Is it a measure of success or failure when OWS has these clashes with the police?

[dkf]

There seems to be such excitement here when it looks like a confrontation is coming and I don't get why that is a good thing. Is OWS trying to provoke extreme reactions from the government?

If the goal of the movement is to get government to restrain corporations, how does making the government look like a bunch of thugs accomplish this? Does that help Obama's argument that Government is the solution or is this situation going to turn it into the problem? Wouldn't that then place the Republicans "less government" position more favorably?

[dtexdem]

1. The measure of success or failure is what happens afterward.

Does Occupy collapse or roar back with greater momentum?

[dkf]

9. But if you just have a larger population pissed off at the government for not

Letting them amass what is the relationship of the people to their government? Haven't you permanently created a hostility?

Is that really what the goal is? To rile the people towards government? Isn't this going to redirect the anger or does this just leave people who are mad at everything?

[CreekDog]

56. Actually, I don't see many if any DUers relishing an OWS clash with police

i think folks here hope OWS succeeds (well, not everyone, and not you...but i digress) and people here don't want OWS to give up, but i don't see DUers in any significance wanting violent confrontations with the police.

i really wonder what you're up to when you post something that is

obviously untrue
obviously untrue about DU and its members --and in a defamatory way
obviously untrue about liberals and what they want --and in a defamatory way

when your work in this thread is done, will the outside world have a lower opinion of the rest of us because of an untruth you created?

:wtf:

[valerief]

2. It's not success when innocent people are bludgeoned or maced.

Being arrested for doing something lawful is one thing. Being physically assaulted is another.

[Modern_Matthew]

3. When government is married to corporation, they are both the problem. nt

[Capitalocracy]

4. It's a failure on the part of the police.

It's a "success" for OWS only in the sense that they are drawing attention, and the reaction demonstrates TPTB believe they are a threat to the status quo. Their goal is not actually to be beaten up by police officers.

And the organization is loose at best, so it's a bit complicated to talk about "their goals". But a lot of them would probably agree that part of the problem is not just that government fails to regulate corporations, but that corporations are regulating the government.

[backscatter712]

5. It shows the power-elites are afraid.

So I'd say it's a good sign, since they're freaking out enough to call out the thugs.

[Codeine]

6. When the mayor has to step back and allow everyone to return with

minimal police presence I'd call it a resounding success.

[tridim]

7. OWS is testing the Constitution

And so far, even with the clashes, the Constitution is winning and the people are becoming stronger.

It makes me proud.

[Fumesucker]

8. An eventual extreme reaction is as predictable as gravity..

In that sense I would say that OWS is "provoking" the authorities simply by existing.

But it will be the authorities who initiate violence in the great majority of cases.

[vets74]

49. No way. Setting up liaison with police is usually enough to forestall excesses.

If you are going to move a crowd then you need to manage that process.

U.S. Park Police are the very best for managing this problem. Their info is first rate.

You do need to weed out provocateurs.

D'oh.

[Fumesucker]

50. If it goes on long enough violence is inevitable..

Indeed, it's already happened.

Unless you think getting pepper sprayed for breathing is not a violent act.

Let alone what happened in Oakland the other night.

[vets74]

97. That is irresponsible. Also flat-out wrong. Crowds and cops are manageable.

We worked with US Park Police for the large-scale marches in 1969-1970-1971.

They ran their own people and the DC police officers. No problems like Oakland and Boston now.

[ixion]

10. OWS doesn't 'clash' with the cops. They are attacked by the cops.

nice try, though.

[justiceischeap]

12. ^_^ This post. nt

[vets74]

43. The "clash" is generated by Agent Provocateurs sent by right wing organizations.

Check the Occupy web sites.

Google works. Inciting a riot is illegal. D'oh.

One Patrick Howley confessed online at The American Spectator blog. Then they rewrote his piece to try to reduce the legal impact -- but the original was captured.

[AsahinaKimi]

48. I was just gonna say these clashes are one way ...

Against the citizens who are doing nothing but exercising their rights granted to them by our founding fathers and the United States Constitution.

[randome]

11. OWS is fighting the wrong enemy.

It shouldn't be an amorphous target like 'the authorities' who are seen as the enemy.

It shouldn't even be corporations or rich people.

The anger, IMHO, is best directed at the legislators who failed to do their jobs and regulate the economy for the betterment of all.

Milling about in a hundred different cities only makes it easier for clashes to occur.

[Fumesucker]

13. If it bleeds it leads..

We all know that the only way OWS is really going to get big coverage is for violence to occur.

The difference these days is the ubiquity of video cameras in the general public, damn near every cellphone these days does video.

