Skip to main content

Good news folks, the rumors spread by people not at GAs that the "Black Bloc" has taken over Occupy Oakland...that

"they ARE Occupy Oakland now" are rumors that are easily counter-argued with FACTs. Allow me to present to you one such fact known as TONIGHT in a moment.

Why this counter-factual meme is given credence, I've yet to fathom. I understand the concern that change is happening at an alarming rate. It is normal, to a degree, for all of us to feel at such unacustomed times that things are spinning out of control & insidious forces are taking over. However, the truly insidious forces took over quite a while back. When we participate in participatory democracy at the GAs we are not-

fools leading fools. I will also no longer support Occupy Oakland has sealed its own fate by taking this action (not excluding the black bloc in the first place).

Unions will not support an organization aligned with the Black Bloc, as well they shouldn't. I encouraged my union, successfully, to support the General Strike. I will now encourage them to withdraw support and tell them why.

No Union stand of solidarity has been withdrawn from Occupied Oakland. The few people who use "Black Bloc" tactics in every urban center in the U.S. haven't seized, taken over, or derailed Occupy Oakland. Sure, that's the meme some people are consciously or unconsciously spreading around. It just isn't true. Really, it isn't.

Remember the "clothes" meme...that the way people dressed at OWS events was turning off the country...that people "having sex" in their tents would alienate the "silent majority?" Those had their run here. And after the "Black Bloc" scare is regulated to the dustbin of history, there will be another meme to take its place why the movement is faltering.

The reality is different.

THIS is the reality of Occupied Oakland TONIGHT. The reality you'd see if you were here or watching Live-stream (which you can do by clicking on that link & listen to the truth yourself.

Photobucket

The man with the moustache, Frank, is from SEIU. I'm not sure what organization the blind woman with the cane is from. The man on the right wears a NY Yankees cap, but isn't affiliated with them. The man in the middle hosts OakFoSho Live-stream, & his mom was a life-long union member (& SEIU member). As he says, "This isn't just a community, it is a family."

"If you can change Oakland, you can change the world", says the man with the beanie cap-2nd from the left.

Frank, the man from SEIU & 40-year union member, explains the bravery of the sight-impaired woman he is hugging...& explains powerfully why labor IS aligned with, & supports, Occupied Oakland. "We've been ineffective because we've not challenged power."

The union man on the far left with the other baseball cap perfectly summarizes what too many people buy into. "When times are good, the employers reap the benefits. When times are bad it is the workers who have to suffer"

The SEIU man is a hero-

"The solution for unions is to join the people here. Bring sleeping bags, bring our blankets & bring food...we are much better off joining in here in occupied Oakland defending the perimeter." To which the African-American man on the left side (with beanie) responded, "& get out of bed with the employers."

The blond woman, 3rd from the left, smiled & said, "Come & join us. Everyone is welcome."

While I admit I love the people in the photo above, I also have to admit that the truth they represent on the ground in Oakland is not as sexy as the "violent people in black have taken us over" meme.

You really think the "Black Bloc" has taken over...come down & talk to the blind woman-I promise you her view is crystal clear...& then maybe you can convince the SEIU man not to stand with Occupied Oakland-'cuz I neither can nor want to.

You might also speak to the veterans here. Last night, as JPMassar pointed out, there were 30 veterans at Occupy Oakland. I'm sure Doug was one of them. I've met him several times. He's stocky & is towers above me at way over 6 feet. I bet he's working in the medic tent again tonight. As an Iraq war veteran, he puts himself on the line defending & repairing people who have no other access to healthcare. A job the city should be doing. When it comes to things like that, he knows what he's doing. You think he, or his fellow vets on the scene here, would let anything fringe group seize this movement? If you do, then come down & talk to him (& the other vets about it).

Photobucket

They've put their bodies on the line to protect Occupy Oakland from violence, & their voices behind non-violent actions. Try to tell them in person they've failed. Look for Doug, his height, stockiness, & habitually worn floppy camo hat, make him easy to find. He's very friendly & loves conversation. If I haven't convinced you that we're on track, maybe he can.

Originally posted to MBismo Vencerá on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 09:55 PM PST.

Also republished by Occupy Wall Street.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (166+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    humphrey, FlamingoGrrl, boadicea, Lorikeet, cany, Major Tom, navajo, remembrance, Glen The Plumber, jpmassar, markthshark, mahakali overdrive, Otteray Scribe, wu ming, Meteor Blades, Zydekos, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, allensl, john07801, JekyllnHyde, psyched, Horace Boothroyd III, Publius2008, SwedishJewfish, dsb, Shockwave, DeusExMachina, kevinpdx, We Won, NapaJulie, Mother Mags, shopkeeper, joliberal, solesse413, paxpdx, UnaSpenser, webranding, 207wickedgood, Sean X, RhymesWithUrple, ActivistGuy, mint julep, fumie, KenBee, Nada Lemming, eeff, deepeco, kaliope, Horsefeathers, awshucks101, antirove, jw1, WisePiper, Kitsap River, grollen, susakinovember, evergreen2, Floande, bula, justiceputnam, Laughing Vergil, GenXangster, Kamakhya, petulans, BentLiberal, operculum, Sanctimonious, blueoasis, alizard, Onomastic, kyril, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, MadRuth, CTPatriot, kestrel9000, DiegoUK, kurt, tRueffert, irate, hyperstation, luckylizard, LSmith, hannah, shanikka, Pinto Pony, gulfgal98, rgjdmls, bushondrugs, Mosquito Pilot, theKgirls, pickandshovel, gooderservice, googie, linkage, cybersaur, Gustogirl, MKSinSA, Thinking Fella, leonard145b, karmsy, Mary Mike, missLotus, buckstop, cynndara, zukesgirl64, billlaurelMD, Tara the Antisocial Social Worker, CT Hank, Mentatmark, glitterscale, JDWolverton, ehrenfeucht games, dksbook, Caddis Fly, shortgirl, SherwoodB, Dem Beans, divedeeper, Matt Z, annan, Sylv, Aaa T Tudeattack, jofr, gatorcog, One Pissed Off Liberal, Steven D, Wolf10, Losty, kathny, Alice Olson, majcmb1, Siri, cotterperson, timethief, Pizzapotamus, anodnhajo, KJG52, bronte17, muddy boots, IndieGuy, sagansong, DMiller, no way lack of brain, Dr Colossus, poliwrangler, pioneer111, citisven, maybeeso in michigan, kimoconnor, offgrid, martini, Anne was here, sea note, SadieB, tofumagoo, Nowhere Man, bnasley, Ice Blue, elwior, stolen water, Kurt Sperry, shaharazade, joedemocrat, vigilant meerkat, DawnN, Lensy

    Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

    by catilinus on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 09:55:35 PM PST

    •  Yes! the story should be not be about the violence (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blueoasis, elwior, shaharazade

      that many police departments and mayors etc, obviously at the service of the 1% are practicing on peaceful protesters. And YES it should not be about about the "Black Bloc" who are in actual acting as agent provocateurs  that will give ammunition to the MSM and others to portray the OWS and related Occupy incarnations as just violent anarchist!

      The story should be about the brave Occupy non-violent protesters who are exercising their fundamental rights to free speech that is strongly protected in the US Constitution.

      On the other hand the repeated use of unwarranted excessive force by many police departments, which echo the actions of dictatorial regimes that practice this, should be challenged on a bigger scale.

      Maybe that is the other story that should be highlighted, the trampling of basic civil rights and freedom of expression that are guaranteed in the constitution.

      What awesome stories of bravery and heroism by the Occupy Oakland and many other Occupy movements in different cities!

      Thanks for a great diary shedding light on the acts of bravery by all of you who were there, the lady who stood her ground and eventually won the battle to get her thrown out of the park, and possibly thrown in jail, and the brave young souls who sat in the inner circle ready for whatever was thrown at them!

      Yes We Can - Tear Down the Walls of fear, hate & division!

      by SpringFever on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 10:12:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Always spot-on with the right take-away. nt (16+ / 0-)

      Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

      by catilinus on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 10:42:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Meteor Blades: the entire point is that we WANT (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MKSinSA, fcvaguy, elwior

      OO to disavow and expel the black bloc. We want them to dissociate OO from them and they refuse, presenting a public face to everyone for the past week and a half that says very clearly: we, OO, will not exclude the BB.

      This is not something I'M doing: this is coming out of the GA's and OO's own press releases.

      To give credence to the lie that this diary is trying to sell, that this is just a media creation or has nothing at all to do with OO people is just ...

      All I can say is that this diary reads to me as either wishful thinking, at best, or propaganda at worst.

    •  Normally (9+ / 0-)

      I'd say I was rather Black Bloc sort myself: born military, raised to believe that God is on the side of the heavy artillery, and firmly believing that bullies need to be hit over the head with a 2X4 to get their attention.

      But not with Occupy.  Occupy has shown us a path of resistance that does NOT depend on violence; a kind of solidarity and large-scale commitment that can only flourish as long as its people renounce violence and concentrate on the moral high ground.  You can't wage war and occupy moral high ground.  Wars are messy and nasty experiences and always end up violating conscience and humanity.  The beauty of the Occupations is their ability to stay focused above all that.  From the many posts I've read here, I can feel the power and strength of spirit that's coming out of this shared commitment to STAND, and not to yield, neither to the abuse of enemies nor the dark cravings of our own fears and furies.

      Let the Black Blocs serve elsewhere in this struggle.  Over the last decade, occasional violence over WTO conferences has served to highlight the importance of the issues.  Perhaps in a year or two, if the Masters crack down with violent oppression, concentration camps, chain-gangs, and medieval torture and slavery, there will be need for violent retribution.  But here and now . . . NO.  This is the time to allow the warriors of peace to stand out and contest by strength of will alone.

      Good gods, I wish I was with you.  I wish my personal situation was either worse or better, and I could just quit hanging on to a precarious respectability and join the fight.  I'm just not there right now.  Only in heart.  Only in spirit, and by the light of my keyboard, for five more months during which the weight of the world literally hangs on your shoulders.  You make me weep with pride.

      •  Well Said (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Meteor Blades

        If the BB wants to smash bank windows and risk arrest on their own I don't really care much one way or the other. But given the realities doing so in the context of a non-violent protest endangers everyone in the vicinity.  Endangers in a direct and immediate way.  There may be children or people with physical disabilities in the immediate area that cannot flee the response to the provocation.  Just as the police create immanent danger every time they irresponsibly raise the level of chaos and violence, so too do provocateurs.

        Safety has to be at the top of the list of priorities at any protest where be essentially defenseless if the situation is escalated to a street riot.  Not just defenseless participants but uninvolved people who happen to be in the vicinity.

        Provocative escalations that by themselves increase chaos and potential for violence must not be tolerated from either side of the situation. I have trouble believing we cannot broadly agree on this.  

        Advisors for President-Elect Barack Obama feared the new administration would face a coup if it prosecuted Bush-era war crimes, according to a new report out this morning.

        by Kurt Sperry on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:27:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  That's what I've been trying to tell people for (23+ / 0-)

    weeks now.  Black Bloc does not encamp.  They do not participate in GA or occupys generally.  They show up when they can cause trouble.  My advice: walk in the other direction when you see them.

