fyi: i submitted this friday night as a comment on Some useful insight on how #OO affects the entire movement from NYC. it never got posted publicly, so trying again as a new post. There’s nothing in it that hasn’t already been said by others, so please approve it, moderators.
it is absolutely essential to get a grip and neutralize this renegade faction that will listen and speak to no one, and the strategies suggested by the #ows writer is exactly what’s needed – and what a few brave souls tried to do in front of whole foods wednesday and during the midnight standoff too. OO, you’ve come up with many creative, nonviolent ways to protest that we fully support. i’m sure you can come up with just as many creative, nonviolent ways to neutralize this faction (if in fact it’s a faction and not hired, well-trained thugs in brand-new matching outfits). surrounding them, following them, photographing/videoing them, blockading them whenever they try to do their hit-and-runs are just a few nonviolent suggestions. i was grateful to see the post-strike Occupy cleanup crews, but the media damage had already been done.
another easy strategy: spread the word that if you converge on an “action” (like the traveler’s aid occupation) only to find these black-clad renegades on site, turn around and go the other way, no matter how supportive you are of the action they’ve touted in their flyers, because it might just be a setup. (i heard from someone who was there that the security gate had been unlocked before occupiers even got there. do you really think someone’s going to give us the key to a bank-foreclosed building?? and yet the gate was unlocked. think about it!!!)
the civil rights movement’s young activists went through trainings on how to remain in passive-resistance mode even while you’re being attacked; not a bad model for Occupy too. also, fyi: the giant anti-war marches in the 60s had monitors all along the route. i hardly saw any on this day. so, many more monitors please.
it’s sad and frustrating that this is happening, but it is, and we MUST address it ASAP or the whole movement’s circle of support will fall apart, and with it, the movement itself. no amount of ideological argument is going to change that simple basic fact. and we need this movement desperately!
thanks for your commitment and good hearts, and your dedicated efforts to figure out what “Another World Is Possible” looks like, and how to get there from here. the bulk of the strike day was a beautiful thing to experience. let’s keep it going!
wow, i’m amazed at the filter you have over your eyes when you watched this video.
Really? I think I have a measured and fair response. I criticize the Black Bloc and the “Peaceful” protestors when they acted violently toward one another.
i saw very little “restraining” by the regular protesters, who mostly tried to block the militant protesters’ path.
Now I think this reveals the filters you deploy when responding to representations of the Great Strike. Here’s the video of the dude w/ the yellow helmet attacking and restraining another regular protestor (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3HvGV3D1VU) watch it for yourself w/ whatever filters you’d like.
they were too afraid to do much more. the guy at the end also did not physically prevent the militants but blocked their path holding a stick he seemed prepared to use.
First when I referred to someone poking others w/ a stick it was w/ regard to the black bloc member at the beginning of the video you posted.
Second the guy at the end who grabbed a stick and began swinging it wildly, also said that the black bloc activist should be “shot” then he grabbed a stick and started swinging it at people.
good for him i say, and if the guy in the yellow helmet tackled someone, good for him too.
This completely undermines your position of peaceful non-violence. You oppose symbolic acts of destruction – that you feel (and perhaps you’re right) hurt our movement – not violence. you seam to be just fine with people, you can identify w/ (ie regular protestors), carrying out violent attacks.
they sure surrounded and tackled him right back.
First this is a false equivalence, particularly if one is advocating non-violence. The fact that other people are violent doesn’t justify the violence we perpetrate or support.
Second: No they didn’t. they simply freed their comrade from the clutches of an over aggressive violent individual who you are defending in the name of peaceful protest. The irony is rich.
no, so sorry, it was the militants who pushed the regular protesters around, at both locations, when they tried to stop them. that is unacceptable, period.
Yeah um I’ve already conceded that these skirmishes took place – however that black bloc – generally – attacks property and abhors violence against actual people and living beings. What I saw in the video of the yellow helmeted tackler was a dangerous and violent attack that was responded to by a broad divers group who liberated the blocer. That;s what I was referring to when I framed things in the order that I did. Now my argument has evidence based in video documentation and black bloc ethic/tactic (see david greaber;s direct action or just google black bloc and do some research for sources).
to say they were “enforcing their code of nonviolence on the black bloc” is absurd, as if it was some coordinated faction with a mission. this protest was PUBLICIZED as NONVIOLENT and PEACEFUL.
