Apparently police used tear gas and batons to wreck Occupy Oakland's encampment this morning. Nothing very subtle about that. But it was the excuse from the mayor's office that caught my eye. According to the Oakland Tribune, a spokeswoman for the mayor, Karen Boyd, said Friday that the protesters had shown themselves incapable of self-governance. "As a collective, they cannot maintain the plaza in a safe condition," she said.
I haven't been to OccupyOakland, so can't speak to conditions. But at Wall Street, and in DC, and in Boston, I've seen people doing remarkable things, both outside and inside their camps. (Boston even has a library, with librarians from Boston Public). It's pretty sweet.
But if the standard for successful governance is 'maintaining the plaza in a safe condition,' what does that say about the 1%? They've got a rapidly overheating planet, with an ocean 30% more acid than it used to be and the Arctic shedding sea ice. They've got endemic unemployment in almost every advanced economy, failing banks, and no answers to international conflicts beyond another round of drone flights.
Maybe it's just me, but failing to "maintain the planet in a safe condition" seems like a worse charge. And if we need to be on the plazas over and over again to make that point, what choice really do we have?
1:18 PM PT: A very sweet update--just talked with friends in the apparently irrepressible Bay Area, and they're in a crowd of 500 anti-Keystone protesters waiting to greet the pres. when he arrives in San Francisco. Many thanks to Credo for organizing!