Occupy Oakland damages itself more than ports

[hack89]

Even as the Occupy movement attempted to spread its influence on Monday by forcing the shutdown of ports of call up and down the West Coast, its numbers appeared to be shrinking.

March organizers didn't help their cause by ignoring labor leaders who did not support this action. That makes Occupiers about as arrogant as business owners who refuse to negotiate contracts in good faith with their workers.

Union leaders describe Occupiers' attempts to draw labor and education unions into the fray another way: hijacking and piggybacking another movement.

"Support is one thing," wrote Robert McEllrath, president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, in a letter to local union chapters. "Organization from outside groups attempting to co-opt our struggle in order to advance a broader agenda is quite another and one that is destructive to our democratic process."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/12/12/BAFC1MBL7C.DTL#ixzz1gSKvDAor

[Luminous Animal]

1. Actually, it didn't. Anyone who was there witnessed the support from the rank & file.

I love all the hand-wringing about OWS today. It reveals that their tactics have the 1% worried.

[TheWraith]

3. No, it reveals that OWS is flaming out.

Kind of like the Tea Party did, and for the same reasons: believing that they had an almighty mandate from the public, when what they had was an early, tentative public support for some of their goals.

[Matariki]

5. You wish.

[TheWraith]

82. No, I accurately predict.

If you'll go back and look at history, my record of predictions is pretty damn good.

[LanternWaste]

111. I imagine we all think our own guesses and prognostications

I imagine we all think our own guesses and prognostications are better grounded than of those around us; and then rationalize our revisionism after we miss the mark...

[GeorgeGist]

126. 0 for 10

by my count.

[quiller4]

11. You are right. The Oakland activity was offputting even to some Occupy activists let alone to

folks who were just watching on TV.

[tavalon]

67. um, no.

You might try getting your information from non-network sources.

[TheWraith]

83. In other news, the only "acceptable" news about OWS is from OWS.

In terms of objective reality, you might as well watch Fox News 24/7.

[sabrina 1]

74. Oh, that's funny!!

I will have to convey that to the people who actually know what is going on.

I remember in the beginning of this movement, the first weekend, the dire predictions, (or hopes depending on your perspective) that it would not last a week.

I also remember the preparation for this movement, before it began. They were so organized. One very important thing they pointed out was that the far right and some on the 'left' would trash the movement, stating that 'there will be nay-sayers from the beginning'. Not hard to predict, but what I admired about them was their advice on how to deal with it. They intended to ignore it. Not to get bogged down with negativity but just keep moving ahead. And I am in awe of how they have stuck to that decision. .

I made a bet on Sept 17th with one of the 'naysayers' who predicted it would not last two weeks, that it would still be here in December. I guess I should pick up my bet.

I am willing to make another bet. This movement is going nowhere, in fact it is growing every day and spreading further around the country and the world. It cannot be stopped now. And it will be here for years.

It took years for the bad guys to destroy the world's economy and the countries they wrongfully invaded. They have had a head start, so it will take years to fix the harm they caused. And from the beginning, another thing I admired about occupiers, how realistic they were, they knew it would take years.

So, the whining cries of 'they're finished' have been heard every day since September 17th and will continue to be heard. Meantime the occupiers are doing as they said they would do, continuing to grow and to plan and to build and ignoring those who for some inexplicable reason, do not want the PEOPLE to prevail over the evil that has taken so many lives and so much of our and others' countries' treasure.

But that is their problem. They are predictable as the sun rising every morning. Being wrong won't deter them. It never has.

[FirstLight]

80. ... up twinkles ...

isn't that the term?

i agree wholeheartedly to all that you said!

solidarity, sistah!

[sabrina 1]

99. Thank you!

'The people, united, can never be defeated'! Lol!

[TheWraith]

84. Protests that hit ten thousand plus at their height are now down to a few hundred at a time.

Public support is guttering. There has been no uptake in Congress. It's become a phenomenon of the "ineffective activism" wing of the left, the same people who kept "Code Pink" alive long after it was an embarrassment to left-wing politics. If that's how you've chosen to redefine an effective movement, I feel badly for you.

[sabrina 1]

98. I am thrilled with the progress of this movement. It's now in over 2,000 cities worldwide

Way, way beyond what was planned, let alone anticipated. Lol, do you think any movement plans massive marches every day? Of course not, but wait until the next one that IS planned, takes place. Even those not really planned, such as in NY less than three weeks ago in the middle of the week, turned out over 40,000. And around the country and the world, smaller ones in solidarity. On short notice.

But the big ones being planned will be massive once the Winter activities are over, my favorite now are the Foreclosure occupations and the homes they have saved, building an even bigger following including Churches in poor neighborhoods, just this week.

This movement has touched every segment of society. Recent polls show they are more popular than most other large, social change movements ever were and they are only beginning.

