Occupy Wall Street 3: Now What?

i mean don't thank me, i'm just tryin to keep people talking and acting about the stuff that pisses us all off.

sometimes i forget i'm talking to other people, and i wind up talking to myself & posting stuff that excites me while freaking out other people and maybe maligning people who'd stand with me but condemn tumblrs i like or whatever. which is not what i'm after.

you're maybe a more generous person to not necessarily react in same way that i do to the imagery in that black. i'm 34 years old and have been off and on active in protest politics since my teens and when i think of all the useless posturing "revolutionaries" i've met in that time i have a hard time mustering up anything but contempt. i was kind of raised this way--my mom has been an activist since the early 1960s (she joined the civil rights movement in college and was registering black folks to vote in mississippi from 1963) and she told me stories of maoists disrupting antiwar rallies. she also thought the weathermen were a bad punchline. ironically b/c she's an activist and educator in chicago she's gotten to know bill ay3rs and we both agree he's mostly a self-absorbed glad-handling charlatan.

in that BLOG not black -- i was thinking about "black bloc" and my words got kind of jumbled.

in other other news, occ oakland people who (it's my secondhand understanding) had BS hate crime charges thrown at them have been acquitted

http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash2/s320x320/148930_3379296480889_1223710522_54586717_754226861_n.jpg

i didn't know they were reviving the mod squad again!

she's gotten to know bill ay3rs and we both agree he's mostly a self-absorbed glad-handling charlatan.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Tuesday, May 22, 2012 9:10 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

haha i buy this 1000%

when i think of all the useless posturing "revolutionaries" i've met in that time i have a hard time mustering up anything but contempt. i was kind of raised this way--my mom has been an activist since the early 1960s (she joined the civil rights movement in college and was registering black folks to vote in mississippi from 1963) and she told me stories of maoists disrupting antiwar rallies.

i mean i definitely hear this to an extent--what has an american maoist ever done to get the guys at the san antonio toyota plant a better wage?--but at the same time i'm also very much of the view that people pushing at the edges of "respectable politics" are vital and necessary. i'll always stand with and fight alongside people struggling for appreciable gains, but i also think it's important for there to be people willing to expand the parameters of that which can be gained. given the place and age i had the accident of being born in, it seems to me that radical agitation is an important part of all the broader strategies to win a better world(s). moving the overton window to the left, little by little, til maybe we'll find the window has met up with the open door and we can walk outside.

plus, like, we have vegan potlucks and stuff.

occ oakland people who (it's my secondhand understanding) had BS hate crime charges thrown at them have been acquitted

on further reading it seems the charges were dismissed on two of the 3, the third was given a slap on the wrist re: unrelated "vandalism"

whoa lots of xps but weird, i am from austin also and postponed my first trip home in ~2 years so that i could be in chicago for may day and the nato summit

second city cop blog has some ... interesting ... takes on the weekend if you can stomach reading some of the comments etc

i just find it depressing how ows seems to have found its place so quickly as another repetition of people and cops being aggro towards each other. to me the whole initial promise of the protests was rooted in the way they were trying to do things differently, so that for example you had people of all ages, families with small children, etc. attending protests and expressing their grievances with how things have come to be. but all this emphasis on "fuck the cops, they're the real terrorists" is such a red herring and one which ends up playing so perfectly into the hands of whoever is interested in discrediting the protests on every level.

obv the average person is going to look at stuff like that and conclude what they're seeing on the news or what is holding them up in traffic is just violent "extremists" acting out and want no part in it. it completely distracts from the crucial point that needs to be emphasized over and over-- that the so-called one percent are in fact the real extremists. which i think was one of the original very wisely-emphasized strategies of the movement, but increasingly that kind of thing has been lost in throwing around pointless words like "fascists", etc. the thrust of the protests should be about how we are all suffering at the hands of a really fucked system, and not side a antagonizing side b.

