Hi everyone,
A LOT of us want an “official” endorsement of non-violence and peaceful tactics. But that’s not going to happen. I’ll explain why in a minute.
Right now, we’re basically playing into the divide-and-conquer strategy. Violence or non-violence? Pacifism or Black Bloc? This is textbook stuff and we’re letting our differences get the better of us.
But at the same time, the reason the divide and conquer strategy is working is because we don’t have a clear picture of who we are or what this movement is. This has been one of the criticisms lobbed at us time and time again. If you notice, we’re grasping at straws. Some of us seem to think that the Occupy movement is “official” in the sense that the NAACP is official or that Food Not Bombs is official.
It is not.
There is no “official-ness” to this movement. There are no clear boundaries, no clear categories. There are so many interests united under one umbrella, that any “official-ness” to this movement would be a HUGE understaking in trying to reconcile the interests and differences of everyone involved. This movement is different. It is spontaneous and organic. We like clear, defined categories, but this movement resists all and any attempts to be pigeonholed, but what unites us is the fact that we want social justice. Anyone can join, and anyone can leave. It is completely open and porous. Again, what unites us is our desire for social justice.
Let’s think about social justice for a second.
This movement is more than just about money. It is about what’s fair for everyone. It seems that this is the moment for everyone, not just the disenfranchised middle class to come out and demand what’s fair. I think that’s what we’re seeing in Oakland. For example, there are people who for many years have been getting raw deals because they live in the wrong neighborhood, or because their skin isn’t the right color, or they want to make love to the wrong people, or they want to lead a unique sort of lifestyle. What better time than now to make their voices heard while everyone else is listening?
So we have all these different people with different ways of thinking coming together under one common cause. Each individual has ideas about what should or shouldn’t be done and how things should or shouldn’t get done. In our day-to-day lives we, for the most part, respect each other and our ways of life and the ways we do things.
Now, from what I’ve been able to observe, the General Assembly is more of a conduit than anything. If we want to join our disparate backgrounds and ways of life toward action, then the General Assembly is the place to do it. And as far as statements go, the GA seems to only go so far as to issue statements of solidarity with other struggles. It doesn’t seem to like to classify itself one way or another. As far as GA-approve tactics go, the norm seems to be marches. Everything else is relegated to individual responsibility, including Black Bloc.
Now, Black Bloc isn’t a “gang”. There are no initiation rites, no secret handshakes, or interesting dances. Black Bloc is a tactic Black Bloc isn’t limited to destruction of property and vandalism, but also providing medical attention and extracting people arrested by the police. It is an “active” form of protesting, “active” referring to more involved physical action than marching and passively resisting. There are people who use Black Bloc more often than not, but anyone can use Black Bloc.
Because Black Bloc is an individual choice, the General Assembly has no authority to enforce non-violence. Just imagine the can of worms that opens up. For example, who will enforce non-violence? How will they derive their authority? How will we trust them?
That’s why the best we can do is to commit ourselves individually, those who want to, to non-violence, and to encourage others to do the same. Black Bloc takes issue with hurting people (but not buildings), so if property damage is a concern for the non-violent contingent of the Occupy movement, it would up to individuals to non-violently stop other individuals from damaging storefronts and the like.
The General Assembly is a small, but important, component of this movement, but the biggest component by far are our individual actions. Case in point, Bank Transfer Day. It wasn’t started at any General Assembly, for example: it was a woman who had enough with the banks and posted about it on Facebook. Let’s not fall back into the trap of depending on an outside organization to do what we want, even if the organization is the GA.
So, regarding non-violence, we can’t wait on the GA. The time to act is now. 😉
Disclaimer: I’m not a facilitator or on any committee, but I have been involved in #OO by visiting the camps, supporting actions, talking to people, etc. I’m your run-of-the-mill average working stiff supporting the Movement. I speak for myself and not for Occupy Oakland. Please forgive confusion, spelling errors and the like: I’m at work.
If anyone is skeptical that black bloc protesters might be hired provocateurs, please check this out:
http://anonops.blogspot.com/2011/11/occupyoakland-beware-of-police.html
Not a good solution. No.
I agree, Nikki. Many of us suspect that the Black bloc are hired saboteurs meant to discredit the movement. If they are not stopped, they will succeed in destroying us.
You are right. As David said, we are trying to do this. Many of us agree with you.
I agree. Communicating and aligning with other GA’s around the country regarding violence/nonviolence policies would strengthen the movement.
Further, that means you have no need of “condemning” the actions of anyone in the movement. Something which is inherently divisive.