We are now at the 'beginning of the beginning' which will probably last at least one year as they gather more and more supporters each day. Are you really this unaware of what is going on with this movement? Have you NO idea of the plans and the accomplishments that are happening all over the country each day?

I find it odd that someone on DU would be so opposed to a movement most Democrats have been planning and hoping for for the past ten years.

But, the minority won't stop this. This is going to grow and grow and you can either join it and move into the future, or stay behind hoping for the impossible. I am happy to see the future finally unfolding. It's way, way past due as the poll numbers for Occupy demonstrate. The people are ready, more than ready, for big changes in the direction of this country. And I don't know a single progressive who is not on board to make it happen.

Those remaining on the old, failed path, are on the wrong side of history.

[onlyadream]

120. So glad to hear this, Sabrina!

My worst fear is that this movement will fizzle out, but my brain tells me that people know that there is too much at stake. With people all over the world hurting because of the evilness of some of the 1%, it can't end.

BTW, looks like your bull is sinking! I don't know if this is on purpose, or because of the new DU3 - but I find it very apropos, lol.

[sabrina 1]

123. Lol, yes, I noticed my bull has sunk but didn't think of the symbolism.

It wasn't on purpose, so maybe you're right

Re the movement, what is going on in Europe right now is going to energize the protests over there as more and more people are affected by the effort of the leaders to keep saving the banks at the expense of the people. And when they fail, as most experts agree will happen, the affects will reach the US. So, too much is at stake to continue down the same old, corrupt path and it's way past time to change course.

[rbixby]

118. You also have to remember

That its winter, that the occupations have been broken up. If you think the movement is only the actions in the streets and the occupations of public spaces, you're sadly mistaken. This, like any other ideology, is independent of geography. The coldness of winter has set in, making it difficult in many places to continue occupying the streets, but the doesn't mean that the movement is dead.

Sure, there will be false starts, sure, things won't always go right, people will disagree, but that's how any movement starts.

[onlyadream]

121. this is why I wish DU3 had like buttons , nt

[randome]

6. One of the most laughable propositions regarding OWS...

...is that the 1% are afraid of them. Why would they be afraid of a few thousand people holding sit-ins in public parks and managing to pull off minor disruptions of port traffic?

They are not afraid. They SHOULD be afraid of a people's uprising but so far the uncoordinated antics of OWS can simply be ignored by rich cats sitting on the beach in Jamaica, far, far removed from daily life.

[nadinbrzezinski]

14. I'd like you to introduce me

to the OWSer who speaks in such a way... I am willing to bet you won't be able to find one...and if you do, and such person claims to speak for OWS...well then.

Tea party had spokespeople, still does.

[FarCenter]

18. The union leadershp does not support it

Calling strikes when and iff it will benefit them and their membership is the union leadership's perogative.

They are not happy.

[backscatter712]

29. As explained several times already, union leadership has no-strike contracts to deal with.

Nothing more than CYA.

[FarCenter]

40. Union leadership works to benefit their members, not some fuzzy social goals

They've had plenty of strikes and other labor actions to maintain their members bargaining position in the ports, regardless of what their current contract is.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. Their current contract is quite specific

Say yes to the S word, you're fired. It's automatic.

[sabrina 1]

76. The union leaders DO support them. This has been explained over and over again.

They planned this very carefully. This was very cleverly done. Kudos to the Unions and the Occupiers for pulling it off.

[Luminous Animal]

92. So happy to see you on DU3, Sabrina! (n/t)

[Vincardog]

2. I believe that the unions have NO STRIKE clauses in their contracts.

To support OWS would be illegal for them.
NUDBE NUDGE WINK WINK
Say nothing more.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Thread winner

[quiller4]

16. That is true. Most do. However even without a no-strike clause ILWU members who have no dispute

with their employers lack an incentive to strike. Most of the Longshore locals on the West Coast were at least sympathetic to the Occupy Movement until yesterday. When some of the occupy protestors expressed a willingness to cost the ILWU workers roughly 20% of their week's wages, they changed that overnight. It isn't just union officials who resent Occupy's port closure tactics. The rank-and-file members of local 19 in Seattle who lost the opportunity to work the second or third shift are the workers who can least afford a day without pay. Those with the most seniority work first shift. The C and D list longshoremen who lost a day's pay are part of the 99% and they suffered for the day's closure. The major shipping line weren't impacted a bit.

[LooseWilly]

48. You really believe no one was impacted a bit except the longshoremen?

You think a day's closure doesn't back up the unloading of the cargo? You think that, 2 weeks before Christmas, there isn't an ass-load of crap on those docks destined for distribution centers and retail loading docks not only along the entire length of the West Coast but also throughout major portions of the Midwest?