Come on talk about absurd. All I was referring to by code was the individual code of conduct that some wish to impose on others. obviously it wasn’t organized because the GA proposal in support of the general strike said NOTHING about PEACEFUL and NONVIOLENT protest (here’s a link to the actual proposal: http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/10/general-strike-mass-day-of-action-november-2/ ). The nonviolence crowd was clearly not organized and I in no way indicated that they were.
do you really think 10,000 people including parents, teachers, and children would have come out if that wasn’t the case?
Yes. Because they did. See the actual proposal that tens of thousands of people mobilized behind, the links above –nowhere does the proposal say anything about violence/nonviolence, however it clearly states
“While we are calling for a general strike, we are also calling for much more. People who organize out of their neighborhoods, schools, community organizations, affinity groups, workplaces and families are encouraged to self organize in a way that allows them to participate in shutting down the city in whatever manner they are comfortable with and capable of.”
they were trying to prevent a small band of renegades from acting in their name and hiding behind them, meaning the overwhelming majority of peaceful marchers in the crowd.
Again, wrong. The black bloc was not hiding behind anyone they were in front of the entire march. People followed them on the anti-capitalism march, which historically have included black bloc tactics and “leadership” insofar as they’re generally out front of these marches. The black bloc hijacked nothing – they were not present in either the morning or evening marches. They were only in the march that they historically participate in.
also, check out the comments on the youtube video. i’m not the only one suggesting infiltration. i never post to youtube or twitter.
Yeah I know ur not the only person spread fear and recrimination throughout the movement and society. It’s unfortunate. This video actually shows evidence of infiltration http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrvMzqopHH0&feature=youtu.be
i am really really sad to hear you parrot the same tired arguments for militancy from, yes, the 60s and even back to the 30s. they don’t work, they will isolate you and doom you to failure.
Really. Wow now I’m convinced. The civil rights movement was a big bust; the anti-vietnam war protests were for not; and I guess the long hard labor battles, that, yes involved militancy and yes won the 8hr day, child labor laws, the pension and so on were all failures. Sorry but again your wrong. These battles were all fought by people who wanted more than what they eventually got but more than anyone could have expected, they used a diversity of tactics, all peaceful and not came under massive police/state repression and despite all their shortcomings changed the world for the better. I’m defending the movement and calling for unity so irrelevant media spin doesn’t detract from what is actually taking place. the glass has been cleared away, windows replaced, the bank transfer day was a huge success, the universities are going to start occupying campuses, occupations are poping up in new locations globally, new campaigns and new energy is coming to camp and strengthening the movement. don’t forget our allies aren’t yet out of the hospital or jail so the movement must stay strong and remember that police are the violent mob and nothing justifies their actions.
so i hope you will learn from those lessons rather than repeating the mistakes of the past. talk to some black panther vets; they’ll tell you about cointelpro. the panther who spoke at the noon rally, elaine brown (?), will tell you that cointelpro was the reason she became a widowed mother with an arrest record within a year of becoming active with the panthers.
That would be so cool. Because I felt Ward Churchill et al. “The Cointelpro Papers” was lacking in detail. I learned nothing form it despite a detailed reading. If you haven’t read it I really do suggest it. It is the comprehensive text documenting how the FBI infiltrated, and neutralized the Civil Rights Movement, The Communist, Socialist, Radical Labor Movement, And the American Indian Movement. so yeah I know about cointelpro, but thanks for the fyi.
finally, when i say “who are they?” i mean who are THESE particular black-clad renegades, the ones in the video, the ones who, from several accounts, also passed out the flyers and did the blockading and fire setting? if you can find them and negotiate with them, great. i doubt if they’ll ever identify themselves, much less negotiate.
Again you’re wrong compare your video to this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSTLxcV7KMY
The flyer I received outside the TAS building was from some w/o a mask. And while there were some blocers as the video shows. They were pretty much out numbered.
any discussion or debate on the topic is pointless if they are not there.
Your right we should just move on and continue building the movement instead of trying to trackdown people who were actively trying to avoid identification. Now if building the movement means the growth of a large ACTIVE non-violent direct action contingent that would be hella awesome. But the only way this is possible is if the non-violence crowd comes out and participates even if the anarchist and black bloc remain, because packing up and going home won’t get any of us to where were trying to go which is a world where we have a say over and can improve the conditions of our lives.
And i fear for occupy akland if your views prevail.
