.
If they can’t respect an old lady’s opinion, they can bleep themselves, dearie. Most of the problems are always caused by white guys with a fairly privileged upbringing, college-age or not much older, who weren’t told “no” nearly often enough when they were children. I’ve seen it too many times. And they aren’t going to listen to me or anyone else no matter how I address them.
The Capitol protestors in Madison made a strong effort to police their own and keep things non-violent, not only because we knew how Faux News was spinning things, but also because most of us are aware of the Sterling Hall bombing and how it tarnished the whole anti-war movement 40 years ago.
Without any context, may I respectfully propose the possibility that the guy in the photo tackling the copy may have just seen his wife or girlfriend maced or beaten with a club. In fact, in the photo you see a young woman right next to him who appears to be crying. And IF that’s the case and I were him, I’d have a hard time restraining my rage. The urge to kill that pig would be very strong.
No interview with that guy in the photo? Probably because he’s in the back room of the police station getting beaten to a bloody pulp.
In view of all the violent attacks on the crowd by club-waving storm troopers, I’m impressed by the remarkable restraint shown by these “children.” I don’t know how they do it.
It seems like the NYPD white (brown?) shirts are paid thugs working for JP Morgan Chase, who is apparently paying their salaries:
http://www.disinfo.com/2011/10/jp-morgan-chase-donates-4-6-million-to-nypd-on-eve-of-protests/
Sorry, Maha, but on this OWS thing, you have been wrong since day one. Of all people, I just never expected you to talk like this.
It’s going to be several months before you can say that. I’d love to be proven wrong, but it’s way too early yet to say this “movement” is not going to go the way of too many other “movements” I have witnessed over the years.
Barbara & C U ND GULAG & Jill – Suggestions for a commitment to non-violent demonstration and self-discipline are spot on. But the spread of the ‘Occupy’ movement has put liberal targets all over the map. While a lot of the vocal Teabaggers are all mouth, I’m convinced some of them long (perhaps lust is a better word) for a violent confrontation with an unarmed group of liberals.
A fat cop with mace may not be the big threat. Y’all keep your eyes open out there.
Yeah… the longer this goes on the more likely it becomes that stupid people will do stupid things. And if there is no power structure in place to react then the entire movement will be blamed. Depending on the media for your social interactions has never gone well for the Left.
I couldn’t agree more. Your not wrong about this in the least. People are responding as if you said this will without a doubt happen rather than saying if it happens it could damage the movement irreparably. Apparently some are challenged to understand the difference.
In LA there were older people and families with kids. 60% of the crowd might have left if people started acting up. People that do that are only thinking about themselves and are the 1% of the 99%. Better that they not even show up. If I saw them a second time I’d rat them out in a heartbeat.
On the other hand LA is a lot more laid back than NYC. That’s not to say there won’t be a few like that. I’m hoping not.
Maha said:
It’s going to be several months before you can say that. I’d love to be proven wrong, but it’s way too early yet to say this “movement†is not going to go the way of too many other “movements†I have witnessed over the years.
If you’re talking about the OWS movement being a success vs failure at changing the system, we’re probably on the same page. I don’t expect them to win. They are up against a brutal corporate state that is not shy of breaking heads. Over the past decade we’ve seen that even torture is no longer off the table, as it once was. But I don’t blame these kids for trying – what else can they do? Just vote for Obama and everything will be OK? They tried that already, and it didn’t work.
OWS may well be the last peaceful demonstration we see. At some point, the NYPD may stop using nightsticks and mace, and start using guns, a la Kent State. A poster on James Kunstler’s Clusterf*ck Nation put it succinctly: “Demonstrations are tolerated until they become effective.”
But they could win. I can see the possibility that they could win. But to do that they’d have to become a much larger movement that includes people who are not necessarily liberal on issues other than economic injustice.
I know this country very well. Not only have I lived here for 60 years, but much of my family roots here go back a good three centuries, which is about as far back as roots go for white people in America. And I do not believe the political system is as yet so corrupt that it cannot be made to bend to public opinion, and democracy is not yet so dead that Washington can ignore public opinion entirely. The problem is that in recent years “public opinion” has been entirely manipulated and manufactured by the Right. A smartly organized effort such as OWS could change that.