    Ordinary political process is dead. The Supreme Court killed it. In Chambers. With a gavel.

    by Publius2008 on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 10:33:56 PM PST

    •  I don't think anyone should make blanket (6+ / 0-)

      Statements like this. I fully agree with the diary. The black bloc was one day, not even a whole day, mote like a few hours. If people really think that is going to destroy this movement then they must think this movement is really weak. At the same time I see comments like the one above that are based only on assumptions and simplistic press versions of events. There is absolutely no reason to believe that the people who participated in the black block either do or don't occupy. There is a narrative that has been pushed for years on the mainstream media  and it makes me a little sad to see people who I otherwise respect buy into that simplistic narrative.

      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

      by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:43:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  i hadn't heard the rumor about BB taking over OO (26+ / 0-)

    delighted to hear any such thoughts are BS.

    loved the video in MOT diary showing OWS taking charge over BB. Maybe they will get the hint and beat feet.

    Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Mohandas K. Gandhi

    by Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 10:34:14 PM PST

  •  Point taken (25+ / 0-)

    It's hard to tell, sometimes, when there are so many different narratives going around. I've read so many first-hand accounts of the increasing divisions concerning the BB presence that it seemed credible to me. But I now trust they have this under control. Setbacks and internal conflicts just come with the territory-democracy is messy.

    Anyways, since I'm one of the people you quoted I just want to make it clear- my concern was genuine at the time but has since abated. My other Kossaks have set me straight, and I stand in enthusiastic solidarity with Occupy Oakland now more than ever.  

    R.I.P. Troy Anthony Davis
    October 9, 1968 - September 21, 2011

    by SwedishJewfish on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 10:36:39 PM PST

  •  Catilinus I know you speak the truth (25+ / 0-)

    The Black Bloc is an aberration, they have nothing to do with OO.  They are opportunists at best.

    Go Oakland go!

    Dailykos.com; an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action 48forEastAfrica - Donate to Oxfam

    by Shockwave on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 10:41:14 PM PST

    •  But They Are Real (9+ / 0-)

      I was at the IMF/World Bank protest in the late 90s. They just came out of nowhere and messed shit up for those of us that want to peaceful protest.

      When opportunity calls pick up the phone and give it directions to your house.

      by webranding on Sat Nov 12, 2011 at 10:59:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was at the IMF/WB protest in 2000 too (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cotterperson, KJG52, catilinus, JesseCW

        And saw no such thing. I was a reporter for a Connecticut alt weekly and reported on the April, 2000 IMF/WB convergence.

        The Black Bloc respected the "no property destruction" consensus at that event.

        I am totally opposed to the actions the Black Bloc took in Oakland on November 2 and have so stated in comments on dKos. One can get into all the philosophical discussion they want about whether property destruction is violence but two facts remain:

        1) It looks like violence to folks on TV.

        2) It leaves you wide open to manipulation by agents provocateur and even outright "fake Black Bloc" actions by cops.

        That being said, I did get to know sincere activists who participated in Black Bloc actions in the 1999-2001 period. Most of those folks have remained activists, doing constructive radical organizing work.

        The issue is not--as far as I'm concerned--"expelling the Black Bloc" as it is categorically rejecting actions that defy open, democratic consensus processes and harm the movement.

        Now, OO apparently can't get consensus on a statement that categorically rejects the types of activity in which the Black Bloc engaged and that is unfortunate and a problem. But there has not been--to my knowledge--a consensus decision to support those actions. It seems pretty clear, in fact, that the overwhelming majority sentiment is opposed to the Black Bloc tactics on that one day. (And here I think one should distinguish between a nonviolent vacant building takeover and smashing windows, setting barricades on fire and attacking nonviolent activists who try to stop that. The first action, if engaged in constructively with nonviolent discipline seems to me a legitimate tactic whereas the latter actions strike me as testosterone-fueled acting out.)

        The lion's share of the violence that has occurred--as has been documented on videos over and over--has been perpetrated by the police. Where are all those who are demanding that Occupy Oakland issue a formal condemnation of the havoc caused by the Black Bloc on one day (or the whole movement is doomed) making those same demands of all the political leaders across the country who have created militaristic police forces--an army of Robocops--and unleashed them on overwhelmingly peaceful protesters?

        •  With all due respect (11+ / 0-)

          The OO GA has passed several resolutions denouncing police violence and indeed the presence of paramilitarized police forces in general.  

          Your argument is attacking a straw man. To suggest that those of us who are trying to stem violence perpetuated by members of OO have not ALSO denounced violence by the police is false, and if you think about it for a moment, absurd on its face.

          And yet, I have been called a "shill for the 1%", a "hall monitor", and a "cop" for trying to address this with members of the Oakland GA. Usually right after being told that my suggestion that we denounce acts of vandalism that directly impact communities of color in this neighborhood are "divisive". Think about that pretzel logic for a minute.

      •  could they (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        catilinus

        have exactly that agenda in mind? What kind of an anarchist group all dresses in a uniform and is so focused and organized against  protests that are against the very things you would think they too are against. I think they are saboteurs and my tin foil hat and a lot of people I know say cops. Not necessarily Oakland cops but as this is global I do not think that the 1% is going to use anything they can to subvert and turn people away from this dangerous to them global movement. the fact that they show up at peaceful protests and have for years does not make them real in the sense that they are a separate legitimate movement maybe they are but it's more likely they work for the entities that are threatened by peaceful demonstrations.    

  •  When is GA going to disavow violence? (10+ / 0-)

    When Is the GA going to disavow violence? Inability to do so feeds rumors like these.

    •  consensus is complicated (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BentLiberal, hannah, cynndara, SadieB, elwior

      and rumors will persist no matter what anyone officially decides.

    •  When will Occupy disavow property violence? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MKSinSA, cynndara, elwior

      You mean, like, illegally seizing control of private property and using it for purposes against the wishes of its legal owners?

      I'm pretty sure that no Occupy GA is going to disavow that.

      Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

      by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 03:49:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And you think Congress is dysfunctional? (0+ / 0-)

        Explain how a non-violent extended sit-in is violent and/or to lighting a trash can on fire or busting a storefront up? Was Gandhi the leader of a violent movement? MLK?

        “The first principle [in science] is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman

        by the fan man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 06:08:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Many of these (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JesseCW

          claims are grossly exaggerated.  A trashcan fire can be a practical solution to problems of lighting, heating, or cooking, not an act of "violence".  Store windows can get broken by accident when crowds of people are being pushed by police or even playing ball in the streets.  Much can be built out of nothing.  And even when intentional, there are many, many different situations and shades of grey when dealing with damage to inanimate objects.  

          •  Sidestepping the question. Vandalism: (0+ / 0-)

            "willful or malicious destruction or defacement of public or private property".

            If much can be built out of little, why go there? Cops pushing a protester into a window is obviously violence by police and we can now document it! Sitting around a open trash can fire may be non-violent but not very smart on a city street, and we are smart, aren't we? Willful and malicious destruction of private property is another thing and should be condemned. You're afraid to because, they'll use that statement against you? Make me laugh!

            “The first principle [in science] is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman

            by the fan man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 07:28:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  You Have Blinders On... (0+ / 0-)

            The property damage on the day of the General Strike was NOT accidental and the fire was not so someone could read.

            If you support property damage, say so, don't dance around the edges so you don't have to admit it publicly.

            I personally don't support property damage.  I wouldn't want someone damaging my property and most of the 99% do not support it.

        •  Is vandalism violence? Is theft? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          catilinus

          If force against property is violence, then a sit-in is as an act of violence, as is a picket line or a squat. Or, perhaps more to the point: if the Black Bloc squatting in an abandoned building is the kind of violence which "Occupy must denounce" (as I'm being told it certainly is) then so too is the squatting in a private park like OWS.

          Explain how a non-violent extended sit-in is violent and/or to lighting a trash can on fire or busting a storefront up? Was Gandhi the leader of a violent movement? MLK?

          I'm trying to think of an example where either of them advocated squatting on private or public property to achieve goals which were not immediately related (Greensboro Four: "Serve us coffee." "No." "Ok, we'll wait."). Both men advocated non-violence through boycotts, marches and non-participation, but (as far as I can tell) they did not employ squats or expropriation of property by mass action. To the extent that MLK did, he called it "direct action" with the goal was to provoke such a crisis that negotiation was preferable to escalation. Both men certainly operated within a context in which they offered the peaceful alternative to the immanent threat of widespread riot or armed rebellion.

          You contrast a sit-in with lighting a trash can on fire, implying that the first in non-violent but the second is violent. I find this quite odd. Lighting a trash can on fire is an ordinance violation, as burning trash is something generally permitted in designated places and times. A burning trash can infringes on others only to the extent that it is their trash, they want to go where the fire presently is, or are down wind and smell burning trash. A sit-in, however, has the aim of using physical force to physically obstruct people from performing actions which they would otherwise be permitted to do. A sit-in is as non-violent as handcuffs. It's not a kludgeon to the cranium, admittedly, but it still involves applying force to an unwilling recipient.

          Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

          by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 07:39:21 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  So you agree with Berkley police, linking (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SadieB, blueoasis, elwior

            arms is violent? Thankfully, that is a minority opinion. As far as trash cans, I've hung with farmers and loading dock laborers burning crates in a can to keep warm at market and I've seen burning cans rolled down streets by protesters in Greece. One is violent, one isn't. Guess which is which.

            “The first principle [in science] is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman

            by the fan man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 07:56:49 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  What happened on the night of 11/2 (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fcvaguy, SadieB

              was the latter.

              The burning of trash cans was not for "heating" or "cooking" in a squat. It was a show of "force" against police, that happened to put local residents of 16th street in between the demonstrators and the police line.

              It was juvenile and completely counterproductive. It put the kinds of people who have been most victimized by economic violence in this country at risk of further damage. When these people are more afraid of OO offshoots than they are of the cops, we're in fkkn trouble.

            •  I don't find the binary helpful. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mahakali overdrive, AoT, catilinus

              I spent too much time learning the Use of Force Continuum to have much use for the "violent" vs "non-violent". The binary is now spread out into one long, grey spectrum in which what is legal, justified and appropriate is determined by the material situation, not moral principles. Any time I've used the binary here, I was using a formulation someone presented to declare what Occupy absolutely had to do.

              Strictly, on the OccupyCal question:

              The explanations offered by the University and PD are absurd. I refer you to the brutal rebuttal at at Zunguzungu: “The Grass Is Closed”: What I Have Learned About Power from the Police, Chancellor Birgeneau, and Occupy Cal.

              The PD was legally correct that the protesters linking arms is a form of force which justifies an escalation in force used by police. I am, however, skeptical that the force that was actually used was justified.

              I only watched one video of that incident but was not please with what I saw. I would consider most of what I observed to be lethal force, and at least two instances in which I am certain that lethal force was applied. Such force was not justified by the situation so police will have to claim that they used less force than they really did. (Which appears to be what they are now doing.)

              Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

              by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:45:59 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  There are some things that people refuse (4+ / 0-)

                To see as nuanced. In the liberal community violence is one of those things. I was planning on writing a diary on this subject but you seem to be more well versed than I. And certainly a better writer.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:11:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Write it. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  mahakali overdrive, catilinus

                  Let me know if I can help in any way.

                  Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

                  by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:43:48 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  How do we view Tea Partiers? Nuanced? No, (0+ / 0-)

                  we look to the grossest examples of misconduct, racism, and posture of violence as the norm. If you've not engaged in this, my apologies. 99% did.