Where do you think the Advent Calendars in your local Target or Walmart or whatever-retail-behemoth you shop at come from? They come through the f-ing ports.

Santa gets his shit shipped in from China and India by sea, my friend... and if ports close for a week then that threatens the sales figures at retail stores, which threatens corporate quarterly earnings reports, which threatens stock prices, which threatens the jobs of the executives and the dividends of the big boys and the money market managers alike, which then threatens those corporations with the possibility of being seen as weak— and vulnerable to a buyout followed by a "streamlining" of management as the company is re-structured in order to "return it to profitability" (or just torn apart and sold piece by piece).

You go ahead and keep telling yourself that the shipping lines and their customers weren't impacted a bit... because the ripples stretch out beyond your personal line of sight— you're about as right as an ostrich is that it can't be seen when it sticks its head in the sand.

[quiller4]

58. The blockage began at 3:00 pm. Most freight is moved between 5 am and 10 am.

No ships were kept from entering the port. Yes. There were containers whose movement was delayed by 8-10 hours. I don't see that as much of an achievement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. Wrong, it started at six in the morning.

Yes, was there and even reported on it for local indie paper. All west coast actions started at six. I had to wake up at four to catch the first train at 5:03 to make it.

[LooseWilly]

78. “The man who moves a mountain begins by carrying away small stones.” ― Confucius

You maybe wanted all of the Wall St. Finance houses to go bankrupt in one day?

And you are wrong, plenty of freight makes it to retail outlets in the middle of the night... unloaded at 2 am and onto the shelves when the doors open at 8 or 10 or whatever... delay the movement of those containers 8-10 hours and you have pushed the loading onto a truck back until there are traffic considerations... and then you have shortages/delays in distribution centers... which leads to a day's delay in getting merchandise to the retailer's sales floor— but a day without product during the Christmas Shopping Season is like 3 or 4 during the off season...

I think this might actually be an activist's version of the "leveraging" that is discussed so much when talking about loans made by banking establishments... with one day's activism producing three days worth of financial impact.

Judge for yourself if that is an achievement.

[TheWraith]

85. So to inconvenience Walmart by a barely noticible amount, they screwed the port workers out of pay.

Yeah, that sounds like a really good trade. And people wonder why we say they're being self destructive.

[LooseWilly]

91. Walmart operates on barely noticeable marginal amounts... multiplied over vast numbers of margins.

A "barely noticeable amount", to Walmart, might multiply out to half the sales budget for a department... and could be a VERY noticeable amount when the computerized sales budget tracking reports tally the numbers.

Multiply that out over all the stores represented by all of the containers stacked on all the ships that are impacted at all of the ports up and down the coast... and yes, I think it is a good trade.

Maybe you're in a trade where the marginal numbers aren't significant, but I assure you that Walmart isn't.

And corporations aren't known for being willing/able to "do without a little", unlike workers. Or overly comfortable middle management sorts who think they're the center of the world...

(Hmm, it looks like Goldman Sachs stock dropped 5% after Monday's festivities... barely noticeable to them, I'm sure.
BootsRiley Boots Riley
Goldman Sachs stock dropped 5% after yesterday's WestCoastPortShutdown. GS owns SSA terminals. finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GS+Basi… #OWS
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GS+Basic+Tech.+Analysis&t=5d
)

[TheWraith]

94. Put another way, Walmart makes a few thousand dollars less profit out of a $15 billion dollar year.

Whereas some port workers lose 20% of their salaries for the week. Not proportional.

[LooseWilly]

97. You fail to acknowledge the "mass" in mass production/sales...

Walmart will stand to make a few thousand dollars less profit per store affected out of a $15 billion dollar a year profit. The port of Oakland alone serves many ships a day, and each ship is liable to be loaded with HUNDREDS, if not THOUSANDS, of shipping containers worth of goods... and then there's Long Beach, Seattle, Tacoma, Portland, San Diego, and Houston...

Do the math.

Have you ever watched a truckload of pallets of retail shit being unloaded at o'dark:30 am? Have you ever stared up at the staggering piles of shipping containers on a single freighter in a port like Oakland? Have you ever noticed how many trucks ply the the interstates (like I5 here in Cali) in the wee hours of the morning, or any other time of day? Have you ever taken a moment to ponder how many containers get shipped by train from major shipping hubs like Stockton CA?

If you've ever seen what one truckload of crap unloaded into a retail store translates to at a cash register... and you then multiply that by all those truck and train loads represented by those containers on a single freighter... then multiply that by all the ports that were shut down... "a few thousand dollars" is possibly representative of one or two of those containers. And that's just the cost of the one day delay for the one or two containers.

The pretense that the magnitude of the stoppage is more significant for the truckers than it is for the retailers is like saying that the pay to the truckers is higher than the profit that the retailers will make selling the cargo— which is laughably ridiculous, because if that were even close to accurate then the retailers would never pay for the shipment of the cargoes in the first place.