I think this is unfair and emblematic of a dogmatic ideology that will ignore the facts, rationalize away blatant contradiction, take a condescending approach, that does more to harm the movement than help it. Or this is what I have tried to demonstrate in my response to this post. So if my tone has been harsh or dismissive or in anyother way rude, as I know it was, I apologize. I just kind of feel like im being ignored and spoken down to plus your not telling me anything I don’t already know – aside from the more personal insights about how you feel in response to the vandalism and the fallout which is of course useful information, and I appreciate it even if I disagree w/ your conclusion. So sorry again. I respect you and this movement a whole hella of a lot so lets keep on going. Unity in difference.
I’m hugely amused at the calls for Marxism from so many of you. Never mind that Marxist systems have slaughtered more people than any other system in history (including National Socialism).
There are many of us in the so called 99% that will not allow that. We will fight you Marxist filth!
Does the political/economic systems in this nation need change? Of course they do.
But vile Marxist filth IS NOT the answer.
My 2 cents.
My point was that NONE of us are idiotic enough to believe that ALL of the people involved in black bloc tactics are consciously working for the police even if we believe with absolute certainty (as I do) that law enforcement is involved in the manipulation of these tactics and the way in which people have been organized to carry them out. Sorry if I was unclear. I agree with everything you’ve written and respect your point of view. I’m as upset about these tactics as anyone but refuse to allow those who defend them to set up straw men about our “conspiracy theories” or to label those who resist them as “less radical” or defending “the man” or worse, as violent in themselves. Again, my point was that we are NOT idiots.
i appreciate your thoughtfulness and reasoned tone, very much, along with your links with first-hand accounts, which i’ll check out later.
unfortunately, you are incorrect about cointelpro strategies. the government infiltrated and instigated militant activities of leftist groups and also arranged assassinations such as fred hampton, national spokesman of the black panther party, which did advocate self-defense and militancy along with self-determination and self-rule.
the peaceful protesters are not the ones who pushed out the militant ones. peaceful protesters dropped their support as the militants got more militant (with the aiding and abetting of the cointelpro infiltrators) until the militants had so little support and became so isolated they were pretty easy to target and destroy. that’s the last thing we want to happen to the occupy movement.
there’s a lot more to it than that, but please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro
also, i wish i had the experience you did with your family members. from 80 miles away where i am, i’ve had to go into a big explanation each time i mention to classmates, friends, and co-workers i was there nov. 2, because all they saw in the media was the vandalism and nighttime chaos. i have to tell them – and they don’t really believe me – that for 16 hours with ZERO police presence, 99% of the 10,000+ diverse citizens from every part of oakland and the east bay were peaceful. it’s to the point where i don’t even want to bring it up, even for education purposes, and even though i’d like so much to share that incredible experience.
OO, you cannot have it both ways. make up your minds about it and be consistent in your messaging to the outside world, including on this web site (and i don’t mean the forums, i mean the official OO pages including videos you choose to post).
the guy i talked to – an iraq vet – was there. he said they did not have to break in or pry open the doors, because someone told him they had the key. someone leading the occupiers had the key. to a bank-foreclosed building.
thanks for calling us idiots. way to go.
Only an idiot would suggest that ALL these skinny white kids in fancy clothes are cops. But as an older person with a lifetime of involvement in groups with militant wings that were infiltrated and then manipulated from within I am certain that their activities are determined by whoever is paying the folks that lead them(some of whom can thrive in an activist community for years). Pretending that “security culture” and ASU’s will lead to some pure form of non-cop militancy is totally naive, especially in a nonwar situation in the midst of people who are young and inexperienced enough to trust those who dress and talk like them, while holding contempt for those who form the bulk of our communities. Even in those most extreme militant organizations atleast 90% percent of the work is done by those who practice nonviolence and can mingle with law enforcement (whether covered or not) without fear of misspeaking and those people are NOT the enemy. Mass movement and militancy CAN go together but not prematurely, in a brawl on the streets. The fact that most of us espouse nonviolence is a positive, even or especially, for those who seek to trigger revolution. When this movement needs defending look to those with inner discipline, love for our most vulnerable and something to either protect or create.
wow I can’t believe how paranoid and unsound this logic is. More likely than the totally strange claim that cops lead people to the building as a giant set-up, how about this idea. the building didn’t belong to occupy oakland and had to be opened with lock picking, prying open doors, or some other way, so certain individuals secretly had to break in to it, and then were able to have the door open when it was time for all of the other people to come over and see their new building. But next thing is that people are going to complain that breaking into the building is bad for the movement?