It’s because I see that they could win that I become so exasperated at the stupid stunts that amount to shooting themselves in the foot. Like their stupid declaration of issues I panned a few days ago. I didn’t pan it because I disagreed with it, but because it created a series of liberal litmus tests that are not directly about economics —
If OWS can grow to the point that large numbers of middle- and working-class Americans even in the Midwest and South are joining demonstrations, they could win. And the discontent is certainly there to be tapped into. However, if the demonstrations turn violent, they have lost. It’s over. The public will turn against them, and it will be over. The Powers That Be know that and want them to turn violent. That is the real point of the police violence; they want the protesters to fight back, because if they do, they lose. And OWS must not do that. They cannot take the bait.
They haven’t been through any thing nearly as harsh as what Martin Luther King’s marchers went through, and MLK won because the marchers didn’t take the bait. If the civil rights marchers can discipline themselves to that degree, why can’t OWS? Well, I have an answer for why it’s going to be harder to get that idea across to the hotheads, but I’m saying it’s not impossible.
I have to say I think people have a right to defend themselves – even if it’s not “deadly force” – a choice to engage in extreme non-violent resistance is a personal choice and commitment – not something you require people to sign an agreement on, in order to participate in a political demonstration. Heck we’re lucky to have these many individuals show up. And we need a lot more if we’re going to change the system.
I think people have been remarkably peaceful, for the most part. Holding together that way. The “talk-alongs” seem to help. But I agree that it’s not going to last. Mostly because we would need a Nelson Mandela to bring about a peaceful revolution. History shows that very wealthy classes do not voluntarily relinquish their ability to oppress others. It’s going to get worse before it gets better.
I wish that were not the case. But it seems thus. Wall Street and Congress in their grip isn’t going to step down because some people are demonstrating.
American history also shows us that mass movement that turn violent do not win. Even if they eventually win (the labor movement, for example), violence sets them back. It’s only when a movement grows beyond acts of violence and taps into strong public support that it wins. And if they fight back physically, they lose.
So far OWS hasn’t been put through anything close to what Martin Luther King’s marchers went through 45 or so years ago. Not even close. MLK won because his marchers didn’t fight back. People watching on television saw people being pelted with rocks, beaten, and assaulted with dogs and fire hoses and they didn’t break and fight back, and they won, because the public watching on television saw then what racism really was. If the television cameras had caught marchers fighting back, the public would have turned against them, and they would have lost.
If OWS presents itself as ordinary folks trying to get a fair shake in the economy, and the police beat and harass them, they win. But if they fight back, or if they persist in promoting a grab bag of unrelated liberal issues that don’t mean so much to most Americans, they lose.
It’s growing more and more likely that there may very well be real class warfare in this country if somethings aren’t done about the income disparity.
And it may not be as peaceful as the OWS movement has been so far. And it may not even turn out to be confined to an American movement since, with global media, national boundries mean less and less. And if it spreads, then where, dear Galtian Overlords, will you run?
I’m not advocating it, I’m just giving my opinion.
As someone on another blog wrote, the powers-that-be may be facing a choice:
You can either deal with the DFH’s today.
Or, the Jacobins tomorrow.
Unfortunately, the days in which a big-enough mob of peasants with pitchforks could overwhelm the castle and drag the king to the guillotine are long gone. A violent uprising in the U.S. would either turn into a guerrilla war dragging into generations, or the powers that be will declare martial law, suspend the constitution, and institute a more obvious dictatorship. And if the professional military doesn’t support them, they’ll hire soldiers who will. Nothing good will come of that.
C U N D Gulag, I could not agree more.
“…or the powers that be will declare martial law, suspend the constitution, and institute a more obvious dictatorship. And if the professional military doesn’t support them, they’ll hire soldiers who will. Nothing good will come of that.”
Nothing good may come of anything since this sounds like pretty much a recipe for what’s going to happen anyway.
Voter suppression is already the first step to making sure only the right voters vote the right way on issues. All that’ll be needed is a spark to ignite the right, and we may not be able to recognize this country. And it won’t take much of one, either.
Add a healthy dollop of Dominionist Jesus worship.
And we may end up there in my lifetime.
If this is the future, Id rather go down fighting. But, I’m barely ambulatory. So, I’m not sure what I could do.
I don’t want to be too bleak about this, but if Republicans DO win, and get in power in 2013, it’ll make a lot of us long for the the Little Boots years.
And I’m not sure what the years after 2016 will bring if Obama wins next year, but I dread the thought of what it’ll be like if he doesn’t, and if the reactionary Republicans control both houses of Congress, with a Republican President. They’ll see this as their last opportunity for long lasting control of this country.