                  I think a diary on the violence of non-violent direct action would be interesting. Fascinating actually. I see the propensity to put non-violent acts such as arm locking on the violence side of the equation, perhaps to make other less savory actions acceptable.

                  “The first principle [in science] is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.” Richard Feynman

                  by the fan man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 03:41:12 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  I, for one, would not expect Occupy to disavow... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        opendna, catilinus

        ...property damage in thee abstract, since there may be a GA consensus in the future to engage in some specific nonviolent civil disobedience that could involve some property damage.

        But having nonviolence guidelines that prohibit unplanned and undicplined property damage is a fairly common approach.

        "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

        by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 07:11:43 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If it involves willful property damage (0+ / 0-)

          then it's not civil disobedience.

          (There may be exceptions to that rule, but I can't think of any that would apply here.)

          Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

          by Nowhere Man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 10:56:12 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Pacifists rather routinely engage in willful... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            catilinus

            ...property destruction as part of nonviolent civil disobedience.

            "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

            by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:09:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Then they are not pacifists, and that is not CD (0+ / 0-)

              that they've engaged in.

              It's one thing to engage in CD to protest against harmful, unjust, and/or illegal laws. Sit-ins at a lunch counter, or exercising freedoms of speech and assembly outside of so-called "free speech zones", are perfect examples of civil disobedience. But Thoreau, King, and Gandhi never broke any more laws than they absolutely had to (i.e., those that were themselves unjust, or that served to preserve a gross injustice), and they never put anyone at any greater risk of life or property than they put themselves into.

              Vandalism of any kind rarely, if ever, meets that standard.

              Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

              by Nowhere Man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:59:08 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Not pacifists? Seriously? (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                mahakali overdrive, catilinus

                These folks aren't pacifists?

                And all those folks from the Plowshares Disarmamant Movement in this video holding hammers aren't pacifists?

                Celebrating Nuclear Resistance from the Nuclear Resister on Vimeo.

                The Hammer Has to Fall
                Charlie King

                My name is Daniel Berrigan, chaplan at a hospice for the dying.
                I have seen the face of death. It is for life, I bring this hammer down.

                My name is Molly Rush. I have six children, they deserve a future.
                I strike this blow today for the children all the world around.

                I hear the prophets' cry of hope ring through the prison wall.
                We've waited thirty centuries to see that hammer fall.
                If we think we've got thirty more, we cannot see at all.
                For swords into plowshares, the hammer has to fall.

                My name is Elmer Maas. Were this a peaceful world, I'd sit and play piano.
                But lacking Nero's concience, I could not watch that fire devour the land.

                My name is John Schuchardt. I am no stranger to the prison that awaits us.
                But where genocide is legal, I stand an outlaw with a hammer in my hand.

                I hear the prophets' cry of hope ring through the prison wall.
                We've waited thirty centuries to see that hammer fall.
                If we think we've got thirty more, we cannot see at all.
                For swords into plowshares, the hammer has to fall.

                Dean Hammer is my name. Mica and Isahia my tradition.
                Oh, I tried to be their scholar, but could not escape their logic in the end.

                My name is Philip Berrigan. In world war II I flew the bombing missions.
                Now with every blow I strike today, I say the bombs will never fall again.

                I hear the prophets' cry of hope ring through the prison wall.
                We've waited thirty centuries to see that hammer fall.
                If we think we've got thirty more, we cannot see at all.
                For swords into plowshares, the hammer has to fall.

                Carl Cabott is my name. I have lived and worked amoung the thirld world peoples.
                I've seen corporations flourish, while the poor were left to fight for every breath.

                My name is Anne Montgomery. My life spent in community with women.
                I bring their healing power to this factory of of carnage and of death.

                I hear the prophets' cry of hope ring through the prison wall.
                We've waited thirty centuries to see that hammer fall.
                If we think we've got thirty more, we cannot see at all.
                For swords into plowshares, the hammer has to fall.

                The hammer has to fall...

                "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

                by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 03:10:37 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  If I say that they aren't pacifists (0+ / 0-)

                  that doesn't mean I don't respect what they did. But I don't call them pacifists; pacifism rejects the use of violence or force to settle disputes. (Some pacifists will allow the use of force in cases of imminent danger.)

                  Furthermore, if you commit an act of destruction -- whether it be against property or against a fellow human being -- you are taking it upon yourself to be judge and jury over the targets of your actions. If your actions could lead to serious harm or even deaths, you are in effect playing God without a license.

                  In a civilized society (or even the one we have now :-} , legal systems are established to provide certain kinds of protections, even to criminals. Among these is a protection against convictions or punishments meted out rashly by judges and/or juries. Humans are fallible, after all, and even a trained judge or a mature, sensitive juror can be swept up into a rush to judgment when the (alleged) crime is a particularly heinous one.

                  I have no illusions that the judicial system is infallible -- I've been on juries, and I know damned well how fallible it can be. But I'm certain that without the due process afforded by the judicial system, people will tend to be even more fallible in casting judgment on others. (Thoreau decried government as a corrupting force. I think he would equally have decried the idea of people taking it upon themselves to become a government, even if only for a moment. Remember, Thoreau passively resisted paying war taxes; he made no attempt at and gave no nod to smashing the system through coercive action.*)

                  Hence it seems to me that no one, whether individually or even especially as part of an ad hoc group, has moral standing to commit acts of violence or destruction in the name of some higher cause. I do see self-defense (or the defense of others) as a valid exception. I can also see cases where destruction of some object (say, tearing up a road that's used to transport war vehicles) might be a legitimate use of destructive force. Generally speaking, though, the use of violence or destructive force delegitimizes the claim to civil disobedience or passive resistance.

                  I respect the brothers Berrigan, et al. for putting themselves on the front lines and not dodging responsibility for their actions. I also acknowledge that they may have helped bring issues to the forefront that otherwise might have gone unnoticed. But I think they could have been at least as effective without the red paint.



                  *It's possible that I've missed or misinterpreted something Thoreau wrote. But based on my reading of Civil Disobedience, I find it hard to believe that he would have advocated for direct action. If someone knows otherwise, I would appreciate a link!

                  Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

                  by Nowhere Man on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:39:11 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  What red paint? (0+ / 0-)
                    But I think they could have been at least as effective without the red paint.

                    As far as I know, nobody in the Plowshares Movement has ever used red paint. (At least not in CD's. The folks at Jonah House in Baltimore used to paint houses for a living, so I'm sure that they've used red paint for that a few times.)

                    Sledge hammers and blood, sure...but no red paint that I know of.

                    I think that you have a weird definition of pacifism that would exclude most of the leading pacifists in this nation, and one which ignores the history of pacifism.

                    (The dictionary definition of violence, that I've seen posted here a few times, really isn't very useful here. It's just not how pacifists use the word.)

                    Are you perhaps confusing pacifism with passivism? One has an "f", and the other has a "v".

                    Pacifism isn't passive. Pacifism is active.

                    "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

                    by ehrenfeucht games on Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 04:24:06 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Sorry, my mistake (0+ / 0-)

                      It wasn't red paint. It was blood, as you said.

                      As for my definition of pacifism: I see on wikipedia that there are some who don't share my definition, but it's the one that I grew up with. Martin Luther King Jr. certainly fits the definition that I use, as do many other organizations and activists: Jane Addams, David Dellinger, WILPF, CND, the Quakers, and many more.

                      From personal experience, my grandparents spent over 40 years on the front lines (and continued giving their time behind the scenes when they became too old to continue actively working on the cause.) They also fit the definition of "pacifist" that I've been using.

                      Let us all have the strength to see the humanity in our enemies, and the courage to let them see the humanity in ourselves.

                      by Nowhere Man on Mon Nov 14, 2011 at 04:59:33 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

  •  It's Too Late To Stop Occupy..... (13+ / 0-)

    The pundits have tried.  CNN has tried.  FOX has tried.  The politicians have tried.  The media has tried.  And we know the police & the mayor's have tried.  

    We're still standing.....and we're not going away.  

  •  I'm a vet and I support Black Bloc tactics (0+ / 0-)

    completely, I know what's at stake and the risk they take.

    "Foolproof systems don't take into account the ingenuity of fools."

    by overclocking on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:18:10 AM PST

  •  I can't be convinced of any wrongdoing (7+ / 0-)

    on #OWS' part. The movement is big, harder to control and frankly, I'd take that over any other situation like having a really small and controlled movement where you kept track of every person involved. If it was that fucking small, it would be like one of the protests I was involved in some years ago and nobody would know or give a damn.

    99 is an inclusive number. I think it's powerfully suggestive and most people would understand that when you have the whole world to consider, trolls are bound to be a part of it.

    "It's not enough to acknowledge privilege. You have to resist." -soothsayer

    by GenXangster on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:09:11 AM PST

    •  I cut my comment off too soon. (9+ / 0-)

      I was gonna say, I wonder what they could start doing to begin to separate themselves from this groups and putting the theme that when your movement includes the world, how do you control the .05% of trolls?

      If people are on the internet, they understand what a troll is. Seems like it would be worth making the association. Just a suggestion for how to begin to control these fringes or at least get them un-associated with #OWS.

      "It's not enough to acknowledge privilege. You have to resist." -soothsayer

      by GenXangster on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:14:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for turning me into a straw man (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mdmslle, johnny wurster, FG, GFW, fcvaguy, elwior

    You've taken selected comments I've made on another diary  and built an entire diary around them. Bravo for you. That must've been hard work.

    As for claiming my statements misrepresented any of the wonderful people you mention and show in your diary, or some of the truly awesome people at OO and in the camp, I can only say that nothing could be further from the truth. My comments were clearly not about these or any other individuals.

    My comments were made explicitly in response to the vote on the non-violence resolution and the inability of OO to deal with the problem of the BB, including to disavow the violence and the BB itself. Moreover, the agenda of the Black Bloc, which occupied an abandoned building setting off the confrontation with police, was explicitly endorsed by OO at  GA early last week, just days after these disastrous events and during a time when many, many, many members of OO used the propaganda spread by BB and others to defend their continued inclusion in OO (refusing to explicitly exclude them).

    I am hardly someone you should be attacking (for making random posts on DKos). The local indie media has covered this fairly extensively and echoes my concerns and those of many others.

    It's titled "How the Black Block Occupied Oakland."
    http://www.eastbayexpress.com/...

    Occupy Oakland's own Facebook page started a forum explicitly on how to "communicate" with the Black Bloc without excluding them and kicking them out of OO (this was all done publicly).

    To claim, as you do, that this is a fabrication is just foolish. My comments are a direct result of and response to what is coming out of the GA's and of the press releases being issued by OO itself.

    If you want to shoot the messenger, that's fine, but I am hardly even that (the messenger IS the GA's and OO's press releases).

    I'm someone who commented on a diary with my personal observations and I was hardly alone in expressing these concerns. If you think these comments exist in a vacuum, you're wrong. If you think they are the result of media manipulation, you're also wrong. The statements--while heated and perhaps a bit strong--were born out of the frustration of OO not distancing itself at all from the BB and members of OO consistently defending their right to be "included" in OO. Including in the very GA in which the non-violence resolution was withdrawn due to lack of support.

    I hate to burst your bubble, but the black bloc has also infiltrated other Occupations.

