With the horizontal structure of Occupy, will it mean less or more chances of a bad actor

[applegrove]

messing with the message. We saw a few weeks ago that a few black bloc could mess up the whole message of Occupy (by throwing condoms). Each occupy group is suppose to creatively come up with ways to fight for the 99%. This creativity means more freedom. Freedom, and a non hierarchichal structure, means bad actors could go in and take over a single Occupy group for a period of time long enough to do damage. Should other Occupy groups have a means of calling out a rogue group? Should they?

[mdmc]

1. occupy is protest

So do your own thing and let the flag burners do theirs

[99th_Monkey]

2. It depends on whether violence (including property destruction) is being forced

onto everyone else present, who came there (perhaps with children or in a wheelchair) expecting the
peaceful protest to be .. well .. peaceful and to NOT involve this kind of counter-productive and
provocative behavior from fellow demonstrators.

I think serious discussions are underway currently in most local Occupies as to how to deal with this.
I even saw one report where bamboo polls were to be used to corral BB offenders and hand them
over to police in order to contain the violent behavior, NOT give police an excuse to unleash violence
on peaceful protesters and to maintain a semblance of safety for unsuspecting vulnerable protesters.

Not saying I would necessarily support that, but it is being considered.

[applegrove]

3. I agree they should isolate BB and hand them over to the Police. In Toronto people were

told to start yelling "black bloc" and pointing if they saw anybody pull a bandana over their mouth.

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. I disagree. This is red-baiting hysteria -- the idea of using bamboo poles (<sp) to corral

Last edited Thu Feb 23, 2012, 04:11 AM - Edit history (3)

fellow demonstrators because of their beliefs or turn them over to the police for what they are wearing frightens and disturbs me.

Time's Person of the Year wore a bandanna.

I don't think people understand the roots of Occupy. It's not about property destruction, it's also not about this red-baiting, anti-leftist hysteria.

People don't seem to understand how to tolerate and overcome differences among violent opponents any more. They didn't do it in the civil rights movement by collaborating with the police.

And most asinine of all are the protestors (on edit -- not referring to you, I apologize -- referring to several weeks back) who call on people to physically unmask people, instigating violence against supposed BBs whom they KNOW (and say in their messages) are undercover cops.

The idea of yelling "bb" at people for wearing anon masks is next, I suppose.

[99th_Monkey]

6. Please

Cease and desist from your "anti-anti-Leftist" rant, as I am experiencing it as friendly fire.

1) My moniker on Facebook IS the Time magazine cover you reference (with bandana).

2) I did NOT say "this idea" involved turning people over to police who "wear a bandana or mask";
rather "the idea" is to not tolerate violence (including vandalism) at demonstrations billed and
intended to be peaceful and 100% non-violent, and if necessary to turn BBloc and/or agent
provocateurs over to police, to identify them, point them out, etc. the second they start with
the property damage, throwing bottles & bricks, etc.

3) "This idea" is NOT mine (which I already indicated) so please stop shooting at the messenger.
You are encouraged to direct your ire and outrage to the source of "this idea" here:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Occupy-the-Black-Bloc-Pres-by-Kirk-Oakes-120219-206.html

[Leopolds Ghost]

7. I apologize if I over-reacted, it's just that we don't experience all this stuff at my local Occupy.

Everyone from the anarchists to the faith groups to the mainstream political organization groups tries to stay in solidarity with the GA hereabouts, and we've gotten criticized by young and eager folks from NY for being "insufficiently confrontational" because of it.

I agree with you that pointless vandalism and such is cancer to the movement, and I'd go further and say that stuff like flag burning and other slogans go against the message Occupy is trying to put out, which is why Occupy relies on GAs (it's not just flag burning or vandalism, but things like moochers printing "Support Occupy -- donate money" and panhandling for personal gain, etc.) in short, Occupiers need to try to let the GA process correct for this stuff or else having GAs is pointless... if it wasn't consensed on by any local GA, then don't use Occupy as a cover for actions that are not in solidarity with the Occupy message. Beyond that, it's a discussion over tactics... but in general repudiating provocateurs is sufficient, the media will not care how we responded if a brick is thrown, they will only report on the brick, because the media goal is to destroy the movement and they can always find or hire someone to do something that will upset TV-land.

