Many of us have felt bullied, shouted down, and silenced by a cadre of folks who seem to be intent on driving the Occupy Oakland movement into the ground. Is it time to identify problematic folks and ask them to leave? I think that the time is rapidly approaching.
17061
The more that some of us have been researching the more that it is evident that there is an organized takeover of Occupy Oakland by a faction of anarchist academics who are in the insurrectionist movement. Three prominent names are Jasper Barnes, Joshua Clover, and Caitlin Manning. They have taken tactics from the UC Student Strike of 2009. The goal is create as big of a conflict with the police as possible. They are trying to follow the strategy laid out in the book “The Coming Insurrection” written by the so called “invisible committee”. There are plenty of others that are involved in some way or another. The Building Action group, and the Media Committee are two bodies that they have used, and are using to carry out this plan. If you don’t believe this please at least keep an open mind and do a little research. More information will be forthcoming.
I’ve been hearing that same argument about demands/no demands for 4 months. So, we have no demands. Where has that gotten this movement. This movement keeps losing support and is running out of money. Occupy Oakland is out of control. The only reason NY hasn’t yet gone the same direction is weather.
The propaganda on the News page is getting more and more violent. So I can only guess that NY will go the same way as Oakland come spring. If this movement doesn’t make some serious changes and get its act together it will only continue to lose support. It made a splash 4 months ago. Now its sinking. People are bailing out. It’s not going anywhere.
Some of the methods that may have made sense in the beginning, being leaderless, not having demands, worked to some degree to get this started. Now its holding the movement back.
You think without changes the general mainstream public is going to change its mind about this movement now? And join up? Decide, hey, you know what, that crazy leaderless movement that has no direction is a pretty good idea afterall! I think I’ll support it! Of course not. People have already made up their minds. And most people know that leadership, organization and a focused message with direction is important. They’re not signing up. There is nobody beating down the doors to get into this movement. OWS is just dragging along on life support now.
Nothing is going to change in this movement so long as it is being run by anarchists. Whose only goal is to keep their ridiculous notions of direct democracy in existance. They couldn’t care less about making positive change in this country. They’re too busy having anarchy delusions of grandeur.
And all of the consensus building crap is just helping this movement to go in a downward spiral. There is no real leadership, to draw a line in the sand and move the puck forward. So everyone continues to go in endless circles. Then comes back to, hey, maybe we should have some demends! What should our demands be??!! OMG. Its ridiculous.
Go read some of the minutes from the Demands Working Group. They are having the same frustrations. The anarchists are running this movement like a totalitarian regime. They dictate what happens at the GA’s. They use Direct Democracy and group think to manipulate the movement. Even the Demands Group knows this.
Yes, but UCB is an extremely well funded State University that had a huge endowment. Oakland is a city reeling from a murder rate that is exploding, a budget that’s been gutted by the state, and a mayor who has proven totally unqualified for her position. The REAL 99% of Oakland are tired of seeing their police tied up in huge protests, their public buildings damaged by vandalism and a movement that apparently has not set direction or course. YES, the foundation ideals of OO are good but we must return them them and stick to a sincere stand AGAINST VIOLENCE AND VANDALISM! Actions like what happened in City Hall last Saturday do NOT help the cause but turn people against it.
I understand the desire on the part of the movement not to be co-opted by outside forces. That said, I have never seen a succesful movement of any kind occur without leadership. Common sense should tell you that leadership IS required.
As per violence, clearly the non-violent approach is the preferred option. However, as many have observed in the goings on of life, when you take the high road when others fight dirty, you’re ultimately going to get your ass kicked. In this vain, if factions are emerging within the group, which appears to be the case, then perhaps there should be a friendly separation in order to preserve the movement as a whole while avoiding a fractious disintegration. Those who want to be more confrontational should have that option while others who don’t should have that option as well.