Makes it far more difficult for the authorities to deny actual events and substitute their own doctored version.

[randome]

18. So violence is inevitable?

I guess it is if you pick a fight with the wrong group.

I thought OWS was about protesting our anything goes financial system?

What the hell do the police have to do with that?

[Fumesucker]

21. The police are the agents of the 1%, not the 99%..

There's a Japanese aphorism about the nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

That's what you'll be seeing shortly, OWS is a threat to TPTB and the 1% (basically two names for the same group) and they will try to hammer them down.

[randome]

22. I'd say the vast majority of police are good people.

Just like the vast majority of our military troops are good people.

There are rotten eggs in any large group.

Fighting the police when they don't have a choice but to go where they are deployed is the wrong tactic, IMO.

[Fumesucker]

24. Yes, just go home and vote for more of the same..

And more of the same is what you'll get.

There is a vast amount of inertia in the system as it stands, turning it even a fraction of a degree is a task that's going to require a great deal of blood, sweat and tears.

So you're saying that cops will bash in the heads of non-violent protesters rather than quit their job in protest of illegal or immoral orders?

[randome]

25. When police are ordered to riot duty...

...chaos and confusion ALWAYS results. It's rarely clear who is more at fault.

Do public officials have a right to clear an area if they think the public welfare is endangered? Sure. Should they do it in as equitable and nonviolent a manner as possible. Absolutely!

But things will inevitably get out of hand. And if I was a cop trying to protect my fellow officers in a giant melee that might have been started a block away, I'm sure I wouldn't think twice about that.

On edit:
The 'fog of war' is not a pointless phrase.

[Fumesucker]

28. So you think it's not clear who was at fault in Oakland? n/t

[randome]

30. I think mistakes were made.

You think the police en-masse simply charged like barbarians and began cutting down people left and right?

I doubt that.

And simply saying 'THEY started it' doesn't really help.

I've been saying for a few weeks now that the longer OWS is around without a coherent message, the more likely something tragic will occur and then the Pukes will be able to paint the entire movement as crazed.

Oakland could have been worse, I'm sorry to say.

[Fumesucker]

31. "Mistakes were made"..

:rofl:

A classic "both sides do it" non-answer..

:hi:

[randome]

33. I wasn't there.

I'm guessing you weren't, either.

Video can be shot from one point of view or another and not one video can capture everything at once in as large and spread out a group as OWS in Oakland.

Are more clashes what we want to happen?

[CreekDog]

60. he was shot in the face by a projectile

you don't need to be there to know that.

[randome]

62. Everyone pretty much agrees on WHAT happened.

But it was a no-win situation from the start when police go against a large crowd. And it sounds like the Oakland mayor did not sanction this.

All I'm saying is it's easy to throw blame one way or the other but no one can monitor the entire crowd and the police at the same time and determine why or how this happened.

Cops need to protect both the citizens and their fellow officers. It's easy for things to get out of control when large numbers of people are involved.

[CreekDog]

67. You won't say if you think it's right or wrong that they shot that protestor in the face

I think you do have an opinion, but you're too cowardly to admit what it is.

kind of embarrassing!

:rofl:

[randome]

68. Of course it's wrong!

Jeeze, where did you get the idea I am in favor of severely injuring people??

All I'm saying is that during a riot control situation, things will quickly get out of hand and it isn't always clear who started what or how the situation came to be in the first place.

I've been saying THIS for weeks now: the longer OWS goes on without a coherent message, the more likely something tragic will occur and then the Repukes will be able to brand the entire movement as crazed.

What happened in Oakland could have been worse, I'm sorry to say.

But if anything positive is going to happen with this movement, it needs better messaging skills.

[CreekDog]

69. Ahhhhh, and you brought out the "incoherent message" meme too

is it Christmas? :rofl:



all this while repeating the false charge that it was a "riot".

[randome]

70. Damn! You caught me!

I'm a short-haired, right-wing yuppie dedicated to destroying our Purity Of Essence.

(Thought I was doing so well there for a while.)

[CreekDog]

72. not quite:

And he to me: "This miserable way
is taken by the sorry souls of those
who lived without disgrace and without praise.

They now commingle with the coward angels,
the company of those who were not rebels
nor faithful to their God, but stood apart.

[Ignis]

80. Ahhh, the passive voice takes away all that worrying accountability!

:rofl:

[LanternWaste]

37. I imagine Income Inequality is not very cohesiv

I imagine Ending Income Inequality is not very cohesive to those who dismiss and deny its existence, its message, and its strength.