[99th_Monkey]

9. We agree on pretty much everything.

Especially that this stuff gets discussed and clearly decided upon by local GAs and so everyone gets a voice in this discussion,
and to become a part of the solution.

No one in Occupy is stopping BB from conducting their own "actions", just don't try to force that on self-declared non-violent Occupations.

Thanks for taking the time for your thoughtful reply.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

10. I don't think the NYPD would aprove of protestors

carrying bamboo polls.

[zeemike]

4. I don't think it matters the structure

If agent provocateurs want to infiltrate and cause trouble they can and will no matter what the structure...and I think history will show that in every non violent movement it has happened.
The important thing is being aware of it and what you do about it.

[99th_Monkey]

8. The structure may not matter to you.

but it does to me. And I think actually the OP has a valid point, about the horizontal being a bit more vulnerable to infiltration than hierarchical.

Never-the-less, I think on-balance Occupy should stay with the horizontal approach; because it's more inclusive and user-friendly, more love-based
rather than fear and suspicion based, etc.

I see no reason -- if a given GA decides on this course of action -- why Occupy demonstrators who are determined to conduct a 100% NON-violent
march or demonstration should not be able to do so without random intruders who are intent on turning the event into a mockery of non-violence.
Demonstrators have every right as agreed to be vigilant and on the look-out for people who insist on vandalizing property at marches, throwing
bottles at police, or doing anything that is deliberately turning energy in a direction towards more violence i.e. giving Police ample reasons to beat-up,
tear-gas, arrest otherwise totally peaceful protesters ... I see no reason why such disrupters should not be turned over to police by their fellow
demonstrators.

It's a very ugly choice either way: it's just that this way at least holds out a slim chance that Occupy just might pull off actually BEING who we say
we are publicly ... and make that plain as day to EVERYONE who pays a whit of attention to actual facts .. and therefore succeeding at what we are
attempting to do.

[zeemike]

11. And they need to be vigilant

Because the police and other people who want to keep change from happening have a great advantage...they know all the low life people and they will sick them on you..and be there with cameras to capture the results to show on fox news.
They have the ability to control the news and manufacture it if necessary.
The advantage Occupy has is the non hierarchical structure which appeals to the young and idealist who are the creative and thoughtful ones in our society,,,and that is where they can be successful....I think Mic check is a prime example of that creativity

[patrice]

17. Agreed! Vigilance + to KNOW one another for REAL.

[Vincardog]

14. What should Occupy members do? I believe that they should distance themselves physically

from anyone they see as violent. Let the (BB)=Bad actors go about their mischief and stand away from them pointing in their direction when the "MAN" comes asking "Who did that?"

[patrice]

15. That was the jist of what i said last weekend in OccupyKochTown ...

Awareness, in order to create respect for ALL occupiers' and supporting activists' (such as Sierra Club's) freedom to make THEIR OWN CHOICES about whatever happens, and creative awareness in "what you do about it" so that the message TTE "We are free autonomous individuals acting together to do WHATEVER IS NECESSARY to support OUR OWN collectively held objectives" is un-mistakable.

It happens that part of what worked for OccupyWichita et al and the Sierrans was the presence of a wild-card in our midst, a free-poet with OccupyKU who spontaneously began to riff on tree-money/people's-script, after dialogue between OccupyKochTown and counter-protesters in front of Koch HQ had gone on for a while and had progressed to a point at which things such as money, work, and "value" were under consideration in the discussion.