Your proportions are inverted. At best.

[Vincardog]

122. OK what action are YOU proposing to have the impact you desire?

[coalition_unwilling]

53. I actually think you may be mistaken about ILWU workers losing a day of pay. If

I have understood their members who post here, if the ILWU business agent considers a port disruption to create an unsafe environment, ILWU workers are released from the day's work with no loss of wages, provided the company agrees. That's actually written into the contracts. If the company does not agree that the work place is unsafe, an independent arbitrator is summoned who can make the determination upon which workers are released with no loss of wages.

ILWU members, I apologize if I have fundamentally misstated the reality of your contracts. I think a longer-term issue might be the alleged abuse of the 'unsafe environment' clause, but that would only become an issue the next time the contract is up for negotiation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. Jaysus

They got paid...unsafe conditions they go home with pay!

[julian09]

50. Unions like no strike contracts, no need for strike benefits.

What leverage do they hold without it?

[tavalon]

68. I think a no strike clause makes for a very weak union.

I work for such a weak union. There are some benefits but they kowtow to the administration so much, it's just damn embarrassing.

[Scuba]

4. The movement is not perfect, but we need to support it to our fullest ability....

.... without it there will be a huge void to fill.

[Liberal_in_LA]

37. I agree with you

[pintobean]

45. I'm union first.

[Scuba]

47. I got not problem with that!! n/t

[hack89]

62. But when they make poor choices we need to voice our displeasure

to ensure they get back on the right track.

[Scuba]

106. Agreed. n/t

[TheWraith]

86. And yet, you seem to feel the opposite about the Democratic Party.

So let's get this straight: Elected Democrats who embrace minor compromises in order to do things like pass healthcare for everyone, or extend unemployment benefits, need to be reviled, cursed, and denied any support.

Occupy Wall Street, when screwing unionized working class port employees out of needed hours of work, needs to be supported as much as possible because the alternative is unthinkable.

Nope, that makes no sense to me.

[Scuba]

107. "Reviled, cursed and denied any support"....

... care to cite anything where I've done or advocated that?



Blind, uncritical obedience is not "supporting" a candidate.

[HappyMe]

114. So we are supposed to blindly and uncritically

support ows?


I'm not advocating lockstep support of any candidate, but I am also not going to advocate lockstep support of ows either.

[Scuba]

117. Again, putting words in my mouth....

... being constructively critical is a key part of supporting the movement.

[Union Scribe]

7. Funny that all the "union opposition"

has been that quote from McEllrath. I've seen it being peddled in about half a dozen articles now. Viva Occupy.

[Fire Walk With Me]

8. Kick

[Sarah Ibarruri]

9. ROFL!

and ROFL again.

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Change location and year

And I could be reading this from insert here paper of record, in insert here labor actions.

No serious.

[AntiFascist]

15. Some union leaders seem to be siding with the 1% in attempting to marginalize OWS...

I wonder how union members feel about this?

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. No strike clause

That's your answer...

Read the full statement and how it reads and read between lines.

That said some will.

[quiller4]

21. Walk in to a Longshore Hall and ask around. If you check in at Local 19 or 123 you'll find

that the rank and file are solidly behind their leaders and very angry at Seattle Occupy but glad that Tacoma Occupy decided Not to try and shut the Port of Tacoma and did informational picketing instead.

ILWU locals are democratic with staff as well as officers elected. When officers or staff displease members they are quickly booted out of office. I am not sure if the ILA is as democratic. The ILWU represents West Coast longshore workers while the ILA represents those on the eastern seaboard and part of the gulf.

One month ago Labor, rank and file and leadership, was well represented at Occupy marches in both Washington and Oregon. Now after the port shut downs, you hear rank-and-file members say of the Occupy protestors "with friendslike them, who needs enemies?"

[AntiFascist]

27. This is a good example of why consensus is crucial...

did any local ILWU members in Washington bother to appear at any GA meetings? It's too bad if they didn't. For democracy to work there needs to be participation.

[quiller4]

59. I don't know about Seattle but in Tacoma the answer is "yes" and that is at least in part why there

was no shut down. Occupy listened to the concerns expressed by workers and opted for informational picketing instead.

[randome]

28. It couldn't be because they simply don't AGREE with OWS' tactics.

Nah. That's ridiculous.

[AntiFascist]

35. More likely that union leaders feel threatened...

the global Occupy movement is potentially far greater, and potentially far more powerful, than this single union.

[randome]

39. I agree wholeheartedly that its potential is enormous.

But when enough people point out that the message is not resonating, a rational person might re-think his/her position on tactics.

I keep hearing how it's a positive that OWS has no leadership or clear-cut goals. That's in reality a prime example of denial. Because without organization or messaging, nothing long-lasting will occur.