[CreekDog]

59. do you think it was wrong to fire projectiles at those protestor's faces?

or not. it's a simple yes or no question.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

93. They (OPD) started it

They just did, plain and simple, no complexity required. Sorry if that doesn't make you happy, but it's a simple and settled truth.

[Magoo48]

36. They DO have a choice...

[randome]

42. Ultimately, yes. We all have a choice.

It's not always an easy one to make when you have signed on to protect citizens and your fellow officers in the event of a clash.

[CreekDog]

61. so through with this line of argument

so insidious, so ashamed to state what they actually think in plain English.

:eyes:

[randome]

63. Unless you're a cop yourself, I don't think you can know what that's like.

At least I'm prepared to admit I don't know what it's like.

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. Having been in EMS where that applies too

I get it...and still they have a choice.

Also this will vary on what happens depending on local politics and departmental culture. I expect less in departments with poor civil rights records.

Them pesky shades of gray I know.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

95. I don't care what it's like to be a cop

If they cannot do the job properly, then they need to get out, irrespective of what it's like to be a cop. I'm a little short on pig sympathy of late.

[tama]

77. Big coveradge

is not what this is about. This is not about being attention whores. This is about self-governance, taking responsibility for our lives and keeping this place livable and decent for our children. Of course the attention whores of the politician class turn their weakness against themselves.

This is about building self-confidence, learning to work together and take care of each other and letting go of control mania and power games.

Growing up.

rEvolution.

[Jackpine Radical]

20. I disagree.

The politicians are mere tools, acting upon the wishes of those who bought them. Tools are cheap and replaceable. You need to get at the tool wielders.

[brentspeak]

32. Some of the OWS offshoots have protested directly at the source

National OWS protests have been useful in spreading the message nationwide that we live in an economic Rigged Game. However, I agree that tense standoffs with local police in far-flung places like Oakland and Atlanta are not especially beneficial to the whole point of the movement -- however much the standoffs have been instigated by the cops in the first place. The corporate overlords and the corrupt politicians who do their bidding are usually located far away from these cities and are not affected by Mayor Daley-type incidents.

On the plus side, the Occupy DC and Occupy Wall Street factions have gone straight to the source. I especially like what Occupy DC did: protest literally on the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1ROPGASMBM">doorstep of the US Chamber of Commerce.

I'd like to see an Occupy CNBC or Occupy Fox News or even an Occupy CNN protest going.

[flamingdem]

41. The Bay Area, San Francisco is right next to Oakland, is a huge financial hub

California is a huge economic engine and silicon valley is a few miles away..

[backscatter712]

45. It's both the wealthy one-percenters & corporations and the government.

The government has been corrupted by money from the business elites. They're both to blame.

[shraby]

14. ........And then they fight you...and you win.

[TygrBright]

15. Read up on the history of nonviolent social change movements.

While "making the government look like a bunch of thugs" is not a GOAL of the movement, per se, and perhaps not even a planned strategy, nonviolent social change movements rest their power on the awakening of the collective human conscience, and work toward the 'tipping point' where individual self-interest loses and altruism takes over.

The dynamic of nonviolent social change rests on two equations:

First, that the non-aligned majority will, as they perceive the power structure becoming ever more extreme, unethical, and inhuman in their opposition to the movement, re-align in support of the movement. The increasing contrast between the movement's clearly-visible commitment to nonviolence and a focus on the common good, and the clearly-visible willingness of the power structure to exceed acceptable community standards and its growing focus on the end justifying the means can be very powerful in effecting this realignment.

Second, that the sacrifice of those within the movement to the violence of the opposition will, in the long run, result in less violence, bloodshed, and disorder than armed and aggressive confrontation, which has the enormous potential to devolve into destructive chaos, rather than constructive change. The calculated commitment to this belief on the part of the organizers and participants of a nonviolent social change movement is the source of the movement's power.

We are seeing these dynamics play out in the Occupy movement. If we continue the commitment to making it a NONVIOLENT social change movement, I am absolutely convinced that we WILL see more of the results we want than if we allow it to escalate into violence.

But then, I'm a Friend.

Anyway, that's how it has worked in the past. You needn't take my word for it. There's a whole literature on nonviolent social change and how it works.

helpfully,
Bright

[dkf]

16. I can see where it works for things like racism or sexism where cultural attitudes

need to be changed and you can bank on the shame of prejudice and bigotry.

I don't see how that fits here.

[TygrBright]

23. Paging Mohandas Ghandi...

Anti-imperialism (and isn't the Occupy goal an effective end to the economic imperialism of our Beloved Oligarchs?) was one of the most effective uses of nonviolent social change EVER.