It appears, from reading the list of non-violent actions(from the guy who wrote the book it seems), that all the black bloc tactics are covered with the sole exception of breaking windows and throwing projectiles at police. Why not propose a resolution specific to breaking windows and throwing projectiles? That leaves a wide diversity of non-violent tactics at the disposal of everyone including graffiti, seizure of property, and others…
yeah, that does not sound like a good way to resolve the problem.
That’s wise, but I would urge you to continue supporting Occupy Berkeley, Occupy San Francisco, Occupy San Jose, and Occupy UC.
Please, it is not just a problem with all of Occupy Oakland. It is a problem with the consensus process and direct democracy. If we had tried to form a non-violent consensus prior to the police attacks on 10/25, we might have done it. But after they started putting our people into comas, it really starts to divide people when you talk about how we’re not allowed to fight back. Please know that many people who are dedicated to non-violence have been trying to get enough people at the GA to pass non-violence, but with about 100-150 people who are opposing all non-violence, we need well in excess of 1000 people on any particular night to win. We have been trying, we really have.
Please however, do something more constructive than just talking about it. Urge your local GA to work with other GA’s around the country to draft a petition to Occupy Oakland. If Occupy Oakland is willing to defy the request of Occupy Wall St. itself and dozens of other Occupations, that will do the job of “distancing” for you.
That is a very good list of strategies.
I also think it highlights why many of the regular attendees are nervous to sign on to the various “anti-violence” resolutions that have come before the GA. Just looking at that list I see several which would be compromised by the current spate of “anti-violence” proposals.
#19 – wearing symbols (masks/black clothes)
#26 – paint as protest (vandalism)
#27 – new signs and names (vandalism)
#31 – “haunting” officials (vandalism, stalking, psychological harm)
#43 – political mourning (black clothes)
#44 – mock funerals (black clothes)
#45 – demonstrative funerals (black clothes)
#68 – sanctuary (almost all the current anti-violence proposals explicitly revoke sanctuary)
#129 – refusal of assistance to enforcement agents (ditto)
#134 – non-obedience in the absence of direct supervision (ditto)
#137 – refusal of an assemblage or meeting to disburse (potential for violence when resisting police)
#140 – hiding, escape, and false identity (masks & potential for violence when escaping from police)
#146 – judicial noncooperation (almost all current anti-violence proposals explicitly revoke judicial noncooperation)
#179 – alternate social institutions (many of the anti-violence proposals rely on the existing police & court system)
#187 – seizure of assets (occupation – OWS would have problems without this)
#188 – dumping (vandalism)
As Thlatoli has pointed out, at the core OO is an assemblage of individuals who have either been victimized by the current wealth disparity or take issue with it on moral grounds. It is not actually a shadow government (#198). This is probably just as well, as a shadow government would eventually require some mechanism for enforcing its dictates – and that eventually would require violence (of the unambiguous people hurting people sort).
So what other options are there short of employing violence against vandals or giving up the fight?
Organize non-violent actions.
Support others in making their non-violent actions a success.
Literally place yourself between vandals and the property they seek to deface.
Pack up your tent and join a different occupation.
Pack up your tent and create a new Occupy encampment in a different neighborhood.
A LOT of us want an “official” endorsement of non-violence and peaceful tactics. But that’s not going to happen. I’ll explain why in a minute.. ..
No need for explanations. Oakland can go its own way and the rest of us can distance ourselves. How does that strike you? Because that is what I personally will do and I am sure a vast majority of people will do the same if you can’t take this bull by the horns.
Wrong. The fact that you don’t condemn it does mean you don’t care either way and that is the same as endorsing violence. We are growing a movement here and this violence will destroy it. Think about that when you are debating this NON issue.
“This movement is more than just about money. It is about what’s fair for everyone”.
this movement is about the 1% and the unholy alliance between them and our govn. “Fair for everyone”? What pray tell is fair and what good does it do when the violence is directed at health food stores and small businesses? And who is suppossed to beleive its about fairness when you are neutral on this violence against the very people you profess to be defending?
” There is no “official-ness” to this movement. There are no clear boundaries, no clear categories.”
That is a crock when it comes to violence. Not taking an official position on violence IS AN OFFICIAL POSITION. I can see that if you have “discuss” your position with regard to violence and how to respond to the violence there, Oakland is going to be problem for the entire movement. No position IS a position. Not speaking out against violence IS a position. YOu are all responsible for making these protests peaceful and you are representing a whole movement, all over the country. If you think you can’t do this without hurting the movment as a whole because of your neutrality when it comes to violence, then stop until you can do it right.
We can pass a resolution self defining as a non-violent movement.