in fact even using the name "occupy" at this point lends itself rightly or wrongly i think to such easy associations with violent extremist groups or whatever. i mean, i just am disheartened to see things going the way of "fuck the cops" etc. insofar as it inevitably alienates so many people that are important to reach out to become involved. obv. the enemy at bottom is not "the cops"... it's whatever allows us to be okay with the idea that improved access to medical care and housing and food for children and other vulnerable parts of the population is somehow an unbelievably twisted and radical anti-american idea

just spitballing, but do you think that you know, maybe the cops themselves had something to do with this process?

anyway, this whole thing is so played. 1) minor thing gets no attention. 2) cops go aggro on it and everyone is angry. 3) minor thing becomes big out of response in solidarity vs. the cops. 4) the thing drags on and goes nowhere, so people get bored and drift away. 5) eventually somebody decides to rewrite history and say "when did this become all about the cops? what happened to the message, man"? all this really means is "i was excited to protest against the cops being terrible. now i'm bored because they're still terrible. see-ya!"

need to see more mic checking of pols too

anyway, this whole thing is so played. 1) minor thing gets no attention. 2) cops go aggro on it and everyone is angry. 3) minor thing becomes big out of response in solidarity vs. the cops. 4) the thing drags on and goes nowhere, so people get bored and drift away. 5) eventually somebody decides to rewrite history and say "when did this become all about the cops? what happened to the message, man"? all this really means is "i was excited to protest against the cops being terrible. now i'm bored because they're still terrible. see-ya!"

i don't understand the point you're trying to make

you had people of all ages, families with small children, etc. attending protests and expressing their grievances with how things have come to be.

fyi this happened more than once this past weekend in chicago afaict

basically people get mad at cops being terrible, then eventually they get bored and go home.

this is a thing that happens all the time.

that's it.

I understand where del is coming from, but if the cops won't let you assemble than what you're protesting becomes moot.

basically people get mad at cops being terrible, then eventually they get bored and go home.

this is a thing that happens all the time.

that's it

ok, that was basically the point i was trying to make? it's not a winning strategy or inspiring to me

except your point was "to me the whole initial promise of the protests was rooted in the way they were trying to do things differently, so that for example you had people of all ages, families with small children, etc. attending protests and expressing their grievances with how things have come to be".

but really, initially, people started to protest because of the cops to begin with.

What are you talking about, it's totally a winning strategy...for the cops.

I understand where del is coming from, but if the cops won't let you assemble than what you're protesting becomes moot

right but all the attacking cops in the world is not going to change that. unless you're pushing to make the police forces use increasingly more outrageous tactics and create martyrs and stuff i guess. but even then, who cares? people will write songs about it and some marginal media outlets will be in an uproar about it, but ultimately those divisive tactics are pointless. which again, is what i thought the initial genius of the strategy of ows was-- everyone, left-identified, right-identified, whatever identity-politics that you align with is being fucked over. plus we have huge amounts of youth that are graduating from college and are looking at a bleak economic future, the baby boomers are feeling this massive weight, everyone is. it's even, as silly as it sounds to invoke, something of a mythically or at least popular culturally apocalyptic year on our calendar. with a presidential election happening which involves increasingly surreal bullshit as usual plus the republicans being batshit-insane in ways that even their traditionally staunchest supporters are starting to question. and all that stuff in europe. y'know that stuff.

so i just mean it's sad to me if this keeps devolving into "fuck the cops", chicago seven redux. "us vs them" i wish would be shunted off. like, the mythical one percent are not these cartoonish mr burns types. they are miserable in their own way. (ok, so maybe they are mr. burns types). so in the same way that hyper-capitalism is in a process of dying, the orig vision of ows gave me hope that the old models of protest would be dying.

fyi this happened more than once this past weekend in chicago afa

well, that's awesome. i am just thinking of like, a may day protest here in philly were ppl were trying to block a wells fargo atm on walnut st. in center city. i mean, i don't know if it succeeded in doing really anything except decreasing sympathy for purported ows ideals.

