Open letter to the Occupy Movement from nobody in particular

This is an open letter to the Occupy movement.  It was sparked by a question a friend posed on Facebook on how to provide solidarity to Occupy Oakland.  I stand in solidarity with you, Oakland, and am sending this with both appreciation and humility.  I don’t know the history of your occupation or decision-making processes.  This is a general critique directed at the movement as a whole, which last night’s events in Oakland inspired me to put into words.

First of all, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I’ve been waiting for Occupy Wall Street all my life. Recently, I was giving up hope for change – the American people seemed so passive, abuses were getting worse. So, thank you for sparking this movement and for all you are doing to keep the flame alive!

I am an erstwhile activist with a lot of experience in collective, consensus-based organizations, and also have done “mainstream” community organizing for a regional nonprofit. I have some concerns about the movement, which I feel can and should be at a turning point now after the amazing initial flowering of Occupations nationwide and beyond.

Since I’ve already written it, I thought I’d communicate my concerns to you by sharing a comment I made on a friend’s Facebook status that asked, “How do we provide solidarity to Occupy Oakland?” My answer:

My thoughts on this aren’t simple.

First, the most important thing for the movement, including for the folks on the ground, is to win the hearts and minds of the American people. Not just that things are effed – most are in agreement there – but that a movement can hold the promise of change.

In response to the events at OO, it is important to get out a narrative of what happened from the protestors’ perspective. A lot of spin from police departments goes on in these situations. I’ve seen a chili pepper or rags used for painting “discovered” at protest meeting houses (two different protests and cities) spun as the makings for home-made pepper spray or Molotov cocktails, so I know what BS can come out as justification for repression. The press often eats it up without question, the repression occurs, a correction may be printed later but at that point no one cares.

On the other hand, there is a significant tendency for protestors to get caught up in the drama of sparring with police. Not just the ones who do, but the sympathizers as well. We all love drama, to be the heroes of our own movies, and I think we have to seriously watch that tendency. Because it can lead to a movement that is more focused on that drama than how it is playing in Peoria or whether all the energy devoted to holding a park or protesting police tactics (police should be questioned and held accountable, no doubt, or it could get worse) – whether that energy could be better spent reaching out, organizing, theorizing, and making long-term plans for the movement (which I envision as being a “big tent” of smaller, more focused movements organized around specific goals, while the larger movement can remain the amorphous zeitgeist). Because it’s going to have to be a long-haul effort if it’s to be successful.

There are some people who do get off on fighting cops and there’s a lot of debate over internal “repression” of them within movements. To me, this is, for one thing, an unfortunate energy suck that I can’t see a good way around. I feel that they are going to appear in their bandanas from time to time, and throw paint-balls at cops, set fire to dumpsters, smash  few windows, etc. (As far as I know, windows were only smashed in Seattle – and we’re still hearing about it.)

Though their overall menace and the scope of their destruction are hugely overblown in the mind of the public, it only takes a little violence to discredit the movement in many people’s eyes. Others in the larger movement must disavow such tactics, even something small-fry like a paintball, and emphasize the strategic need to adhere to nonviolent tactics. Some semi-famous person (whose name I forget) recently said, “Stick to nonviolence. It drives the government crazy!”

Perhaps the commitment to occupying city parks also should be reexamined. There are a number of internal problems encampments can attract, which can become public relations nightmares (drug use, mess, smell, and various hangers-on and opportunists), and it’s difficult for most people to participate in them. Furthermore, without a more articulated agenda, it’s easy for people to wonder, “What’s the point? What are you camping in this park for months for?” We need to have an answer.

Still, I love the resistance and love that it keeps the movement alive with actual occupations. And, the Oakland teargassing story on NPR this morning segued to a study they said backed up OWS’s claims – finding that the top 1%’s income rose 270% (I can’t remember the time frame). Occupations and even police clashes do keep the topic of inequality in the news more. And that’s good.

Addendum: A longer NPR story by a reporter who was at the scene claimed that while things were thrown at the police when the camp was cleared in the morning, the protest at night was disciplined and nonviolent.

One reason the authorities cite for the park being cleared is that police and paramedics were not allowed into the camp. It seems that, while it might seem “radical” to hold this ban, it doesn’t serve any larger good and just creates unnecessary distrust and trouble. It sounds like the camp was basically well-run. If so, show it off instead.

Those are the thoughts I’ve composed at this time. I hope that they will be topics for a General Assembly discussion, because I believe that many OWS supporters share my concerns.

Thank you again for your creativity and commitment!

Helen in Massachusetts

cc: Occupy Together and other local Occupations