Occupy Anarchy

Ever wonder about the insistence that OWS has no leaders, agenda or goals?

Matthew Continetti:

But they might as well be talking to rocks. Both left and right have made the error of thinking that the forces behind Occupy Wall Street are interested in democratic politics and problem solving. The left mistakenly believes that the tendency of these protests to end in violence, dissolute behavior, and the melting away of the activists is an aberration, while the right mistakenly brushes off the whole thing as a combination of Boomer nostalgia for the New Left and Millennial grousing at the lousy job market. The truth is that the violence is not an aberration and Occupy Wall Street should not be laughed away. What we are seeing here is the latest iteration of an old political program that has been given new strength by the failures of the global economy and the power of postmodern technology.

To be sure, there are plenty of people flocking to the tents who are everyday Democrats and independents concerned about joblessness and the gap between rich and poor. The unions backing the occupiers fall into this group. But the concerns of labor intersect only tangentially with those of Occupy Wall Street’s theorists and prime movers. The occupiers have a lot more in common with the now-decades-old antiglobalization movement. They are linked much more closely to the “hacktivist” agents of chaos at WikiLeaks and Anonymous.

[...]

Anarchism is often dismissed as merely the rationalization of hooligans. But that is a mistake. Anarchism has a theory and even a canon: Bakunin, Kropotkin, Goldman, and others. Anarchism’s purpose is to turn the whole world into one big Fourierist phalanx. “At every stage of history our concern must be to dismantle those forms of authority and oppression that survive from an era when they might have been justified in terms of the need for security or survival or economic development, but that now contribute to​—​rather than alleviate​—​material and cultural deficit,” writes Noam Chomsky in an introduction to Daniel Guérin’s classic, Anarchism. Dismantle “the system.” Then we’ll be free.

[...]

This permanent rebellion leads to some predictable outcomes. By denying the legitimacy of democratic politics, the anarchists undermine their ability to affect people’s lives. No living wage movement for them. No debate over the Bush tax rates. Anarchists don’t believe in wages, and they certainly don’t believe in taxes. David Graeber, an anthropologist and a leading figure in Occupy Wall Street, puts it this way: “By participating in policy debates the very best one can achieve is to limit the damage, since the very premise is inimical to the idea of people managing their own affairs.” The reason that Occupy Wall Street has
no agenda is that anarchism allows for no agenda. All the anarchist can do is set an example​—​or tear down the existing order through violence.

Just as hostility to property is inextricably linked to utopian socialism, violence is tightly bound to anarchism. “Anarchists reject states and all those systematic forms of inequality states make possible,” writes Graeber. “They do not seek to pressure the government to institute reforms. Neither do they seek to seize state power for themselves. Rather, they wish to destroy that power, using means that are​—​so far as possible​—​consistent with their ends, that embody them.” What seems aimless and chaotic is in fact purposeful. By means of “direct action”​—​marches, occupations, blockades, sit-ins​—​the anarchist “proceeds as if the state does not exist.” But one who behaves as if the government has no reality and the laws do not apply is an outlaw, not to say a criminal.

When you see occupiers clash with the NYPD on the Brooklyn Bridge, or masked teenagers destroying shop windows and lighting fires in downtown Oakland, you are seeing anarchism in action. Apologists for Occupy Wall Street may say that these “black bloc” tactics are deployed solely by fringe elements. But the apologists miss the point. The young men in black wearing keffiyehs and causing mayhem are simply following the logic of revolutionary anarchism to its violent conclusion. The fringe isn’t the exception, it’s the rule. The exception would be “direct action” that took care to respect the law.

---

There is a reason that anarchists tend to be young, single males with no children. That is the only group dumb enough to find the idea of chaos appealing.

---

---

Killing the Golden Goose

---

Occupy Oakland Calls for TOTAL WEST COAST PORT SHUTDOWN ON 12/12

Proposal for a Coordinated West Coast Port Shutdown, Passed With Unanimous Consensus by vote of the Occupy Oakland General Assembly 11/18/2012:

In response to coordinated attacks on the occupations and attacks on workers across the nation:

Occupy Oakland calls for the blockade and disruption of the economic apparatus of the 1% with a coordinated shutdown of ports on the entire West Coast on December 12th. The 1% has disrupted the lives of longshoremen and port truckers and the workers who create their wealth, just as coordinated nationwide police attacks have turned our cities into battlegrounds in an effort to disrupt our Occupy movement.

