Occupy Oakland Clashes with Police (Again)

[Narz]

Gay rights is obviously the big one.

Gays still can't marry in a lot of places though. And even in 2002 you weren't allowed to discriminate based on orientation, right?

If you're into education policy, urban school choice would be the other.

That allows you to choose any school within a large urban area to send your kid to?

If so it sounds like a good step. However, if one school is a much further distance from poor people wouldn't it still be kind of a bandaid solution (as most aren't going to bother traveling a long distance & also wouldn't this just encourage the school the motivated kids are abandoning to get even worse)?

I may have understood that wrong. If so, please educate me as I am interested (seeing as a have a kid who starts pre-school next year).

 

[choxorn]

Gays still can't marry in a lot of places though. And even in 2002 you weren't allowed to discriminate based on orientation, right?

But there has been some improvement, which is better than none. In 2002, only the Netherlands allowed it. Now, it's allowed in 10 countries, Mexico City, some random Brazilian state, DC, and 6 (soon to be 7) US states. And yes, that leaves another 180 countries and most of the US, Mexico, and Brazil, but that's better than nothing, isn't it?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Ok, when this Occupy movement was just starting, I heard a lot of the people talking about the following so it seemed to be a main theme:

They felt that the 1% has a disproportional access and influence to legislators which the 99% have not.

I think this is valid criticism. I wonder, does anyone disagree with that criticism?

What happened in the later stages is inevitable. The main difference with the TEA party is the average age. Younger people protesting does usually lead to ... ahem ... rapscallion behaviour But the similarity with the TEA party is that there were people protesting there who genuinely stood for the Taxed Enough Already message, while others just took the opportunity to rail on Obama and vent a little frustration.

 

[kramerfan86]

Ok, when this Occupy movement was just starting, I heard a lot of the people talking about the following so it seemed to be a main theme:

They felt that the 1% has a disproportional access and influence to legislators which the 99% have not.

I think this is valid criticism. I wonder, does anyone disagree with that criticism?

What happened in the later stages is inevitable. The main difference with the TEA party is the average age. Younger people protesting does usually lead to ... ahem ... rapscallion behaviour But the similarity with the TEA party is that there were people protesting there who genuinely stood for the Taxed Enough Already message, while others just took the opportunity to rail on Obama and vent a little frustration.

Indeed it was a valid criticism, and the validity was a big reason the movement was pretty popular at first. They squandered their chance though with disorganization. Eventually a next step beyond making filthy camps needed to happen, it didnt, and not the momentum for this movement is gone. The message still has great potential, but the occupy's chance to be the standard bearer is gone IMO.

 

[Traitorfish]

What possibilities? What cracks? Seriously. Tell me. Too much of this is generalities. Things are bad. Things need fixes. Give me specifics. I'm listening.

I don't know. Things will unfold as they unfold. All I'm saying is that the economics system isn't going to be repaired on our terms- which is far from saying that it can't be repaired, mark you- and that OWS is drawing increasing attention to this. This widens the ideological cracks that have already appeared in the neoliberal orthodoxy, and make it more possible for people to begin fighting for a settlement on their own terms, whatever that will turn out to mean. (And, personally, I think that this is an impossible conclusion, which will force them to something yet more radical, but that's another topic...)

Indeed it was a valid criticism, and the validity was a big reason the movement was pretty popular at first. They squandered their chance though with disorganization.

This is a logic that I'm not quite grasping- if OWS are to be accused of lacking cohesion and leadership, then why are we saying things like "they squandered their chance though with disorganization", which constructs OWS as a broadly unified actor? Surely what happened is that the desired level of organisation didn't develop? So we should be asking why things developed as they did and not in some other fashion, rather than trying to to blame on the folly of an organisation whose non-existence is the very criticism being made?

 

[RobAnybody]

If you understand the issues that OWS is drawing attention to, why are you asking me what they stand for? My point is that OWS exists to draw people's attention to those important issues. I'm not hung up about its inability to provide solutions now. In fact, I don't think OWS is capable of doing that because of its very nature. OWS is a diffuse movement that, in my reckoning, simply represents the agreement of the figurative 99% on the topic of contemporary issues that need to be addressed. It's a statement of what its diverse participants can agree on. Anything beyond that will probably require more specialised movements.

In addition, I don't think those movements can emerge from OWS itself so quickly without ruining the sense of solidarity that the movement has achieved. It's probably better for new groups to spring up that draw on the energy and the impetus for change that OWS has engendered. That way, the whole thing would be less likely to be plagued by massive internal bickering that would only cause it to self-destruct.