We are mature thinking people who want to encourage a critical mass via the Occupy Movement which can reawaken a transparent democratic system. Already Occupy has influenced the vote in Ohio, essentially a vote to support of our sisters and brothers in the unions. Transparency includes showing who we are, mask free, empowered by our community and proud of our ability to promote progressive social change through non-violent action.
The following on implementation of NON-VIOLENT ACTION is taken from the Occupy Seattle site:
Gene Sharp’s “Methods of nonviolent protests and persuasion”
Mon, 09/26/2011 – 01:38
Gene Sharp
Gene Sharp is Professor Emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth. He is known for his extensive writings on nonviolent struggle, which have influenced numerous anti-government resistance movements around the world. Over the past four decades, revolutionaries from Belgrade to Tehran have cited Sharp’s work as a key tool in their struggles. His writings on nonviolent strategy have been translated into 40 languages. All are freely accessible on the website of the Albert Einstein Institution, a nonprofit Sharp founded in 1983 “to advance the worldwide study and strategic use of nonviolent action.”
“How to start a revolution” is a documentary following the life and work of Gene Sharp. For more read the “Lessons from the Godfather: Interview with Gene Sharp”.
You can purchase his books from Albert Eistein Institution website. The list of 198 methods of nonviolent actions from his book, The Politics of Nonviolent Action, Vol. 2: The Methods of Nonviolent Action are the following:
THE METHODS OF NONVIOLENT PROTEST AND PERSUASION
Formal Statements
1. Public Speeches
2. Letters of opposition or support
3. Declarations by organizations and institutions
4. Signed public statements
5. Declarations of indictment and intention
6. Group or mass petitions
Communications with a Wider Audience
7. Slogans, caricatures, and symbols
8. Banners, posters, and displayed communications
9. Leaflets, pamphlets, and books
10. Newspapers and journals
11. Records, radio, and television
12. Skywriting and earthwriting
Group Representations
13. Deputations
14. Mock awards
15. Group lobbying
16. Picketing
17. Mock elections
Symbolic Public Acts
18. Displays of flags and symbolic colors
19. Wearing of symbols
20. Prayer and worship
21. Delivering symbolic objects
22. Protest disrobings
23. Destruction of own property
24. Symbolic lights
25. Displays of portraits
26. Paint as protest
27. New signs and names
28. Symbolic sounds
29. Symbolic reclamations
30. Rude gestures
Pressures on Individuals
31. “Haunting” officials
32. Taunting officials
33. Fraternization
34. Vigils
Drama and Music
35. Humorous skits and pranks
36. Performances of plays and music
37. Singing
Processions
38. Marches
39. Parades
40. Religious processions
41. Pilgrimages
42. Motorcades
Honoring the Dead
43. Political mourning
44. Mock funerals
45. Demonstrative funerals
46. Homage at burial places
Public Assemblies
47. Assemblies of protest or support
48. Protest meetings
49. Camouflaged meetings of protest
50. Teach-ins
Withdrawal and Renunciation
51. Walk-outs
52. Silence
53. Renouncing honors
54. Turning one’s back
THE METHODS OF SOCIAL NONCOOPERATION
Ostracism of Persons
55. Social boycott
56. Selective social boycott
57. Lysistratic nonaction
58. Excommunication
59. Interdict
Noncooperation with Social Events, Customs, and Institutions
60. Suspension of social and sports activities
61. Boycott of social affairs
62. Student strike
63. Social disobedience
64. Withdrawal from social institutions
Withdrawal from the Social System
65. Stay-at-home
66. Total personal noncooperation
67. “Flight” of workers
68. Sanctuary
69. Collective disappearance
70. Protest emigration (hijrat)
THE METHODS OF ECONOMIC NONCOOPERATION: (1) ECONOMIC BOYCOTTS
Actions by Consumers
71. Consumers’ boycott
72. Nonconsumption of boycotted goods
73. Policy of austerity
74. Rent withholding
75. Refusal to rent
76. National consumers’ boycott
77. International consumers’ boycott
Action by Workers and Producers
78. Workmen’s boycott
79. Producers’ boycott
Action by Middlemen
80. Suppliers’ and handlers’ boycott
Action by Owners and Management
81. Traders’ boycott
82. Refusal to let or sell property
83. Lockout
84. Refusal of industrial assistance
85. Merchants’ “general strike”
Action by Holders of Financial Resources
86. Withdrawal of bank deposits
87. Refusal to pay fees, dues, and assessments
88. Refusal to pay debts or interest
89. Severance of funds and credit
90. Revenue refusal
91. Refusal of a government’s money
Action by Governments
92. Domestic embargo
93. Blacklisting of traders