    Moreover, my concerns and those of others are a result of statements coming out of the camp and the actions (and non-actions) of the camp itself.

    I never claimed OO had lost union support, EVER. I stated it WOULD lose that support because of the failure to deal with the BB.

    You are clearly confusing things.

    OO still has a black bloc problem, regardless of what you think about some random comments I'vevposted on DKos. Just because you're not able to grasp this problem doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

    •  "The Black Bloc" doesn't exist (7+ / 0-)

      Black bloc is a tactic that has been used by different groups of people for different reasons in different places. What you should be talking about is Anarch-insurrectionists. These are, along with various communist groups, who are resisting the ga's attempts to pass a resolution on non-violence. The idea that these people are infiltrating is a bit absurd. It is an open assembly. I'm not exactly sure how one would go about excluding them, especially given that some of them have been involved since the beginning.

      There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

      by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:55:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You exclude them from the beginning the way OWS (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fcvaguy

        Did.

        •  OWS didn't exclude them (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mahakali overdrive, elwior

          I heard talk about the same issues there. There have been black bloc actions there. I was on an unpermitted march with about fifty people in black block wear. I think the one thing I haven't made clear is that black bloc doesn't always mean breaking things. In new York it was used by people who wanted to take the street despite the police insistence otherwise. It certainly can be used for property damage but that isn't the only thing people in a black bloc do.

          There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

          by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 10:53:57 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, correct (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior

        That perfectly states my own very close look at this matter too. On all counts.

      •  Who cares about the labels? (5+ / 0-)

        The problem are those idiots in black in MoT's video, hellbent on senseless acts of violence, some even directed against enterprises that actually support OWS. They do their violence and then when the shit hits the fan with the cops, those cowards run and hide, leaving OWS to deal with the consequences of police action.

        •  I don't so much care about the labels (6+ / 0-)

          It's the history, and the ahistory, that I care about.

          Why are WE dredging up a ten day old story to make it sound like it's some ongoing problem?

          It's not an ongoing problem. It was an isolated incident. I'm going to say it again. Wake me up when we have a problem. Otherwise, we're fearmongering and playing right into anti-OWS swiftboating memes.

          So far OWS has last no support to my knowledge. Am I missing anything in that?

          •  It's because you are in denial about how this has (0+ / 0-)

            affected OO.

            The statements and actions coming out of the GA have all been about NOT excluding the BB members and not denouncing as a group the violence caused by the BB. and even GA proposals were then adopted and publicly circulated embracing the BB's agenda on the night of the General Strike. It makes OO look extremely bad.

            People who support OO have been looking all week for some sign that OO is distancing itself from this group in a public way and instead they have seen, based on OO's own press releases and actions, the exact opposite.

            And we are looking for this because we know what happens , historically, when these tactics are not strongly and unambiguously disavowed at the start of nascent political movements or cultures or in this case Occupations.

            •  Mmm... I see... I am in personal denial (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              AoT, catilinus, navajo

              I'm glad that you are Occupying my Mind.

              Prove to me that Occupy Oakland has lost support because of Black Bloc actions. Thanks! Catilunus' diary suggests otherwise. See my comment downthread.

              P.S. Black Bloc is a tactic, not a "group." We've been over this. Amply.

              Sorry about my typos. I too need to get back to grading shortly.

            •  Pure BS. You have zero understanding of Occupy (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              navajo

              Oakland. Zero. You're sprouting nonense...& your own brand of intensely paranoid & absurd McCarthyism seems won't be satisfied until you shut down the soup kitchen at Occupy Oakland.

              Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

              by catilinus on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:55:26 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  And to whomever did commit those acts (6+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, blueoasis, elwior, catilinus, fcvaguy, navajo

          of property damage, I also think it was stupid, FWIW. I'm not defending them. I am disdaining them. But I don't think I need to apologize for them.

          Anymore than I need to apologize for the folks here in Hidden Valley and the crazy shit they say.

        •  They might as well be agents of the 1% because... (5+ / 0-)

          ...their videotaped actions undermine the operations of OWS, not just in Oakland, but elsewhere, and help the megaphones of the ruling class present the movement as something 99% of the 99% do not support.

          Even the Guardian (UK), which is probably the most leftwing mass-distribution English-language newspaper in the world, spent half of the 2-minute video it included on its web site after the General Strike on the vandalism. So the narrative that the vast bulk of OO participants and supporters spent weeks trying to craft got chewed up because a small group of people chose to act against the wishes of that vast bulk. Vandalism is not an extension of freedom of speech.

          Under some circumstances, I would not be opposed to "black bloc" tactics. There may come a time when they are necessary. But, right now is not that time. Right now this small faction is counter-productive, contributes to bolstering the 1% narrative of the megamedia and threatens to topple OWS from its moral high ground. So far, that hasn't happened. But it easily could. For a somewhat analogous example from the past (which I am admittedly simplifying), one need only look at the arc of Students for a Democratic Society, a group that argued for "participatory democracy." Today, most people aware of the group link it to the Weather Underground, a teensy bomb-exploding fraction of the group's membership that gained control via a coup d'organisation and proceeded to do as much to wreck the left as CoIntelPro.

          The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

          by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:02:29 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I am opposed to Black Bloc tactics (4+ / 0-)

            I also know that this probably came from local insurrectionary communist wannabes a la the RCP or whatever (someone having a big wet dream about revolution at any rate -- and could not really be Anarchists since they attacked OTHER Anarchists, which doesn't happen -- either CointelPro or pro-revolutionary wannabes, possibly 14 year old kids too from the looks of the video), so I don't know what can really be done about that. Particularly in a leaderless movement. And why are we dredging it up now, decades after the fact?

            I don't see any dropping of support for Oakland. If there is, then they should do something about that. If we, on the Daily Kos, can do something to combat these memes, fine. We should. I am personally doing my best. I believe it's a false meme. As Catilinus points out, there's still tons of support. I talk to folks involved with Occupy Oakland almost every day, or at least peek in on their FB profiles, and no one has mentioned these "concerns."

            But the way that the GA's work isn't to have intervention from outside forces. They have to do their own thing. If they can't handle themselves, what are we to do about that?

            Our only recourse is to COMBAT FALSE MEMES. We're trying. I am trying at least. Denouncing implies some kind of lack of distance in the first place. It also implies an ongoing problem. I'm asking for any evidence whatsoever that there has been any further problems, in any Occupation site around the Nation, since the General Strike and that one anomolous action which could have been a lot of people, and no one has yet produced a shred of evidence other than "maybe there were some of the same people at the GA, there were some hecklers who seemed to ideologically support violence toward property."

            Give them a little time to come up with a draft to denounce the violence that they can pass.

            Incidentally, this is why sometimes I really hate leaderless movements. But they're messy and they are, for better or worse, the form which the Occupy Movement has chosen.

            Also, seriously, what hypocrites we are to regard this differently than we do other democratic revolts worldwide. That is not acceptable to me.

            •  There IS still tons of support... (4+ / 0-)

              ...and I am a supporter, and a supporter of the GA process. But the movement is still, at best, a toddler. And discussion of issues like some of the "black bloc's" tactics is essential, both by the GA actually on the ground at OO and among those of us who support this movement and hope for its long-term success. So far, it's been a single disturbing instance of those tactics, and if that's all there is, no problem. But I suspect that will not be all there is.

              As for "dredging up" stuff from the past, I've been told by a few people that the past is irrelevant to this movement and the lessons learned from previous struggles make no difference to the here and now. Indifference to the past (and I am not saying you are indifferent, but some people seem to be) seems to be why so many people have expressed  shock and surprise by how the police have responded to the protests. Several of us who have been in protests since long before our turned white were not shocked and surprised. We expected this response would happen, just as it always has previously. (Billy-clubs are not new, and even pepper-spray has been around for four decades. Being a perfectly peaceful protester has never protected one from being assaulted by the cops.)

              As for giving the GA time, yes, of course. It's a messy, slow, patience-testing process that is essential if there is to be a changed paradigm. But we also have to be cognizant of the fact that communications technology has made time speed up in terms of how fast a situation, a new meme, good or bad, can develop.

              The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

              by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:57:48 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  All strong points, definitely (4+ / 0-)

                Thanks for this clarification. I think the distinction about the two speeds here, the speed of the GA process vs. the speed of the MSM's ability to swiftboat is really important.

                I was just reading the GA's minutes which were, to me, interesting. They're online (link way downthread).

                This was the most interesting part to me:

                Is the proposal an implicit agreement to use of violence in the movement? – No, it is not.

                Also, they say that they have a ton of funds coming in.

                I have long liked your idea of flash mobs or spontaneous protests. To me, these are always faster than police activities, and tend to be the sorts of protests that I use. Right now, I think what happened at UC Berkeley was intensely effective because of how sudden it came and went.

                I think getting beaten by the police is very much part of nonviolent tactics. It's meant to shame the state apparatus of power, the old long arm of the law, and the public of course gets caught up in the spectacle of it, gasping. It's a good thing to be pepper sprayed, in my view. Although if they take it too far (the police), like with Scott Olson, that's not good. I expected it too. I'm glad about a lot of it. It's managed to keep the spotlight on the matter.

                Today's lede story SHOULD be about Dr. Celeste Langan's vicious attack. That SHOULD be enough to sustain media ire for a week. We haven't done anything to push that out there at all. A UC Berkeley Professor, tenured and in excellent repute, is yanked around by hired thugs from off-campus for trying to protect peacefully protesting students as the police get a little antsy, and then is arrested. She's a person of rock solid standing and reputation, well-heeled and well-published but not a 1%'er. We should be discussing her AND telling others about her story. Instead, there are forces who would like to see OWS fail that are quite apparent and gumming it up with these small, rehashed stories. Give the GA a little time.

                And watch what happens at UC Berkeley and around. They've decided to not camp for now. But that letter going around is going around with a lot of Professors. There will be a strike of some sort, probably from students. Students should be thinking HARD about what they want to do at the UC's right now. They've got some potent voices in this, and are behaving sensibly too, having hopefully learned after torching Chancellor B.'s mansion last year. Parents of students there should also be very confronted by what just happened. Some of the students were apparently just walking by you know. Paying how much and for what now? Average family income at UC Berkeley is still below Berkeley as a city.

                That should be the lede. Not some dithering at a GA over a term pertaining to a sketchy situation a week and a half ago. But real cold-hard violence toward students and faculty that just happened.

                •  I totally agree with you about focusing on ... (4+ / 0-)

                  ...Langan as well as focusing on the real violence — not vandalism — done by banksters and those in their employ.

                  And I agree that getting beaten and arrested is a crucial element of non-violent tactics. I first was engaged in that in 1964 and have scars from the police-dog bites to show for it. But I have to say that we were ready for it in those days, trained extensively on how to behave, how to remain calm, how not to be provoked. In those days, the cops waded in, billyclubs flying, without a care in the world that their actions might be broadcast on the evening news. I'd like to see more effort — I know there has been some — to better train those protesters likely to be in the same situation now. Even for the most committed protester, getting whacked, pepper-sprayed, hit with a tear-gas canister or, obviously, a rubber bullet, is serious business. Solid preparation is essential.

                  The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

                  by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:31:00 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  More training to deal with arrests (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Meteor Blades, joedemocrat, navajo

                    that's a really good idea. You're right. These protesters aren't getting trained in that, and in dealing with cops in general. They're skittish. Really skittish. You have to know that when you're dealing with them.