The 1% are not afraid of OWS.

[AntiFascist]

61. The way I view the movement at this point...

is that it is in the process of making it clear that it simply EXISTS, and that it is not going away anytime soon. If it limits itself to a limited list of goals, then it suddenly becomes a finite political initiative that can be absorbed and subsumed. That's NOT its purpose. It is a response to the 1% taking control of our government and financial system. That response will morph and may take form in a variety of different ways and initiatives. The 1% may not be particularly afraid, but they may be bothered by the fact that when they attempt to squeeze the movement it will simply flow out between their grasp and reform somewhere else, with no leadership or hierarchy that can be targeted, and no single platform that can be marginalized.

[randome]

63. Appreciate the response.

But I don't think that's how the real world works. To make long-lasting changes, we need numbers and focused protests.

Of course there is a danger of being marginalized if there are leaders or an agenda. But I'm afraid OWS is going to be marginalized WITHOUT those things.

It's a paradox, I know.

[tavalon]

69. A leader will bububle up when the organization needs one

There are plenty of people who were completely trained and ready to go from day one. They just waited until something (OWS) blossomed organically and then they came in to provide the structure. It is from that core that a leader or leaders will eventually come, most likely some time in the spring. The spring will be when we will hear nothing but OWS. The 1% is skittish now, in the spring they will be scared.

[AntiFascist]

71. I agree, leaders have appeared from time to time, even addressing the media...

People like Scott Olsen have even served as figureheads. The movement certainly does not lack leadership. It is the dynamic nature of the movement that throws people for a loop and causes them to be critical. It's also important not to put all the eggs in one basket, otherwise the movement will be judged by that one action. If a general strike is being planned for Spring this far ahead of time, then there had better be full, complete, robust consensus on it.

[tavalon]

79. There is supposed to be a convention

They aren't calling it a constitutional convention but I hope that's what it is. Each of the states are to send delegates in the same number as there are Congressional seats.

[randome]

103. So now OWS is going to secede from America?

Or, by the power of the righteousness of their ideas, this new constitution will be presented to the bad guys and they will all fall down?

[tavalon]

129. Yeah, that's exactly how it's going to happen.

LOL

[TheWraith]

87. When OWS screws over the people they're supposedly fighting for...

...they marginalize themselves. How do you think those union workers on second and third shifts felt about losing a fifth of their paycheck this week?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. It's more like OWS is stepping up to the plate to do what the unions should be doing.

[hack89]

20. Do you think publicly showing up the unions is a wise move? How does this grow the movement? nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. If the unions don't want to be "shown up" they should be out there picketing.

[hack89]

26. So deliberately antagonizing the unions is a good thing for OWS? OK. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

31. Or, vice versa? Is it a "good thing" for the unions to try to break a strike?

And, openly antagonize a peoples' movement?

[hack89]

32. I would put my money on the unions - I am very pro-union. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

36. The union leadership tried to stop us from striking in '71 and Nixon called in the troops.

I'm very pro-union, too. But, not pro-scabs.

[quiller4]

60. There is no strike at the Port of Seattle, Neither is there a strike in Tacoma. Were contract

negotiations tough? Absolutely. But the workers at both of these ports negotiated decent contract and are honoring their contractual obligations.

[CreekDog]

22. Actually, the shutdown was supported by many unions, but keep going, I'm enjoying this

it's very entertaining to watch you post in defense of a union.

if you did this more often, or at all, we might be getting somewhere!

[backscatter712]

25. The union rank-and-file are strongly supporting OWS actions.

It's the leadership that is practicing CYA because of no-strike contracts and because secondary-strikes are illegal.

[hack89]

30. Glad I could make your holidays merrier. nt

[backscatter712]

23. Your concern is noted... n/t

[taught_me_patience]

33. I'm not happy about the direction of OWS

They lost me when they started talking about forgiveness of all student loan debt. This stunt didn't really help either.

[SomethingFishy]

34. Well then, I'll tell you what I tell every other

keyboard commando. If you think they are doing it wrong then GET OUT THERE AND SHOW EVERYONE HOW TO DO IT RIGHT.

For some odd reason, sitting here behind my keyboard, I have no desire to tell OWS how to do what they are doing or to slam on them for actually being out there doing something. But, that's just me.

[hack89]

41. Not all of us have that luxury - life gets in the way

I have been to Occupy Boston and Occupy Providence a couple of times but that is all the time I can afford.

That being said, if OWS says they are doing this in my name then I have the right to tell them when I think they have gone astray.

[SomethingFishy]

49. So when you went to "Occupy"

Did you tell them how to do it properly?


Somehow I doubt that OWS is out there doing anything in your name. Judging from the two posts you have on page one of GD today and the OP I saw yesterday you are not a friend of OWS and they aren't friends of yours.