94. International sellers’ embargo
95. International buyers’ embargo
96. International trade embargo
THE METHODS OF ECONOMIC NONCOOPERATION: (2)THE STRIKE
Symbolic Strikes
97. Protest strike
98. Quickie walkout (lightning strike)
Agricultural Strikes
99. Peasant strike
100. Farm Workers’ strike
Strikes by Special Groups
101. Refusal of impressed labor
102. Prisoners’ strike
103. Craft strike
104. Professional strike
Ordinary Industrial Strikes
105. Establishment strike
106. Industry strike
107. Sympathetic strike
Restricted Strikes
108. Detailed strike
109. Bumper strike
110. Slowdown strike
111. Working-to-rule strike
112. Reporting “sick” (sick-in)
113. Strike by resignation
114. Limited strike
115. Selective strike
Multi-Industry Strikes
116. Generalized strike
117. General strike
Combination of Strikes and Economic Closures
118. Hartal
119. Economic shutdown
THE METHODS OF POLITICAL NONCOOPERATION
Rejection of Authority
120. Withholding or withdrawal of allegiance
121. Refusal of public support
122. Literature and speeches advocating resistance
Citizens’ Noncooperation with Government
123. Boycott of legislative bodies
124. Boycott of elections
125. Boycott of government employment and positions
126. Boycott of government depts., agencies, and other bodies
127. Withdrawal from government educational institutions
128. Boycott of government-supported organizations
129. Refusal of assistance to enforcement agents
130. Removal of own signs and placemarks
131. Refusal to accept appointed officials
132. Refusal to dissolve existing institutions
Citizens’ Alternatives to Obedience
133. Reluctant and slow compliance
134. Nonobedience in absence of direct supervision
135. Popular nonobedience
136. Disguised disobedience
137. Refusal of an assemblage or meeting to disperse
138. Sitdown
139. Noncooperation with conscription and deportation
140. Hiding, escape, and false identities
141. Civil disobedience of “illegitimate” laws
Action by Government Personnel
142. Selective refusal of assistance by government aides
143. Blocking of lines of command and information
144. Stalling and obstruction
145. General administrative noncooperation
146. Judicial noncooperation
147. Deliberate inefficiency and selective noncooperation by enforcement agents
148. Mutiny
Domestic Governmental Action
149. Quasi-legal evasions and delays
150. Noncooperation by constituent governmental units
International Governmental Action
151. Changes in diplomatic and other representations
152. Delay and cancellation of diplomatic events
153. Withholding of diplomatic recognition
154. Severance of diplomatic relations
155. Withdrawal from international organizations
156. Refusal of membership in international bodies
157. Expulsion from international organizations
THE METHODS OF NONVIOLENT INTERVENTION
Psychological Intervention
158. Self-exposure to the elements
159. The fast
a) Fast of moral pressure
b) Hunger strike
c) Satyagrahic fast
160. Reverse trial
161. Nonviolent harassment
Physical Intervention
162. Sit-in
163. Stand-in
164. Ride-in
165. Wade-in
166. Mill-in
167. Pray-in
168. Nonviolent raids
169. Nonviolent air raids
170. Nonviolent invasion
171. Nonviolent interjection
172. Nonviolent obstruction
173. Nonviolent occupation
Social Intervention
174. Establishing new social patterns
175. Overloading of facilities
176. Stall-in
177. Speak-in
178. Guerrilla theater
179. Alternative social institutions
180. Alternative communication system
Economic Intervention
181. Reverse strike
182. Stay-in strike
183. Nonviolent land seizure
184. Defiance of blockades
185. Politically motivated counterfeiting
186. Preclusive purchasing
187. Seizure of assets
188. Dumping
189. Selective patronage
190. Alternative markets
191. Alternative transportation systems
192. Alternative economic institutions
Political Intervention
193. Overloading of administrative systems
194. Disclosing identities of secret agents
195. Seeking imprisonment
196. Civil disobedience of “neutral” laws
197. Work-on without collaboration
198. Dual sovereignty and parallel government
The other night, I volunteer to work in the kitchen but before leaving, I learned that many at the camp support Black Bloc tactics even though they themselves weren’t apart of them. I’ve decided to hold back from volunteering or donations until this issue is resolved.
There is a reason why some police decided to dress up like Black Bloc members and cause problems. It’s a tactic to turn the public off to the movement and YES, I agree, they are playing into the hands of those who want to bring down the movement. Until this issue is resolved and we see what happens at the next demonstration, I’m reframing from becoming any further involved.