Here is a rant I just wrote in the comments section of an article from the Oaland tribune about the City using new tactics against occupy. Thought i would add it hear, asit reflects how I feel today regarding the state of OO….”I am a member of Occupy Oakland, and have been since the beginning. It has been an intense struggle within the group so far, and even though certain things discourage me, I am not giving up. I believe in following a strategy of simple tactical non violence, but I don’t expect that everyone will. Most of us in the movement want the same things, and it will be difficult to attain these things with either violence or non violence because the powers that be do not want to give an inch. I have my reasons for supporting a non violent movement, but the implication that the powers that be will be responsive to the needs of the people because we are being non violent is obviously a fairy tale. So why do they, Quan et al, urge non violence? Will she house all the homeless, and stop evictions if the movement behaves in perfect disciplined non violen resistnce. I don’t think she or any of the municipal powers, or the federal government will do much beyond pat us on the back if we are non violent. And if she and all of the sell out politicians aknowledge as they often like to, that the needs of the 99 are indeed just and urgents, then start doing something to fix stuff NOW. Is the caveat that we must remain non violent for two months or some amount of time to earn the brownie points that will convince the politicians that we deserve relief? Hell no!! They have no intention of giving us anything, and that my people is true violence. it is crushing the human spirit. It is snuffing out our human potential, and our ability to be self sufficient. people are dying in the streets. Single parents like myself have stopped paying bills, and have taken to eating patatoes and ramen. When we non violently disrupt business as usual to show that we are desperate and resolved, will Quan and Delafuente and the local power meisters send the cops home, give people houses to shelter in, provide food nd care for the indigent. Nope. She will still sic the goons on us if we threaten her owners bottom line. At this point, Jean Quan pretty much makes me sick to my stomach, and unfortunately I can’t listen to a thing she says even when it seems reasonable. She was responsible for starting this stuff off by brutally attacking the camp and unleashing tear gas on peaceful demonstrators on 10/26, of which I was one. I have not forgotten or forgiven, and the hypocritical pandering that comes out of her mouth only serves to remind me that she is pretty much behaving like Netanyahu, or Assad, while giving lip service to the 99 percent. The police have options. They could have surrounded the camp until people left. They could have brought in community leaders to help negotiate. They went with the guns, because they are showing off their new Homeland Security weapons and toys, and show the world how Occupy will be dealt with. . She has no business moralizing about violence at this point.
That said, I have spent a lot of time being pissed off at various things that have happened within the group. There is a lack of accountability from the inner core when things go terribly awry. The claim if no leadership is BS. There is hidden leadership that never makes itself available for critique. This needs to stop, and it will. if you are going to do something as confrontational and grandiose as the Saturday action, strategy, discipline, and accountability need to be air tight. I am not upset about some random violence as much as damage to the movement. They didn’t secure space, they didn’t keep the message of housing rights at the forefront. they got a bunch of people hurt and busted, and ratcheted up the tension with no gains accept for applause from afar. Some things that have happened have been so divisive and draining to the movement, that you have to wonder if there are not well placed police and feds within our ranks messing things up. Changes will happen though. We have reached a crossroads. It is time to reassert control of our local movement, and stop letting ourselves be lulled into following the invisible leadership blindly. For those of you who have supported in the past, or are sympathetic to the cause, please get back involved and help us make this work. At the very least join one of the functional committees, and shoe up to vote down any ill conceived actions that are brought forward by these people who have been so irresponsible, and callous to the needs of Oaklands beautiful but burdened peoples. there is a meeting tonight at the plaza to begin the discussion of how to make things work. 7 oclock…Hopefully Quan will leave us alone and not send the guns after us. The global movement for justice will not stop until it suceeds or is crushed brutally like so many movement have been in the past. Which side are you on?
Yes violence on our side has to stop or we will fail completely BUT please read on…
1. A great number of nonviolent demonstrators were arrested, so find ways to help them, don’t turn away from all arrestees.
2. When we think about this problem, consider a few factors. Police are as brutal as they were 50 years ago and it is hard for the best of us to remain calm in the face of their provocation. Also, because of police behavior, many strong practitioners of nonviolence have left, so that the most combative parts of those who seek change feel excited to join; the OPD is succeeding in changing the makeup of our movement.
I don’t know the solution, but lets support those arrested and lets don’t give up.
In my opinion the ‘might-makes-right’ approach has alienated protesters uncomfortable with violence and destruction. Simply put, violence and vandalism will divide the movement, not unify it. Having said that, asking people to leave isn’t the answer. Instead Occupy Oakland should re-define it’s self. No leadership is a form of leadership. But it appears that Occupy Oakland does have leaders; that militants have assumed control taking all other Occupiers on unnecessary trips to jail. I would be happy if I were found to be incorrect.