[hack89]

51. So OWS only represents special 99 percenters? It is not a global movement? Got it. nt

[tavalon]

70. Exactly!

[Matariki]

38. THIS was a post from Occupy Seattle

"If anyone tries to tell you that the unions were not behind the action yesterday, tell them we did have support. This morning we held another picket line and, after we were done, the ILWU workers gave us a round of applause, we shook hands with them, and talked about our common goals to protect workers' rights. Go ILWU! Go Port Truck Drivers! Thank you all for supporting us!"

[Mnpaul]

42. This appears to be a coordinated message being sent

I've seen it on several boards. Someone doesn't like the message OWS is spreading.

Yell a little louder just to piss them off.

[randome]

52. Right. DU is against OWS.

The Democrats are against OWS. Even Rachel Maddow is against OWS.

But that is only when you don't agree with something someone said.

It all boils down to this, doesn't it?

"You are either with us or against us."
"All or nothing."
"Show us your loyalty papers."

[a simple pattern]

64. I don't think DU is against OWS.

You're definitely in the minority there.

[randome]

66. I was being sarcastic.

Too many DUers think that if you don't have blind faith in everything OWS does, then you are actively trying to destroy it.

On edit:
When I say 'too many DUers', it's also become clear that a lot of other DUers have recently 'come out of the closet' to suggest changes in how OWS operates.

That's how a discussion forum should work -a free exchange of information and opinions.

[a simple pattern]

72. From my point of view, too many DUers are negative about OWS

while claiming to support it in some theoretical realm, and those people always seem to suggest that Occupy do something, anything at all, besides occupy. If you want to suggest changes to how OWS operates, you have to get on stack. That's what democracy looks like.

[U4ikLefty]

75. It's called concern trolling.

If they really cared, they would find the time" to get involved in a GA & express their "ideas" and "concerns". The fact that they don't & spend their time on DU heaping judgenmental crap about OWS shows us all we need to see.

[TheWraith]

89. So anyone who doesn't have the luxury of traveling to OWS in Oakland, California should shut up?

And because clearly, the other people at OWS would automatically recognize that what they were planning was an incredibly bad idea just because someone else tells them it is? Because, after all, people ALWAYS and AUTOMATICALLY recognize the right thing when they see it, right? That's why nobody in the world believed that the Iraq War was a good idea.

No, what would happen is the same thing that happens on DU: the people who can rationally say that X is a bad idea get shouted down by people who believe OWS can do no wrong, and are attacked as trolls, plants, and they're claimed to be trying to "sabotage the movement."

[U4ikLefty]

95. Where did I tell anyone to shut up?

I am fully aware of your position on the movement & am not interested in your strawman.

[TheWraith]

96. The only strawman is your insinuation that I have a motive other than accuracy.

You very clearly implied that instead of discussing the problem on this DISCUSSION BOARD, people should take their opinions to the OWS "general assembly."

[eilen]

115. You misunderstand the structures and focus of OWS

You think of it as just one entity when it is many entities-- Occupy Wall Street, Occupy Oakland, Occupy Boston, Occupy Albany. While they are all called Occupy and have similar messages, each is tailored to their own Local-- kind of like union halls only there is not a "national" entity telling them what to do, making them conform to any rules. Local Occupys decide through their GAs what their focus or most important issues are and how they wish to address them. In one place it may be failing infrastructure they wish to highlight, another may be widespread foreclosures, or diminishing public space, or police brutality/homicide being tolerated by the TPTB in certain sections of town, or a plant closure, or ridiculous hikes in tuition costs at a state university, or a hospital closure, or any of the signs and symptoms of wealth disparity, government collusion with the 1%, etc. Occupying public spaces in town squares by Town Halls and Big Banks were just to get their attention. We are Here and WE are not Going Away. The 99% were putting TPTB On Notice. Apparently, they got their attention.

If you wish to influence what your local Occupy does, I suggest you attend a GA. If you wish to influence what a different town or state's Occupy does... lots of luck unless you relocate. That is out of your sphere of influence.

[randome]

102. No, it's called making suggestions on a discussion forum.

Is there anything -ANYTHING- about OWS that you disagree with?

[AntiFascist]

104. I think you are confusing OWS with someone's presidential campaign...

I don't have "blind" faith in everything OWS does, and I'm constantly posting my own ideas about how things should be planned or done. One can do that in a positive, constructive way or you can do it in a negative, destructive "they'll never go anywhere, might as well give it up" way. The latter method is suspect, and I suspect that there may be a coordinated effort to clear the discussion boards of OWS matters so that it does not detract from the 2012 campaign soap opera.

[randome]

105. Another conspiracy?

I, for one, have never said "they'll never go anywhere". I think energy is being squandered on side issues like trying to close down West Coast ports.