                    Copwatch trainers could help more with this. Berkeley Copwatch has really good instructional videos and seminars about nonviolent police watch.

                    Having been involved in legal observation with police for some years in the past, as you know, on many a night, standing there with a camera and a cop, it never occurred to me about the lack of training for these protesters. Part of why I ever even did that was specifically because I am about the calmest person on the planet and unflappable. The words "I do not consent to this conversation" are always at the tip of my tongue for police making "casual conversation." I also wasn't usually snide about it. I just was trained. Damned Panthers got me nicely oiled that way.

                    Okay, fine. I will think about this more. And I strongly suggest that people do obtain copies of Berkeley Copwatch's training videos for dealing with law enforcement. There are some other good ones, like the NLG has one for protesters, specifically. But I like Berkeley and their copwatch advice because it uses nonviolent tactics AND has been in use successfully for about a decade now, while also being comprised mainly of Anarchists. It works. They know what they're doing and how to do it. Also good is the stuff from Portland Copwatch (it splintered into two groups; one's better than the other, the Rose City Branch, with Kristian Williams, whom I've met and is a stand up human being).

                    There must have been some outreach, but perhaps more funds put into training of protesters and filming and law enforcement encounters, if they're trying to determine what to do with funds. Also, it would enable more protests at less determined times.

                    •  "...because I am about the calmest person... (3+ / 0-)

                      on the planet and unflappable."

                      Likewise. Part of that is personality. Part of it derives from the very first training I received in Ohio for Freedom Summer.

                      I think you should write a diary about the Copwatch stuff. Perhaps there is a teaser video on this?

                      The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

                      by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:55:02 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I'll write a diary on it (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        joedemocrat, Meteor Blades, navajo

                        Although so much better in person because you have to demonstrate certain tones and facial expressions (like "blase" and "calm" or even politely disinterested...). There are some videos online but not the ones I was looking for. Just checked. There are some okay ones; I'll have to rewatch them.

                        I can't write it now though! I have to work today! But I will write it soon. It does seem like an oversight to me now that you mention it. Maybe it could help a bit.

                        Dealing with police is a skill. They are aggressive and will push your buttons. Also, you have to be prepared for being assaulted or jailed. You cannot think that won't happen. Even pepper spray is something you learn to breathe through and how to handle.

    •  My pearls! (6+ / 0-)

      Occupy Oakland, a protest consisting of illegally seizing property and living on it, endorsed a "Black Bloc" action consisting of illegally seizing property and living in it. There is a clear and unambiguous moral difference between squatting in a public park, which was being used, and squatting in an abandoned building, which was not being used. For consistency, we must also condemn the Occupy actions defend families against eviction or (worse!) help them move into abandoned homes.

      Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

      by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 03:58:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You seem fixated on legality. (8+ / 0-)

        What separates the Black Bloc from the Occupy movement at large isn't that what they want to do is illegal – after all, the whole point of civil disobedience is to break unjust laws.

        The difference is in destructiveness. Even if you want to use a decidedly expansive definition of “violence” that includes simply standing somewhere you're not supposed to be, the Occupy tactic is still non-destructive.

        Formerly known as Jyrinx.

        “If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution.” ― Emma Goldman

        by Code Monkey on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 04:19:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Is that really the difference? (5+ / 0-)

          When a blockade of the Port of Oakland costs businesses millions of dollars a day, is that not destructive? When traffic is disrupted and commerce impacted, is that not destructive? When city resources are redirected from other areas, does that not have destructive results? When an abandoned building made available for human occupation and community organizing, is that not creative?

          Yes, Black Bloc and Occupy are different tactics, but the fundamental differences isn't illegality, violence against property, "destructiveness" or interest in movement building. They share all of these things.

          Consider the Black Bloc actions described at the end of "G8/G20 Communique: Critiquing the Black Bloc" (July 2010):

          The Black Bloc tactic works by:
          • providing defences to activists in dangerous or vulnerable situations by providing tactical, medical or logistical expertise since participants in the bloc technique often receive activist-related training.
          • providing protection by creating a physical barrier between an injured activist and the police or a barrier between a group of activists and the police. In Québec City during the FTAA protests, I witnessed the Black Bloc run up and protect an activist who was overcome by tear gas. As two Black Bloc participants ran towards the fence, they used home made shields to defend themselves against rubber bullets and tear gas canisters fired at chest level as they approach the unconscious activist, where they provided temporary first aid at the scene and then evacuated the injured activist. That was the Black Bloc in action that did not include the breaking of one window.
          • providing a diversion to draw the police's attention and response away from the crowd towards a group that is arrest-able and willing to take the brunt of police aggression on themselves. I should note that this is not how things played out on the street during the Toronto G20 protests, thus a review of the tactic is necessary.

          There are a great many valid and thoughtful critiques of Black Bloc (several in that article), but I have yet to read one on DailyKos.

          Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

          by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:17:08 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I will remain sceptical... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            opendna, MKSinSA

            There has certainly been no video produced out of Oakland that reveals the Black Bloc doing anything like what is described in your insert.

            Likewise what was done in Rome.

            They are destructive to the goals of the Occupy movement.

            Wonders are many, but none so wonderful as man.

            by Morgan Sandlin on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:29:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I too will remain skeptical... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Morgan Sandlin, RanDomino, JesseCW

              ...until the "Occupy Movement" shows that it can grow beyond the "occupy" tactic. I'm young, but I've seen enough "movements" die out because they identified with tactics and failed to evolve.

              Say what you like about Anonymous, but they know how to evolve. The OpBART group has proposed a new movement- and network-building tactic, offering Occupy a way forward. But as far as I can tell, it fell flat as Occupiers reacted to police pressure by digging in.

              Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

              by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:40:36 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Some occupiers dug in (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                opendna

                Others, myself included, have expanded to other tactics. I think this is a good thing. There is no reason that all these tactics can't exist and be used at the same time. Some people are better able to commit to specific tactics, that means that by utilizing a number of different tactics we expand the movement rather than spread ourselves thin.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:22:12 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  Destructive to whom? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RanDomino

            I wish they'd blockade the Port of Oakland every single damn day.  The businesses you are so worried about are the ones who contract their manufacturing in China and receive their goods made by wage slaves through the Port of Oakland.

            This is 'destructive' to greedy CEO's who have destroyed the American worker.  It's at the very core of why the country is struggling with unemployment.  If I still lived in Oakland you can bet I'd be encouraging more actions against the Port.

            you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows

            by Dem Beans on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 07:38:22 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I have seen this (6+ / 0-)

            As a reporter covering anti-globalization protests in 1999-2001 I saw for myself that Black Bloc members could be courageous, constructive members of the movement. I'm sorry but that's just a fact.

            I completely and unequivocally oppose some Black Bloc members' use of property destruction as a tactic for reasons I have stated elsewhere in this comments thread and at other times in comments on dKos. But the idea that all the activists who engage in the Black Bloc should be excluded--how can this even be done?--is ridiculous.

            •  As I have previously stated, my view is... (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              opendna, catilinus, joedemocrat

              ...that those only those who commit vandalism should be isolated, corralled and excluded. People should not be excluded for their ideas. But if, during movement-sponsored actions, there is no effort to block those who act on ideas not approved by the overall movement, the movement will forever become tainted by those unapproved actions.

              The debate over what are appropriate actions must continue, however. Not least because OO and all the OWS groups must innovate to stay one step ahead of the authorities.

              The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

              by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:13:12 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  They should be engaged, not excluded (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JesseCW

                There are people in new York who have regularly argued that property destruction isn't violence and there has been no problems like this there. I think the key reason for that is because those people have been engaged in the process.

                There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:45:06 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  I agree there should be efforts to block... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JesseCW

                ...those actions in movement-sponsored actions.

                I was on the Brooklyn Bridge march of OWS where 700 were arrested. At one point--I was on the pedestrian walkway above where the marchers were getting arrested--a younger person next to me (I'm 55) started shouting down at the "pigs." I said, "Stop. Please don't do that. That's not helpful to those people down there and it's also cowardly do to do that from up here where you feel safe while those folks down there could suffer from your incitement." And he stopped.

                I would hope if I was on a march like those on November 2 that I would have the physical courage--as many did--to nonviolently interpose my body between the Black Bloc members and their target.

                But I also have to ask: Who here will unequivocally urge not voting for any politician who won't categorically renounce police violence against peaceful demonstrators and demand that those police who commit those acts be charged? This is a site after all that more or less comes out for voting for Obama despite the fact that he refused to prosecute or otherwise hold accountable people who have committed heinous crimes, both violent and financial. (And he has probably overseen the commitment of crimes himself.)

                I think it's worth doing some soul-searching on a site where some urge the expulsion of misguided Black Bloc activists--who so far have only committed property damage (much as I believe they should not have)--while at the same time not holding truly powerful people capable of real violence to such a rigorous standard.

                Please don't misunderstand me. I strongly believe Black Bloc members should be challenged and confronted when they engage in actions that are sure to provide grist for those hostile to the Occupy movement. I also believe every effort should be made to hold this movement to a high standard of nonviolence, for both moral and practical reasons.

                But it bothers me a lot that there are those who would exclude and expel Black Bloc activists who will next year be telling us how we need to support Democratic politicians guilty of far more awful actions than any Black Bloc member has any committed. Folks who call for unequivocal accountability among Occupy Oakland but then insist on support for a Democratic President who gives torturers a pass. There is a disconnect there and I think it's major.

          •  I think your comment should be expanded... (3+ / 0-)

            ...into a diary.

            The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

            by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:06:43 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  That's not an argument that's being made (3+ / 0-)

          generally.  If you want to call property destruction "destruction" then obviously that's impossible to disagree with.  But then the discussion needs to be about "non-destructionness" rather than "nonviolence".  If any GA passes a "no destruction, please" resolution, there would be markedly less opposition from anarchists IMO.

          •  If we did that (0+ / 0-)

            We'd have to pack up camp so as not to cause any more destruction of the park.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:47:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  What about no intentional destruction of (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RanDomino

              property in the name of the Occupiers? That might pass. Especially if you added a caveat that the unintentional destruction of property, such as park space wear and tear, wasn't included.

              Like a rental agreement.  

            •  "No unplanned property destruction" or... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mahakali overdrive

              ...something along those lines is a fairly standard formulation.

              If there is a consensus to engage in a certain act of property destruction as part of a nonviolent direct action, then there is the opportunity for the level of care, dicipline, and training that is appropriate for such an action.

              "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

              by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 04:07:52 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  Originally, all land belonged to nobody (7+ / 0-)

        and everybody. Designating some land for the exclusive use of somebody or bodies as "private real property" was done as a sop to encourage its exploitation and productive use, as well as to pressure the excluded to conform their behavior and deserve being sustained.  Private property ownership is a mechanism of social control--some are bribed with special access to resources in order to deprive the non-compliant of sustenance.
        Which is not to say that communal ownership is morally better.  Communities can be just as exclusive as individuals.  
        However, when Dubya spoke of an "ownership society," he was promoting behavior that essentially precludes the obligation to share the natural and man-made resources.  Ownership is exclusive, especially when people can own things, but not themselves.
        Consider how the obligation to register for the draft (involuntary servitude) serves as a constant reminder that the amorphous state has a claim on each adult male person, which takes over when the parents' claim is relinquished after 18 years.