wow, i’m amazed at the filter you have over your eyes when you watched this video. i saw very little “restraining” by the regular protesters, who mostly tried to block the militant protesters’ path. they were too afraid to do much more. the guy at the end also did not physically prevent the militants but blocked their path holding a stick he seemed prepared to use. good for him i say, and if the guy in the yellow helmet tackled someone, good for him too. they sure surrounded and tackled him right back.
no, so sorry, it was the militants who pushed the regular protesters around, at both locations, when they tried to stop them. that is unacceptable, period.
to say they were “enforcing their code of nonviolence on the black bloc” is absurd, as if it was some coordinated faction with a mission. this protest was PUBLICIZED as NONVIOLENT and PEACEFUL. do you really think 10,000 people including parents, teachers, and children would have come out if that wasn’t the case?
they were trying to prevent a small band of renegades from acting in their name and hiding behind them, meaning the overwhelming majority of peaceful marchers in the crowd.
also, check out the comments on the youtube video. i’m not the only one suggesting infiltration. i never post to youtube or twitter.
i am really really sad to hear you parrot the same tired arguments for militancy from, yes, the 60s and even back to the 30s. they don’t work, they will isolate you and doom you to failure. so i hope you will learn from those lessons rather than repeating the mistakes of the past. talk to some black panther vets; they’ll tell you about cointelpro. the panther who spoke at the noon rally, elaine brown (?), will tell you that cointelpro was the reason she became a widowed mother with an arrest record within a year of becoming active with the panthers.
finally, when i say “who are they?” i mean who are THESE particular black-clad renegades, the ones in the video, the ones who, from several accounts, also passed out the flyers and did the blockading and fire setting? if you can find them and negotiate with them, great. i doubt if they’ll ever identify themselves, much less negotiate.
any discussion or debate on the topic is pointless if they are not there.
and i fear for occupy oakland if your views prevail.
yes you are wrong. historically, during the lead up to N/30 (the battle in seattle) included long debates and process over the question of tactics. currently there are lots of people in the GA that support a diversity of tactics while not all of these individuals deploy bloc tactics some of them might. additionally the black bloc is not an organization, its got no members, representatives, or identity. it is a tactic. So when you ask if they/it have come to the GA the answer is no. the spirit of the bloc has. the spirit of class war has awoken. and this is what the black bloc is. it is a return to the radical confrontational politics of working class resistance that preceded the fetishization of ghandian non-violence since the 1960’s. we’re building a fighting union/movement that is capable of change the conditions of our labor. this is what is emerging and overwhelming all of the various restrictions that are being imposed upon it. this is why the movement is still growing and expanding in all directions…internationally…locally…in the universities…on bank transfer day…in new campaigns…bigger and better positive projects will overshadow a little vandalism.
the video you posted shows “peaceful non-violent” protestors trying to physically restrain and forcibly impose their code of non-violence on the black bloc. This code of non-violence was not agreed to or established before the general strike and was not enforced through dialogue but through force. Now this is not an excuse or apology for the asshole poking people with a stick at the beginning of the video. I also saw the asshole in the yellow helmet tackle someone and hold them down on the ground which was incredibly dangerous. I understand the black bloc did get into skirmishes w/ “non-violent” protestors and that was unfortunate, however lets be real the videos confirm what i saw – the black bloc destroyed property, in response some “peaceful” protestors began attacking/restraining the bloc who then retaliated and thus the shoving matches.
hey, if i’m completely wrong then these black bloc kids will negotiate. right? so go ahead, try and negotiate with them. i’d love for you to prove me wrong. try and find them in the first place. i’ll lay odds you won’t even be able to find them, much less negotiate with them. but i’ll be extremely happy if they really will “work our shit out through dialogue.” they sure didn’t dialogue with the people trying to stop them on wednesday, as you can see in this very disturbing video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86XhCwHhwn8
have they even shown up and announced themselves at any GA before or since Nov. 2? i’d be very surprised if they did.
and i’m not talking about the anarchists. i’m talking about these young, white, mostly male pretenders in brand-new matching outfits. they give anarchists a bad name. the tully’s coffee manager whose heart was broken because she supports the 99% and yet her place was trashed, told me today that they showed up at the oscar grant protests too, doing the same kind of destruction, and she and others believe they are from “out of town” or the suburbs.
they are not the same people, in manner or dress or tactics, as the black bloc that used to show up at big san francisco marches leading up to the iraq war.
so who are they? that’s the question of the day. who are they?
