Seven: Confrontation

Communique D-4 cont.

The following is an attempt to articulate the present case or arguments for confrontation tactics as some have offered it to this observer.

1) Confrontation and militancy are methods of arousing moderates to action. The creation of turmoil and disorder can stimulate otherwise quiescent grps to take more forceful action in their own way[s].

2) Confrontation and militancy can educate the public. Direct action is not intended to win particular reforms or to influence decision-makers, but rather to bring out a repressive response from authorities. When confrontation brings violent official response, uncommitted elements of public can see the alleged "true nature of the system." Confrontation, therefore, is a means of "political education."

3) Confrontation, militancy and resistance are ways to prepare young radicals for the possibility of greater repression. If a movement seriously threatens power of political authorities, efforts to repress through police state measures are inevitable.

4) Combative behavior with respect to the police and other authorities, although possibly alienating "respectable" adults, has the opposite effect on the movements relationships with student and non-student youth. Militant street actions attract a heterogeneous grp of non student youth participants who have their own sources of alienation from middle-class society and its institutions.

5) The experience of resistance and street combat may have a liberating effect on young middle-class radicals. Militant confrontation gives resisters the experience of physically opposing institutional power, and it may force students or disfranchised youth to choose between "respectable" intellectual radicalism, and serious commitment to revolution, violent or otherwise.

6) The political potency of "backlash" is usually exaggerated. Those who point to the possibility of repression as a reaction to confrontation tactics merely wish to compromise demands and principles and dilute radicalism.

It is difficult to assess and know just how many participants in such actions share these perspectives; many rank and file participants may engage in militant or violent action for more simple and direct reasons: they have been seemingly provoked to anger, or they may feel moral outrage. To a large extent, acceptance of the moral or practical validity of these arguments depends on ones view of the nature of American society and govt. and institution. Its like a negative faith in the repressive and illiberal character or American institutions (if actually perceived as 'repressive' and illiberal). The bottom line is this is a new age and era and police on the protest front lines ARE ALSO the 99% and are not the enemy but of the relatively poor working middle-class and simply want to get home to families at end of the day. Could you even begin to imagine of these riot police being so sympathetic to the cause and purpose that they would actually lay down their clubs and refuse orders to take brutal action against demonstrators. Well insults and combat sure won't win them to the side of liberation. But in the end only the demonstrators will control the course of events through whatever their commitment to whatever style, tactics and strategy among a unified movement will determine the ultimate outcome of events and its effectiveness in accomplishing whatever the goal.

Ideas from MoErika

I believe the importance of consistency is huge. Being a presence in the public eye is more than just awareness and news media, it's creating and building hope in people that something is changing, that momentum is building. Most people that have even slight inclination to open up their minds to the idea that the government and corporations and the powers that be (same same same) have not been doing things in their best interests ARE THE BIGGEST POPULATION to be reached. Those people, who go to work every day, who hope every year for a raise from their ho-hum job, whothink they can do nothing more, who want to believe that all of civilization is just proceeding along the way it should and in their best interests, those people need consistent visual awareness. They need that chisel put to their stone built wall of 'how it is' every day. Because little by little, fact by fact, and with the truth so readily available (BUT ONLY FOR THOSE WHO KNOW TO SEARCH), is it easy to see the unjustices that have been built into our government.

Now, does that mean every day at rush hour in different business districts, standing with signs at busy intersections? Maybe.

But to me, that consistent presence can mean educating while doing. Organizing community outreach events under the blatant name of the Occupy movement (or whatever it shall be named). This can be soup kitchen work, staff support at a local fun-run, working with kids, parents and teachers at afterschool programs, helping to build community gardens.

There is no better way to have meaningful conversations than while completing a common task or goal. People you are working with respect you more when you both have your hands in the dirt, when they see that you are just a human trying to do the right things, when they can relate to you on a personal level...then and only then can people really accept what you're saying and believe you! (THese are ideas i stressed to occupations in the New England area and ALSO why i love physical therapy work, it allows for these conversations to transpire quite normally and easily)

When Occupy can occupy the halls of schools, the gardens of the city, the soup kitchens, and the general public park clean ups, then they will not only be in a better light in the public eye, but also will be contributing to improving the society to be what they are fighting for...at least i THINK that's part of what they're fighting for ;)

These steps are just the beginning. But when the people who want to change the government and create fairness are ALSO the people who you trust and respect as your neighbors, friends, and community members...the people you know personally and really feel would only fight for things in the community's best interests...then their will be support. People will back the movement the way they stand up for their neighbors (or used to).