        People to Wall Street: "LET OUR MONEY GO"

        by hannah on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 04:45:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Lest we forget. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Losty
          "Patriotism which is bought and paid for is not patriotism."
          -- President Calvin Coolidge (1924)

          Re the WWI Bonus Army, also see: Marching on History by Paul Dickson and Thomas Allen, Smithsonian magazine, February 2003.

          Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

          by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:32:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, paying people for doing what one (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cynndara

            wants them to do is certainly more respectful of human rights than insisting that the progenitor has a right to extract subservience for life.

            I can understand the paternal impulse to exact recompense for the providing sustenance to off-spring, as well as for sharing access to the maternal female, without approving of it. I can understand that some humans are not mentally equipped to comprehend that social obligations are inter-generational and that in caring for the young the adult is merely repaying the care extended to him/her before memory actually set in, but that doesn't make it right.

            Self-centered people are isolates, probably because their sense of feeling connected to other people is somehow defective. Moreover, making a virtue out of one's deficits is pretty common human behavior.  Other people accepting isolation as the norm is a big mistake.

            Man does not live by bread alone, largely because he can't make bread alone.

            People to Wall Street: "LET OUR MONEY GO"

            by hannah on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:49:52 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Tee hee... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        opendna

        I think you hit the ironic nail on the head.

      •  Of course, this is different from illegally... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RanDomino

        ...seizing property and then running away.

        Occupy Oakland, a protest consisting of illegally seizing property and living on it, endorsed a "Black Bloc" action consisting of illegally seizing property and living in it.

        The running away part kinda' defeats the whole purpose of seizing the property in the first place, and creates an atmosphere of irresponsibility and cowardice.

        "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

        by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 09:06:02 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  You've declared yourself not in solidarity with (9+ / 0-)

      Occupy Oakland. You've declared you will work to break union solidarity with Occupy Oakland. You've done so on a public forum. In the process you've smeared the people of Occupy Oakland sleeping out in the cold tonight as being fools duped (by a tactic no less).

      You are pushing a meme that one of the epicenters of OWS should be abandoned because it hasn't dealt with a problem in the exact way you wish...as quickly as you wish...that meme is as appealing to the 1% as it is destructive for the 99%.

      Each of the above statements are documented by your own words in several diaries. You don't see why you'd get pushback from someone who believes in the people of Oakland who are hanging on by a thread, of the open General Assembly, of the people camping out, & those far away who still support them? Really?

      Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

      by catilinus on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:33:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is total histrionics and sad. I never once (0+ / 0-)

        Smeared anyone catilinus. I stated my opinion on both why OO was losing support among dedicated left/anarchists/activists and I did so in good faith.

        You are now twisting the context of that critique to fit your absurdly narrow critical frame of reference.

        It appears to me that 1) you take every statement about OO that I made as representational (I.e. that I was speaking for, about, or on behalf of people in the plaza). I never did any such thing.

        Not once did I say that "everyone in the plaza is Bb." or "everyone at the GA's is bb."

        I am a theorist. I was speaking about ideas. The defense of the inclusion of the BB, the failure to exclude them, is in fact a position, an idea. Bb infiltration, as an idea or tactic, is allowed when you specifically "include" and refuse to exclude those ideas. Period. The ideas being used to not exclude the Bb at the camps and GA's are, in fact, bb ideas and arguments (and these are coming out of the GA process). This is all I have talked about. Instead, you have turned it into something else, something truly based in hysteria, where you seem to think I am talking about specific people. I am not.

        I am not the enemy of OO and have done nothing to harm OO. I have stated, in a very heated moment, some strong words about OO BECAUSE of its inability to deal with the BB. But these were in one thread after a long week of working to get things changed at the camp. And i was very frustrated. My sentiments were heated, for sure, and I doubt I would repeat them now (at the very least I have not). They were intended to give expression to that frustration, and point to the seriousness of the situation which, frankly, you and many other people STILL fail to get. Passing grandiose resolutions at the GA's instead of getting something through on this issue (for an entire week, while the plaza metaphorically burned) is itself an indication that many in OO don't realize how badly this has damaged the Occupation.

        2) By turning this into a personal attack on me and my support for the Occupation, you are even further muddying the waters. This is not about me but OO. If all you can do is attack people and, to use your phrase, smear them, then it is obvious to anyone you are working with an impoverished set of analytical tools.

        It used to be okay for people to engage in self-criticism. To be included as a political ally and still make critical statements. It appears that this is no longer the case. All my statements were made because I support OWS and it's goals. I am being forced into a situation by the leaders of OO where I have to now choose between the OWS model and OO and I am clearly indicating that choice.

        I did mean what I said about union support because I think OO cannot get that support without dealing with the BB problem. What you and others on here seem not to understand is this: the fact that the BB did what they did during the General Strike was a giant steaming dump on all of us, all 40,000 of us who peacefully marched that day. We ALL gave OO time to deal with it, the media locally bent over backwards to specify the difference between the BB and the rest of us, and then everything that came out of the camp, with the GA's stamp on it as well, seemed to indicate a refusal to disavow and dissociate from the BB and even an embrace of it. how do you think this makes those 40k people feel? To have to incessantly read BB apologetics and philosophy coming from the camp, itself, officially? It says to those of us who are paying attention, that OO has jumped the shark.

        Instead of dealing with this problem, you are now on here attacking someone who wrote spent the past week working on this problem ob the ground, and picking apart a few of his critical comments in a diary on DKos. I'm not sure why you think that's productive. Why aren't you doing something about the root of the problem, which is OO failure to deal with the BB problem it clearly has?

        •  "OO is a disaster for the movement" (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Meteor Blades, blueoasis, AoT, catilinus
          OO is a disaster for the movement. OWS and everyone else need to distance themselves from it immediately.
          -- Mindtrain.

          So, are you saying this to the veterans marching up there in the photo? Tell Are you saying this to the SEIU members featured in this diary? Are you telling them that they are participating in a disaster and that OWS should run far and fast for them?

          If not, by all means, do tell them.

          Tell them that "OO has jumped the shark," to quote you.

          Because I am NOT hearing that from the people involved with it.

          Like the blind SEIU woman. Or the thirty veterans there. Or the 22,000 FB followers that they have.

          You seem to be raising the loudest criticism on this forum of anyone. Why? How does it help? Who does it help? What does it help? And who and what does it hurt? You do see the ramifications of your actions, don't you?

          And don't start with my about "inferior theory or analytical skills" as above. I also teach these. In area. For all I know, we share students. I am still trying to personally discern that there is a problem at all beyond what occurred at the General Strike, which was not easy to anticipate, and which was dealt with, although sure, the media has run with it. What else do you expect the media to do? Moreover, here on this forum, we're not properly countering swiftboating by proclaiming a death knell for a movement that has not yet died, nor are we doing it any favors by pushing the boat further and further away from the edges of historical reality here.

        •  I share the concerns of others that... (5+ / 0-)

          ...some "black bloc" tactics are problematic for OWS and could deeply wound the movement if not dealt with effectively. I've made myself clear about that. So, obviously, I am on the same page as you in some ways.

          However, now that I have gone back and read a boatload of your comments, I agree with catilinus's characterization of what you're doing.

          The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

          by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:22:50 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Shrink Wrap The Black Block Infiltrators (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fcvaguy

    A role of shrink wrap is cheap. Surround the Black Block infiltrator and then shrink wrap their arms to their bodies. Then deliver them to the police along with witnesses to make statements to the police regarding their acts of vandalism. We are many, they are few. It shouldn't be that hard to do.

    •  A few problems with that "plan". (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bushondrugs, RanDomino, cat94925, JesseCW

      They are organized, "we" are not.  They are disciplined, "we" can't figure out when to stop yelling a the cops and sit down. They are practiced in street warfare, "we" have a hard time doing passive non-violence civil disobedience properly.

      I am also skeptical of the ability of "non-violent" protestors to arrest violent protestors using violent (but non-lethal) force, and keep them arrested long enough for the police to collect them because... well... Black Bloc tactics include evading arrest and "liberating" protestors who have been arrested.

      Groups: Toolbox and Trolls... to preserve the best & the worst of DailyKos.

      by opendna on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 04:32:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It would be an intervention, a citizens arrest. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fcvaguy

        We would be intervening against vandalism "a crime" and making a citizens arrest. We would surround them and then, yes, forcibly hold them down in order to shrink wrap them thereby neutralizing their act of violence. Even if the police refused to arrest the individual we would have stopped one individual from doing harm to the movement. In fact, just by surrounding them individually we are neutralizing their actions. It will require putting some of our bodies in danger but enough of us would be able to subdue the antagonizor.

        •  I think (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JesseCW

          you should go back and read the post from somebody in Seattle last week, who accompanied the Occupy group responsible for keeping order when they were invaded by an explosive nut-job and successfully isolated and TALKED him out of his shouting-spree by empathy.

          The entire focus that Occupy has taken as a society -- a model for the society we are trying to build -- militates against using coercion to impose the will of a majority.  It is as important to the survival of the Occupations to develop consensus and respect the deep convictions of all participants, as it is to resist agents of the 1%.  In order to BE the 99%, we must learn to accept the opinions of others and facilitate cooperation without co-optation by or of either faction.  We are inventing a new social paradigm here.  "I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't cut it any more.

          •  a model for the society we are trying to build . . (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Meteor Blades

            I could not find the post from someone in Seattle you referred to, however from your description I would agree that talking down an explosive nut-job is always the first and best approach to threats of violence within the camps. That being said, what do we do if the individual pulls out a club and starts wielding it? What if the individual starts striking people with the club? What if he pulls out a knife? What do we do then? When and how do we protect ourselves? Don’t we have the right to defend ourselves? At what point would you agree that we hold up our hands to stop the blow of a club or baton? And is it not the right if not the moral obligation of our fellow citizens to intervene and physically grab hold of an aggressive violent person to hold him down in order to stop the assault on another human being. We can’t just stand around talking, taking pictures.

            In any case, I was responding to a video in a post by MinistryOfTruth regarding the black bloc’s violence in Oakland. In the video I saw black bloc protesters smashing windows and destroying property belonging to some banks and a Whole Foods store. My suggestion was that we surround the individuals who are seen vandalizing businesses; that is, breaking the law, in order to isolate them, thereby neutralizing their violence. However, if these people begin assaulting fellow citizens then I believe we have every right to defend ourselves and our fellow citizens from serious injury. At that point I am suggesting that we hold them down and shrink wrap their arms to their bodies, take them to the police or the police station and make a citizen’s arrest.

            We the 99% have decided to occupy public spaces. With this decision comes with it the responsibility of protecting each other, our fellow citizens and their property. So I am concerned for the survival of the movement when mainstream America watches these videos showing vandalism and the occupiers are running around taking pictures and shouting “The world is watching!” Yes, the world is watching and what is our position on this vandalism, this violence? Are we against violence or not? We can’t have it both ways. Don’t tell me, and I’m quoting you now, “we must learn to accept the opinions of others and facilitate cooperation without co-optation by or of either faction.” Surely we can listen to these views that promote the use of violent protests but I think the movement has already defined itself as a nonviolent movement and so we must quickly denounce verbally and with action these ideas so that the world can see that we are truly nonviolent and trying to defend and protect the lives and property of our fellow citizens even if it is the property of Wells Fargo Bank. And it was reassuring to see in that same video, occupiers putting their bodies in front of the bank windows, to try to prevent more damage from occurring. I also saw a young black man trying to talk some sense into the antagonists by shouting, “This is “occupy”, not “destroy!” But it is naïve to think that you are going to talk down “black bloc” an out-of-town group of infiltrators bent on destroying the occupy movement.
            As for your statement, “In order to BE the 99%, we must learn to accept the opinions of others and facilitate cooperation without co-optation by or of either faction.  We are inventing a new social paradigm here.  "I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't cut it any more.”” I’m sorry but there is black and white here. Striking or assaulting another human being with a club or baton is wrong no matter who swings it; either a cop or a 99%er.

