There have been incidents of black bloc type of behavior at various demonstrations and events. Just google it up and you’ll see the kind of hobby it is. Now, I have no kind of philosophical commitment to non-violence, and people certainly have the right to defend themselves in the midst of a police force as ‘community challenged’ as Oakland PD, but the smashing and spray painting and cop-baiting has got to stop. First and foremost, black bloc behavior sets the police on edge, invariably putting everyone in acute danger. After the strike last Wednesday, I got into a few scuffles with some kids by literally running after them to put out their fires like a freaking Three Stooges sketch. And when the police reacted, well, you know how that went… Secondly, it doesn’t play well in middle America: the media loves conflict, so twenty or thirty kids breaking shit is going to get more airtime than 100,000 people peacefully protesting in solidarity. And to look at Fox News the next day, that’s exactly what happened. A bunch of dumb kids buried the lead and now the Occupy movement is suddenly some kind of insurrectionist cult that coddles violent left-wing reptilian baby-eaters. We’re making their job too easily for them—we’re practically writing their copy.
Additionally, the General Assembly (the ‘organizing’ arm of Occupy Oakland) has reiterated, many times over, that it will not and cannot boycott or denounce black bloc tactics. Many reasons are given for this but the two chiefly responsible, insofar as I can tell, is that (a) the GA is not the kind of body that can sanction in this way and (b) people have to be responsible for their own behaviors and (c) dudes will break shit no matter what the actual rules are.
(a) Maybe gravy—I will talk about this more bellow.
(b) ‘Sure.’
(c) Quite probably.
In spite of these, I would argue that the GA at least ought to try, setting up boundaries and rules of engagement. Additionally, GA should reach out to local business that have been vandalized to help clean up, pay for, and repair any damages. This is kind of what happened the day after the strike, and it was good to see, albeit perhaps a little too late.
This country has a rich history of non-violent civil disobedience. To turn our backs on this strategy is to ignore the history that has validated its implementation. Our cultural narrative has a indelible mark left behind by Dr. King: namely it is what quiet white people expect and exalt. In a violence-tolerant movement you lose the majority even if they might have been inclined to agree with your platform. This is not to say that more vigorous forms of resistance are unacceptable or without efficacy—this too would ignore history; but we’re not just talking history, we’re developing public narrative, the projected image of what the Occupy movement is about. Like any guerrilla campaign, you have to have the locals on your side. Folks see the kids smashing things on television and their immediate takeaway undermines the bigger picture. Even within the immediate Occupy ranks, many people are simply getting turned off by all the people busting up shit. One can only put out so many fires and apologize so many times before getting tired.
And so creeps in the problem of pluralism: by maintaining a ‘diversity of tactics,’ we’re quickly undermining everything we’ve accomplished. Sure, such a diversity encourages a wider swath of participation, but it also obfuscates the overall strategy. You don’t send soldiers to war and then encourage them to use a creative panoply of projectiles: pebbles, jelly beans, cotton balls, and free hugs really won’t cut it as munitions, bullets it’s got to be. Rather than a diversity of tactics, we need a coordination of tactics, something that is currently outside the GA’s scope of plausibility. Last night one peace proposal, however imperfect, was resoundingly rejected and thoroughly mocked. What is clear is that the disunity as it stands makes our phalanx permeable, weakening the whole movement. At some point you just take your ball and go home. I admit that I’m getting pretty close.
Lastly, I’d like to point out that it’s not going to be chief executives on their hands and knees scrubbing out your stupid A symbol and picking up shards of glass. Just who is ultimately responsible and so burdened by vandalism? It’s janitorial workers, day-laborers, construction workers–and many people in these sectors are undocumented persons, some of the most marginalized people in our society today. And you just added to their burden. Nice! So excuse me if I roll my eyes when another white kid waxes superior about ‘crushing the machine’ or whatever.
Am I casting ham-fisted generalizations and aspersions against those who utilize black bloc tactics? Yes I am. But might I suggest that you quit making it so easy for me to do so.
You can read about more occupy ish at my blog: http://aphorismsandcheese.blogspot.com/2011/11/bellum-omnium-contra-omnes.html
5291
Internet viral news,videos and a promotion campaign would help us to overcome the news barrier and tell the actual truth to the people. I really do believe it is possible.
No one cares what the media thinks. We care what the rest of the 99% are watching-which, contrary to what you said, is MAINSTREAM TELEVISION. Like it or not, this is STILL how the majority of Americans get their news. Flash mobs, social media, and everything else pales in comparison to the far-reaching effects of mainstream media.This is not an opinion, it is a fact. Take it or leave it.
Who cares what the media thinks? The media is owned and controlled by the ruling class which bankers, politicians and ceos make a good chunk of. We must learn and develop ways to subvert the fake media and spread our message face to face with everyone who has to sell their time and labor in order to pay the rent or buy food. There are many things on our side. I read some study a year ago about how cable and satellite tv use is down dramatically as less people watch tv. That means we can work on methods online, utilizing flash mobs at busy areas where our on-the-ground fellow workers can see there is a struggle to join and that together we can create a better world.
Agreed, it was a very weak attempt at compromise, but I salute the people who put it forward and had the courage to stand up there at the GA and take the heat for it. Not to say that you don’t salute them too, but I just wanted to point that out because I liked how the facilitators said they should be respected and I think anybody who comes to the GA for approval should be respected. I’m sure all of us felt at least some of the ideas and sentiment in it were worth endorsing and were things we could agree with, but it wasn’t focused enough.
Awesome comments, I really appreciate your perspective and contributions here. It’s true that the people who actually suffer from the vandalism are some of the least fortunate of the 99% who spend their time on hands and knees cleaning up after everybody’s random messes and just life’s inevitable wear and tear to properties and businesses. it sucks that they have to clean up after our protest also, and unless the message behind the vandalism was itself positive and creative and inspiring, I would tend to say it was a job badly fucked up.
I also agree with you, even if we say “Ok, violence is going to happen anyway.” Like for example this tragic death downtown tonight…. violence and shooting deaths is a common event here in Oakland. The fact that it’s so common is what should be a fucking outrage. We in the Occupy movement should not in any way be adding to the tragedy of all the violence in Oakland. I believe is personally on a moral basis, but also just tactically on a message basis.
FWIW, the proposal that was defeated last night was not about non-violence. (I’m referring to #2, which was defeated; not #3, which was withdrawn without discussion.)
The proposal, insofar as it said anything at all, was a tacit _endorsement_ of violent tactics for those that felt they were appropriate. The author of the proposal said as much, here:
http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/dont-tell-anyone-but-were-having-a-revolution/#comment-1396
And to all of those “tired” of this debate about violence vs. nonviolence, get used to it. This is what it is like to have collaborative dialogue. THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE.
You are right. If we have a successful and well-attended protest, the rest of the 99% will see that and be inspired to join. But if there is violence and vandalism, the media will play that and IGNORE ANY POSITIVE ELEMENTS OF THE EVENT, making it look like we are a bunch of angry vandals with no purpose. Will the rest of the 99% then join us? NO!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED THE REST OF THE 99% to fight the power of corrupt entities in this country. Without the support of the 99% who haven’t joined us yet, WE WILL FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a disaster for us, and although there we can’t control what individuals do, making a statement of a nonviolent policy will go a long way in controlling the damage done to the Occupy movement.