We call on each West Coast occupation to organize a mass mobilization to shut down its local port. Our eyes are on the continued union-busting and attacks on organized labor, in particular the rupture of Longshoremen jurisdiction in Longview Washington by the EGT. Already, Occupy Los Angeles has passed a resolution to carry out a port action on the Port Of Los Angeles on December 12th, to shut down SSA terminals, which are owned by Goldman Sachs.

Occupy Oakland expands this call to the entire West Coast, and calls for continuing solidarity with the Longshoremen in Longview Washington in their ongoing struggle against the EGT. The EGT is an international grain exporter led by Bunge LTD, a company constituted of 1% bankers whose practices have ruined the lives of the working class all over the world, from Argentina to the West Coast of the US. During the November 2nd General Strike, tens of thousands shutdown the Port Of Oakland as a warning shot to EGT to stop its attacks on Longview. Since the EGT has disregarded this message, and continues to attack the Longshoremen at Longview, we will now shut down ports along the entire West Coast.

---

Regarding Longview, EGT hired workers from a different union, enraging the longshoremen so much that a federal judge issued a restraining order:

A federal judge ordered union protesters to stop using illegal tactics Thursday as they battle for the right to work at a new grain terminal in Washington state.

U.S. District Judge Ronald Leighton issued a preliminary injunction to restrict union activity, saying there was no defense for the aggressive tactics used in recent days. Protesters twice blocked the pathway of a train carrying grain to the terminal at the Port of Longview on Wednesday, and early Thursday morning hundreds of them stormed the facility, overwhelmed guards, dumped grain and broke windows, police said.

[...]

Six guards were trapped for a couple of hours after at least 500 Longshoremen broke down gates about 4:30 a.m. and smashed windows in the guard shack, Longview Police Chief Jim Duscha said. He initially referred to the guards as “hostages,” but later retracted that after the guards clarified no one had threatened them.

[...]

Most of the protesters returned to their union hall after cutting train brake lines and spilling grain from a car at the EGT terminal, Duscha said. They also pushed a private security vehicle into a ditch.

---

I understand the Longshoremen’s point of view, but which group of unionized workers are we supposed to support here? As for EGT and Bunge LTD., they export American grain – one of the few things we still sell to other countries.

Now let’s be clear here – this proposed shut-down is not a union strike. This is a group of outsiders trying to close all the ports on the west coast. If successful they will be interfering with the livelihoods of thousands of longshoremen, truck drivers, farmers, warehouse workers, railroad employees and members of the merchant marine.

Now some would argue that these ports are part of a capitalist system that exploits workers. But who would those workers be working for if it wasn’t for the capitalists? Do scab workers feel exploited or lucky to have jobs?

Now here is where we find a dichotomy in progressive thinking:

1. We should support unions because they enable workers to collectively bargain for maximum wages and working conditions.

2. We should support illegal immigration because they take low-paid jobs nobody else wants.

---

If we really want to help American workers, shouldn’t we oppose illegal immigration? Fewer workers would mean higher wages under the Law of Supply and Demand. Without illegal workers, how many of those jobs would remain low-paid? OTOH, how many of those jobs would remain?

BTW – Why don’t we just raise the minimum wage to $50 hour? Because if we raise wages so high it puts the capitalists out of business, nobody will have jobs.

---

A man and his wife owned a very special goose. Every day the goose would lay a golden egg, which made the couple very rich.

“Just think,” said the man’s wife, “If we could have all the golden eggs that are inside the goose, we could be richer much faster.”

“You’re right,” said her husband, “We wouldn’t have to wait for the goose to lay her egg every day.”

So, the couple killed the goose and cut her open, only to find that she was just like every other goose. She had no golden eggs inside of her at all, and they had no more golden eggs.