Is there anything -ANYTHING- about OWS you do not agree with?

[AntiFascist]

108. Whenever I feel that I may have a problem with the movement...

I'm constantly being surprised by how self-corrective and adaptive it is. At one point I was worried that it might be going too Marxist, then I was surprised to see a list of goals adopted at one General Assembly that seemed to embrace well regulated capitalism. When the 'lazy hippy' meme started going around, I was again amazed to see reports of extremely hard working people making their Occupy communities productive and self-sufficient. I tuned in to a livestream of a NY GA where they were discussing worker-owned cooperatives and a myriad of options that were available to pursue, as an alternative to the big corporations. I am honestly much more suprised by the movement than I am disappointed by any particular action.

I think the relationship between unions and OWS is probably going to be a more difficult one to foster than even that of the Democratic Party. If OWS is able to make headway then the Dems will follow, and I think we're already seeing some of that. Unions, on the other hand, pride themselves on independence and their power comes from very concentrated support. The OWS movement needs to foster the support of union members who are willing to work with them.

[Warren Stupidity]

110. well of course it is

first a nationally coordinated suppression of the occupations and then a coordinated media campaign to marginalize all new efforts by OWS to organize us.

They are fighting back against the only threat to the establishment.

[backscatter712]

46. It certainly occurs to me... n/t

[a simple pattern]

65. I can't reply to the hidden post, so I'll reply to yours!

I don't know if they're right wing or not... I would say there are 1% trolls for sure (not to imply that they are 1%ers, just wannabes)

[Starry Messenger]

44. Oh hey, a place for my thread on Occupy Oakland.

Check it out and relieve your fears: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1024253

[robertpaulsen]

54. Typical dismissive condescending MSM perspective.

Fuck the Chronicle, Fuck Chip Johnson, and Fuck the 1% that owns them lock, stock and barrel.

[AnOhioan]

56. Your concern is duly noted

[themadstork]

77. Just a few months ago

seems like many DUers were convinced that the general populace was too lazy and apathetic to actually get out in the street and fight economic injustice.

Now that they actually are, we get the chorus of DUers who are convinced that they know the One True Way to Protest, and who seem very eager to see OWS "flame out."


First, I think generally you should be very suspicious of anyone who claims that in order to be successful OWS must use one certain tactic only, or conform to one line of thinking only. I'm not sure if it stems from simple narrow-mindedness and ignorance re the history of protest movements, or from some other less innocent desire to see OWS fail, but it commits the basic error of mistaking the simple answer for the accurate one. It would, after all, make protesting a hell of a lot easier, wouldn't it, if one certain protest-strategy were proven to Always Work? If there were one true way?

Second, I think something underpinning a lot of this is a general distaste for the masses, in the mode of our founders: the "great beast," etc. The masses are too lazy and stupid to protest. . . and when they do protest, they're too lazy and stupid to do it "correctly". . . There are some who will always be pointing out what the masses are too lazy and stupid to ever do.

It's a pretty normal reactionary impulse to think of the masses in that way. People in huge groups are stupid, loud, and stinky. Right? Why should we even consider trusting their judgement? Why should we value their collective action over our precious armchair quaterbacking?

In scanning the various criticisms of OWS (here and wherever) I think it's worthwhile to try and determine what amounts to authentic constructive criticism and what comes from a place of automatic contempt for the masses. And if anybody is surprised by the "with us or against us"-type replies, it's probably because your post came off as being the latter.

[TheWraith]

90. OWS isn't the "general populace."

And frankly, it's fantasy to equate protests of a few hundred people at a time with the entire American public.

[themadstork]

93. What a strange thing to take issue with

Has any protest movement ever consisted of an entire population? How is this relevant to the discussion in a way that isn't petty point-scoring?

My point was that many duers thought protests of this scale to be unlikely. It was a pretty common gripe.

[randome]

101. 'We are the 99%' implies that they speak for most of the population.

[themadstork]

128. It implies that they are in the bottom 99% of wealth.

[Kaleko]

100. Great post.

You make some points that I haven't seen spelled out yet in this battle about whose perspective will dominate, whose angle on what's going on will hold sway over the brainwaves of the great unwashed, and who will tell them what to do now that our Anglo-American Empire is beginning to implode into its own footprint.

As a side-note, it's interesting to see the divide getting bigger between people who are capable of holding many different perspectives, able to consider each of them to the point of understanding exactly where a proponent of that perspective is coming from, and people who are petulantly attached to one perspective only. Confined to a "one view only" view of the world, they essentially keep saying, "My view is the right way and therefore I am right!", which seems hilarious, of course, to the people who have a greater facility in seeing many angles on the same thing at once. Well, either hilarious or infuriating, and sometimes thoroughly deflating, depending on what day it is on this incredible roller-coaster ride into our future.