At the least, 4 more years of Obama means less of these older reactionaries will be around. But, it’s not like there’s a real shortage of younger ones. It’s just that maybe the other demographic changes may make the an even smaller minority. And that’ll mean an even more violent minority.
“what else can they do? Just vote for Obama and everything will be OK? They tried that already, and it didn’t work”
Maybe they could move to another country and carp on all things American from afar!
Mayor Bloomberg says OWS’s tent city is not covered by the 1st Amendment:
http://www.businessinsider.com/bloomberg-says-occupy-wall-street-tent-city-is-not-covered-by-freedom-of-speech-2011-10
Move over Hoovervilles.
Make room for Bloom Burg’s.
Barbara: “Like their stupid declaration of issues I panned a few days ago. I didn’t pan it because I disagreed with it, but because it created a series of liberal litmus tests that are not directly about economics …”
This has gotten me to thinking– if the Southern Strategy was a way to get people to vote for conservatives by distracting them with “social issues” (to put it nicely), it has also been a decoy, a distraction from economic issues also for voters who are more left-leaning. It cuts both ways. The Southern Strategy has distracted not only would-be conservatives, but liberals as well. So yeah, the focus should be more on economic issues, which have been brushed under the rug for far too long…
And yes: non-violent resistance works– satyagraha is what will work. Anything else at this stage would be completely counterproductive.
Well I would not be surprised if we wind up with a civil war in the U.S. because the 1% is too stupid and greedy. I do not agree, Maha, that mass movements that are either violent or peaceful compete for results one way or the other. Human history is a story of wars and bloodshed. Lots of bloodshed sometimes does result in positive advancements for human kind. Take the Civil War or the American Revolution, for example. Or World War II. And of course, lots of horrible things too. And peaceful means have made great advancements – usually more unusually – just as peaceful means have also failed terribly – which is often the case. I’m not placing a value judgement here – I’m a peaceful person – I’m just saying “that’s the way it is.” And I don’t agree that our government is open to opinion. Give or take a small number of representatives here or there. The only reason they are open to opinion at all – is to squash and quell “too much” uprising – to keep the ants in their proper places. So to speak – give them a beer and their day in the sun before they all go home. As our standard of living keeps plummeting, jobs keep going out of the country – in this anarchistic capitalism without borders. There is no allegiance to the United States here. It is about the profits of a very small group of individuals plundering the planet. If we are the next starving India, and another nation is the next world empire, they could care less – as long as they can take the money and run. They are bandits without any moral scruples.
As far as OWS is concerned, I agree that it’s best not to bring a whole platter of issues. But this idea that OWS is without focus or direction is more corporate propaganda from a corporate owned media. It’s very clear to Americans what this is about – it’s about the corporate stranglehold on Congress. There is no more accountability in our government because you are wrong, Maha – our government is completely taken over by ruthless and corrupt interests. It has become totally disfunctional. We need a revolution.
That is going to happen, one way or the other – whether we live to see it or not. But whether this happens peacefully or violently – well, peacefully will take an extraordinary convergence of circumstances and effort and the fortuitous appearance of any number of extraordinary individuals. While more often the case – the ruling eilte will stop at nothing to retain their obscene wealth and power.
Now I am going to go meditate. Peace out.
I’m looking at U.S. history, in particular over the past century or so. Movements are very much creatures of culture, and what works in one culture fail in another.
In the U.S. the first overriding objective of a successful mass movement is gaining widespread public support and, generally, making your opponent look like a bigger asshole than you are. When you have widespread public support, change is possible. However, when mass movements resort to violence, or come across as bigger assholes than the establishment, the public turns against them. And then the establishment wins. This is now it always plays out in the U.S. Examples from other times and societies are irrelevant.