This inevitably builds numbers as well as support, through conversation instead of yelling and education instead of anger. The place for violence will come, but i don't think the numbers are yet there and i don't think the AMercian people at large will get angry enough about some hippy protesters getting squashed or taken to prison, besides the more that go to jail, the better our prison-based economy ;P

Number Six

In researching i found a common thread with major demonstrations of 60's-70's and with this "occupy" movement thang and their action of occupying parks. In Chicago 68, Berkeley Student Revolt(Free Speech Movement)1964 - Berkeley again w Student Strike in 69, May Day 71 in DC, anti war demon NYC April 67, March on Pentagon 67,--- in every case confrontation and violent action/response only began or really occurred when police enforced city ordinances of park closure times and when police moved to sweep and clear the parks. We know the historical and constitutional tradition of our parks,city sqrs as place to exercise rights, to rally,demonstrate,etc., but in those days there weren't laws/ordin regulating hrs of these public spaces for forum. At Berkeley 64 the issue was a bit more complex. The immediate cause of Student Revolt and birth of Free Speech Movement was an announcement by campus officials that a 26ft strip of land at the entrance of the campus previously thought to belong to city of Berkeley, was actually property of the university and subject, therefore, to existing university regulations dealing with political activity. This historic strip of land spawned a National Movement and became,and still is named "Peoples Park." The only exception to park closure rule i found not enforced was the Poor Peoples March to DC led by all the leaders, Martin L. King, Ralph Abernathy, even Stokely Carmichael. The city leaders decided they could never contain such crowd of hundreds of thousands so they were allowed to overnight camp on the pond parks before the Wash Monument where King gave the hair raising (at least on my arms) "I Have A Dream" speech. All went well and after 2-3 days crowd dispersed and went their way. Obviously the present "Occupy" mov has drawn from this history, at least with respect to using then attempting to occupy the parks. They never allowed it in all the aforementioned events and enforced the closure/curfew hrs. Tensions built directly as result of the park closure police sweeps n enforcement which precipitated into violence on every occasion. The most obvious thing that jumps out at me now is how truly far we have come,and social control police as well. How long did Pdx, N.YC., Boston, Philadelphia, etc actually allow protesters to camp and remain in these parks granting them full right to express and voice grievance. Practically all went on for at least 30-45 days before officials said ok, we gotta get the mess cleaned up and allow our citizens to also use prks and get our cities movin again. And then, when even so doing the police used non-violent[depending on Resistance] minimal use of force to accomplish clearing,getting parks cleaned and repaired and reopened to public again. Now, i have my ideas of employed demonstrator tactics to abide by the curfew/closure hrs of the prks and yet maintain a 24/7 public presence to continue momentum of cause and movement BUT i want u to think out some creative tactics and strategies to work with officials,demonstrators,gen public to avoid violating prk use ordinances and yet be out there in public view with your demonstration as we all know the backlash of defying and resisting prk closures, both from police forces as well as potential sympathizers and of the gen public support (and/or loss thereof). If those truly determined to instigate/create/propagate/cause direct action which they knowingly will draw a police response no matter how minimal which of course will be offered as proof of govt gone mad, mad dog police, and need for violence to respond to the violence manipulation, then not "occupying" parks is the best way to avoid what u know will lead inevitably to confrontation. So the die hard radicals can occupy parks all they wish and let them battle with police while the majority of demonstrators comply with law and carry on-move forward with their movement. Let me hear some brain-storming ideas. With all my luvin entrails,...and Tulas 2 XXOO

Post Five: Leadership and Organization

Notes from the Underground

Communique' D-3

Determining future course of "Occupy" movement:

Impressions/Observations

The present concept being echoed by the various "occupy" movements of No "leadership", No "organizers," No "organization is baffling. This position of having no leadership,organizers (in traditional sense of authority, arbitrary decision making) etc as they publicly keep proclaiming, that "leaders" mean organization, organization means hierarchy and hierarchy is undemocratic may be what has this movement deadlocked, stalled in static unaccomplishment and what may be the major obstacle with respect to this "movement" moving forward, maintaining momemtum and gaining not only involvement, support of labor, religious grps,churches but also turning the 100% against not necessarily the voiced ideals but at least the tactics being employed by demonstrators. Where is the linking up of all these "occupy" movements/actions throughout the country with oneanother and a drive calling for National Mobilization and coordinated action ? It is as absent as a cohesive/coherent statement, list of demands and clarification of just what "occupy"'s goals,purpose and aims are. The idea of some how getting a political and social statement by camping out in city parks which are governed by city ordinances,curfews, closure times seems more like stubborn playful folly as opposed to having anything to do with countries economic collapse, restructuring of social, welfare, financial, political institutions.However, this non leadership, non organizer-organization ethos bears striking resemblence to the ethos,philosophy of the Students for Democratic Society (SDS) of the 60's and therefore begs the question of did/do and have these 16-25 yr old demonstrators seen in the mass majority of these demonstrations think up this ethos, philosophy out of the clear blue and out of their own educated thought process or is there some phantom behind this development? The SDS ethos and vision consisted of the following tenants of thought: 1) The establishment of a true democracy calls for/of individual participation governed by 2 central aims; a.) that the individual share in those social decisions determining quality and direction of his life; b.) that society be organized to encourage independance in men and provide a medium for their common participation; c) that true leadership in SDS ethos, must avoid imposing idea and values on the community/people/protestors, etc. If there was/is to be a transformation in values it had to come through personal relationships-community; d.) A 'leadership per se must exhibit great tolerance and no speaker silenced, no matter how irrelevent or repetitous. "Maintaining a dependancy on fixed leaders, who inevitably develop interests in maintaining the organization (or themselves) and lose touch w/the immediate aspirations of the rand and file." - Tom Hayden past SDS President (later married Jane Fonda). Clearly seen is this old SDS element within at least Pdx "occupy" movement with their "General Assembly" meetings, and speakers stating we have no leadership, iam not an organizer which i have heard repeatedly. Nonetheless, despite of or because of this for almost 2 months now these meetings have always ended with no uniform consensus, game plan, no active cohesiveness of people or action, no positive accomplishment other than a short "their at it again" clip on local evening news and at the end of the day/or meetings it all fades from the wks news like yesterdays garbage and the various 'grps' within the 'occupy' movement splinter off and go about acting independantly upon their own agenda whether nefarious, rational, constructive or destructive. This is no way to wage a war, or function as a movement. Of course todays youth 16-35 have no knowledge of the activism of the 60's, the Civil Rights Movement and its awesome, inspiring National Mobilization and organizing to bring about such paltry events as million man marches, May Day 1971 Wash DC, Poor Peoples March. The National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam, the "Yippie" party with Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin at the leadership helm, the militant Black Panther Party (Bobby Seal,Eldrige Cleaver, Huey Newton as the founders and leadership); SNCC(Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee-formed by Southern black University students in 1960(Robert Moses Parris,founder,President. Every such activist, militant grp throughout 60-70's had a very defined grp of strong leaders, spokespersons to guide and organize,organize,mobilize were the keys to success of these movements. The organizing and organizational skills developed by these movements and their leaders which included founding and funding dozens of inner city(urban) movement projects, workshops, created jobs for staffing their offices,operations throughout the country and shockingly,..without the use of computers,present social networking technology as these satanic machines hadn't even been invented or available yet. These leaders and organizing skills were vital and essential to maintaining momentum,funding for the movements and to pass on to each other whatever they had learned about demonstrations(success and failures), community organizing, the do's & dont's,the how and why of setting up campus chapters the tactics and theory, or non-theory, of their movements. U can still be non-theory, non-ideological but still have leadership and organizational structure with a vision/plan of direction, focus, purpose to accomplish whatever your goal. It takes knowledgable leadership and extreme organizing or the result will be hollow nothingness which is the present status of "occupy". While paying constant lip service to credos like "unity", "solidarity" it is obvious their meaning is not fully understood for unity,solidarity means cohesive unified action and purpose with coherent specific demands,reason, and offering of some SOLUTIONS ! This has yet to materialize as the anal fixation appears to be just finding a park to sleep in so we can keep the community irritated, unable to use their parks as well, cause worse city, management fiscal/budgetary crisis from unexpected city workers overtime pay,needless repair costs of restoring destroyed city parks. Perhaps the 'old' Left style of sound leadership, organize,organize,organize is overstated since these movements only brought about desegregation, long awaited civil rights for Black Americans, equal stutus for women (Womens Lib Movement), Student rights and active participation in university,college policy making, stopped a thing called the Vietnam War, rescinded and stopped something called Mandatory military draft system. Obviously no lessons here to be learned from the past so are we doomed to repeat such failures of the past ?? MoE call me when phone on line.

Post number Four:

Communique' D-2

"He who wages war in a country when he can avoid it is a criminal, just as he who fails to promote war which cannot be avoided." Jose Marti'

whether the "Occupy" movement can be defined as protest, demonstration, revolution, anarchist, violent-non violent matters little as violence is generally inevitable not necessarily from the schemes of individuals, but simply from the volatile mixture of elements (some of which are inhibited by lifestyles from adopting or attempting a range of tactics) that are drawn together at such events. In knowing this if you intend involvement one should prepare or come prepared for such possible confrontation-violence. Nonetheless, it is each individuals moral and social responsibility to attempt every effort to communicate,cooperate as much as possible with your rank and file AND soc control forces to at least minimize barbarity, bloodshed and injuries. Responsibility owed to all. This is not the 60's-70's soc control forces you saw, law enforcement in civil disobedience matters have a new age style,strategy,tactics and grace and no more want to hurt or b hurt as you. A pre coordinated plan for assisting,protecting of all those injured and evacuation of them should be discussed and worked out w/soc control forces when planning major event[s]. This is a new age, new era from the police brutality, and politics of the 50's-70's and highlights the progress made. The police tactics are now very refined, flexible and incorporating all lessons learned in the past with policies of "only minimal use of force and only whats necessary to enforce laws, protect safety of all and gain compliance to lawful orders.