As long as Occupy supports or allows these members to run through the streets of the Oakland community, destroying property etc. and than going back to the camp to sleep, they represent the Occupy movement and therefore the movement has endorsed these so called “diverse tactics”. This tactics in the end will turn the community on the Occupy movement and turn others away who are thinking about joining. These individuals may very well “black bloc” their own movement. And wasn’t there a resolution passed to discourage this type of behavior? Seems hypocritical that Occupy wants to use these tactics and than put out a statement that to “disavow” themselves from them because they weren’t brought before the GA. Hmm… People aren’t going to buy it, sorry. It’s not going to work.
What the hell? No.
The tactics of Black Bloc directly put the rest of OO protesters in harms way. The night of the 520 16th Street dance party, as police progressed west onto 16th Street, a human wall of about 10 people stood in front of a motionless police wall. As the protesters were calling for others to join them in standing ground, I witnessed a black clad male run up, pick up a paint can, lob it over the heads of the 10 protesters at the police, and very cowardly, run away. It was at this point that police utilized tear gas and projectiles. I still wonder what would have happened had this paint can not been thrown. I know this after the events on 16th and Broadway, but I still wonder if more had been brave enough to join the wall (myself included) if events would have been different.
Right on John Seal, what you say is bitter but it cuts to the truth. People who act as some kind of collective army without the authority of the others in the march are obviously on a power trip. Those of us who’ve marched in the SF area for years have seen it before again and again, and it always demoralizes us… which is why they are the best friends of the cops. Their appearance on this scene doesn’t surprise me, but our inability to deal with them is beginning to undermine my faith in everybody’s dedication to seeing this through in solidarity with all the other Occupy camps and not just certain people’s egos.
Hi Tiahtolli, I am responding again to your other post because it won’t seem to let me respond to your other messages. Again, I appreciate the rational tone of our disagreement and I’m sure you feel the same. In response to your other question, “If we can’t support Occupy Oakland in its current form, how can we support the Occupy movement in the Bay Area?”, it’s difficult. I want to support the whole Occupy Oakland, but I can’t for example march to occupy any of the vacant buildings that should be put to public if I don’t know what kind of violent tactics might be used to “defend” the space. As if launching bottle rockets and throwing stones is going to defend anybody from a militarized police force.
It’s difficult, I don’t want to say anything that could be seen as undermining the efforts of so many good hearted people downtown. Amazing things are happening every day. But myself and my friends have also observed things like, hustlers asking for change posing as some kind of occupation representative. We don’t have security tactics against these kinds of exploitation, or against a lot of the theft going on at both camps in Oakland. Instead of addressing any of the issues going on, there wasn’t even a GA tonight. I’m still disappointed…..
check this out: it’s in the works:
http://pastebin.com/Kc1RdWVd
someone tried proposing a good neighbor policy here at OO and it failed. hard…
this is a possible solution…
Very good point.
great points, once again.
thlatoli: you made some very strong arguments that made me reconsider my positions on this matter. this needs to be shared and discussed. THANK YOU.
I don’t think the assumption of non-violence is in doubt at all. What’s I’ve concluded over the last two days is that it’s completely mistaken. I believe this means OO has thus lost any chance of building a broad-based movement to counter economic inequality. I hope to be proven wrong.
If the Black Bloc-practitioners are so convinced of the righteousness of their tactics let them take off the masks and take responsibility for their actions. The power of civil disobedience emanates from the willingness of participants to accept punishment.
Their refusal to reveal themselves is both cowardly and a thuggish intimidation tactic designed to scare those of us opposed to violence. It’s also a clannish ‘member’s only’ fashion statement for self-righteous idiots who claim they are fighting on behalf of the 99% whilst not so quietly sneering at the sheeple who are averse to breaking windows and throwing bottles at cops.
