I’m reposting this excellent post from yesterday at occupywallstreet.org, which does a pretty good job of encapsulating my sentiment — as someone who was at the former Travelers Aid Society building occupation and then 16th and Telegraph right before the street went up in flames and the police descended with tear gas (I left when it became clear that a violent confrontation with police was going to be deliberately provoked by the massed and masked fake “anarchists” who don’t give a shit about anyone’s physical safety) — about the upshot of Wednesday night/Thursday morning. #OWS is watching…the WORLD is watching…let’s get our house in order, people. Apparently at least one proposal on dealing effectively with the fringe elements who want to coopt and hamstring, if not utterly discredit, the amazing things that #OO and the worldwide Occupy movement are accomplishing will be presented at the GA on either Sunday or Monday night. Please show up to show your support and to make a strong statement that #OO is better than this, that fifth column shit stirrers who have no interest in actually working to achieve economic and social justice for the 99% are not welcome and will not be tolerated.
Thanks for reading! -Kim
******************
Forum Post: SUGGESTION: Unmasking Vandalism and ViolencePosted Nov. 3, 2011, 7:54 p.m. EST (1 day ago) by NateNine Read any mainstream coverage of the strike in Oakland yesterday – “mostly peaceful” gets drowned out by “broken windows”, “graffiti everywhere”, “local businesses suffering”, “tear gas”, “bonfire in the street”, “rioting”. Even the most sympathetic coverage focuses on the actions of the radical fringe; they simply go on to state that a small group of “anarchists” are responsible well after the general public has already gotten entirely the wrong idea. OWS will fail without widespread support. Ideologically, the American people largely share the core grievances being expressed by the majority of protesters, but if any act of violence or vandalism is committed anywhere near an OWS gathering, even if it is in no way endorsed by anyone else, that act is all the news media (and therefore the public) will see. We’re all fed up with the status quo; that’s what OWS is all about. But what good does it do to deface a local bank branch with spray paint? What good does it do to smash a bunch of windows? What good does it do to terrorize a damned grocery store? Adolescent acts of vandalism and deliberate provocation of police will only make OWS go away, and then you rabble-rousers will be back to having no cover from which to commit your pointless acts of nihilism. Anarchy is not the solution, it’s not even a solution. If you abhor government so much, go join the Tea Party – the rest of us want to build a better world without burning the old one entirely to the ground. Anarchists – settle down or get lost. This is not the moment when the American people rise up to spill the blood of the oligarchs we all fear and distrust, and trying to turn it into that will only kill the movement itself. If you want to be part of OWS that means helping it grow, not making it fail. GAs across the country are about to have serious discussions about the role of violence and vandalism in the movement, and I can already tell you what the majority will say: Those things have no role. They serve no purpose other than to inflate egos, as though painting a few swear words on an ATM makes you Che Guevara. OWS is and must remain a strictly non-violent phenomenon to survive, and that means no violence against people (no matter how vile) or property (no matter how vile its owners). If you prefer violent tactics to non-violent ones you have no place in OWS – go start your own movement and see how far it gets. Everyone else – those people I just addressed? They’re still here. Some of them are actually hired agents provocateurs; most of them are probably just confused and small-minded people with more bottled up rage than common sense. Do. Not. Let. Them. Define. You. They’re not going away no matter how nicely you ask, either, because this is the first time in their short, addled lives they’ve ever been part of a crowd that would hesitate to stop them from being belligerent and openly destructive. It’s hard to stop someone you basically agree with who is resorting to methods you wouldn’t use, but you absolutely need to change that, and NOW. They aren’t just destroying bank facades and coffee shop windows, they’re destroying your only chance to make OWS matter. Luckily, there’s a very simple solution to this issue. Anyone who wants to protect his or her identity with a mask should be given the right (even outside a “masquerade ball”), but should be treated with extreme suspicion by all other protesters. Use all those fancy smartphones and cheap digital cameras to keep tabs on these people at all times. Don’t let them blend with the crowd, form bubbles of accountability around them. If they do attempt to use their anonymity to commit a violent or destructive act, remember the slanted news media will turn this into an act of violence against you. Stop them. Tackle the idiots. Take away their masks. Shout “CAMERA!” Show the world their faces, and show the world you in no way tolerate their actions. Violence committed by one of you translates as violence committed by all of you in the minds of everyday people, and if you have to resort to a little violent tackling just to wage a successful PR war I don’t think Gandhi himself would revoke your satyagraha cards. Physically stop all vandals and provocateurs. Knock the cans of spray paint out of anarchists’ hands. Unmask anyone who commits an act that you yourself would not commit. Don’t let people who only want to watch the world burn start by leaving OWS in ashes. |
shameless plug: GA minutes available here until the occupy website gets organized: http://www.facebook.com/groups/260338734017637/
tonight’s minutes will be up soon…i’m too sleepy to get to it at this moment…!