It doesn’t explicitly approve vandalism, but the agreement being referred to is stated in the press release for the General Strike: http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/pr11111/
“Occupy Oakland embraces a diversity of tactics among its supporters, and is firmly rooted in the common understanding that there will be no endorsement of political parties or politicians running for office.”
Presumably this happened at the GA on the 31st.
“As I understand it, the Oakland GA agreed to autonomy and diversity of tactics”
Please refer me to which night the GA approved vandalism.
The shout out and the sincere attempt at discussion are both much appreciated, thanks.
When did the GA reach this consensus? Do you have a cite, hashtag, URL, documenting this?
That’s a damned good question, honestly. All I have to go on is some claims and commentary I’ve picked up in bits and pieces; I stumbled on one source just now that isn’t any more reliable than an anonymous comment can be, but so it goes. http://anarchistnews.org/node/16933#comment-164205 I certainly don’t have any official documentation, so I suppose this point in particular should be considered “from what I’ve heard”.
And more to the point, what does this consensus mean? That the Black Block has free reign to pursue whatever tactics it alone (do to tactical considerations if you’re planning something provocative, you don’t tell the whole plaza, eh?) determines? Or that The Black Block is free within a larger action to “protect and serve” the majority of peaceful demonstrators, I.E. to give them time to flee when the State employs it’s Centurions?
And this question is even better – one that has, in some form, gone back and forth through anarchist circles, even. Since I’m not privy to the details of whatever discussion led to the consensus of respecting autonomy and diversity of tactics (assuming that, hopefully, this discussion and consensus took place), I couldn’t say for sure what people might have had in mind.
Some people within anarchist circles advocate for the black bloc taking on a defensive role, being the ones with the right equipment to keep the riot police away from the rest of a demonstration. Others see it as more of a combination of aggressive and defensive, either by leading the police on chases throughout the city (pulling manpower away from other areas) and attacking targets haphazardly as the bloc moves along; or by the bloc itself asserting control over an area, and using that temporarily liberated zone to accomplish whatever they please (perhaps similar to the occupation of the Travelers Aid building). And I’m sure others see it as purely aggressive (a simple tool for militant resistance, or something else entirely).
It’s impossible for me to say for certain at this point whether there was a consensus for the black bloc to take one form or another, or any form at all. I’ve certainly heard some people assert very assuredly that there was such a consensus – but I would hope that, if it did happen, it would have resulted in:
1) from the peaceful camp, less denouncing of militant resistance and advocating for endangering the safety of radicals [by video taping them, removing their masks, etc], and
2) from the militant camp, more discussion with others about how militant resistance could play a role in this movement [although the tough part would be doing so without going into too many specifics and getting charged with Conspiracy, which might explain some vagueness or lack of discussion].
The “Occupation” and “decolonization” of the Travelers Aid building could be viewed as an action in line with the GA Statement of November 1st, http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/declaration-of-solidarity-with-neighborhood-reclamations-103111/ Do you see it that way?
Absolutely, although I’ve heard a lot of critiques regarding how said occupation was undertaken. I’ll say that it seems in line with the GA Statement you linked to (especially judging by this statement from one of the occupiers: http://anarchistnews.org/node/16898 ), but I don’t think I can comment as to whether it was, y’know…a genuinely viable action.
Finally, accepting for a moment that the GA did endorse a “diversity of tactics”, are you suggesting that the GA thus did tacitly endorse ALL of the provocations to property – window breaking, tagging, barricades and bonfires – that were carried out Wednesday night and on into Thursday Morning?
I would make a distinction here, I think. There’s a difference between saying “those who are interested in participating in the movement can do so in whatever way they see fit”, versus “any actions taken by anyone within the scope of the movement should be considered representative of, and endorsed by, the movement as a whole”. I wouldn’t suggest that the GA endorsed every action partaken by those who engaged in attacks on property (black bloc and otherwise), no. But if the GA did, in fact, consent to a diversity of tactics, that would imply that they would not attempt to forcefully impede nor condemn any forays into militancy, nor (presumably) advocate for others to do so.
In my humble opinion, non-violence escalates into pacifism when a non-violent person insists that everybody else should be non-violent. I have no problem with peaceful and non-violent means of protest – I think there are many forms of it that can be powerful and effective, and anyway I don’t believe that everyone could be convinced to be militant any more than everyone could be convinced to be pacifist – but I sincerely do not believe that a pure, 100% peaceful (i.e. pacifist) movement can accomplish what a movement that respects a diversity of tactics could accomplish.