Pride, Integrity and Guts

---

To hear Thom Hartmann (and others) tell it, we live in a police state. I must have missed the memo that says liberals and progressives are supposed to hate the police. I was raised to like and respect the police.

I despise bad cops, but I don’t hate cops in general. And I’ve had more than my share of bad experiences with the police. They once even kicked in my front door and hauled me off to jail (I was innocent and the case was dismissed).

I was watching the livestream reports the other night when the NYPD cleansed Zuccotti. People were standing right next to the police as they recorded events. Contrary to popular belief the police do not have to give the press free access to everything.

With a few notable exceptions the police in New York City, Oakland, Denver and other cities around the country have acted with professionalism and restrain in dealing with Occupiers. The police did not just rush in swinging billy clubs at peaceful demonstrators. The people that got arrested chose that option.

Here is one of the reasons I respect the police and the job they do:

Vallejo cop killed by suspected bank robber

A Vallejo police officer was shot and killed Thursday during a foot chase after a bank robbery suspect lost control of his car and ran into a backyard, authorities said.

The officer, James Capoot, a respected 19-year veteran of the Vallejo Police Department and the married father of three daughters, was driving alone in his cruiser just after 1:30 p.m. when he came across a fleeing silver SUV wanted in a robbery that had just occurred at the Bank of America at Springstowne Center on Springs Road.
Vehicle chase

Capoot chased the sport utility vehicle for 3 to 4 miles before using his cruiser to do a “pit maneuver” that forced the SUV to spin out of control on the 100 block of Janice Street, said Vallejo police Sgt. Jeff Bassett.

At least one suspect fled on foot, and Capoot got out of his car and ran after him as two other police officers were pulling up in their cars, Bassett said. Those two officers heard several gunshots and found Capoot wounded in a backyard, Bassett said.

Capoot, 45, of Vacaville was pronounced dead about an hour later at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in Vallejo, where colleagues gathered after the shooting.

“The officer did not discharge his weapon,” Bassett said.

---

Think about that the next time you see a protester screaming “Fuck the police.”

---

Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Rankings

---

Image and Symbols

---

Occupy Wall Street’s Image Problem

Falling out of the public’s favor, the protesters should take a lesson from the civil rights movement and wrap their frustrations in the American flag

Occupy Wall Street is at a fork in the road. One path leads to political change, as the movement pushes the center of gravity in American politics to the left. The other path leads to irrelevance or even harm for the progressive project.

“Unless OWS understands the power of symbols, the American Autumn will be followed by a winter of discontent.”

For OWS, the latest opinion poll should be a wake up call. Early polls were favorable, but things have changed. Now only 30 percent of Americans have a positive view of the movement, and 39 percent have a negative view. It’s proving too easy for opponents to caricature OWS as a hodge-podge of extremists and oddballs — especially given reports of the violence in Oakland.

[...]

Meanwhile, the cautionary tale is the anti-Vietnam War movement. By the late 1960s, the Vietnam War was highly unpopular. But incredibly, the anti-war movement was even less popular than the war. The protesters were widely seen as un-American: rioters, desecrators of the flag, and advocates of amnesty, acid, and abortion. The protesters got a “reputation for being elitist, radical, and unpatriotic.”

The anti-Vietnam War movement never captured American hearts and minds. When protesters and police battled at the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, a large majority of the public backed the police. One poll in 1968 asked people how they felt about the protesters on a scale of 1-100. Fully one third of the public gave the protesters a score of zero. And only one-in-six people put the protesters anywhere on the top half of the scale.

The protesters helped to elect Richard Nixon — not once, but twice. In 1968, the anti-war movement attacked the Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey as an establishment hawk indistinguishable from Nixon, contributing to Humphrey’s narrow defeat. And in 1972, the movement was instrumental in nominating the ideologically pure but unelectable George McGovern.

To reach out to Middle America, Occupy Wall Street must present itself as part of the nation’s story: as a rebellion against the concentration of wealth in a new aristocracy. The movement should get churches engaged. It should get as many veterans as possible involved. And the simplest strategy of all: Occupy Wall Street should wrap itself in the American flag.