Thank you. That was helpful. Really.

It's still a little... unsatisfying, I guess, but it helps me understand that so far it really is just about drawing attention to the problem. My issue remains that it's kind of like saying "Fire! What should we do?" or "That guy's drowning! Somebody do something!"

I still think downtown has the right of it, though. It's getting to the point where the only times OWS makes the news anymore is when something violent happens. The message is getting distorted. I think you either need to get more organized, even at the risk of losing solidarity, or watch the message being lost because the most news-worthy of the messengers become the face of the movement.

 

[downtown]

Gays still can't marry in a lot of places though. And even in 2002 you weren't allowed to discriminate based on orientation, right?

Actually, in some places, you still can. Sexual Orientation isn't a federally protected class for employment, only a state one (that most have bought into).

Gays can now join the military, and can marry or get a civil union in about 10 states. Gay Marriage/Civil Union approval ratings have never been higher...over 50% nationwide, so more progress is pretty much inevitable. These things have never really happened in only 10 years, after all...

That allows you to choose any school within a large urban area to send your kid to?

Not quite. It isn't a perfect system and it varies a LOT by where you live. School Choice is meant to give you other options besides the single neighborhood school where you live. In some cities, that means you could get a voucher for part of private school tuition, or that you could pay tuition to enroll in a suburban school. What is more likely is that now there is a proliferation of other completely free public charter schools you could enroll in (or an online one) if your local school sucks.

There has been some fairly radical education legislation passed in the last 2 years, and if that works, it would be the biggest change since desegregation, as far as schools go.

Ok, when this Occupy movement was just starting, I heard a lot of the people talking about the following so it seemed to be a main theme:

They felt that the 1% has a disproportional access and influence to legislators which the 99% have not.

I think this is valid criticism. I wonder, does anyone disagree with that criticism?

What happened in the later stages is inevitable. The main difference with the TEA party is the average age. Younger people protesting does usually lead to ... ahem ... rapscallion behaviour But the similarity with the TEA party is that there were people protesting there who genuinely stood for the Taxed Enough Already message, while others just took the opportunity to rail on Obama and vent a little frustration.

That is a good point. Another key difference is that the Tea Party unabashedly embraced "the system" as a means of getting change. They took over local political parties. They went after school boards. They sought to build an actual grassroots political system. Granted, in large part because of their ideology, they were also able to sell out to Big Business or ex-politicos to grease the skids for some of the moves, but at first, it was pretty anti-establishment.

It worked. The Tea Party defacto runs the House now, and we're going to be talking about it for Decades. Because of the foundation they built, it is not going away any time soon. Occupy could do that if they wanted to. I think energy from Occupy type activists is the big reason Elizabeth Warren's campaign is going so well.

 

[Murky]

I don't disagree with the basic premise behind the OWS movement but I am concerned with the method. It makes the protestors too vulnerable to all sorts of Malfeasance. Marching is certainly viable so long as laws are not broken. I believe you can make your point about the ruling class without making yourself a target for arrest or brutality.

 

[Traitorfish]

That is a good point. Another key difference is that the Tea Party unabashedly embraced "the system" as a means of getting change. They took over local political parties. They went after school boards. They sought to build an actual grassroots political system. Granted, in large part because of their ideology, they were also able to sell out to Big Business or ex-politicos to grease the skids for some of the moves, but at first, it was pretty anti-establishment.

It worked. The Tea Party defacto runs the House now, and we're going to be talking about it for Decades. Because of the foundation they built, it is not going away any time soon. Occupy could do that if they wanted to. I think energy from Occupy type activists is the big reason Elizabeth Warren's campaign is going so well.

The Tea Party, or the career politicos who managed to take over the Tea Party label? Very different things, even by the less than impressive standards of the Tea Party.

 

[downtown]

The Tea Party, or the career politicos who managed to take over the Tea Party label? Very different things, even by the less than impressive standards of the Tea Party.

Honestly, I think it's more of the actual Tea Party. The massive GOP Freshman class consisted of mostly political rookies, and they've shown to be fairly resilient to leadership from the GOP "establishment". The most powerful senator isn't really McConnell (the actual GOP minority leader), but Jim Demint, the much more junior Tea Party grandfather.

The CEOs of some of the major Tea groups are often ex-politicos, but in the halls of congress, I think they are pretty responsive to the actual Tea Party groups, rather than the GOP "Man".