(Note that when I say “militant”, I’m referring to actions such as illegal occupations of property [that are determined to stay there rather than being dragged out and arrested], sabotage, property destruction, and self-defense against the police – not some kind of armed struggle campaign, which would be beyond ridiculous.)
As for what good the Black Bloc has done, that’s a fine question, frankly. I can only provide my personal analysis, which will hopefully be a little more detailed than “smashing stuff is awesome” or “they fucked everything up”.
I’ll skip my defense of two oft-quoted criticisms of militant actions (“it makes us look bad” and “it invites police violence”) because I think they’ve been covered enough, and instead try to focus on some positive things the black bloc did. But I’ll start off my saying that, honestly, I’m not certain that the use of the black bloc was actually a good tactical decision by anarchists in this circumstance. I’m less concerned with defending the actions of the black bloc in this particular instance, and much more concerned with defending the idea of militant resistance from being thrown under the bus, and causing an irreconcilable division between the peaceful and militant protestors.
And as a brief segue, I think I need to point out to anyone going off about police conspiracies and COINTELPRO tactics: “divide and conquer” was a big strategy back in the 60s – get peaceful/pacifist activists to oust the more militant radicals, arrest all the militants with no moral outcry from the public, and then move in on the peaceful movement once their dangerously militant back-up is sitting in jail.
Anyway. The black bloc have certainly managed to up the media hype of Occupy Oakland and turn a lot of eyes toward the occupation. I honestly believe that the majority of people in America who would express disgust at the actions of November 2nd are those who were already opposed to Occupy as a whole – anyone with conservative sensibilities and continuing rightward from there. These people might see the black bloc as “proving their point”, but ultimately, that doesn’t really matter – they were, are, and always will be operating against anything that smells like progressivism or liberalism (and god help the genuine leftists and anarchists).
I actually have some pretty apolitical, vaguely conservative (for the sake of the status quo) family members who’ve heard about the actions of November 2nd, but were mainly impressed with the power of the general strike and the sheer anger that must have driven some people to riot. They didn’t necessarily agree with the militant actions, but they were nowhere near seeing it as damning for the movement as a whole.
I believe that the thing that could really kill this movement is fostering internal divisions, and publicly condemning wide swaths of the movement. With enough creative independent media work, blog posts, tweets, and videos, the mainstream media can be countered or even neutralized. But if those same sources of independent media are just echoing the words of a corporate news network, it pretty much plays into their hands.
There’s also the possibility that the black bloc has actually been inspiring to some people – for all the folks that mourn the vandalism and broken windows of those local bank branches, I’ve heard from a good number of people that they were inspired by the actions (the occupation of the Travelers Aid, the attacks on bank branches) and felt that the Occupation in Oakland might really be getting serious.
That’s all I’ve really got to say about that, and, really, I admit it’s possible (not definite, but possible) that the use of the black bloc in this situation might have been more negative than positive. At the same time, I have to say that it’s almost entirely certain that the black bloc could be used effectively and in conjunction with peaceful forms of protest. But I really think that that can only happen if there is communication and coordination between the peaceful and militant segments of the movement.
For more about the black bloc and some perspectives and interpretations of Nov 2nd, some people who had a first-hand experience have written their accounts – including ones that are critical of the black bloc’s actions, which might make for some interesting reading. (Most of these articles link to AnarchistNews but were not necessarily posted there originally.)
http://anarchistnews.org/node/16910
http://anarchistnews.org/node/16933
http://anarchistnews.org/node/16941
http://anarchistnews.org/node/16956
http://www.birdsbeforethestorm.net/2011/11/oakland-general-strike/
i was in the plaza when the TAS building was occupied and during the fallout into the early morning hours. I don’t think that these accusations of infiltration hold water. the black bloc members didn’t look to be cops (ie well-built, athletic, above 25 years old) and unlike Rome, where authorities use fascist soccer hooligans, the bay area lacks a large organized rightwing youth group that police can mobilize to fill their shoes (obviously none of this is conclusive) I did speak w/ some black masked folks and they seamed sincere and dedicate as well as articulate. how about trying to talk to black bloc participants and being nice at first because they won’t bite if you don;t. additionally most of these comments are conspiratorial and baseless e.g. “it sure does smell like a setup” … “could be infiltrators” … “and if all of it was a setup, its tactics and training and strategies went way beyond opd.” now i agree that we should learn from the past and that cointelpro was terribly destructive to the left and numerous movements (Civil Rights/Black liberation, AIM, Anti-War/Peace Movement etc.). However the lesson that i learned from this time is that all of the left needs to stand on the fact that we are right (morally, ethically and in simple practical terms) and we should stand in solidarity articulating this position – instead of – as was the case then – allowing the state to divide the movement into bad/violent protestors and good/non-violent protestors. and furthermore if we are to learn from conitelpro there is no reason to jump to the conclusion that history is repeating itself or that the current dynamics correspond to those of the 1960’s and 70’s (I would say the decade of increased survailance goes way beyond any conitelpro activity and creates an entirely more complex set of variables when considering security culture within the movement). what we can be sure of is the state/repressive forces will actively try to use a diversity of tactics against our movement – form divide and conquer tactics by spreading lies and mistrust – to framings a la Peltier, Pratt etc. all the way to murder a la Fred Hampton. and in the face of this violence and repression we have choice to either stand together in solidarity and fight or we can give in and succumb to the pressures of trying to change the world – yes the cops will inevitable try to stop us… until they don’t… then we “win”.
