Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Let Them Clean!

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 13, 2011, 6:46 p.m. EST by riethc (1149)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I think people in the park shouldn't force their hand. Let them to clean! You're going to look like the assholes in this situation if you don't.

14 Comments

14 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by ribis (240) 2 years ago

There's legitimate fear that, once everyone's out, they'll effectively never be let back in. With the ban on sleeping bags, it's already clear the Bloomberg office is trying to expel OWS. Bloomberg and friends know that arresting everyone that's there now would be bad PR, so they're trying to make things ever-less-hospitable to decrease OWS numbers in the park. At some point, maybe tonight, maybe in a week, they'll most likely deploy riot cops in the wee hours to cuff and confine everyone remaining, then seal the park for a few days of "cleaning." They want as few people in there as possible when it happens so they can just sweep it under the rug and pretend nothing happened until the news cycle finds something else upon which to fixate.

In short, solidarity in NYC is now more important than ever. I see two options: OWS moves en masse to a new location, or OWS sticks it out in the Park and forces arrests. I'm not a party to their Assembly; it's ultimately their decision to make on the ground.

[-] 2 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

I guess the question becomes "cui bono"? Who benefits from this forcing this situation? I doubt the real estate company cares just to clean the park, although, as a side issue, they may want to make sure their property isn't damaged.

[-] 1 points by ribis (240) 2 years ago

I'm not an NYC insider, so this is just sporting/armchair/blind idiot conjecture. I'll accept any relevant corrections. =D Anyway...

Case 1: OWS stays, Bloomberg caves, ZP owners make a deal. OWS remains, and gains a bit of credibility in the process. Bloomberg (and his administration) come off a bit weak locally, but get pretty good national press. ZP owners either swallow the loss for good PR, or capitalize somehow on OWS for decent PR and a little return on the situation. Nice outcome, but not likely.

Case 2: OWS stays, Bloomberg caves, ZP owners throw a fit. OWS remains for now. Bloomberg comes off as a complete sissy locally, and gets absolute outrage from the national right wing, plus dithering noncommittal gibberish from the left. The owners get outraged; they put their foot down, and Bloomberg is forced to act. Welcome back to square one.

Case 3: OWS relocates, Bloomberg and the owners retake ZP without a fight. OWS's fortunes ride on the new location -- visibility, amenities, etc. They get a bit of good PR for being amenable to deals, but come off as a bit milquetoast. Bloomberg gets mild criticism at most; ZP retains maximum value. Best case for the owners, here.

Case 4: OWS resists an expulsion, Bloomberg fails to expel OWS despite intentions. Very unlikely -- NYPD is strong. Still. OWS rolls the dice here: big payoff, massive risk. They could be catapulted forward, or delegitimized as hooligans. Bloomberg looks like a total nincompoop, the owners go ballistic and demand outside interference. National Guard or some likely party comes in and evicts OWS. Best case, it rallies a nation. Worst case, it's just another awful page in our awful history, something people read about in badly-written history texts.

Case 5: OWS resists peacefully, and Bloomberg expels them. OWS's fortunes ride on their rallying power and just how many people get hauled away -- the PR of a big mass arrest is heady stuff. Bloomberg gets a lovely mix of hearty red and frosty blue press. The ZP owners take a hit on their property value -- ZP becomes the "mass arrest park" in the near future.

Case 6: OWS gets violent, gets closed down. 90% bad for OWS. It raises public awareness like nothing else, but OWS hemorrhages down-home credibility. Bloomberg gets victory laurels from the right, tepid head-shaking from the center-left, and a tight core of Hitler comparisons from the far-left. ZP owners take a big hit on their property value -- ZP becomes the "violent crackdown park" for the foreseeable future.

shrug At least, that's what I see in re the people most directly involved.

[-] 2 points by unended (294) 2 years ago

I agree that the city should cooperate with the American people to allow them to clean the park as they have sought: "If Bloomberg truly cares about sanitation here he should support the installation of portopans and dumpsters. #OWS allies have been working to secure these things to support our efforts."

[-] 2 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

I agree with that as well, but the situation as is, they should allow the cleaners to come through and clean 1/3 of the park at a time.

If you guys want to clean it yourself first, too, that would be a good idea. This is a PR moment people!

[-] 1 points by Flsupport (578) 2 years ago

It is very clear to me that this is a pretext for removal of the protesters. Additionally, it doesnt even appear there was much to clean as they already had a cleaning committee. The people in the park are having their hand forced. Isnt it a coincidence this happens one day before Oct. 15th? The reason this movement even means anything is because of the willingness of the protestors to resist. If they leave off that.....might as well just go back to doing other things. Non violent resistance has to be confrontational or it does not work. To put it another way, if Rosa Parks sat in the back of the bus, what did she really accomplish?

[-] 1 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

Sleeping in a park isn't the same as Rosa Parks sitting at the front of the bus. We were already in the park for almost a month.

One of my concerns is how this is going to look. If we don't respect property rights, we're going to look like the kooky leftists they want to portray us as.

Also, if we force their hand and they violently push us out, a riot might erupt, and the whole movement will be put in jeopardy.

It'll be difficult, but I think the best thing to do now, would be to move to a new location.

[-] 1 points by Flsupport (578) 2 years ago

And then they will push you from there, and the next and the next. Eventually, you would have to make a stand. There really isnt much way around it. And the point I make about Rosa Parks is that there was no movement without her resisting something she felt was ridiculous. I can tell you, as someone who is not there, I cant imagine what reason they have for wanting you out other than to try and disrupt the movement. And if you do everything they say every time they say, they will put you in a nice box where you really wont be able to affect change or do anything. It is up to everyone in the park....but you must choose to stand up at some point. This cant just be a bunch of people pissing in the wind forever. There is a point...and you can draw your own line in the sand....there is a point where you must at least be prepared to make a stand......and after that, then set up in the new place if you need to.

[-] 1 points by equazcion (688) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Vote on which option you think is best for the movement:

http://www.themultitude.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=28&p=125#p125

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

garbage tumbling in the wind would be a detraction from the presentations of information available at tables

[-] -1 points by mbnfromtheog (70) 2 years ago

this place is so filthy theres a website for it- www.mudfall.com

[-] 1 points by RationalReaper (188) 2 years ago

shut the fuck up

[-] 1 points by mbnfromtheog (70) 2 years ago

oh its you again. hi!