#Occupythisthread

[StrangeSox]

There is only no real organization when it suits them as in to avoid responsibility.

 

Explain how they are responsible for violent police actions.

[StrangeSox]

And just for reference's sake, it has been a long time since I bought the whole "disorganized" thing. The purple shirts down their organizing traffic and protesters like they did during the May Day rally in 06 kinda killed that idea.

 

http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?s=...t&p=2496189

 

There is loose organization at the local level and some national discussion, but there is no overarching structure to this thing.

[StrangeSox]

 

[bmags]

They are f***ing all of this up. They need more centralization. They've made this about police vs. protestors now, which is not the fight they should be having. Just let winter kill it off.

[southsider2k5]

They are f***ing all of this up. They need more centralization. They've made this about police vs. protestors now, which is not the fight they should be having. Just let winter kill it off.

 

In a nutshell, this is why I don't buy the idea that police everywhere are just randomly deciding to beat the crap out of these people to try to kill the movement. It was already fading from the headlines. The best way to kill the movement would have just been to do nothing, and they know that.

[StrangeSox]

They are f***ing all of this up. They need more centralization. They've made this about police vs. protestors now, which is not the fight they should be having. Just let winter kill it off.

 

It can be related back to the same central theme of power vs. powerless and the use of the state to protect privilege. But it does obscure the central wealth and income inequality message.

 

I'll crib this from another board:

 

it's kinda depressing to think that the whole point of civil disobedience is to force the question of whether the law being broken is worth the brutality used to enforce it and people seem really comfortable with the assumption that cops have no moral obligation to not abuse citizens, citizens have a moral obligation to just do whatever they want or they're breaking the law and f*** you.

Edited November 21, 2011 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

In a nutshell, this is why I don't buy the idea that police everywhere are just randomly deciding to beat the crap out of these people to try to kill the movement.

 

I don't attribute that motivation to their actions. I attribute it to an authoritarian mindset that doesn't like when people don't follow their exact orders. This isn't unique to #ows protests or even protests in general, and the rationalizations in favor of it show that. To clarify further, the police brutality being witnessed is no an anti-#ows phenomenon or necessarily a reaction to their message or politics. It is independent from a left-vs-right framework. It would be equally abhorrent if applied to anti-abortion protesters barricading a clinic door.

 

Give me a plausible scenario where there's a national organization that is successful in getting police to beat or spray peaceful protesters in order to garner sympathy. What are they doing to get the police to respond with disproportionate violence, and how are they being so effective at it?

Edited November 21, 2011 by StrangeSox

[southsider2k5]

I don't attribute that motivation to their actions. I attribute it to an authoritarian mindset that doesn't like when people don't follow their exact orders. This isn't unique to #ows protests or even protests in general, and the rationalizations in favor of it show that.

 

Give me a plausible scenario where there's a national organization that is successful in getting police to beat or spray peaceful protesters in order to garner sympathy. What are they doing to get the police to respond with disproportionate violence, and how are they being so effective at it?

 

My argument has been all along that you are watching it.

[bmags]

It can be related back to the same central theme of power vs. powerless and the use of the state to protect privilege. But it does obscure the central wealth and income inequality message.

 

It will also kill any goodwill you have from the country. I do believe police privilege is a discussion to have, but don't ruin your occupy message taking that on. It's too muddled. I went to OWS chi twice, even made a sign, but was really hoping that some sort of political organizing would result from it. But it's just run by kids who for the first time feel like they are "connecting" and s***. The heart of this was the tumblr...we literally needed a powerful and charismatic person to help push it. It's funny, in a way, the conservative tea party protests for decentralizing big government were much better at centralizing their power, then the OWS movement which started off so promising getting union and community participation, only to not make that next step. It sucks. Their emotional argument was 100% correct, but they were so scared of alienating anyone they never allowed the intellectual argument it needed. And so may smart people were there to make it.

[bmags]

My argument has been all along that you are watching it.

 

I don't disagree with you on the blocking intersections and bridge marches, but the actual camp break ups i don't think was meant for this.

[StrangeSox]

My argument has been all along that you are watching it.

 

You say that they are deliberately "enticing" these brutal police responses that are ostensibly unprovoked and unwarranted. I'm asking for some sort of plausible mechanism for that to actually happen, not a plausible motivation for #ows.

[southsider2k5]

I don't disagree with you on the blocking intersections and bridge marches, but the actual camp break ups i don't think was meant for this.

 

I'm sure they didn't plan on fading from the headlines so fast either.

[southsider2k5]

You say that they are deliberately "enticing" these brutal police responses that are ostensibly unprovoked and unwarranted. I'm asking for some sort of plausible mechanism for that to actually happen, not a plausible motivation for #ows.

 

Like in Oakland where cops were getting rocks and bottles thrown at them?