all that being said it would not surprise if there were infiltrators who caused some of the damage on the 2nd/3rd, particularly in the chaos of the police raid and mass arrest/assault. However instead of this militarized response to the police state – where we do their job by finding and rooting out subversives or we simply take our ball and go home, better world be damned – lets figure out ways of working our shit out through dialogue.
I love how you are reframing peaceful and non-violent as pacifistic and non-resistant, and objections to tactics that have brought very little good to the movement as somehow something that’s just an outgrowth of our soft little hearts.
But I’ll bite: what good have Black Bloc actions done for Occupy Oakland? What has Black Bloc given us that wasn’t a double-edged blade which has cut much deeper on the side facing us than the side facing our enemies?
Sorry, I don’t mean to imply that you were the one screaming or condemning, necessarily – but you are echoing a repeated attempt by a number of people (both in Oakland and in other Occupy locations throughout America) to shout down and condemn anyone who advocates for militant resistance.
You additionally seem to be operating under the assumption that the black bloc is either some kind of vague “outside force” (somehow not a part of the 99%, despite their only distinguishing feature being their manner of dress) or an outright police conspiracy. The first one, you could potentially argue, although I would say that the 99% is made up of many unique groups of people rather than a homogenous whole, and thus the participants of the black bloc simply represent another unique group.
The second point is plainly absurd – the black bloc is a long-standing tactic of certain political movements, and there is no way in hell that the police would dedicate so many officers to causing disorder. Any black bloc might have one or two police infiltrators hoping to discern the identity of participants or guide them into a police trap, but to deem the entire affair as a police tactic is just unreasonable.
And, how is it that you know they won’t negotiate or discuss? From what I’ve heard, anarchists (the most prominent participants in the black bloc) have been debating, discussing, and arguing their hearts out in the Occupy movement since its beginning. As I understand it, the Oakland GA agreed to autonomy and diversity of tactics, which would allow for the black bloc tactic to happen without promoting itself as representative of the entirety of the movement. There have been further discussions, and plenty of explanations and talking pieces posted by anarchists in Oakland and beyond (see: http://anarchistnews.org/node/16956 and http://anarchistnews.org/node/16933 and http://www.birdsbeforethestorm.net/2011/11/oakland-general-strike/ ), whereas from the pacifist side I’ve mostly seen a slew of knee-jerk condemnation and a refusal to discuss the idea that a certain segment of the movement clearly views militant protest as viable and preferable to pacifistic protest.
I agree with you that this movement needs to survive, and grow, and we need to keep in mind tactical and strategic considerations. But I think this needs to include the members of this movement who desire to participate in ways besides pacifism and non-resistance – so that this movement can have teeth to back up all of its heart, and so that these two passionate camps of anti-corporatism can stop fighting each other and get to fighting the real battles.
@Nic:
“From what I’ve heard, the Oakland GA had a consensus that autonomy and diversity of tactics would be respected…”
First, let me give you a shout out. You clearly have a historical perspective; you make good points; and while you and I do not YET agree, I appreciate what you’re bringing to the dialog.
Back to the quote. I’m very frustrated that non-campers have a real hard time figuring out what the GA decides. The last GA Announcement is from November 1st. The last GA minutes on the web site are from October 26th.
When did the GA reach this consensus?
Do you have a cite, hashtag, URL, documenting this?
And more to the point, what does this consensus mean?