            •  Where did you see the black bloc (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mahakali overdrive

              Strike someone? You are the one arguing that we should use violence against people to stop property destruction.

              There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

              by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:28:51 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I didn't . . . (0+ / 0-)

                I didn't say I saw them strike anyone. I said that I saw them vandalizing property, smashing windows and damaging property. I wrote this, "My suggestion was that we surround the individuals who are seen vandalizing businesses; that is, breaking the law, in order to isolate them, thereby neutralizing their violence." Then I wrote "However, if these people begin assaulting fellow citizens then I believe we have every right to defend ourselves and our fellow citizens from serious injury. At that point I am suggesting that we hold them down and shrink wrap their arms to their bodies, take them to the police or the police station and make a citizen’s arrest."

                Please read carefully everything that I wrote and then respond so as not to waste anyones time. Thank you.

                By-the-way . . . why does everyone keep saying that I am advocating violence. I am advocating self-defense. And I am not suggesting "a blow for a blow" I am suggesting holding someone down. How is physically holding a person down who has just "hypothetically speaking" assaulted a fellow citizen constitute using violence. Is using force to defend oneself the same as committing an act of violence? Please, if there is a lawyer available comment on this point.

                •  Sorry, I misunderstood. (0+ / 0-)

                  Although people do take similar actions to what you're suggesting I would have a serious problem with your exact suggestion. Namely that you are trapping someone then using violence when they try to escape. It isn't self defence on your part if entrapped someone. It's false imprisonment essentially. There are people at marches who do something similar, but the put themselves between the person causing the problem and what that person is try to break or vandalize.

                  There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

                  by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:54:31 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Folks who aren't prepared to suffer some blows... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...from a vandal should not be interposing himself or herself in the first place.

                  Such interposition should not be done with the intent of creating an excuse for further escalation. If that is your "plan B", then it is better to simply leave the vandals alone in the first place.

                  I wrote this, "My suggestion was that we surround the individuals who are seen vandalizing businesses; that is, breaking the law, in order to isolate them, thereby neutralizing their violence." Then I wrote "However, if these people begin assaulting fellow citizens then I believe we have every right to defend ourselves and our fellow citizens from serious injury. At that point I am suggesting that we hold them down and shrink wrap their arms to their bodies, take them to the police or the police station and make a citizen’s arrest."

                  "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

                  by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 04:15:58 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  with the intent of creating an excuse . . . (0+ / 0-)

                    Are you accusing me of bad intentions? “Such interposition should not be done with the intent of creating an excuse for further escalation.” Do you actually think I am looking for an excuse to advocate for violence?

                    First of all, I was responding to a video in a post by MinistryOfTruth regarding the black bloc’s violence in Oakland. In the video I saw black bloc protesters smashing windows and destroying property belonging to some banks and a Whole Foods store.

                    Now I am concerned about the perception of this and I think everyone who cares about the movement should be. I am concerned for the survival of the movement when mainstream America watches these videos showing vandalism and the occupiers are running around taking pictures and shouting “The world is watching!” Yes, the world is watching and what is our position on this vandalism, this violence? Are we against violence or not? We can’t have it both ways. Remember, we the 99% have decided to occupy public spaces. With this decision comes RESPONSIBILITY.

                    We need to accept the consequences of occupancy and take responsibility for the danger it brings to others. We should develop a plan to protect each other, our fellow citizens and their property.

                    Now I believe the movement has already defined itself as a nonviolent movement and so we must quickly denounce verbally and with action these ideas so that the world can see that we are truly nonviolent and trying to defend and protect the lives and property of our fellow citizens even if it is the property of Wells Fargo Bank.

                    I must tell you it was reassuring to see in that same video, occupiers putting their bodies in front of the bank windows, to try to prevent more damage from occurring at the hands of the hooded men in black. I also saw a young black man trying to talk some sense into the antagonists by shouting, “This is “occupy”, not “destroy!”

                    Finally, I also take offense with your other statement, “Folks who aren't prepared to suffer some blows from a vandal should not be interposing himself or herself in the first place.” I don’t know what this is supposed to mean either. What do you say to rape victims? Let me guess. Gals who aren’t prepared to suffer some abuse from a rapist should not be dressing themselves in an attractive and sensually appealing way in the first place. In other words it’s always the victims fault. And when these vandals start breaking windows again we should just look the other way. Oh, I forgot, we take out are video cameras, start taping and shout, “the world is watching!” But no one should intervene. Or when fellow occupiers are assaulted and raped in our camps we should just tell them to shut up and pretend it didn’t happen because it’s bad for the movement. You shouldn’t be in the movement if you can’t take a little sexual abuse.

          •  Agreed overall, but there is a conundrum: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mahakali overdrive, joedemocrat

            Some of the "black bloc" protesters don't care about or respect the deep convictions of other participants and are willing to take very public actions that cut against those deep convictions and even punch those who try, non-violently, to stop them from those actions. How do you facilitate cooperation with them?

            The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

            by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:27:24 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Anarchists would never punch other (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Meteor Blades, JesseCW

              Anarchists. Just to make that abundantly clear. They'd be socially ostracized forever.

              This is why this whole situation is confusing. No one is sure who did this. So no one wants to denounce it. Or if it's just the cops playing around. Or some other underground group wrecking havoc and having fun, or whatever. And then people are tangled in knots about this red herring having to do with the ideology of private property.

              It's silly.

              •  Personally, the ideology of private property... (3+ / 0-)

                ...isn't on my list of concerns. Much of the movement's force comes from its opposition to the violence the 1% is committing through banksterism and other behavior, and that to me is far more important than hand-wringing over a little vandalsim on philosophical grounds.

                What I do care about is the prevailing narrative that takes hold among non-OWS participants among the 99% as a result of those who took actions most of us object to, actions that, if repeated often enough, will harm the movement and taint and/or weaken future resistance. That narrative matters a good deal among the broader public.

                You're absolutely right, while I doubt it's the cops (at least directly), this could be just a group wreaking havoc because they can, not folks actually part of OO/OWS. All the more reason to come up with some means — and I am not saying it's easy — to stop or at least reduce those actions through collective actions of our own. Not, to repeat, against the ideas or even all of the tactics of the "black bloc," some of which are good, but against those individuals who take actions that can work to the detriment of OWS.

                I know that many see this as a mountain made out of molehill, or some similar cliché, but I think it matters to the long-term health of a movement which sprang to life just a few months ago but whose origins are in decades of predation by the 1% and its enablers.

                The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

                by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:14:40 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Fair enough and definitely with you (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Meteor Blades, joedemocrat

                  on the ideology of private property debate. I'm sure people can figure that one out on their own time, can't they?

                  Tactically what to do about any Black Bloc tactics? I'm a Socialist and sympathetic toward the BPP, so my personal response would be highly unpopular since most of these organizations are following Anarchist principles that are dilute and non-hierarchical (I'm for shared hierarchy). But I'd make sure that there were strong consequences for snakes in the grass. Usually, just ostracizing people works in a moment of violence. Like people standing back, pointing cameras on those people, and asking "WHO ARE YOU?" loudly. I don't think you need to be violent towards them and rip their masks off. You just need to vocally state, on film, that they aren't part of your march. You can also shout "COPS!" at them. That's usually how we've ever handled provocateurs. Shout "What's your badge number, officer?" while filming them. Refuse to stand anywhere near them. Change routes if need be. Definitely brief the crowd in advance too about the possibility of provocateurs. That is NEEDED. Like Know Your Rights Cards being distributed. Dealing with provocateurs cards are sometimes distributed.

                  What do you think is the solution for provocateurs enacting violence and smearing folks in the media with it for OWS right now?

                  •  I favor pulling off their masks... (5+ / 0-)

                    ...while those photos are taken even though that is risky at several levels. I am not talking about every bandanna-wearing, black-clothed protester, only those actually engage in vandalism (or actual violence. And that may come, as we've already seen a couple of confrontations between protesters that could legally qualify as assault. I am reminded of the LaRouchie cult's fascist attacks on leftists 1969-73. In some of those cases, we had to get physical out of self-defense. FTR, I am not suggesting the "black bloc" are LaRouchies.)

                    I like the idea of cards being distributed. A little education can go a long way in this regard. I not totally persuaded about calling the vandals "cops," however, even though some may be. Having seen some reputations unfairly ruined because someone labeled someone else a cop/infiltrator based solely on their ideas gives me pause. On the other hand, it might be effective if it is narrowly focused.

                    The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

                    by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:49:51 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Violent assault against persons? (0+ / 0-)
                      I favor pulling off their masks..

                      It's ok and non-violent as long as they aren't wearing a badge, I guess?

                      How does this hierarchical "non-violent" approach you now advocate work?

                      Only attack the people without guns and tear gas?  Only attack those not backed by the power of the state?

                      Starting a brawl by grabbing peoples faces is a hell of a way to try to resolve the situation - I can only say "you do it first".

                      She's the sort of person who would not only happily stay in Omelas, but would ask "Couldn't life be more wonderful if we threw a few more kids in there?"

                      by JesseCW on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:17:47 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Well, JesseCW, since they're masked we... (7+ / 0-)

                        ...don't know whether they are backed by the power of the state, do we? We don't know if they are wrong-headed participants in OWS, out-for-the-fun-of-it vandals, or agents provocateurs seeking to discredit the Occupy movement, thus serving the power of the state by giving the 1% propaganda points. But their behavior, which includes trying to physically push aside those who stand against their vandalism, DOES serve the power of the state.

                        As I said, pulling off masks (of those who actually commit acts of vandalism in a protest where the vast majority opposes such acts, not just anybody with a mask) has risks.

                        Your insinuation that I am doing the cops' work is unworthy of a reply.

                        The surest way to predict the future is to invent it. — Stephen Post. [Me at Twitter.]

                        by Meteor Blades on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 03:20:37 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Having been in the front of marches facing (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        navajo, Meteor Blades, fou, Bob Love

                        armed, angry & nervous OPD cops when from far behind me some masked character (whether protestor, undercover cop, or whatever) tossed a bottle & ran away leaving the rest of us to face the violence...those people should be unmasked.

                        At other protests I've seen masked people but themselves between protestors & the police to protect injured protestors...that's very different from what MB is talking about

                        Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

                        by catilinus on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:21:38 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  provocateurs enacting violence and smearing folks (0+ / 0-)

                    I'm sorry, I didn't understand this question, "What do you think is the solution for provocateurs enacting violence and smearing folks in the media with it for OWS right now?" Can you be more specific?