like, it happened on a corridor that is already just a really crazy chaotic kinda angry place to be at that time of day on a weekday. and people found themselves on their lunch breaks and trying to do banking so that they could pay their bills or get cash for later in the day or whatever, but instead confronted with the feeling that THEY were somehow the targets of these protests. plus all the re-routing of traffic etc. it was a mess. this is an angry enough city w/o riling up people for all the wrong reasons. it just seemed so ill-thought out.

i mean if you think of all of the factors that were ripe here for addressing: how people have to scramble around to conduct business on their abbreviated lunch breaks, and maybe need to go to their own banks' specific atm so they don't get gouged by fees for accessing their own money, how there is no room left in city budgets to fund public transportation, resulting in people getting caught in these ugly traffic situations during protests, how we all become so alienated from each other in daily life because so many conflicts ultimately point back to our insecurities around money and its meaning... but instead i think all that people here took away from it was an excuse to yell "get a job" at these kids who were interfering with them for simply trying to get through their tuesday afternoon w/o losing it

i feel the urge to yell "get a job" every time i see the protestors too

basically i'm saying that occupy was the same old protest as always just there hadn't been a bunch of protests since obama got elected and then eventually it just got ridiculous and so you had a protest which snowballed. there's nothing complicated here. every time there's a big protest people say it's new for some bs reason. and every time things fizzle people start blaming whoever's actually left protesting for "hijacking" things by basically doing what they'd always been doing, except momentarily joined by a bunch more people.

but again, on top of that, the whole reason ows escalated was *because* people wanted to protest against cops being shitty. and that only had a certain half-life. but to then blame people *still* protesting cops being shitty is sort of beyond.

and these nato protests are, from what i know, not even like an ows thing, just a protest against nato thing which, i mean fine, since lots of people have been doing ows and then also were involved in these nato protests, then... ? i dunno.

you guys are so damned condescending BTW (big hoos excepted), you're kind of making my points for me.

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Monday, May 21, 2012 10:40 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

dude I asked you a serious question about whether you would be more receptive to people dressed up as clowns than in black bandanas if they were, say, barricading a bank door or blocking traffic. I was genuinely interested in your thoughts (although clearly the answer is "no"). maybe you think I'm being condescending, but I certainly wasn't trying to be, and in turn I think you're acting like a character out of "Love Me, I'm A Liberal". God forbid somebody should disobey your Peace Police rules at the next protest you attend, lest they be "neutralized".

so frustrating because I completely agree w/you about the ineffectiveness of a lot of militant posturing, I don't see where this disconnect is.

just as a quick aside, cohost & i chatted with a member of the chicago NLG about the NATO5 today; it turns out the rumors were correct--the no-knock warrants used to gain entry in the raid ~didn't even have a fuckin judges signature on it~

they're still in solitary. their next hearing is, iirc, 6/19

http://www.vof99.org/#!tune-in

sleeve the "condescending" comment was in response to this"

xxp yeah i understand why it didn't get used in the march, because it would be misread in the way that you did

― 1staethyr, Tuesday, May 22, 2012 12:38 AM (21 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

just the assumption that i "misread" some chant whose supposedly correct reading is evident to some tiny fraction of protest insiders.

i mean saying i "misread" something before deigning to explain how it _should_ be read (as if it were supposed to be obvious) is pretty condescending, which is why i rasied the media-studies analogy of teachers who patronize their students for not instantly grasping these "queer readings" of major motion pictures.

i really don't know how to respond to your hypothetical about a "clown bloc." clown costumes can be kind of off-putting and menacing. why not just wear jeans and sweats or whatever you'd wear otherwise when you're engaging in protest? i guess i just don't really get your question, sorry...

and i think the clown costumes would probably just make people feel that there was some arcane joke that they weren't being let in on....

May 1 in NYC there were guys in Tax Dodgers baseball uniforms w/ a Mr Moneybags guy toting stuffed burlap $ack$. Is that acceptable street theatre?

http://media.metronews.topscms.com/images/b4/ec/5da6d1634cb7bed3049979a0e6fd.jpg

and i think the clown costumes would probably just make people feel that there was some arcane joke that they weren't being let in on....