A little exploration of history can be exciting and hopeful and interesting in this context.

helpfully,
Bright

[dkf]

26. That is true occupation and even more obvious.

When has it worked for pure economics?

[LanternWaste]

38. I don't see how it doesn't fit.

"I don't see how that fits here..."
I don't see how it doesn't fit. :shrug:

[patrice]

17. Agree. It's a question of priorities. nt

[Le Taz Hot]

19. You have that backwards.

The OWS protesters didn't clash with police, the police clashed with the OWS protesters. It's not a good thing but it is an inevitability at some point and at some locations.

[dkf]

27. Doesn't it take two sides?

[brentspeak]

35. In your distorted world, being on the receiving end of a unprovoked pepper-spray stream

and having a tear gas canister shot into one's face equates to "taking two to tango".

[dkf]

44. When you know the police are coming to clear the place and you stay anyway then

I consider you are doing your part. I guess that makes me a wimp for not daring the police to arrest me as I express my rights.

[Demstud]

53. Yes, sometimes standing up to bullies will hurt

Anytime you refuse a bully's demands, and you know that bully has a proclivity towards violence, you know you're probably in for a beating or worse. In some extreme situations, to draw attention to a bully, it might be necessary to provoke them in some non-violent way.

[JackRiddler]

52. Exactly. Nicely put.

[LanternWaste]

40. Not to initiate.

"Doesn't it take two sides?"

Not to initiate. That is predicated on merely one side.

[CreekDog]

58. game over, okay?

enough already.

[Le Taz Hot]

66. Well, it takes two sides for a rape to occur

as well but the culpability rests solely on the person perpetrating the violence. It's pretty appaling that you want to make the victim(s) equal partners in that culpability.

[Ignis]

81. +1

[DisgustipatedinCA]

96. If you count "being in wheelchair" as the counterpart to "firing gas canister at head"

...then yeah, I guess it takes two sides. However, this is more commonly referred to as "overwhelming police brutality in the face of peaceful behavior". I hope that helps you sort things out.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. "..then they fight you, then you win," Gandhi

When the establishment resorts to violence they do so from a position of weakness, not strength. If OWS wasn't having an impact it would be ignored.

[jtuck004]

34. Maybe it's in the way we frame that question?

I heard one of the organizers say OWS is not an organization with a goal, but more of a think tank.

As such, their behavior makes a lot more sense to me, and gives them a lot of ways to use resources. They seem to have a picture of the powers and parties that are creating a world they are resisting. Now they are just in discussions as to what to do about it.

I think everyone should back off, they should pick up their trash and be allowed to put in tents and porta-potties with hand-washing factilities, the cops should go back to arresting people that intend to hurt others, and let them talk and proselytize.

Unless everyone is askeered of these people, or their speech. Cowards.

[Enrique]

39. neither

no, it's not the goal to clash with the police, but neither is it OWS's fault that the cops are attacking them.

[randome]

47. If you weren't there...

...and you weren't actively monitoring the entire crowd at the same moment in time, then you don't know how the clash got started.

You simply don't and you never will.

I am NOT reflexively defending the Oakland police. I'm saying you can't know how things got out of hand.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JackRiddler]

51. It is a measure of brutality and stupidity by the authorities, obviously.

You have a staggering false assumption in there, that Occupy protesters make "the government look like a bunch of thugs." The authorities are the ones doing that, entirely by themselves.

[Amonester]

64. +1

Sometimes, it's much too obvious to see...

"Then THEY fight you" :thumbsdown:

:thumbsup:

[The Magistrate]

54. Heavens To Betsy, Ma'am! We Cannot Have Masses Of People Demonstrating Against Wealth And Privilege!

Why, the next thing you know, taxes might be raised on millionaires and workers' wages might increase!!!

[devilgrrl]

57. Mr. Magistrate sir, I need to ask a question...

How has this obvious disruptor managed to have lasted here longer than necessary?

[RandomKoolzip]

74. That's a really good question.

How long does it take to get one's jollies by playing devil's Advocate anyways? When does one stop "playing" devil's advocate and start actually doing the Devil's work?

[CreekDog]

55. it seems like you look at the news with Republican lenses

why not just ask liberals when they'll stop beating their wives?

[CreekDog]

65. DKF, then you opposed Martin Luther King, Jr. and all that he did

you can't disagree.

he didn't cancel a protest or stop one because the police were coming. in fact, quite the contrary.

"...civil rights leaders, led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., began "Project 'C'" (for "confrontation") in Birmingham against the police tactics used by Connor and his subordinates (and, by extension, other Southern police officials). King's arrest during this period would provide him the opportunity to write his famous Letter from Birmingham Jail. The goal of this movement was to cause mass arrests and subsequent inability of the judicial and penal systems to deal with this volume of activity."