There are minutes taken at the GAs, I was sitting right behind the woman taking minutes tonight, and I’d assumed they were going up on the website…but I can’t actually find them now that I’m searching. Wish I could tell you her name, but maybe you could contact the internet committee and ask them if they have plans to get them on here, I agree it would be really helpful.
it is absolutely essential to get a grip and neutralize this renegade faction that will listen and speak to no one, and the strategies suggested by the #ows writer is exactly what’s needed – and what a few brave souls tried to do in front of whole foods wednesday and during the midnight standoff too. OO, you’ve come up with many creative, nonviolent ways to protest that we fully support. i’m sure you can come up with just as many creative, nonviolent ways to neutralize this faction (if in fact it’s a faction and not hired, well-trained thugs in brand-new matching outfits). surrounding them, following them, photographing/videoing them, blockading them whenever they try to do their hit-and-runs are just a few nonviolent suggestions. i was grateful to see the post-strike Occupy cleanup crews, but the media damage had already been done.
another easy strategy: spread the word that if you converge on an “action” (like the traveler’s aid occupation) only to find these black-clad renegades on site, turn around and go the other way, no matter how supportive you are of the action they’ve touted in their flyers, because it might just be a setup. (i heard from someone who was there that the security gate had been unlocked before occupiers even got there. do you really think someone’s going to give us the key to a bank-foreclosed building?? and yet the gate was unlocked. think about it!!!)
the civil rights movement’s young activists went through trainings on how to remain in passive-resistance mode even while you’re being attacked; not a bad model for Occupy too. also, fyi: the giant anti-war marches in the 60s had monitors all along the route. i hardly saw any on this day. so, many more monitors please!
it’s sad and frustrating that this is happening, but it is, and we MUST address it ASAP or the whole movement’s circle of support will fall apart, and with it, the movement itself. no amount of ideological argument is going to change that simple basic fact. and we need this movement desperately!
thanks for your commitment and good hearts, and your dedicated efforts to figure out what “Another World Is Possible” looks like, and how to get there from here. the bulk of the strike day was a beautiful thing to experience. let’s keep it going!
I would be willing to be part of a group of people who link hands and stand in front of targets of violence. I’m not going to tackle someone, I am a pacifist and I try to be consistent. I think even people who think pacifists are misguided can respect consistency.
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/archives/2011/11/occupys_asshole.htm
A way to deal with violent elements in Occupy.
Regarding breaking windows as non-violent, I’m gonna go ahead and quote myself from elsewhere:
“I mean, they’re arguing over the notion that breaking someone’s window is not a violent action because a window is not a person, and thus has no feelings, and so cannot even begin to articulate its own breaking, let alone perceive such a thing as violence. That is just a semantic game that ignores the fact that the reason the window is there in the first place is that people are in the world, and some of them have invested their own time/money into having a window, and usually because they really do need to have it for their livelihood. Others then recognize this fact and so perceive the breaking of someone else’s property to be very similar to assaulting that person themselves because it undermines their livelihood and drains resources, and so feel upset when they see people breaking other people’s windows.