I have felt that the Occupy Oakland movement has been strongly co-opted by a certain mindset that has at its core something not quite in sync with the greater spirit of the movement. BUT, I think it is because Oakland itself is very, very different from many of the other occupy encampment locations. There is a very real, very current, ongoing tradition of police brutality in this city, as well as, poverty, unemployment, gangs, random acts of violence etc. It’s a harsh place for many people. Harsher than most. The OPD set the tone for the movement with their actions the night of the eviction BUT I don’t think we should continue to let them set the tone by anticipating confrontation or worse by encouraging it through acts of vandalism. We play right into their hands that way. They want the movement to explode, they want us to loose our temper and scare our supporters (and fellow 99%) so that they can finally come in full force. BUT that isn’t even the most important reason why we need to resist their manipulation. We are gathered together to find solutions to problems on a systemic level. And marching and striking under 5 million different banners is hugely important but the focus needs to stay on the Common Purpose that brings us All Together in these Occupy movements. What is that one thing? The absolute imperative need for us to put our heads together and think of a way to fix everything they have broken. This might mean a lot more quiet, group talking and a lot less planning the next HUGE statement. This is about endurance in the face of the current status-quo regime while working to create something better. Something that will allow us to kick those bastards out of power for once and for all. Not with force. We don’t have to really Do anything to them. Their House of Cards is crumbling. Soon their money will be worthless. We need to be ready to take care of each other. We need to find a new system to replace the one that is crumbling and we need to do it fast. We need to stop complaining about our individual injustices and we need to stop seeking remediation through the current social, economic and political system, and start trying to think of a different economy. Outside the box. I know there are many down at Occupy Oakland who are exactly about this. But I think everyone down there needs to do more work toward solidarity with the Global movement if they are going to make any progress toward a solution. Nevertheless, I support the Occupy Oakland no matter what. I understand if anger and fear need to be expressed by some people. God know we all have a right to be mad as Fucking hell and some feel it day to day more than others. So, I’m not trying to judge. I love you all. Even the ones who I think say stupid shit. Seriously, I’m just glad you are talking and I am listening and we are not alone.
If you protect institutions that have exploited the working class then you are no better than the police beating protesters to protect the power of the wealthy. The general strike cost the city government, large corporations, and other agencies MILLIONS of dollars from the stoppage of the movement of capital and business. THAT is a major attack on the foundations of the wealthy’s influence over society. I notice more angry comments about a couple of broken windows and some paint that’ll come off with some soap and water than when the police, the paid protectors of the rich and powerful, have carried out violent attacks on protesters, severely injuring some. I see statements about how violence alienates those who carry it out from so-called ‘non-violent’ protesters, and yet these same persons defend violent police actions and have the gall to tell me that police are on my side. Some even support actions by the police because “that’s their job”. It was the job of Egyptian secret police to brutally oppress the Egyptian working class through torture, intimidation, abuse, etc. Would you defend their actions because they’re being paid to? It’s the job of the Syrian soldier in Damascus to shoot unarmed protesters. Would you defend their job?
Good point.
@think!
Thank you!
I actually think a good neighbor policy, like you mentioned OWS has, would be great. And I hear your point about growing the movement, and that we do need to be on our best behavior. I agree that vandalism and destructive action obscures the aims of the movement.
I’m just pointing out that at this point, we need to get away from wanting the GA to offer “legitimacy” to non-violence. I don’t think it will happen for the reasons I described above. That doesn’t mean I like this situation or that I favor it. I think the sooner we move past the Occupy Oakland camp, the better it will be for the movement as a whole.
Most likely what’s going to happen is that peace-loving folks such as yourself, David Heatherly, and me aren’t going to participate in any GA-sanctioned events and the numbers will dwindle. Then the Occupy Oakland camp will have a hard time staying relevant, especially if the entire community is against it. Sooner or later, Occupy Oakland will have to figure out that it needs to build a broad coalition and denounce violence if it wants to continue existing.
The irony of ironies is if the Oakland community mobilized against the Occupy Oakland camp. If the camp won’t listen to reason, then maybe it’s time to speak in terms it can understand.
So true. Likeminded people need to organize and get a solid proposal put together to ensure that this movement is a success.
Yes, yes, and more yes.
Tlahotolli, I respect you and your opinions, and even more, the time and commitment you are putting into this. But I guess somehow I’m not being clear.
It is about GROWING THE MOVEMENT. Do you think we can recruit the tens of thousands more we need to make this a success without public approval? However successful social media is, the vast majority of Americans still get their information through mainstream media. In a sense, until we have critical mass, we do need to live by public opinion. Public opinion is how we can grow. Without it, we are dead.
Look at the bigger picture, here… WE NEED THE REST OF THE 99% TO RELATE TO US… otherwise they will stay asleep on their sofas while the country falls apart around them. Most of the 99% don’t relate to defacing small businesses and other destructive acts. And I don’t think we will appeal to the Jersey Shore crowd anyway, no matter what we do!
It IS a make or break moment. Everyone I know is deeply disappointed that #OO can’t simply make a statement about what the vast majority feels is counterproductive and worse, undermining. I know dozens of supporters in New York who are furious with #OO’s inability to take a stand on this issue. They took a stand against violence as their official “Good Neighbor Policy,” posted in an official statement on their website. Why can’t we do the same?
I wholeheartedly agree with your second point. Part of what kept me coming back to the GA is the opportunity to hear ideas, issues, and things we could work on.
@think!