 

[Akkon888]

A bad economy exists. People out of work exist. Wealth polarization exists. Therefore, discontent exists.

Discontent exists. A desire to be content exists. A movement exists. A spectrum of opinions exist.

A spectrum of opinions exist. Dissociation exists. A schism exists. Anarchy exists. Crime exists. Poor media portrayal exists. Appearance of dissolution exists.

The above is a short outline of an essay I had to write a few days ago, about OWS. The people who used to, and still do, compose OWS, will not disappear. The bad economy still exists. People are still upset. I'd say it is likely OWS will continue for months; it may regrow as well, if the economy worsens. The idea may spawn new movements in the future, with the general idea the OWS has. The root cause must be treated before the discontent fades.

 

[Neomega]

OWS has solutions:

end the wars
end corporate personhood
end the fed
reverse the citizens united decision

Fact is, the media never reports these solutions as OWS solutions, so people parrot the corporate media: "OWS has no solutions." Nor does the media ever dare discuss these as anything but ridiculous, world ending solutions. In fact, corporate media has a very recognizable talking point they have been told to use, "a movement that touts itself against perceived corporate greed" They will never say that OWS has solutions, they will always water it down to something akin to a bunch of poor people complaining because they are not rich.

The media always takes the word of the police, even though there is plenty of video evidence to counter police accounts on youtube. I find it fitting, that instead of posting youtube videos of the incidents, the OP of this thread uses a media hit-piece, which uses clever phrases such as "the police responded" which sets in the readers mind that the protesters started the violence, or "occupy city protest turns violent" when the violence is the police coming in and arresting people. Typical use of corporate media grammatical tricks to warp the truth as much as possible to make it seem like OWS is a violently dangerous movement. 1,800 occupy movements worldwide, 3 broken windows, maybe a dozen minor injuries to the police. You do the math.

City Hall in Oakland was left undefended, while all the cops were trying to kettle 700 protestors a mile away. But in the news, they paint it as if the 400 kettled protestors were the same group that broke into city hall. More corporate media propaganda. Now all 400 protesters are flag burners and vandals.

Also, here is what greek protests look like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifYh3eZ8MXo

If OWS people were doing this, they would be shot dead in America. No question about it.

This is how ridiculous law enforcement is, they nitpick enforce, aka selectively enforce the law, (as has always been the case with the United States justice system)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkA-rffPVaw


OWS is nonviolent. Yelling -you pig is still non-violent. Americans don't even know what violence is anymore. OWS is an extremely passive-aggressive movement. That is because the state owns aggressive movements.


Finally, people always whine about how dirty or violent or criminal OWS is.

I think they should tour all the countries the US has bombed, and breathe in the mixture of blown chemical factories, burning tires, depleted Uranium dust, and destroyed water supplies, and know what REAL sanitation hazards are like.

and then, then, think about the REAL violence the republicans and democrats have wrought upon the people of the world with all their constant wars we don't even get a say in anymore.

Then they should look at all the defense contractors, and shareholders of those defense companies, (financial institutions mostly) and the bailed out banks, and think about the REAL crime that the United States has let it's bankster gangster bosses commit against the people of the United States.

Compared to the murderous wars and unfathomable corporate crimes of America and its corporations, OWS is Mother Theresa.

So anyone crying about OWS being violent doesn't really care about violence, they only care about it when it insults their precious little sense of nationalism.

 

[choxorn]

I find it fitting, that instead of posting youtube videos of the incidents, the OP of this thread uses a media hit-piece, which uses clever phrases such as "the police responded" which sets in the readers mind that the protesters started the violence, or "occupy city protest turns violent" when the violence is the police coming in and arresting people.

Yeah, that was just an article I took from someone else's link on page 1 after Camikaze deleted my original article for not containing a link, not that the original article was any less biased. I couldn't really find anything aside from euphemism-filled media articles when I made the thread.

The article does at least say that the Occupy Protestors and the police claim two different things, but it puts the police's side of the story first and gives it more credit.

So, anyone have any YouTube videos of the events in Oakland that I can add to the OP?

 

[CaptainF]

OWS has solutions:

end the wars
end corporate personhood
end the fed
reverse the citizens united decision

Fact is, the media never reports these solutions as OWS solutions, so people parrot the corporate media: "OWS has no solutions." Nor does the media ever dare discuss these as anything but ridiculous, world ending solutions. In fact, corporate media has a very recognizable talking point they have been told to use, "a movement that touts itself against perceived corporate greed" They will never say that OWS has solutions, they will always water it down to something akin to a bunch of poor people complaining because they are not rich.