Before Adbusters promoted the idea of Occupy, there was Chris Hedges who stated a truth that must be faced before anything in the form of protest begins. It is that a slow motion coup d’etat has taken place in this country, crowned by the Citizens United decision, and we must first realize that we have lost. First, admit defeat. Begin there, and ALL is possible. He went on to say that as we confront the power of this massive security state the only option is massive organized non-violent civil disobedience. He was by no means diminishing the strength contained in that form of resistance. He was calling us to use this greatest of weapons against the power of the state. At Zucotti and Oscar Grant parks, it began well. The perception that change was actually possible spread across the country. We can never depart from the principle of non-violent civil disobedience.
As to the topic of this discussion, I can only ask those who broke into City Hall to think about this … are you ready to dedicate decades of your life to the real grindstone of change? Are you ready to first admit defeat, and then say to yourself, First, Do No Harm?
We have a chance to change the country and the world. Thoreau, Gandhi, and Hedges are who you should be reading. Don’t let this movement turn into what I saw in the 60’s with idiot personality cults and snakes eating their tails. Occupy! Plan on at least 10 years of steady, reliable pressure against the formidable corporate kleptocracy! Unite in non-violent civil disobedience and be like the waves against the cliffs!
Jazewell
I was not able to attend this weekend’s event. I am shocked to see the destruction we caused. Please stop this. We need to be non-violent if we are going to be heard. We are talking to all Americans. Are we being infiltrated by those who would see us fail?
There are around 38,000 denominations of the Christian church.
38,000 interpretations of the same events. 38,000 ways to accomplish basically the same goals.
Some of those breaks were legitimate- some were power plays- and some were just easier than finding common ground.
It is far easier to break the bonds of brotherhood and claim piety than stay and do the hard work of community.
The vandalism is the equivalent of a shot across the bow. It is a time-honored tradition that is taught at UCB.
Yes I agree – these call to actions that are so misguided (shutting down the port a second time, the move to 19th & Telegraph, the commune “move-in”) and are made by extremists without I suspect much education guiding their decisions. When people have tried to speak up they are ignored and denounced as dissenters. I can say this, because I have experience it first hand several times. They are losing the support of the public, community, and inside volunteers. There needs to be more education surrounding what happened to cause the 2008 financial crash and our current state of financial inequality. That way concerted efforts will have their intended proactive affect plus garner additional support to keep the movement going. We all know who he is referring to at the GA…..
I am gravely concerned about the future of this movement if OO does not decry vandalism and other actions that could generally be seen as unacceptable to the greater population.
It’s simple.
Run a non-violence proposal at the next GA. Anyone who votes against it is out.
Or more to the point, is it time to have a split and have two OO’s? It seems clear that there are people who can’t work together, and many of the people that I feel like I can work with, no longer have want to be part of Occupy Oakland.
That would have to be decided by a large group of folks. I have no illusion that many would leave when asked, but if certain actions are driving many people away from Occupy Oakland, the people that continually push certain actions, and are not open to revising their approach, I think they should be asked to leave for the good of the movement. There are certain people that I am thinking of, but I am not going to name them at this time. This would have to be a larger group discussion. Unfortunately, the question of who is “from” Oakland which everyone has resisted because it is “divisive” needs to be part of that discussion. If you are not from Oakland, or do not have strong ties to Oakland, and you refuse to listen to the complaints of Oakland residents, then you should not be a part of Occupy Oakland…but this it is not just about who is from Oakland or not. Certain attitudes and actions are proving harmful to the growth of the movement here in Oakland. I am tired of pretending that we are all in this together. Somwe folks need to know that a lot of people wish they would GTFO.
Okay I’ll bite. Could you give a generalised description of who these people might be?
I have a problem with some people’s politics/ideologies in that htye are inconsistent. From my perspective at least I do not feel comfortable with asking anyone to leave unless they are uttering racist/sexist/homophobic slurs, or are being violent, threatening and/or aggressive.
I am interested in hearing who this cadre is.