The free poet presented with a large enough presence, DRAMATIC appearance, and large vocal projection, that he dominated and broke to a certain extent the impromptu GA that was occurring between Occupy and counter-protesters. He brought a relatively large and INTERESTING element of anarchy to what was going on, not out of control, but also CLEARLY not under the control of the occupier who was facilitating that impromptu GA. What was also interesting and powerful about this was that the free poet WAS riffing about money, tree money, and after clearly establishing his self-chosen role in events at that point, he and the facilitating occupier spontaneously switched roles again, the GA continued briefly and then adjourned and then was followed by occupiers who chose to do so linking arms and standing at the police-barricade to people's mic their intentions to stay committed and to return to Koch HQ. They also repeatedly people's miced their solidarity with the police as workers and invited them to occupy with them wherever, which is to me another element of CLEARLY asserting the occupation's autonomy vs. TPB.

[starroute]

12. I would argue that violence itself is implicitly hierarchical

Any system that depends on force and coercion is a system of hierarchy. But any attempt to use force to overthrow that system already has the assumptions of hierarchy built into it -- which is one reason why violent revolutions tend to go sour.

Horizontalism is based on everybody negotiating together to get on the same page. Not marching in lockstep, but working in an ecological manner where every part is mutually supportive.

If the occupiers really believe in horizontalism -- and don't either give way to the allure of charismatic would-be leaders or allow loose cannons under the banner of "diversity of tactics" -- they've got a really strong basis for staying together and on message.

[patrice]

16. I agree strongly with what you are saying here. I also have a footnote derived from some observation

"Not marching in lockstep, but working in an ecological manner where every part is mutually supportive."

As you observe, horizontalism is not a purpose unto itself. It's function is to support the mutual development of individual authenticity. We need authentically autonomous, fully developed, individuals who can work together to figure things out with other fully developed individuals. Practically speaking this amounts to how, though the GA process IS fundamentally useful to everyone, it should not be mechanical and, thus, become oppressive. It should be intimately and fully engaged in the individuals AND the group.

A talented and very young facilitator out of the Tulsa Occupy and I had this conversation and what he said amounted to freeing the process APPROPRIATELY from itself with valid forms of verticality that, because of their horizontal validity, i.e. relationship to horizontal events, are really more like effective punctuation that integrates aspects of the horizontality and then releases that verticality to let the group own it or not as it decides.

I like this idea, because it says that while we are freeing ourselves to be horizontal, horizontality also will NOT be the oppressor; we ARE free to be validly/honestly vertical too; to be either, both or neither is to be free and that is constructive because tasks then become to be more about individual honesty and, hence, validity, and thus also, about RELATIONSHIPS, rather than preconceived ideologies/power-struggles.

A couple of the Tulsa occupiers mentioned that they had really awesome GA facilitation trainings, so I encouraged them to offer their services to other Occupies. I hope their young ladies will also step forward to be part of this if they do.

[patrice]

13. I participated in a GA for OccupyKochTown in which this question was a high priority when the

de facto coalition of Occupies and Sierra Club were preparing to visit Koch HQ.

Sierra Club worked for and with the Occupy and they were concerned about their ability to function, at other times when they are not with OccupyWichita, educating on pipeline issues within their community.

Young, more radical, Occupies out of Oklahoma were there and they were concerned about their autonomy over their own message in order to identify HOW and when the SPECIFIC NATURE of the DIFFERENCE between the Occupy movement and TPB forms of power IS the message.

Sierrans participating in the GA expressed honor for the necessity of non-violent peaceful demonstrations and also their concerns for the likely possibility of disrupters within the movement who can damage the Occopiers' intended message.

Other occupiers validated the importance of an authentic counter to TPB, observed that the Oklahoma occupies MUST make their OWN decisions about ANY action in which they participate, and the fact that if we don't start trusting one another we will never trust one another.

From that point forward the GA discussion became a focus on the logistics of proceeding to Koch HQ, a few talking points that should be communicated, how the speaking would proceed from within the Occupy, and who the counter-demonstraters would be when we arrived KHQ.