The Psychology, Tactics,Politics of Confrontation

"Resistance" and "confrontation" has come to occupy an increasingly prominent position in some elements strategy and tactics of the occupy movement. Resistance and confrontation in this context refer to forms of direct action as deliberate distruption of or interference with normal operations of persons or institutions by large mass's of persons; deliberate violation of authoritative orders to disperse; forceful retaliation against police use of batons, chemicals or other force; the use of barricades or "mobile" tactics to prevent, delay or complicate police efforts to disperse a crowd; the use of ridicule, rudeness, obscenity, and other forms of uncivil speech, behavior to shock, embarass, or defy authorities; refusal to comply with orders or to accept authority demands or requests as legitimate.
Doubtless some factions of demonstrators hope and push for physical confrontation w/police. However, there is little impression that such a hope is widespread and often met with resistance by other demonstrators. Further, there is little evidence that many are willing (much less able) to disrupt functioning, attack persons or go on rampage to destroy property, notwithstanding city parks. But they are willing to engage in symbolic protest - to symbolically throw their bodies on the machine. This leads to showdowns/standoffs with police and then defensive response or violence from either side and then some retaliation by some demonstrators. Echoes of classic "Self-Fulfilling Prophecy."
Many observers who express sympathy for many of the movements objectives (which at the moment are vague at most) always find the turn toward confrontation, disruption and incivility highly irrational and self-destructive. Although one can easily empathise with and understand the frustration and whats at state which contributes to passion and extreme militancy the observation is that the strategy of confrontation generally serves to only defeat the aims of the movement, alienates them from many useful and powerful allies, has on every occasion caused frictiofighting and conflict within demonstrators own ranks. Therefore the radicalized ought to exercise caution if sincerely wishing to achieve their political and social ends. It has been observed, and historically, that confrontation tactics accomplish little more than the arousal of popular hostility, thus fueling the fires of right-wing demogoguery and increasing likely hood of national govt repression.
It could be argued that the effect of present movement is to create disorder, intensify polarization, increase the strength of the far-right, and weakens/undermines civil liberties even further. The question thus arises then; is this the results desired by the movement ??