[StrangeSox]

It will also kill any goodwill you have from the country. I do believe police privilege is a discussion to have, but don't ruin your occupy message taking that on. It's too muddled.

 

Contrary to ss2k5, I don't think they are intentionally getting themselves beat and sprayed. They didn't highlight abusive authority--the police did by carrying out these actions.

[StrangeSox]

Like in Oakland where cops were getting rocks and bottles thrown at them?

 

That is a potential justification for one night in Oakland, though AFAIK the only source for those claims is the Oakland PD.

 

I'm asking about the scenarios we've seen recently, where otherwise peaceful protesters suddenly start getting beaten or sprayed by officers for the simple act of not following the officers' orders.

 

I'll also go back to the action that really started getting the movement attention, and that was the completely unprovoked pepper-spraying of a protester by an NYPD lieutenant back in September. You don't need big conspiracies by the victims of police brutality in order to explain the brutality.

Edited November 21, 2011 by StrangeSox

[southsider2k5]

That is a potential justification for one night in Oakland, though AFAIK the only source for those claims is the Oakland PD.

 

I'm asking about the scenarios we've seen recently, where otherwise peaceful protesters suddenly start getting beaten or sprayed by officers for the simple act of not following the officers' orders.

 

I honestly doubt that is the whole story.

[bmags]

Contrary to ss2k5, I don't think they are intentionally getting themselves beat and sprayed. They didn't highlight abusive authority--the police did by carrying out these actions.

 

I think they are, but beside that, they are holding up police brutality as their rally points, not the occupy original message.

[StrangeSox]

I honestly doubt that is the whole story.

 

Why?

 

And, again, what possible actions could justify what that officer did to a group of people sitting on a sidewalk? Was he so threatened that, even after he casually stepped over them, he had to spray them? Repeatedly? I guess I should clarify that I'm not saying that practices of civil disobedience don't come with expectations of legal consequences; if you peacefully defy police orders to move, you should expect to be arrested. What you shouldn't expect is to be beaten or sprayed in the face.

 

Why is it hard to recognize and criticize authoritarian anti-democratic abuses while still strongly and adamantly disagreeing with the message of a movement?

Edited November 21, 2011 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

I think they are, but beside that, they are holding up police brutality as their rally points, not the occupy original message.

 

Well they are doing it intentionally insomuch as it is an unfortunately expected response to peaceful protests.

[southsider2k5]

Why?

 

And, again, what possible actions could justify what that officer did to a group of people sitting on a sidewalk? Was he so threatened that, even after he casually stepped over them, he had to spray them? Repeatedly?

 

Why is it hard to recognize and criticize authoritarian anti-democratic abuses while still strongly and adamantly disagreeing with the message of a movement?

 

This doesn't happen for absolutely no reason.

[southsider2k5]

I think they are, but beside that, they are holding up police brutality as their rally points, not the occupy original message.

 

This gets attention. The old message wasn't working anymore. Hence the move to the illegal stuff for OWS.

[StrangeSox]

This doesn't happen for absolutely no reason.

 

Yes, police brutality does happen for no reason (on the part of the victim) and much too frequently. I don't know why you'd have this bizarre assumption that anyone who is a target of police action must have done something to deserve it.

[StrangeSox]

This gets attention. The old message wasn't working anymore. Hence the move to the illegal stuff for OWS.

 

Note that this "illegal stuff" is violating park ordinances for the most part and does not in any way justify violent police retaliation.

[southsider2k5]

Yes, police brutality does happen for no reason (on the part of the victim) and much too frequently. I don't know why you'd have this bizarre assumption that anyone who is a target of police action must have done something to deserve it.

 

The target itself doesn't need to be the reason the violence happens. And yes, I have no reason to believe that police just happen to walk up to a random group of people and begin assaulting them for no reason at all. I have been at plenty of protests, very large, and very small, and have never seen the police react violently. Heck, even at times where people probably deserved a baton upside the head, they haven't gotten it.

[StrangeSox]

The target itself doesn't need to be the reason the violence happens. And yes, I have no reason to believe that police just happen to walk up to a random group of people and begin assaulting them for no reason at all. I have been at plenty of protests, very large, and very small, and have never seen the police react violently. Heck, even at times where people probably deserved a baton upside the head, they haven't gotten it.

 

What possible justification could there be for the actions of that officer at UC Davis? I'm assuming you've watched the video; saw him casually step over the students; pull his canister from his belt and show it to the crowd, and then slowly walk up and down the line, spraying them all directly in the face. How on earth can you actually justify that sort of action?

 

This also wasn't a random group of people but a group of protesters who were disobeying his orders. That doesn't sit well with authoritarian types who are authorized to use force.

Edited November 21, 2011 by StrangeSox