Compare photos of OWS rallies and Tea Party events. From a distance, you can’t always tell that the leftwing protests are in the United States. By contrast, the Tea Party is awash with the stars and stripes.

Overt patriotism can make people on the left feel a little nervous. But when the nation’s symbols have such meaning to so many people, why cede the flag to conservatives?

OWS should look to the Arab Spring for inspiration. Protest movements in the Middle East are extremely patriotic and flag-waving. The reformers claim to be the true Tunisians, Egyptians, and Libyans.

Unless OWS understands the power of symbols, the American Autumn will be followed by a winter of discontent. And the protesters can start by hanging a hundred flags at Zuccotti Park. One percent of the United States might not care about these symbols–but 99 percent do.

---

When I was a teenager getting ready to go out and look for my first job I was advised to get a haircut, put on a nice shirt, smile and say sir and ma’am. As the saying goes, “You only get one chance to make a good impression.”

Despite their pretentious claim to represent the “99%” the Occupiers are just a small fraction of the population.

The great thing about democracy is that you don’t need to reach a consensus to get anything done. All you need is 50% plus one. That’s called “majority rule.”

But in order to get to a majority you need to win people to your cause. This is where the left keeps fucking up.

I’ve never been to an Occupy rally. (I’ve never been to a Tea Party either.) But I’ve seen tons of pictures and videos, many of them prepared by the Occupiers themselves.

Their optics suck.

I’ve seen communist flags, anarchist flags, Che Guevara shirts, people that are heavily tattooed and wearing lots of metal in their faces, people wearing bandannas to conceal their faces, and lots of fringe lunatics.

Hey, it’s a free country and they can do what they want. They don’t bother me, I’m a DFH moonbat librul, I just don’t look like one. But some of my friends and relatives would fit right in.

The problem is lots of other people won’t react the same way I do. And before you get close enough to tell them anything they will have already closed their minds based on what they see.

Who the hell wants to follow people who look homeless? But worst of all is the conduct. The “people’s mic” comes across as creepy, and the yelling and rudeness when they disrupt events is a big turn-off. And some people in this country LIKE the police.

If I was secretly a whip-kissing fascist tea-bagger I would encourage the Occupiers to turn the knobs up to eleventy.

Seriously – go over to the wingnut blogs and read what they have been saying. They are hoping the Occupations continue until election day.

---

---

The Cleansing of Zuccotti

---

Just a few thoughts about Tuesday’s TRO Wankfest.

The OWS lawyers obtained an emergency ex-parte restraining order from a friendly judge who made a 6:30 am housecall to sign it. They say a good lawyer knows the law but a great lawyer knows the judge.

But even without a judge in your pocket ex-parte restraining orders are about as hard to get as a $20 Rolex in Times Square and last about as long. “Ex-parte” means “by one party” and refers to a judicial proceeding where only one side gets heard. Ex parte orders are generally intended to freeze the situation until everyone can come to court and be heard.

The OWS’ pet judge only made the order good for five hours until a hearing set for 11:30 am Tuesday morning. The protesters could waive all the copies they wanted but restraining orders are only binding when personally served. More importantly, by the time it was signed Zuccotti Park had already been cleared.

Ironically, the TRO probably delayed the protesters’ return to the park. The police had stated from the beginning that after the park was cleaned people could reenter. But they weren’t going to let anyone return with tents and camping gear, which is really what the dispute was about.

Here’s the court order:

The parties dispute whether the First Amendment applies to the actions of the owner in enacting the rules. For purposes of this application, the Court assumes that the First Amendment applies to the owner of Zuccotti Park, thus obviating petitioners’ request for a hearing as to whether Zuccotti Park is traditional public forum, or a limited public forum. Assuming arguendo, that the owner’s maintenance of the space must not violate the First Amendment, the owner has the right to adopt reasonable rules that permit it to maintain a clean, safe, publicly accessible space consonant with the responsibility it assumed to provide public access according to law.