                    •  Sure. I was asking MB what he thought (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      joedemocrat

                      should be done if you are protesting and someone becomes violent, especially since many who are violent at protests are what are called "agents provocateurs" and are police. But that regardless of whether they were or not, it winds up getting picked up in the media. So as we argue about who is who, the media doesn't make that distinction itself and just sets about tarring folks as "violent."

                      So what should we do if we see people behaving violently, when we don't know if they are police or if they are protesters? When we know that the media won't stop and make that distinction itself?

                      I was suggesting then that we make it by simply saying "You're a cop!" and filming it.

                      There is a big tradition of agents provocateur.

                      One of the things they are really good at is exploiting someone's pre-existing beliefs to get people to behave destructively when they might otherwise act differently. They tend to play with people psychologically. So if some people have agreed to not be destructive toward property, but then twenty people around you start smashing stuff, it's very easy to be swept up in that if you already tend to agree that property isn't a big deal, as many anti-capitalists do believe.

                      So police, and others at times with other agendas, will provoke people to do things they, themselves, have already told themselves are not appropriate to a particular occasion or action or protest.

            •  Nothing works 100%. (0+ / 0-)
              Some of the "black bloc" protesters don't care about or respect the deep convictions of other participants and are willing to take very public actions that cut against those deep convictions and even punch those who try, non-violently, to stop them from those actions. How do you facilitate cooperation with them?

              Maybe interposing oneself between a vandal and his/her objective will work, and maybe it won't.

              Obviously, large numbers would help.

              But if it doesn't work, then it doesn't work. (I'm not going to be grabbing for shrink wrap or something.)

              Just because it might not work doesn't mean that it isn't worth trying.

              "If I can't dance, then I don't want to be in your revolution"--Emma Goldman

              by ehrenfeucht games on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 04:22:45 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  We embrace our movement... (5+ / 0-)

    the ugly and the beautiful, and work hard to sort it out. Work hard to fix what's broken. But bottom line, we embrace our movement.

    Let the financial thugs "condemn" it. Don't do their work for them.

  •  Thanks for another great, heartfelt and inspiring (5+ / 0-)

    Diary! I feel privileged to have made your acquaintance. Stay warm out there. :)

    I used to have hope. Now I just see most Dem's audacity in maintaining the corporate status quo... UPDATED: With OWS, I now feel hopeful again! May the OWS movement strengthen, grow and become a catalyst for significant change.

    by davekro on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 05:40:11 AM PST

  •  It's nice that there is a diversity of... (0+ / 0-)

    folks at the general assembly.  But the black bloc has taken over if the general assembly will not (or cannot b/c of the 90% rule) condemn vandalism and violence.  And the vandalism and violence has been increasing, so it's not a moot point.  They may not even constitute the majority, but they are strong enough to prevent peaceful resolutions by using their veto in the general assembly.

    Sad to say that violence and vandalism is increasing, and OO is unwilling (or, again, unable) to appoint negotiators to talk with city officials about safety or health issues.  Or discuss moving to a place that is better suited for a permanent encampent.  OO is stuck, unfortunately.  It doesn't look like it will end well as a result.

    •  I hope people take the time to read the local... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mindtrain

      news and blogs to understand how OO has degenerated swiftly.  Someone was murdered just paces away from Frank Ogawa Plaza, two local journalists were attacked in the past week, and some people tried to set a tent on fire.  The latter two (at least) perpetrated by "regular attendees" of OO.

      abetteroakland.com
      futureoaklandblog.com
      oaklandliving.wordpress.com

      eastbayexpress.com
      sfgate.com
      oaklandtribune.com

      •  You are spreading propaganda (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SadieB, catilinus

        That murder, in particular, is being used as an excuse to attack OO using incredibly specious logic: The police and city say they need to use the police resources being squandered on OO to protect the citizens from murder, yet they couldn't prevent a murder just feet away from the place where all these police resources are supposedly going!  What??

        •  Nice ad hominem attack. (0+ / 0-)

          Amy Allison and a radio guy from KGO were certainly attacked from folks in OO.  Close friends watched it go down.  There have alse been repeated knife fights.

          I never claimed that the murder was OO related.  Read more closely before attacking me please.

          georgewillcoxon.com

          by GFW on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:24:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RanDomino
          OO has degenerated swiftly.

          Is just meaningless slander & an attempt to swiftboat OO.

          Meteor Blades seems to do an outstanding job of community moderation despite the abject failure to be perfect.

          by catilinus on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 06:10:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  FUD (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        catilinus

        Intentional lie.

        Its ok to HR RW talking points, how about corporate talking points? This crap is really offensive.

        "What could BPossibly go wrong??" -RLMiller "God is just pretend." - eru

        by nosleep4u on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 10:06:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Again an ad hominem attack. (0+ / 0-)

          I've been around here since 2002.  If I could troll rate this comment I would.

          from my above comment:

          "Amy Allison and a radio guy from KGO were certainly attacked from folks in OO.  Close friends watched it go down.  There have alse been repeated knife fights.

          I never claimed that the murder was OO related.  Read more closely before attacking me please."

          georgewillcoxon.com

          by GFW on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:25:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Of those only the tent was internal to OO (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mahakali overdrive, catilinus

        And that was stopped and dealt with nonviolently. Yes there are problems in the camp but those problems have nothing to do with the black bloc. Honestly, I wish the folks who were a part of the black bloc during the day would be more involved with the camp, I think it would help with some of the issues we are having and would be a constructive outlet.

        There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

        by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 12:34:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And the physical attacks on the media? n/t (0+ / 0-)

          georgewillcoxon.com

          by GFW on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 01:26:13 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The "attacks" on the media that I know of (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            catilinus

            Consisted of the people locking arms in a circle around the man who was shot while the medics tried to treat him and someone getting pissed because some tv reporter opened up their tent and was trying to go in and film. Other than that I don't know, although given how some of the camera people act I wouldn't be surprised if they were shoved or pushed. They have no problem walking on people or things to get whatever shot they want. Not all of them obviously, but there are some giant assholes.

            There revolution will not be televised. But it will be blogged, a lot. Probably more so than is necessary.

            by AoT on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:01:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Aimee Allison was attacked... (0+ / 0-)

              From the NYT:

              "Immediately after Thursday’s shooting, Aimee Allison, the founder of Oaklandseen.com, a news Web site, was recording the scene with her cellphone when a man who had been staying in the camp seized the phone and threw it. He then pushed Ms. Allison to the ground, she said.

              Another protester quickly retrieved the phone, ran over and apologized to Ms. Allison and helped her stand."

              Which she discusses at her blog.  

              And this isn't an attack? (why the scare quotes?)

              "Protesters formed a chain around the victim. About a dozen men — some shouting, “No cameras!” and “No media!” — punched Mr. Davis in the head and pushed him to the ledge overlooking a BART station stairwell before other protesters intervened, witnesses said."

              Sounds like a real attack to me, no scare quotes.

              georgewillcoxon.com

              by GFW on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 02:10:42 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks so much for publishing this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SadieB, joedemocrat, catilinus

    I think I fell asleep just past when you published and was a little out of it, but yes, Lord this is a dumb meme, and more so, dumber when it's not actually having 1. any consequences and 2. embraced by a few many people who have been tepid to anti-OWS for a while and 3. old hat.

    I see that the meme will still be pushed by some who are just either nervous or hostile. But until someone proves that there is some kind of ongoing problem with violence at the Occupy Camps, and that it's coming from a certain ideological camp, then why should we push right-wing smear memes intended to swiftboat OWS?

    Yeesh.

    Thank you again. And again. And again. This is such a fake story that I was embarrassed by it,

  •  A tweet reported someone left his/her dog (0+ / 0-)

    in his/her tent and when he/she came back the police had cleared it away.  The tweet was begging someone to look for the dog.

    Never meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer.--Bruce Graham

    by Ice Blue on Sun Nov 13, 2011 at 11:19:07 AM PST

  •  People can read the GA minutes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joedemocrat, catilinus

    here for themselves:

    http://www.occupyoakland.org/...

    Regarding the vote in question about nonviolence, it's quite illuminating to just read what actually transpired in that conversation. The questions asked are excellent and remind me of the kind of critical dialogue I strive for in my own teaching. More people abstained from the vote than anything, and many said due to how it was worded, but generally there seems to be an idea that there will be more conversation on this topic (so we should be patient; it was poorly worded). There was also a categorical statement that Occupy Oakland does NOT support violent tactics:

    Is the proposal an implicit agreement to use of violence in the movement? – No, it is not.

    That's a start. And it's quite clear. No, there is not an agreement at this time to condone violence. How it will be dealt with, however, has not yet been determined.

    Moreover, Occupy Oakland states that they are currently receiving a lot of funding and donations. They are debating what to even do with it.

Meteor Blades, JekyllnHyde, Sylv, Phoenix Woman, MadRuth, grollen, glitterscale, Shockwave, wu ming, hyperstation, eeff, dsb, xynz, bronte17, missLotus, mint julep, susakinovember, boadicea, mrblifil, navajo, Chrisfs, dksbook, scorpiorising, annan, gmb, bula, dmsmith, joliberal, alizard, DMiller, ybruti, Kitsap River, NapaJulie, Mosquito Pilot, Steven D, SadieB, solesse413, RanDomino, humphrey, maybeeso in michigan, alaprst, CTPatriot, SherwoodB, irate, Laurence Lewis, majcmb1, Dem Beans, kaliope, WisePiper, Lindy, peacestpete, kathny, begone, Nowhere Man, Mother Mags, martini, LeftOverAmerica, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, vigilant meerkat, ActivistGuy, cookseytalbott, AoT, KenBee, Lefty Coaster, blueoasis, gpoutney, gooderservice, gatorcog, justiceputnam, anninla, Clive all hat no horse Rodeo, kurt, shaharazade, sea note, markthshark, Aaa T Tudeattack, ammasdarling, One Pissed Off Liberal, FlamingoGrrl, john07801, bluicebank, offgrid, NovatoBon, FishOutofWater, Mary Mike, jeanette0605, noofsh, operculum, deepeco, joedemocrat, bnasley, DeusExMachina, pioneer111, CT Hank, leonard145b, Zydekos, JDWolverton, Clio2, kimoconnor, elwior, Akonitum, KJG52, VL Baker, tofumagoo, davekro, pickandshovel, Tam in CA, Horsefeathers, petulans, luckylizard, sagansong, shortgirl, stolen water, Tara the Antisocial Social Worker, shopkeeper, JesseCW, petral, UnaSpenser, MKSinSA, kevinpdx, mahakali overdrive, jpmassar, citisven, RhymesWithUrple, Captain Marty, angelajean, gulfgal98, shenderson, DiegoUK, Publius2008, Otteray Scribe, Floande, no way lack of brain, Pizzapotamus, Alice Olson, zukesgirl64, Lorikeet, Wolf10, muddy boots, LSmith, poliwrangler, Caddis Fly, googie, Mentatmark, SouthernLiberalinMD, DawnN, Pinto Pony, GenXangster, anodnhajo, isabelle hayes, Siri, We Won, IndieGuy, congenitalefty, Horace Boothroyd III, TheGrandWazoo, ehrenfeucht games, Glen The Plumber, evergreen2, peptabysmal, John Kelly, Kurt Sperry, ShoshannaD, allensl, natfroiland, Lensy, SwedishJewfish, Blue Bell Bookworm, remembrance, mic check oakland

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site