[WillyT]

88. And Here's Chip... From Just A Couple Days Ago...

Occupy Oakland's costs to residents spell disaster
December 09, 2011|Chip Johnson, Chronicle Columnist

<snip>

After two months of the Occupy movement, Oakland residents should adopt their own chant.

We are the 98.5 percent.

The 1 percent control the vast majority of the nation's wealth, possess influence in the highest halls of government, and profit from the misery of others. The one-half percent have taken to the streets.

Then there's everyone else: the veritable Silent Majority who work and pay the bills and the taxes that make the wheels turn.

<snip>

Link: http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-12-09/bay-area/30494159_1_port-workers-port-action-port-closures

Thanks Chip... Silent Majority... now we know...

[unapatriciated]

109. There were union and non-union supporters of #OWS Oakland, It is a shame so many are ignoring it.

We who understand and remember the history of labor and it's struggles are overjoyed the youth of OWS. Fighting for what we have lost since Reagan started the assault on unions and the worker.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1024253

&feature=player_embedded

http://www.democraticunderground.com/111728



http://cleanandsafeports.org/blog/2011/12/12/an-open-letter-from-america%E2%80%99s-port-truck-drivers-on-occupy-the-ports/
AN OPEN LETTER FROM AMERICA’S PORT TRUCK DRIVERS ON OCCUPY THE PORTS
DECEMBER 12, 2011
We are the front-line workers who haul container rigs full of imported and exported goods to and from the docks and warehouses every day.

We have been elected by committees of our co-workers at the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Oakland, Seattle, Tacoma, New York and New Jersey to tell our collective story. We have accepted the honor to speak up for our brothers and sisters about our working conditions despite the risk of retaliation we face. One of us is a mother, the rest of us fathers. Between the five of us we have 11children and one more baby on the way. We have a combined 46 years of experience driving cargo from our shores for America’s stores.

We are inspired that a non-violent democratic movement that insists on basic economic fairness is capturing the hearts and minds of so many working people. Thank you “99 Percenters” for hearing our call for justice. We are humbled and overwhelmed by recent attention. Normally we are invisible.

[Iggo]

112. No.

[mulsh]

116. Chip Johnson and SF Gate writers in general are not good sources of factual information about

Oakland. As a life long reader of the Chron and Oakland resident I assure you that if you read it at SFGate/Chron you are barely getting 1/4 of the story about this little east bay town. BTW, SFGate hasn't exactly been supportive of the Occupy movement either.

[Starry Messenger]

119. +1

[KamaAina]

124. Is there any way to link to your DU2 thread

about why unions can't officially endorse these actions?

[Starry Messenger]

127. Good idea KamaAina: here it is--

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2437405

"There are some misconceptions about whether ILWU supports
The December 12th West Coast Port Shutdown.

ILWU national leadership released a statement saying they "don't endorse" the December 12th Shutdown.

This is exactly how it was done on November 2nd as well. They participated in and supported it just as much then as they do now.

Here's how it works:
We block the gates to the docks, the arbitrator comes and declares it unsafe for the longshoremen to go to work, and the longshoremen then go home- with pay.

ILWU has to officially say that they don't "endorse" the shutdown, this is the only way that they will be able to claim that the blockade is a safety hazard for longshoremen.

If they endorsed it, there would be no safety hazard. How could there be a safety hazard from an action that they endorse? It would be a "strike", no pay for longshoremen that day, and ILWU would be liable for a lawsuit in the millions.

Do not believe the rumor that this means the longshoremen rank-and-file, and the President of the locals don't individually support us. They do. ILWU just can't officially do it as an organization.

This action is in support of Longshoremen in Longview, WA who are militantly fighting union-busting activities by the grain company EGT. The actions of the rank-and-file there are not officially endorsed by ILWU either. These are technicalities for legal reasons, not a measure of support in this case.

Here's what ILWU Local 21 President Dan Coffman said to Occupy Oakland last week at a public rally: "You can't believe what you people have done for my people!"

ILWU Local 10 Executive Board member Clarence Thomas said publicly: "These Ports are public. People have a right to come to the Port and protest. The ILWU has historically honored picket lines at the Port.”

The ILWU has always honored community pickets. They understand solidarity. This is all part of how it works.

They supported the November 2nd shutdown under the exact same circumstances. The longshoremen support this one too.

Please let folks know about this. The details of this action have caused some confusion among people that need to be clear about their support.

The December 12th West Coast Port Shutdown.
Let's do this."
via Boots Riley: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=520078663
He intended this as a public message to be shared around, so I don't think it needs to be cut down to four paragraphs.

[KamaAina]

125. A-yup. As soon as I saw that headline,

I said to myself, "Hi, Chip!"