At the same time, we can’t live by public opinion. Just look at what the public likes: Jersey Shore, American Idol, etc.
David, I explain why the GA can’t condemn it in my missive above. The Oakland GA isn’t the end-all-be-all of the movement as it is.
Ok, well, if that’s what it’s going to be, I really do recommend using Bruce Lee’s strategy to be like water.
If we can’t support Occupy Oakland in its current form, how can we support the Occupy movement in the Bay Area?
It’s not so much being “embarrassed by a few people who break things during marches”, it’s being deeply confused and disappointed by the fact that the GA can’t even manage procedurally to condemn the vandalism even though almost everyone I talk to at OO disagrees with what happened to Tully’s and the other local businesses especially.
Arson, rape and murder have not happened in downtown Oakland while Occupy Oakland was doing mass protests. Property destruction and violence have, however. So let’s be serious here and not talk in abstractions. It really and truly is a make or break moment, at least for Occupy Oakland. A lot of us now feel that the Oakland part of OWS movement has been co-opted by a group of people who appear, to us, to be similar to the nazi street gangs of 1930s Berlin. We cannot march with or support Occupy Oakland until and unless it is willing to officially distance itself from these “tactics.”
The Black Bloc derives its power from its numbers, and the anonymity of the members. Here is how I propose we deal with the problem:
Don’t march with the Black Bloc! Any time a Black Bloc assembles, remove yourself from the situation. Assemble with other non-violent protesters, in a Non-Violent Bloc. Allow the perpetrators of violent acts to be met with the crushing authoritarian tactics that the system will use to suppress those kind of actions.
In addition, the Non-Violent Bloc (We could dub it the Peace-Bloc) should loudly voice condemnation for the tactics of the Black Bloc. Chanting “Shame” would be a good method of condemning the Black Bloc.
This is Non-Violent Autonomous action, being used to show that the Violent tactics of the Black Bloc do not speak for the people of Occupy Oakland.
Dont Give them your body. Dont march with them. Dont support their actions.
That’s fine, David, but you can’t force a decision where one isn’t needed.
In the meantime, I ask you to please continue to support the people’s movement. Please see MoveToAmend.org.
Also, if you haven’t already moved your money into a credit union, I encourage you to do so, and to encourage others to do so as well.
The priority at the moment is to stop the vandalism that is killing support for the movement.
What this is really about is American human rights and lives being at stake. It’s about how to ensure a successful movement to save this country from a total meltdown.
The issue is not about being “embarrassed.” It’s about public opinion! We need this movement to grow. And now, since the destructive acts of #OO General Strike, public approval is on the decline. We simply must avoid this kind of bad PR if we are to succeed.
If a a group of people from Occupy indulged in murder, arson, or rape we sure as hell would want to condemn it.
As it is a group of people from Occupy are vandals.
Our image matters. It will inform public opinion about the movement and will directly impact whether we grow or stagnate.
Our image is being formed, at this very moment, by how we react to the violent and destructive media images of the #OO General Strike. If we don’t come out with a strong statement condemning those acts, yes, actually, that will translate to the public thinking we condone it.
It could, actually, be a make or break deal for the movement if public opinion starts working against us because we have a bad image in the media.
And again, I encourage you to find other ways to support the movement if marching isn’t your cup of tea.
The danger is falling into the trap of appearances and deception. If all of the sudden we’re going to be embarrassed by a few people who break things during marches, and that’s going to stop us from contributing to strengthening the 99%, then we really need to ask ourselves what our priorities are. This is a golden opportunity for democratic change. Not everything we do has to go through the GA, which is what this is about.
Let’s take a step back here.
No one is advocating violence. The majority of the 99% are peaceful and will continue being peaceful. But the fact that we’re not condemning a particular tactic doesn’t mean we endorse it. Otherwise, we’d have to condemn arson, murder, and rape because not condemning it means we endorse or tolerate it. Follow me?
Again, this isn’t a make or break deal for the movement unless we’re wiling to let it be one.
I agree; however I am not going to donate food, blankets, tarps, tents, etc. as I have been doing if they are going to be used for a movement that condones violence. I would just as soon provide material support to the Klan or to the Tea Party. A decision needs to be made my friend. We can’t have a movement that’s halfway violent revolution and halfway peaceful protest.
I strongly disagree. I don’t think the chasm forming within OO is a result of outside influence. On the contrary, it is the product of the choices made by a few selfish individuals without regard to their effect on the movement as a whole. Social justice is not attainable through violent means. Its astounding that people can’t see that. If OO will not officially commit to nonviolence we should stop bitching about our constitutional rights. Those rights were granted under certain pretexts (i.e. peaceable assembly).
