Two perspectives on the recent activist movement
Dan Hanson
In the past week, a broad coalition of left-wing activist groups has staged a major demonstration in New York known as “Occupy Wall Street.” The “occupation,” which has actually taken place in nearby Zucotti Park due to the police blockade of Wall Street itself, has the goal of producing some sort of action against America’s corrupt finance system.
This action, however, has been less than constructive, and there are three major lessons that activists should learn from this event.
The critical flaw of the Wall Street Occupation has been its lack of focus, the same problem that seems to plague every left-wing demonstration. Opponents of the death penalty, the occupation of Palestine, and the embargo on Cuba, to name just a few, are all making their voices heard on Zucotti park. I agree with these issues and that they are interconnected under our capitalist system, but why can’t we pick a demand and stick with it?
The problem is we have no idea what that demand is. The coalition has decided to make that up as they go along by daily democratic assemblies in the park.
While it’s heartening to see a movement committed to democracy, it’s obvious that this protest needs to be more organized. This shows another problem with the culture of left-wing activist tourism: it’s not the working class who is able to skip work for days at a time and hang out at a park to complain about the income of bankers and sit in drum circles.
For a movement to decide its demands democratically, let the democratic institution be available to those it is representing in a controlled and coherent way, not just the privileged, not just anyone who happens to be passing by looking for an afternoon diversion. As Saul Alinsky wrote, “the price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” So far, Occupy Wall Street has created no alternative.
The suggestions for the movement’s demands have ranged from the reinstatement of the estate tax to the nationalization of the banking industry. Let’s say they decide on anything along this spectrum. Now, how exactly are they going to get this done?
Like all protest movements, “Occupy Wall Street” must find a way to convert sentiment into change. Short of an all-out revolution, which it pains me to say has no chance of happening in the near future, activism must translate into legislation of some sort. The campaign has already appealed to left political organizations. Now they must court legislators to endorse whatever it is they’re fighting for. A movement cannot just seek out the white-people-with-dreadlocks crowd, but media, politicians and especially labor unions.
Hopefully, Occupy Wall Street will get its act together and transform into a functional movement that will influence American finance and politics permanently. It just needs to abandon the more frivolous pretenses of activist culture and become something serious soon — before the crowds in Zucotti park go home.
Eric Batke
As you are probably aware, on Sept. 17 protesters filed into lower Manhattan in an attempt to “occupy Wall Street.” While I respect the message of this protest, I’ve found the whole conflict to be poorly executed and amateurish. Despite this, the movement stands to gain a completely new level of exposure due to recent rash and intolerable actions of members of the NYPD.
Multiple reports of police aggression and brutality towards protesters have risen to the forefront of what was a mostly peaceful and non-confrontational experiment. These allegations, accompanied by damning video footage, can be viewed at occupywallst.org. What is particularly concerning about these reports is that they all seem to be against white-collar, senior officers. The video evidence also displays illegal actions being taken exclusively by the same white-collar policemen.
But there’s good to be found in this otherwise disturbing series of events. On Sept. 26, reports began circulating that over 100 blue-collar police officers refused to come to work that morning in a show of solidarity with the protesters. This development reinforces the class tensions that are behind the protests in the first place and brings up questions about who exactly is in command of the white-collar officers.
With this massive “defense” of Wall Street and the rift between high- and low-ranking officers, is it too contrived to say that, willingly or not, the police force is being used to protect capital and power rather than human dignity? I don’t think it is.
I understand that a protest can harbor a hostile environment and bring tensions to the forefront between police and activists. The officers have every right to protect themselves and to keep the protest from escalating beyond peaceful boundaries, and they have the obligation to uphold the law. However, there is no excuse for a police officer like Anthony Bologna using pepper spray on a crowd of innocent and helpless women who were already restrained. In a country where the right to peaceful demonstration is paramount to our idea of freedom, these actions constitute “police-state” far more than “keeping the peace.” Police officers are capable of great beneficence to our civil society, but as the civil rights movement has shown us, they are more likely to be the enemies of social progress than its supporters.
What is far more puzzling to me is how officers like these seem to think they are above the law in committing such actions. We live in an age where nearly every imaginable electronic device can be specifically programmed to discreetly videotape the police; how many internet scandals must there be before behavior like this is considered unacceptable by those on the force? More importantly, how much longer can this keep happening before we, the people, realize that the police are not on our side?
The funny part is that disturbing events like this have a way of increasing media coverage and shifting public perspective. For a movement like Occupy Wall Street, police aggression in the face of peaceful protest is the best possible publicity. While a large majority of the American people will probably never allow themselves to realize Wall Street’s role in the world’s economic crisis, the mistreatment of protesters will attract the eyes of the White House, which is the ultimate goal of the movement.
Eric Batke is a Senior Staff Writer for the Voice. He can be reached for comment at EBatke12@wooster.edu
As you are probably aware, on Sept. 17 protesters filed into lower Manhattan in an attempt to “occupy Wall Street.” While I respect the message of this protest, I’ve found the whole conflict to be poorly executed and amateurish. Despite this, the movement stands to gain a completely new level of exposure due to recent rash and intolerable actions of members of the NYPD.
Multiple reports of police aggression and brutality towards protesters have risen to the forefront of what was a mostly peaceful and non-confrontational experiment. These allegations, accompanied by damning video footage, can be viewed at occupywallst.org. What is particularly concerning about these reports is that they all seem to be against white-collar, senior officers. The video evidence also displays illegal actions being taken exclusively by the same white-collar policemen.
But there’s good to be found in this otherwise disturbing series of events. On Sept. 26, reports began circulating that over 100 blue-collar police officers refused to come to work that morning in a show of solidarity with the protesters. This development reinforces the class tensions that are behind the protests in the first place and brings up questions about who exactly is in command of the white-collar officers.
With this massive “defense” of Wall Street and the rift between high- and low-ranking officers, is it too contrived to say that, willingly or not, the police force is being used to protect capital and power rather than human dignity? I don’t think it is.
I understand that a protest can harbor a hostile environment and bring tensions to the forefront between police and activists. The officers have every right to protect themselves and to keep the protest from escalating beyond peaceful boundaries, and they have the obligation to uphold the law. However, there is no excuse for a police officer like Anthony Bologna using pepper spray on a crowd of innocent and helpless women who were already restrained. In a country where the right to peaceful demonstration is paramount to our idea of freedom, these actions constitute “police-state” far more than “keeping the peace.” Police officers are capable of great beneficence to our civil society, but as the civil rights movement has shown us, they are more likely to be the enemies of social progress than its supporters.
What is far more puzzling to me is how officers like these seem to think they are above the law in committing such actions. We live in an age where nearly every imaginable electronic device can be specifically programmed to discreetly videotape the police; how many internet scandals must there be before behavior like this is considered unacceptable by those on the force? More importantly, how much longer can this keep happening before we, the people, realize that the police are not on our side?
The funny part is that disturbing events like this have a way of increasing media coverage and shifting public perspective. For a movement like Occupy Wall Street, police aggression in the face of peaceful protest is the best possible publicity. While a large majority of the American people will probably never allow themselves to realize Wall Street’s role in the world’s economic crisis, the mistreatment of protesters will attract the eyes of the White House, which is the ultimate goal of the movement.
Eric Batke is a Senior Staff Writer for the Voice. He can be reached for comment at EBatke12@wooster.edu