(source Wikipedia, see "Bull Connor")

[dkf]

84. It's not about supporting it or not...more trying to puzzle out the strategy that is being

used.

This type of thing isn't my style at all, but I am an interested observer.

[CreekDog]

86. you misrepresented the strategy being used

that doesn't make you an observer.

it makes you an opponent. :shrug:

[dkf]

87. How would you describe it then?

Okay...is it a success for OWS when the police attack? Is that better? And what would your answer be?

[CreekDog]

88. i don't know which question you're asking

:shrug:

[dkf]

89. Well me neither. That is why I am asking.

I'm kind of glad you don't too because I'm just sitting here confused.

[CreekDog]

90. well your OP says something quite different than you don't know

:wtf:

[dkf]

94. It's a question as to if it's a measure of success or failure...I.e. I don't know what it is.

What else would i mean?

You probably realize I am somewhat ambivalent about OWS. I agree with a lot of what is said but the tactics are not my style at all. Moreover I can't figure out if what's happening is good for OWS or not.

It's kind of like watching Herman Cain. He baffles me too.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. Exactly when did OWSers confront and taunt the cops?

I'll be here all week.

[tama]

73. Neither

it's just part of the process.

And I disagree that the goal of the movement is to get government to do anything. Democratic self-governance is what we are learning and doing.

[RandomKoolzip]

75. Is it a measure of success or failure that you're still on DU?

[dkf]

85. For me it is successful...I learn a lot here.

I'm not afraid to ask questions or to explore the uncomfortable. I know my pov may be controversial but I would rather understand than pretend to while I shut up nicely.

[fascisthunter]

76. who is confronting who dkf?

hmmmm?

[TNLib]

79. It's civil disobedience

It's just the nature of the beast. By protesting civilly peacefully but still going against the grain of the Establishment, can and most likely will cause the establishment to act out violently against the movement. This in turn adds fuel to the movement and gets attention from the public.

IMHO if that crazy cop didn't pepper spray those girls and the footage hadn't gone viral, OWS would have fizzled out by now and most people would have never had heard of it.

I am really scared for the safety of the young people. I'm terrified that someone will die or many will be injured. But unfortunately from a historical perspective this is what happens before things get better.

[Tsiyu]

82. "Seems to be."

Hmmmmm

Seems to me, that there is a lot of excitement when the cops stand in solidarity with Occupy protesters, as some in NY and other cities have done.

And I see outrage - not "excitement" - when there is violence on the part of police.

People do not view "the Government" as a monolithic entity, unless they are rightie wingbats or Grover Norquist. They are quite able to understand the difference between county police and their president.

The OWS protesters are concerned with goverment regulating capitalism so that 1% of people are not made bejillionaires while destroying the economy for everyone else. Congress and the president and the Supremes are responsible for lax regulation, unfair taxation and Citzen's United. AS for police, most AMericans understand that each locality has its own law enforcement character. Some law enforcement is good, some not so good. Most people understand that cops will need Social Security and MEDICARE too.

But quite the apples and oranges argument you've tried on.

Try harder.

[MrMickeysMom]

83. It's only "exciting" for those who look for excitement...

For the rest of us, it's the only way to change what has happened to this country.

Confrontation? This is a peaceful protest, so provocation of extreme actions, if any, are a result of who has the backs of the protesters... call it the second wave.

It isn't good or bad... it's necessary and it's about time. By the way... the "government" is really supposed to be the American people, eyes finally wide and open.

[Dover]

91. The people can't MAKE the police and local government look bad.

I wasn't aware that the folks in Oakland initiated a clash or even fought back.
I wasn't there but I just saw a lot of people running away. Are you saying the police were provoked?
What are you calling provocation?

I give the people props for holding firmly and peacefully to their position - not moving. And the violence perpetrated
against that resistance did, indeed, make the police and mayor look bad. Who's fault is that? And in the end
it has initiated change. Is that bad?

We are all individually responsible for how we respond in any situation.
Only the people who were there can say how it came down
and what they might learn from it going forward.

[girl gone mad]

92. Your thought process is so simplistic.

"Government can only be all good or all bad, therefore if some cops act violently, Republicans must be right about less government."

Except that Republicans support the corporate police state and the rollback of first amendment rights for citizens. When they say they want small government and fewer regulations, they aren't concerned about the rights of the 99%. They are only working to get rid of the regulations that keep the 1% screwing the rest of us.

[mmonk]

98. There is no clash. That is the talking point of the other side

to invoke a false equivalence of actions.