Occupy San Luis Obispo, CA — OccupySLO

I'd be very interested in people's comments and feelings re the recent events in Oakland.

Well......it's Oakland, and what happens with any one occupation does not necessarily signify for the movement as a whole, media expectations not withstanding.

I don't condone unprovoked aggression, whether it occurs in Iraq or Oakland, is perpetrated by Occupiers or police. I tried to figure out what really happened by watching the live stream of film from Oakland, as well as reading news stories, but didn't get very far with that. In general, I don't think some of it qualified as non-violent protest, and I disapprove. I thought it was interesting that Oakland's mayor was careful to identify the violence with "a splinter group" of Occupy. As to trying to occupy an abandoned convention center, I have mixed feelings. If it had been an empty foreclosed home I would have been more comfortable with breaking the law. Martin Luther King did speak about the need to create tension. But property rights are near and dear to capitalist America, and violating them is a very iffy action. Burning the flag and vandalising city hall were just a plain, idiotic invitation to backlash.

Judy and Topo:

Thanks for your views.

Actually, I think the situation may be more serious for the Occupy movement than has been generally acknowledged.

Here are my thoughts, and I apologize in advance for what some may see as harsh words and others may characterize as "tough love" commentary:

1. The excesses of the Occupy Oakland folks can do nothing other than provide an opportunity for Occupy's opponents to paint the movement as a lunatic fringe. From the Occupy SLO folks I've met, and what I've seen on this website, that characterization would be highly unfair, but it can still be made.

2. Let's be honest: A group that burns American flags, violently occupies a city hall, commits vandalism and smashes historic displays is not going to generate positive feelings for the Occupy movement across this country.

And a failure by other Occupy chapters to publicly distance themselves from such tactics is not only wrong (I thought the movement was, in large part, about "speaking truth," no matter who that might make uncomfortable) but is simply bad politics.

OSLO has a brief opportunity here to condemn violence in the name of the movement; continued delay or inability to make that point can only hurt OSLO and other Occupy chapters in the long run.

If OSLO is procedurally and structurally unable to speak against the violence in Oakland, probably within the next few days, it will have lost a golden opportunity to enhance its credibility and the general public will simply recall what went so very wrong with the movement in Oakland.

3. As the movement continues to lose visibility due to evictions from public spaces, (the group in DC will apparently no longer be allowed to camp overnight), the movement needs to maintain visibility and momentum through positive proposals and political action.

Notwithstanding that, the last meeting I attended of those interested in specific political proposals had a grand total of 2 people attending, not counting me. (I attended only as an observer.)

Both of the attendees seemed to me to be sincere and intelligent folks, but if that's all the human resources OSLO folks can generate for political action, the outlook for the movement is bleak indeed.

I tried to determine who started the violence & was unable to do so. Based on what I observed, I guess you can believe either party started it.

But it doesn't really matter. Since the 60's, one of the biggest messages of protest movements has been non-violence. As Gandhi said, “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” We're at the fighting stage, and implicit in Gandhi's message is They Fight You. If you fight them, you lose.

What happened in Oakland was unacceptable to Occupy. Our code of conduct includes non-violence & we have thrown people out who were unable to comply. All Occupy’s need to do the same. When people see on TV how the Davis protesters were non-violent when being pepper sprayed, it sends a completely different message than burning & looting.

Being “a splinter group” isn’t good enough. Anyone who isn’t committed to non-violence needs to leave Occupy. The “leadership” needs to make it abundantly clear to all who purport to be members that violence is not only totally unacceptable, but that anyone who commits violent acts will be disavowed, not just described as “a splinter movement”.

Just because the city of Oakland has stupid leadership is no excuse for Occupy to do the same. We will never win this way.

That's what I think.

What do you think?

I agree with everything "fly" says. I think I made most of the same points in my response that I was composing while he was composing his.

The most important thing I left out, which "fly" included, was that we need to disavow what Oakland did. We need to do this soon. If possible, we need to do this today and in the media, not just in our minutes. If we are "procedurally and structurally unable to speak", which I fear we are, we need to literally fold up our tent & go home.

That's what I think.

What do you think?

We are individuals, and free to act as we wish.

OccupySLO is an organization, and free to act as such upon consensus. If there is to be a GA this Saturday, perhaps Tom would like to put the issue on the agenda.

It sounds as though you were not watching the livestream as it happened but have sadly and ignorantly relied on the corporate/government media to 'report' for you. I was one of 5,000 watching as the police spokesman blatantly lied to the media about what had taken place. A sad situation but there is no violence to condemn but that of the police force.

"NO ARRESTS at City Hall, 400 arrested outside YMCA

The City Hall incident happened at the same time as the 400 peaceful protesters were arrested outside the YMCA. None of the City Hall folks were arrested or caught. They were 2 SEPARATE incidents. Don't let the media or cops lie to you about that one!"
Aka It's a trap, Agent provocateurs.

occupyoakland.org/2012/02/occupy-oakland...lence-and-city-lies/

interesting to see and thanks.

Of course, that post is one side of the story, as told by a group (Occupy Oakland) which has its own pre-existing agenda, just as the police may, which is life.

So as to get a perhaps more neutral perspective, can you share with us what disinterested observers said actually happened, such as the Oakland Tribune, Associated Press, etc. or if those arrested and charged were released with charges dropped, did a plea bargain or will be standing trial?

Come on FFG. Read the reports, partisan and disinterested and make up your own mind instead of all this gentle concern trolling.
Question: is the neutral, balanced maybe this, maybe that, where you think the "truth" lies or are you fixated on what the "moderate independents" think. Give it a rest man.

It seems as though he did not read my posting. Willful ignorance.

I do not consider the Oakland Tribune or Associated Press to be either neutral or moderate. We live in an information age, and as such you can, if you're interested, watch the event live. I heartily suggest doing so, before drawing conclusions. If that doesn't work, it's always a good rule of thumb to never trust mainstream anything. Even the Suicide Girls had better reporting on OccupyLA than the LATimes and such did. Which is sad, because they're a softcore porn community, not journalists.