The media always takes the word of the police, even though there is plenty of video evidence to counter police accounts on youtube. I find it fitting, that instead of posting youtube videos of the incidents, the OP of this thread uses a media hit-piece, which uses clever phrases such as "the police responded" which sets in the readers mind that the protesters started the violence, or "occupy city protest turns violent" when the violence is the police coming in and arresting people. Typical use of corporate media grammatical tricks to warp the truth as much as possible to make it seem like OWS is a violently dangerous movement. 1,800 occupy movements worldwide, 3 broken windows, maybe a dozen minor injuries to the police. You do the math.

City Hall in Oakland was left undefended, while all the cops were trying to kettle 700 protestors a mile away. But in the news, they paint it as if the 400 kettled protestors were the same group that broke into city hall. More corporate media propaganda. Now all 400 protesters are flag burners and vandals.

Also, here is what greek protests look like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifYh3eZ8MXo

If OWS people were doing this, they would be shot dead in America. No question about it.

This is how ridiculous law enforcement is, they nitpick enforce, aka selectively enforce the law, (as has always been the case with the United States justice system)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkA-rffPVaw


OWS is nonviolent. Yelling -you pig is still non-violent. Americans don't even know what violence is anymore. OWS is an extremely passive-aggressive movement. That is because the state owns aggressive movements.


Finally, people always whine about how dirty or violent or criminal OWS is.

I think they should tour all the countries the US has bombed, and breathe in the mixture of blown chemical factories, burning tires, depleted Uranium dust, and destroyed water supplies, and know what REAL sanitation hazards are like.

and then, then, think about the REAL violence the republicans and democrats have wrought upon the people of the world with all their constant wars we don't even get a say in anymore.

Then they should look at all the defense contractors, and shareholders of those defense companies, (financial institutions mostly) and the bailed out banks, and think about the REAL crime that the United States has let it's bankster gangster bosses commit against the people of the United States.

Compared to the murderous wars and unfathomable corporate crimes of America and its corporations, OWS is Mother Theresa.

So anyone crying about OWS being violent doesn't really care about violence, they only care about it when it insults their precious little sense of nationalism.

Yes indeed.

 

[Tee Kay]

So anyone crying about OWS being violent doesn't really care about violence, they only care about it when it insults their precious little sense of nationalism.

What happened to all that "inclusiveness" and "diversity of opinion" jazz?

Crying about how unfair the corporate media is treating you won't make it better. OWS needs a solid mass media mouthpiece or two of their own. Merely getting known and into the streets without a PR offensive ready in hand only makes it all the easier for the corporate media to paint you how they want to, and the internet doesn't work because there's simply too much noise.

And since the majority of Americans are essentially conservatives who dislike interruptions in their daily routines, the least you can do to make it easier for them to accept you is to not get violent, regardless of any destroyed Iraqi water supplies.

 

[Neomega]

Crying....

whatever, dude.

 

[Tee Kay]

You used it first.

 

[Neomega]

You used it first.

good for me.

 

[RobAnybody]

I think they should tour all the countries the US has bombed, and breathe in the mixture of blown chemical factories, burning tires, depleted Uranium dust, and destroyed water supplies, and know what REAL sanitation hazards are like.

I'm assuming you've gone to all those countries yourself & done all those things, otherwise you wouldn't tell other people they should do them, right? But, waitaminnut... only a very rich person could travel to all those places & gain access to all that. Not to mention the bodyguards you must have taken to have come back to tell us about it. Then there's the medical treatments afterwards from such horrid conditions. Hmmm. Which means... you must be... let me work this out... one of the 1%!?!

I'm so confused. Are the 1%ers protesting themselves now? Or are you a plant, sent by the 1% to infiltrate? I'm not falling for your money-grubbing lies, you aristocratic demon-spawn!

 

[Tee Kay]

Hmm, it appears that I may have hurt your feelings. I do apologise.

Nevertheless, I stand by my points. OWS as it is at the moment (ie disorganised, or "underdeveloped level of organisation" as Traitorfish puts it) is already quite vulnerable to mass media attacks. All it takes is a few bad apples to spoil the party. And in an Information Society, unfortunately, those who shout first and loudest, win. Damage control doesn't work anymore, because any effort in that particular area is bound to be quickly buried under the latest headlines.

It does take orga... sorry, a certain level of organisation to take on the media moguls, and this is what OWS people should collectively aim for if the movement is to escape being Just Another Ultimately Inconsequential Youth Unrest.