The question is not really about whether to commit violence or if its justified but whether to expose oneself to it. The issue is not whether to b violent; it is whether non-violence shall be cooperative,Resistance or provocative. This is why and means, tactics of protesters will thus always diverge. The mood, demeanor,behavior of a collective grp/crowd is consistently unpredictable and can change at blink of an eye No venture into realm of moral question of tactics vs. means to political ends at this time. Even "Resistance" is misleading as it can have many effective forms whether violent or nonviolent, "noncompliance", "passive Resistance", (some examples are sit-ins,volunteer arrest while remaining limp and passive) are a few concepts. My experiences and observation impressions have been that in most cases there seems to be built-in limitation on the possibilities for effective movement initiated violence. Unfortunately at this time it appears American society is simply unready for revolutionary bloodshed. However, by all definition the "Occupy" movement IS a Revolution in that the voiced demands are for a transformation of social structures,institutions,politics and regimes, values,morals and ethics. The logic flows that to succeed at any such goals also calls for a profound, radical, and overturning transformation of ALL men, of their consciousness, ways, lifestyle, values, habits, and of their social relationships. Che Guevara called such transformation the "New Man". PS Tula 12lbs

Number Threeee: Ideas on Appropriate Activity and Important Cohorts

Notes frm Underground: Communique' D-1

MoE: Bad Move - the latest here has been the call to all Pacific NW activists to unite and shut down all Ports(Transp hubs,docks,railway,trucking). How insane,wheres their sense of history? the 1st tactical n strategic mistake of the "Occupy" thing was to fail from the very beginning,during and after to seek and gain support of All Labor orgs,unions or after movement gained some degree of momentum. Catastrophic ! You cant carry on any broad, or mass social movement without support of and labour being on board. Their power, resources, $$ are infinestible. Only they have power to shut down ports,railways,truckers and all aspects of our economy which is why govt always fears them so. These 18-24yr demon cant do what labor can nor should the basically are saying is F U labor and unions and to all the proletariat,blue collar, hard working truckers,railway wrkrs, longshoreman, dock wrks, shipping and freight workers who all are in the 99% cause they sho dont make no qrt a million a yr. and trying to work to feed their familites, pay utilities, mortgage,food,etc. While yelling they have no jobs, how long do they think a job will come when their very proposed actions will only backlash into a further downward spiral of an economy teetering precariously on the precipice of collapse?!! You cant make such vital and potential allies into enemies and the enemy. What backlash may result is the majority working 99% may be the very forces that move against you and initiating violence throwing themselves against ur front line so their trucks,trains,ships of goods can get to the Amer public, keep our economy movin without ur disruption causing them lost wages,lost time. This idea within the movement here is aiming its arrows at the wrong target and wrong rung of the economic ladder. Further, the logistics of operating in these spacious open Port entry pts with all the heavy traffic is suicide. Forces can entirely move unhindered in such open spaces and can completely encircle,contain, disperse ur minions so effortlessly as with having unobstructed aerial surveillance. Backlash also in that Govt. can perceive it as an anarchist attack on the very life-line and blood of our nations economy thus Fed. Troops, Nat. Guard can and may be activated and launched in force against this thrust at the nations jugular.Thats how u can end up getting students shot dead. Can also backlash in creating worse economic conditions by way of enemy corporations increasing prices on everything whether under the guise of disruption caused by the demonstrators which all in turn lead to the factual/actual majority of Amer just trying to make will rise up against you as well. This idea sounds suspiciously Anarchist in origin and propagated by them most likely. Any Marxist and Left org or grp has its roots in LABOUR/Labor and most social change movements were led,originated or flowed from the workers breaking the chains of bondage that held them,----the forces of organized labor. Look discernably for the next Communique'

Post Two: Still Trying to Catch Up

Working on some more written notes and will b forwarding some dialogue ur way. Rather sad and disappointing how "Occupy" is already yesterdays news for the most part and a mere indiscernable footnote. It must be revived and continue forward, urge organizing, leadership, ur own media campaign, how to raise $$ to continue, and finance a more powerful-effective movement. More on all these issues soon.