Secondly, there is a reason the movement “does not have a clear picture of what it is.” It is not very well organized. It is hard for me to believe that something like the civil rights movement would have even been possible if it would have adopted our structure. Something that relies heavily on democratic decision making must be highly organized. Think about how an election works. You know in advance what the issues are. You inform yourself. You decide the best course of action. You spread the word and turn out and vote one way or another for those issues. You don’t go into Elections blindly like every GA I’ve been to. You also don’t sit through 2 hours listening to announcements or irrelevant in house issues, before the opportunity to vote. If this movement is going to be about social justice than we need to be spending our time at the GA’s talking about Social issues. We need to know what proposals are on the table in advance. Post them online.
The GA’s need to be informative, inspiring, and strategic. We shouldn’t be spending our time talking about where to use the bathroom.
Lastly, acts of Violence will probably continue to occur no matter what OO’s official stance is. But that does not mean that there should be no official stance.
Enforcing nonviolence would be a lot easier than it seems.
1. denounce it publicly in every instance.
2. actively reach out to the community and make reparations for any current or future physical or property damage perpetrated by members of OO.
3. report those responsible to the police.
Well, again, it is divisive because it should be divisive. Violence is not acceptable to most of us and, more importantly, not acceptable to the majority of the 99% who we are trying to get on our side. It is not something we can live with or support. It is the very thing many of us are struggling against. I do not wish to march or do anything else in solidarity with anyone who advocates violence. In fact I would struggle to resist such a movement, which I would perceive as dangerous to Oakland and to America. That is why this is a real moment of decision and we cannot keep ignoring it and allowing it to be decided on an individual basis. If Occupy Oakland is going to tolerate destruction and violence then that needs to be made clear. I did not sign up for a violent revolution and I will not support it in any way.
I agree with David, we need to get rid of the violent socialist, communist, and anarchist and keep the remaining peaceful people. Question, how to accomplish this as the disruptive folks (i.e. communist, anarchist) seem to be taking over these occupy (fill in the city name) movements. Maybe start identifying the movement with an official t-shirt and only hand the shirts out to those people that look like their not going to bash in a window or harass law abiding citizens and business men.
It’s your call, David.
I’m personally for non-violence and peaceful means of protest, but I recognize the “twisted” reality that we have and am trying my best to work with it.
If anything, I think we could think of creative, non-violent ways to counter the 1% instead of expending valuable energy on our differences. I mean, the whole approach of condemning violent tactics is COUNTER to non-violence! It produces conflict, stress, and the only solution seems to be an overwhelming show of force at the GA in order to get the GA to condemn it.
If we non-violent folk are serious about non-violence, we should practice what we preach and come up with effective means of protests.
Also just wanted to say, I do appreciate the even and respectful tone of your post and your response. But it’s not “as divisive as we want it to be.” It is divisive and it SHOULD be divisive.
I assumed, and the vast majority of those marching last week assumed, that this was a non-violent movement. Now, that assumption is in doubt — not because of what happened late Wednesday, but because of the Oakland GA’s inability to condemn those actions.
Yes absolutely, I will continue to support those types of actions. But the discussion about taking over buildings is well under way, without our having resolved a fundamental dispute over tactics. I’m afraid that most of us who marched last week in the General Strike will not be able to provide support or to march with OO unless this issue has been resolved. I know that we can’t necessarily prevent Black Bloc from taking action, but we can prevent from providing tacit approval of those tactics. If the GA cannot do this, I would only join further marches as a counter-protestor representing the true spirit of OWS against the twisted version we are spiralling into here in Oakland.
To clarify, an alternative would be a boycott or a Bank Transfer Day type thing, for example.
David, it’s as divisive as we want it to be.
Marches are just one tactic in this movement.
Also, we can’t count on the media being on our side. They have their own agenda.
Exactly!!
David, it’s as divisive as we want it to be.
Marches are just one tactic in this movement. If people who want to march peacefully can’t do so because Black Bloc may or may not be used, then we could find some sort of alternative that doesn’t include marching.
Also, we can’t count on the media being on our side.
If the black bloc members truly avoid violence to people, how about peaceful protesters lock arms in front of places that might be targeted, as an intentional human shield to preempt vandalism? Would have to be there before any b.b. groups get there, though.
So, your answer to this incredibly divisive issue which has caused pretty much all the negative media attention on our group, is to ignore it?
Those who want to march peacefully cannot be expected to march with those who advocate violence and destruction. That is like asking MLK Jr. to show solidarity with the KKK, if a bunch of them showed up with burning crosses and wanted to march with the crowd to Selma.