A modified version of this is: a corporation is not a real person, and so it has no feelings; which completely ignores the fact that corporations are made up of people, regular people who hold the same beliefs as many of us, and who are irritated or threatened when a group of people come along and intentionally start smashing up their place of work.
And through their rhetoric about symbolic action against institutions, its becomes clear that they, the breakers themselves, see destroying a window as violence, since the whole reason they did it in the first place was to send a threatening message to the banks, or Burger King, or that dude with a coffee cart who stores it in someone else’s shop, or whatever.
So they’re just being dishonest about their motivations.”
like a human blockade. Put the biggest & strongest of the Occupy crowd at the perimeter and block their re-entry.
How about this. As soon as people are witnessed getting violent or vandalous, every other Occupy person makes a chain and does not allow the vandals back in the group, if that is possible. Just an idea.
Assuming you’re not in a huge crowd of tens of thousands, walking away might make a point but the people that stepped in against vandals during the general strike protests were right. If its truly autonomous then there will be people on all sides so the argument is inconsequential. Unfortunately, infighting will likely be the new norm as we divide into peaceful/non-peaceful camps.
I don’t believe that tackling people is either non-violent or a good idea. If we’re going to be non-violent, then we shouldn’t be provoking fights. If OO doesn’t want to sanction acts of vandalism by providing a screen of respectability for the vandals, the solution is easy — walk away. Freedom of association is a powerful tool.
I support this message and I think it is time we start using direct action whenever necessary to stop these cops and punks from ruining Occupy Oakland. This is a radical reform movement, not a violent revolution movement. We are trying to fix the system. If we fail, you will get your violent revolution eventually anyway. Violence is the wrong tactic right now, regardless of the morality.
you’re incorrect. the proposals from last nights’s ga had nothing to do with violence, non-violence, black bloc, etc. if there is such a proposal, there was simply no time for it…it didn’t fail, it just wasn’t heard yet.
While I understand the frustration with some autonomous groups within the occupy movement taking up large scale actions without agreement from the general assembly, I also don’t think it’s within a single person’s authority to tell occupy members to physically confront or provoke physical confrontation with individuals that are choosing a tactic that some folks (even a majority) don’t agree with. That in itself has the potential to incite violent confrontation with people that you have acknowledged many of us share common points of unity with. There was a resolution to support a diversity of tactics at the general assembly last week and I hope that an honest and open dialogue around this issue can be had with people on both side of the argument represented. There are many people in this movement who identify as anarchist, many people who have been central to its peaceful and cooperative organization. There is a great deal of conflict around the definition of the word “violence” as some protesters that were involved in more militant activities have argued that the destruction of property should not be equated with violence against people. It should also be acknowledged that a large percentage of the property destruction that was initiated was against corporate banks. I think that most people are smart enough to recognize that a movement this large will include a diversity of opinions on how to resist, and rather than declare unilaterally which people are ordained as “part of this movement” there should be open dialogue about intention and solidarity when it comes to tactics employed by the occupy oakland movement. A large part of what I love about this movement has been its accessibility, inclusiveness and non hierarchical structure. THAT is what gives it its long term potential. In the end, individuals are responsible for their own autonomous actions, and we have to accept that some people as a result of corporate media will choose to focus on the more sensation aspects of the resistance. Having said that, I also agree that individuals should make an effort to argue their point of view in the open with members of the community, and that dialogue and subsequent (modified) consensus surrounding what actions to take is part of what gives us the protection and solidarity with the community that we need to create lasting change. Coercion is never a good tactic, no matter what ideology it is rooted in. I would hope that folks with different perspectives would be willing to give one another the opportunity to participate in tactical discussions, even if consensus is not reached.
Apparently there were proposals tonight to condemn the violent actions of the Black Block that failed. Information flow out of the GA seems to be weak. Is there a source for TEXT of what happened? Watching endless Live Streaming is NOT doing it for me.