They do that, but the public has a responsibility, as well, not to play their game. For example, 100,000 people showed up in Rome – in these demonstrations that have now spread world-wide. Of course, mainstream media made a big deal about the 500 people who rioted in Rome. But there was very little talk about Madrid, or the 1500 other locations worldwide, or the enormous number of people who were peaceful. And, to top it off, Berlusconi – who’s political policies largely led to these riots – now acts like this is their fault entirely – taking no responsibility with the austerity measures. What is the public’s role here? To play along, and all say, yes, these bad demonstraters – we agree with berly brain – it’s their fault and they are acting like jackasses. Well, I think the public’s role is to look more dispassionately at what happened and WHY. And help keep the focus on the bigger picture – which is how tremendous this movement is, globally, how many turned out, and peacefully. Also – you know – violent demonstraters – it’s difficult to know if they are “on the side” of the demonstraters – or there to stir things up so that peopel turn on the overall demonstraters or lose sight of the message. I see the demonstraters at Wall Street as terrific and needing our support, not denigration. IMO, they are terrific. They are smartest generation – smarter than any of us. If anyone can turn the tables on this out-of-control capitalistic raping of our shared country and shared planet, they can! Power to them. That’s all you can really do. Support them. I think it is true that a revolution belongs to the young. Our future is in their hands. I hope they win. It IS possible. If the planet survives – we may not live to see it – but then again, things can happen overnight. It’s very hard to say. And, if things do happen – you may not have a choice about being a neutral, peaceful bystnader. I am not a pacifist. I will support peace and peaceful efforts – and i think it is a rationla approach – but if I were in the middle of Lincoln’s Civil War, for example, I would take sides with the union. In such times, I look critically at pacifists.
So would I, but the rebels were the insurrectionists, and they started the war. And they lost. Those who fought for the Union were defending the establishment.
Violence cannot win this. It cannot. American history screams this at us loudly and clearly. If it gets to the point that violence is the only resort against tyranny, then so be it, but expect to lose. And if hotheads push the violence button too soon, you just give more power to the establishment.
Don’t forget, Maha, that many of attitudes you are taking towards these young people is the same attitude expressed bythe British towards American colonists. Jefferson was a quite a young person. And so were the colonists burning effigies of King George as others called them idiots.
Jack — OWS ain’t Jefferson. Maybe they’ll evolve into Jefferson.
And lastly – all this stuff about Arab Spring. They support Arab Spring but our kids are idiots, eh? They were pretty violent during this Arab Spring. They even gang raped a journalist. They should EVICT CONGRESS.
It isn’t just about “rebels” and “establishment.” Sarah Palin is a rebel if you want to get into these terms. I am actually defending what WAS the establishment, in that, during the 1960s King could have a March on Washington as something that was a plausible means and approach to overcoming. Nowadays, it is laughable – which is why people can’t get a march on Washington together. Because the idea that there are a group of people in the Capitol accountable to The People is ludicrous looking at what we have been experiencing as a nation over the last two decades, at the least. That is why people are on Wall Street instead.
I feel like you are putting me in the position of advancing or defending a view about peace or violence – which I have stated repeatedly is not my intent, here.
This is mouthing platitudes – violence cannot solve this. Peace cannot solve this either.
People have NO solution. Going to Wall Street was the first moment of insight that we’ve had in a long time. But now we face the next issue. How, exactly, do you get things to change at this point – when the demonstration indicates why they don’t – that Congress is so sold out.
As for OWS not being Jefferson – that is a view of Jefferson that has been watered down in our society over time. Jefferson – as a symbol – is now used to support an order that he never would have supported! Jefferson would be on Wall Street! Jefferson would be calling for a revolution – whether he would be supporting violent or peaceful means. Jefferson believed governments should be overthrown every several years. He would be throwing up to see his own face on a piece of American money today.
Let me ask you – if you were an Iraqi citizen – after all they have experienced because of our government – do you think you would be talking about how only peace would solve problems inherent to our power structure?
IF you were Troy Davis – do you think you would feel like our government actually listens to people?
Politicians in Washington in 1963 were no more sympathetic to MLK than politicians today are sympathetic to OWS. Most of them thought civil rights was a joke. They included women in the 1964 civil rights act because they meant it to be an insult. Seriously. They gave in to demands for a civil rights act partly because Lyndon Johnson had many of them by the balls and partly because they sniffed the wind of public opinion.
The difference between then and now is, one, mass media is far
moreless corrupted then than it is now; two, much of Congress isn’t just racist, but is certifiably nuts; and three, the Left itself. There is no leader to rally behind like MLK, and too many lefties still bask in the mythical glory of the Vietnam antiwar movement and do the same stupid and counterproductive things the antiwar movement did.An inspirational leader and a disciplined movement that awoke the American middle class and set them marching against the plutocracy would be a glorious thing. And I think there’s a deep hunger for that, which is why OWS is getting as much sympathy as it is getting, even though the “movement” itself has not been nearly as smart and disciplined as it needs to be.
When the hell did I ever say that “only peace would solve the problems inherent to our power structure”??????
You’re an idiot. Good bye.
Jefferson would likely be in jail.
Well, thank you for your gracious web hosting, Maha, and conversation. You have not returned, so I’ll see you another time (if I’m not arrested.)