Occupy Wall Street

Does this link work?
http://www.occupystream.com/
--- merged: Oct 14, 2011 12:29 PM ---
okay , now i see it does. had trouble editing.

 

You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.

Buckminster Fuller.

 

It looks like this movement received a huge shot in the arm today. Bloomberg realized that trying to remove these people would be a violent pr disaster. I think it's full steam ahead for ows. I still don't think it's ultimately going to change anything, but at least people have some place to go to express their displeasure.

 

Yeah, I was just thinking that this morning as I stepped outside into the Colorado air. It's October and it's going to start getting really cold in NYC. If the movement continues to grow they may set up a sort of refugee camp on Wall St. I don't see how the police can possibly clear all those people out at this point without creating a very violent scene. The police violence that took place in Boston was quite sad.

 

maybe let's think about this as a tactical problem. given of course that strategy follows from being able to anticipate the moves of the opponent and cut them off, one way or another--deceive as to intent. deceive as to force, lead into traps and so forth. if the city of ny was smart--and so part they've not shown themselves to be---they'd do nothing. given the coverage they get,when they act they loose. so it makes more sense to me to not act than it does to act. what's at stake in not acting? what pressures come to bear on the city with that? to what extent, say, does creating or maintaining an illusion of control---or an impression---as you like---limit them? this because winter is coming. and if you were trying to figure out what the ows movement should do, how would you respond to non-action? i mean, we know that when the city acts, they loose. so if you assume that, and are confronted with non-action (which presupposes that the city is smarter than they've been to now) how would you react? what would be your next move?

 

so you're saying that the city has pressure to act that outweigh the wisdom of not acting. in which case, the situation is easy--wait for the city to react, film it, get it out worldwide, and watch the city loose over and over and over. that's not smart.

but let's assume that your position over-rides freedom to protest. where would you prefer the occupation be? anywhere? my impression is that there is no place that wouldn't irk you because, basically, you oppose the fact of the occupation, and this for political reasons that you dress up with concern--the status of which i leave open, but which i am personally suspicious of---for propriety with respect to local rules. this because were you not opposed, you'd not react as you do. i think that you're hedging--if things go one way and the plutocracy gets shook and things actually start to move off the current paralysis and stupidity, you'll want to appear as having been down from jump--and if nothing changes, the same. but dispositionally, you seem opposed to it. my disposition is the opposite.

at the same time, i've found myself reading a bunch of military strategy lately. it's largely been accidental--but still, i'm interested in manoever. i don't see anything considered or useful in the city doing anything given that in 6 weeks its going to be fucking cold overnight in that place....the same end can be accomplished by doing nothing as by acting, and by doing nothing, the city can give an illusion of supporting freedom of assembly.

 

I more than sympathize with the residents, shop owners and food cart operators and it sounds as if things will only get worse for them the longer this goes on.

I don't believe the protesters have any business intruding on shop owners. If the organizers were too shortsighted to realize that the crowd would need sanitary facilities, that is not anyone's problem but their own. I'm also shocked at some of the other behavior brought to light in that article - dancing topless as children in strollers go by? Those that are there for some Woodstock re-enactment should be sent packing along with the other disrespectful assholes that come out of the woodwork for these sorts of gatherings. I'm behind the principle of the protest but there is no excuse for disrespectful and irresponsible behavior of this nature.

 

if that's true. then it'd make sense for the shop owners to play the same game and film what they're seeing and put it out on the web. there are lots of ways to play this game.

 

not really. the resident and businesses around tahrir square were fundamental to the occupation's success. there were networks of places that folk could go to use the bathroom or shower or just hang out....it was an elaborate network...i know people who were part of it. they supported the goals and connected with the people in the square and made something that worked all the way around. there are alot of options. so don't give me this nonsense that there's any necessary contradiction between the occupation and the people in the neighborhood---if the neighborhood was so inclined they could also lift a finger to make something that works for everyone. maybe they should get their shit together too. just saying. it's not like the wheel is being invented here. what seems crazy to me is that the occupation isnt trying to reach out to folk around them. that's why i suspect the infotainment you're posting is bullshit...nothing else would make any sense at all except reaching out to the community. their support is fundamental.

 

well, if the occupation isn't linking up with the folk who are around them and who rely on who are around them to stay afloat, theyre making a mistake. it's such a basic mistake that i can't quite get my head around the idea that it's happening. and if it is, then there we are--tactical errors are important errors.

but at the same time, i sure as fuck can get my head around why it'd make sense for the city to portray the occupation as some outside presence that's messing up the local rhythm of things.

and i would suggest that the predisposition thing goes both ways. the difference is that i'm honest about mine.

 

I agree, any long term occupation of that park is going to require the cooperation of the community. But, if they are going to have any success in reaching out to them and drawing them in, they are going to have get their act together, be considerate and respectful of the fact that they are in someone's else's home. Maybe I'm just an old fart but if I were there, either as a member of the community or as someone taking part in the protest, and saw some dimwits dancing around topless, my first thought would be "This is not a movement concerned with being taken seriously."

And I don't think that the city needs to go out of it's way to promote the idea that the occupation is disrupting the local rhythm. I think it's taken for granted that that many people camping out in a park are going to be a disruption.

 

yeah, i'm an old fart too. but i look at a murdoch paper and the ny times local section and i'm thinking...i smell bullshit. just because it's so basic a mistake. but i'm not there, so this is as far as i can go. maybe i'm wrong. it's happened before.

i'm still interested in the tactical game, though. why it makes any sense for the city to do anything with winter coming. what the occupation should do if that non-action happens. which is, really, the only smart option for the city. thats not to say there aren't pressures, but tactically speaking nothing else makes any sense. if there's smart. we've already demonstrated that they don't have to be.

 

You could be right, I'm not there either. I wish I could be, at least as an observer. I'll be in the NYC area over Christmas but doubt they will hold out that long.

Action on the part of the city, before the onset of cold weather, might occur if the protests actually begin to have some political effect.

Right now, to spare themselves the black eye and escalate support for the protesters, I think the city is content to maintain a somewhat hands off approach - as long as the protest is just a numbers game and a local inconvenience, of course.

Of course, a little propaganda, here and there, never hurts, if that's what it is. Having been involved in a number of protests in the past, I'm aware that not everyone who shows up, shows up for the cause. Some regard it as a party and can get quite out of control.

 

Something to consider is that this movement was started out of anger and frustration at Wall Street. These people are not down there to sing Kumbaya, they're down there because they're good and pissed. I think as the weeks go on, that anger and frustration will only build to a fever pitch. As thousands upon thousands endure the cold and watch nothing change...the movement could very well take a dramatic turn. Perhaps the protesters will start to take over more of the Wall St area, including the some of the bank's headquarters, the stock exchange. If this movement's numbers continue to swell at a steady rate, I wouldn't be surprised if OWS actually shuts down Wall St by force.

 

It would definitely require the addition of fresh, clean, well fed bodies constantly streaming in. It's not easy to maintain a long term protest without fresh recruits. Kind of like war. It could go that way but I have my doubts. They should have started this in the spring or early summer. This isn't the Revolutionary War and they don't have a George Washington pushing them forward while their frozen toes are snapping off. If they are going to actually storm the castle and scale the walls, they will need to do it quickly, before the holiday shoppers come out.