That the Black Block has free reign to pursue whatever tactics it alone (do to tactical considerations if you’re planning something provocative, you don’t tell the whole plaza, eh?) determines?
Or that The Black Block is free within a larger action to “protect and serve” the majority of peaceful demonstrators, I.E. to give them time to flee when the State employs it’s Centurions?
Next point: the “Occupation” and “decolonization” of the Travelers Aid building could be viewed as an action in line with the GA Statement of November 1st, http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/declaration-of-solidarity-with-neighborhood-reclamations-103111/ Do you see it that way?
Finally, accepting for a moment that the GA did endorse a “diversity of tactics”, are you suggesting that the GA thus did tacitly endorse ALL of the provocations to property – window breaking, tagging, barricades and bonfires – that were carried out Wednesday night and on into Thursday Morning?
@Nic LesFlics: none of the suggestions i made involved ripping off masks or physically attacking people, although they can be seen in videos poking people with flagsticks and surrounding and threatening people who tried to stop them. i am also not screaming at or condemning anyone. i am pleading, because they will not negotiate or discuss anything with anyone. i am pleading, because even if they are legit, their tactics of latching on to peaceful gatherings and making sure the media is watching them do their destruction is the quickest, surest way to end this movement, because people like me – who represent most of your outside support – will no longer support it. i am pleading, because the 99% needs this movement desperately. i am pleading.
i wasn’t there, but the guy i talked to was there, and yes, he said there was a security gate – a regular barred gate – that was already unlocked. someone told him that someone else had the key. “otherwise we couldn’t have gotten in, we would have had to break through that gate,” he said. as he was telling me this, he made the same connection you did, especially when he told me the cops, who had been completely absent until then all day long, suddenly appeared everywhere within minutes of occupying the building. you can see that part very clearly on the video on OO’s home page today. he also said the fires started almost instantly too. when you put all that together with the “occupy a bank-foreclosed building for the homeless” flyers that brought people there in the first place, it sure does smell like a setup. and i am also suggesting that the black bloc renegades – who were also doing the blockading, from the first-person account on OO’s site today, and probably the fires that night – could be infiltrators. that’s why it’s so incredibly critical to find creative nonviolent ways to neutralize their tactics before they have a chance to use them again. they are not occupy. and if all of it was a setup, its tactics and training and strategies went way beyond opd. look up cointelpro from the 60s, the infiltration of the black panthers and other radical groups. since then these strategies have gone global along with the 1%. when i posted on OO’s FB page my suspicions about the black bloc renegades, someone commented that they showed up in rome too, with the exact same tactics.
How is it exactly that the black bloc was a “renegade faction” that is accountable to no one? From what I’ve heard, the Oakland GA had a consensus that autonomy and diversity of tactics would be respected, which means that even if the black bloc actions should not be considered representative of the entire Occupation, neither should they be condemned and attacked.
And frankly, the only way to “prevent” black bloc tactics is either by force (physically attacking and/or ripping off masks and clothing), or actually opening up a dialogue with militant protestors and re-examining some peoples’ position of hardline pacifism.
If the Occupy movement is indeed a movement, there’s no way to prevent certain people from participating whenever they see their goals matching up with those of the movement. But if you’re concerned about minimizing conflict between pacifist vs. militant protestors, and especially how to cope with the fact that some people WILL be militant whether you like it or not, then you need to have a genuine dialogue – not just scream condemnations, insults, and conspiracy theories at the people you disagree with.
As for whether the black bloc is an actual group of protestors or some sort of massive group of police spies, why don’t you, say, ask some of your friendly neighborhood anarchists for their thoughts on the matter? Look into the use of the black bloc historically? Somebody’s even made a helpful diagram – the black bloc explained: http://anokchan.com/b/src/132062631946.png
And as one last point – the anti-war movement of the 1960s had its fair share of militant radicals, including even some early versions of the black bloc. The War in Vietnam ended by a combination of pacifist protestors, civil disobedience, riotous direct action, and of course, the Viet Cong.
Even India’s bid for independence wasn’t pacifistic, despite the fact that Gandhi is the most-quoted figurehead. Nor was the Civil Rights movement of America, which frequently ignores the militant participation of Malcom X, and later the Black Panthers. Stop using the mythology of pacifism as an excuse for shouting down people who feel that striking back against a violent system is a better idea than allowing it to push them around.
When you said that the gate TAS was open, is that an entrance to the building? In that case the door was open or how did they get in? Very eerie if that’s true sounds like a setup.