The Court is mindful of movants’ First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and peaceable assembly. However, “[e]ven protected speech is not equally permissible in all places and at all times.” (Snyder v Phelps, 131 S Ct 1207, 1218 [2011], quoting Cornelius v NAACP Legal Defense
& Ed. Fund, Inc., 473 US 788, 799 [1985].) Here, movants have not demonstrated that the rules adopted by the owners of the property, concededly after the demonstrations began, are not reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions permitted under the First Amendment.

To the extent that City law prohibits the erection of structures, the use of gas or other combustible materials, and the accumulation of garbage and human waste in public places, enforcement of the law and the owner’s rules appears reasonable to permit the owner to maintain its space in a hygienic, safe, and lawful condition, and to prevent it from being liable by the City or others for violations of law, or in tort It also permits public access by those who live and work in the area who are the intended beneficiaries of this zoning bonus.

---

I’ve said for weeks that the City was on solid legal ground. Since Zuccotti Park is private property the First Amendment would not normally be implicated, and OWS had no right to possess or occupy the park on a permanent basis. But for reasons too complicated to explain here the park could be considered public property for the purposes of First Amendment analysis.

The court made the assumption it was a “public forum” and still ruled against OWS. That, IMNSHO, is the correct ruling.

Here’s what is so stupid about all this drama and histrionic claims of government oppression – no one has attempted to deny the Occupiers right to protest. Not in New York City, not in Oakland, not in any city.

Mayors Bloomberg and Quan both said that the protesters in their cities were welcome to protest on a daily basis, from early morning into the evening. The main conflict has been over 24/7 camping in city parks.

The protesters were told they were not allowed to camp overnight. They ignored the warnings. They were told to leave. They refused to go. Finally, the police moved in to evict them. They resisted.

So all this time was wasted fighting over camping instead of protesting their cause. Talk about rebels without a clue!

Meanwhile, for nearly two months now nobody has been talking about Barack Obama.

Mission accomplished!

---

Breaking: Occupy Eviction – Here we go again

Riot-clad deputies clear out Occupy Oakland encampment

Riot-clad Alameda County Sheriff’s deputies began removing tents from the Occupy Oakland encampment early Monday, executing eviction notices that had been given to protesters over the weekend.

While the deputies descended onto the camp, hundreds of other officers were surrounding the area. At least 20 people have been arrested.

Tension in has been building since Sunday night when police issued a fourth cease and desist order telling demonstrators they couldn’t camp in the plaza. The order said the protesters faced immediate arrest.

---

Let’s hope Mayor Quan doesn’t change her mind this time.

Meanwhile:

Remember when that guy was murdered at Occupy Oakland last week and the protesters claimed he wasn’t part of their group?

They lied.

Shooting victim is tied to Occupy Oakland

Oakland police said Sunday that a man shot to death near the Civic Center on Thursday had been staying at the Occupy movement’s encampment, as had one suspect in the killing.

Many campers whose tents now crowd the City Hall plaza have said they did not believe the shooting was connected to Occupy Oakland and suggested that the city was using the incident as further justification to raze the encampment. Police have issued three eviction orders to campers since Friday, asserting that they are violating laws banning open fires, overnight camping in public parks and the use of propane, among other activities. The most recent “cease and desist” order was handed out to campers Sunday.

In an evening news release, police said the Alameda County ccoroner’s office has identified the man shot shortly before 5 p.m. on Thursday as Kayode Ola Foster, 25. Foster’s family, the release said, confirmed to police investigators “that Foster had recently been staying at Frank Ogawa Plaza.”

According to police, witnesses say one suspect was a “frequent resident” at the camp for several days before the shooting. A second suspect is also being sought. The Oakland Police Department and Crime Stoppers of Oakland are offering a reward of up to $10,000 for information leading to an arrest and conviction.

---

UPDATE:

Via Hot Air:

Mayor Jean Quan’s legal adviser Dan Siegel has resigned as a result of today’s raid.

---

Quan and Siegel were student radicals at UC Berkeley back in the sixties. I guess they didn’t understand that you can be a radical or you can be part of the establishment, but not both.

---