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Wednesday, May 23, 2012 3:13 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i mean come on man

the "joke" is that THEY ARE CLOWNS

willing to press back against riot shields, or so they'd claimed in advance

like, no, you don't "need" to be in costume for any of this stuff necessarily but given the fact that people who resist police violence wind up being the target of same once they're isolated from their fellow-travelers, it certainly helps to work to anonymize yourself. i've seen people who didn't wear masks holding lines at riot shields get snatched up walking down the street hours later, and concealing one's identity is in that respect not only necessary for personal safety but empowering because one no longer need fear absurd police reprisal.

and please don't use my phraseology here to argue that i'm somehow imagining that scuffles with stormtroopers will overturn capitalism, because that's not my point, and i'd rather not see this go down that road again.

hey look, billo put us on the tv

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/oreilly/index.html

tax dodgers is hilarious

(sorry am if i got aggro on you i just gotta push back some and i can't always push back daisies, its all love though)

tax dodgers is hilarious

― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:45 PM (13 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

http://thejazzemporium.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/6a00d8341bf90553ef01543259f538970c-800wi.jpg

clown bloc wasn't a hypothetical btw, it exists and was in chicago this past week, although i only saw a few of them on sunday.

for sure for sure, just voicing long-distance disappointment cause i'd hoped they'd make a bigger splash in the media & appearances on twitter seemed minimal. effect on the ground is def more immediately important than anybody else running with it, i think. glad to hear they were a presence.

Street theater makes it look like people are there to have fun, kill time, and have some good pictures to upload to the internet. Reminds me of when I dated a girl who went to a richy rich private school ... her friends had just gotten back from a protest in NYC and passed around photos of their goofy ass costumes and talking about what a great experience it was. Of course one vague personal memory doesn't make reality, but that's just the vibe I get when I see stuff like this. Hard to take seriously, I guess.

i really don't know how to respond to your hypothetical about a "clown bloc." clown costumes can be kind of off-putting and menacing.

http://www.the1stfive.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Insane-Clown-Posse.jpg

^^ worst. clown. bloc. ever.

Hard to take seriously, I guess.

― Spectrum, Wednesday, May 23, 2012 10:14 AM (6 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Just so I understand--you're saying you think street theater does a disservice to the seriousness of the weighty issues under consideration because people appear to be having fun? And people should not appear to be having self-indulgent fun around Serious Demonstrations About Serious Things?

Well, yeah, I do. It may not be true in all cases, or in any case (no info), but you see them havin' a blast and that's their most visible motivation: carousing, carrying on, etc. Then apply it to the experience I'm sure a lot of us have had of the fair-weather activist, bandwagoners, etc., which just comes from the natural human motivation of: me.

Most of what I see of OWS are people posting dramatic pictures of themselves in a "I was a part of this!" kinda way. And people are inherently seflish most of the time, so you figure people are doing this for themselves more than other people, in a direct *now* fashion (part of the moment, lookin good, etc.) as opposed to the intangible vague abstraction of "fixing the problems".

I'm sure there are some true altruists out there who are probably doing better things with their time, but when you see people indulging in the heady me-ness of it, it's hard not to think the motivation is less than selfless, especially when a lot of these people probably have no direct stake in the outcome of these protests(vague and distant abstractions don't match the fact that most of the college kids will probably do fairly well when they decide to focus on their careers even if things kinda suck now).

So, a person of average experiene with average insight will probably look at street theater and think these are bunch of college kids having a vacation, as opposed to serious reformers. Wouldn't blame 'em either.

serious reformers are always going to be a small group. the rabble are a softening agent.

hey occupiers i just saw on Fox News that y'all are out of control and Dennis Miller has some thoughts on this issue that he'll give tonight.

this pic is lolhueg so linked only http://cryptome.org/chicago-nato-protest-hr.jpg