Forum Post: Are you upset about the police crackdown and violence in Oakland? Do you support the Occupy movement and want it to succeed? Do you really want to see a revolution? Then READ THIS....
Posted 12 years ago on Jan. 29, 2012, 8:21 p.m. EST by therising
(6643)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It appears that the Occupy movement is faced with a challenge:
Either we embrace and stay true to the nonviolent principles we have espoused all along ---- and therefore speak up AGAINST VIOLENCE --- or --- we cede control of the movement to a tiny minoorty who want to naively just tear the whole thing down (not realizing they're playing right into the hands of the powers that be).
Of course, it would come as no surprise to many of us to learn that the 1% and their minions are, at the very least, hoping this tiny minority takes over the movement. Furthermore, it is also quite conceivable, perhaps even likely, that agent provocateurs (police or paid corporate security) are fanning the flames of those inciting or perpetrating violence.
Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke very clearly about the power of nonviolence in his "Letter from the Birmingham Jail" and those who are naively playing into te 1% hands with violence would do well to read up on what Gandhi and King accomplished. Nonviolence is about creating tension. Martin Luther King, Jr. (who clearly borrowed from Gandhi's play book) put it like this in his "Letter from the Birmingham Jail". As you read this, think about King sitting in a jail cell in a jean jacket, an occupier from back in the day, an occupier for the same cause of justice that is being pursued today::
"Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks to so dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood."
"The purpose of our direct-action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation."
Here's the entire "Letter from the Birmingham Jail": http://abacus.bates.edu/admin/offices/dos/mlk/letter.html . It's a treasure and is as timely as ever.
So how do we fight back nonviolently?
Here's one example of how: http://occupywallst.org/forum/fresh-thread-forum-post-below-received-over-2000-c/
Tearing the whole thing down is just silly. Our founders helped build one hell of a great country and just because it's been hijacked by corporate interests doesn't mean we should throw the baby out with the bath water and abandoned the underlying principles and structure. That's an immature thoughtless impractical approach. That's REacting instead of acting and getting real results. Nonviolent direct action works.
Perhaps the movement needs a section of enforcers to deal with the violent protesters.
[Removed]
Well just from today's news:
Oakland officials on Sunday were inspecting damage inside City Hall that was caused by about 50 Occupy protesters who broke in and smashed glass display cases, spray-painted graffiti, and burned the U.S. and California flags.
DOZENS of partying Occupy Wall Street protesters descended on hipster Brooklyn Saturday night, clashing with police, throwing garbage cans and drinking beer out of a vacant luxury building.
We started with such promise but a few can ruin the whole movement!
It's important that occupy wall street speak up to remind everyone (middle America, the press, their supporters --everyone -- that the movement is nonviolent and those who are violent or destroy property are not part of the movement. Otherwise, we play right into the hands of the 1% who know exactly how to deal with violence. Nonviolent direct action brings real change. They have no play book for nonviolence. It befuddles them. The more we push with nonviolent direct action, the more clear and consistent we are about our nonviolent stance in theory and in practice, the more we look like middle America when we're protesting, the more people will join the movement and the greater our chance of success. This is how real change will occur.
We do NOT need to tear down the whole system. The real revolution here is keeping the system we have intact. It is a beautiful and elegant system designed by our founders.
The problem is that has been high jacked by corporate interests and citizens up until now haven't had the inclination to rise up against such a high jacking. If we rise up NON-violently, we can help give voice to the out rage that is felt by millions of Americans. The Occupy Wall Street movement will swell in numbers this spring -- exponentially -- if we stay true to nonviolence. It is then that we will reinvigorate the electorate and, working together, extricate money from politics. It is then that we will make decisions from a position of united power rather than demands from a position of divided weakness.
Therefore, violence weakens the movement. Nonviolent direct action STRENTHENS the movement. We must speak up now on this. This is a crucial moment.
AGREE with you, therising!!!
We must be not only committed to non-violence, but also PATIENT and SMART, as time is on our side.
I feel very uncomfortable with those who romanticize revolution without the requisite knowledge of history...
Here is an excerpt from a recent interview with Noam Chomsky, who is much more sensible than those "armchair commandos" who appear not only ignorant of the lessons of history, but seriously disconnected from the American people:
Chomsky: "I don't think anyone is seriously talking about a revolution. To have a revolution you have to have a substantial majority of the population who recognize further reform is not possible within the institutional framework that exists. And there's nothing like that here, not even remotely." Q: "Should we be trying to achieve that?" Chomsky: "First of all, We're nowhere near the limits of what reform can carry out".