How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the OWS Protests | Politics News | Rolling Stone
Matt Taibbi gets it:
There was a lot of snickering in media circles, even by me, when I heard the protesters talking about how Liberty Square was offering a model for a new society, with free food and health care and so on. Obviously, a bunch of kids taking donations and giving away free food is not a long-term model for a new economic system.
But now, I get it. People want to go someplace for at least five minutes where no one is trying to bleed you or sell you something. It may not be a real model for anything, but it’s at least a place where people are free to dream of some other way for human beings to get along, beyond auctioned “democracy,” tyrannical commerce and the bottom line.
via How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the OWS Protests | Politics News | Rolling Stone.
Chris, I’ve been following what you’ve been sharing here on the Occupy Process with interest.
”˜I find myself so confounded by what I prefer to call the Occupy Process that I find myself supporting, opposing, and being frighteningly agnostic about it all at the same time.
“Having been eyewitness to two revolutions and ”“ the Islamic one in Iran and the collapse of the Soviet Union- and having lived about half my life abroad (iran and russia and being US-born) -the tinfoil hat wearing part of me does believe that elites actually are *utterly delighted* that OWS is happening”” it”™s a *wonderful* distraction. A *great* way to channel anger and frustration without much getting done. Yes, yes, it has brought the Metaconversation into the public space. And that”™s great. But then what??? So did the Teapartiers, who also were sincere and at first completely grassroots”“ and look what happened to them!”
I like the general thrust of what Richard Moore, practitioner of Dynamic Facilitation and author of Escaping the Matrix: How We the People Can Change the World said in a recent comment on OWS:
“What I am sure of, is that none of the grass-roots initiatives or movements currently on the scene have any hope of changing anything. In fact, activist energy is increasingly being channeled and managed by the very system we are hoping to change. As with Obama, who managed to fool all of the people some the time, and even now is fooling some of the people all of the time. ”˜Hope you can believe in”™, if you”™re dreaming.
“But someone like Obama can only channel those who see hope in the political system. More and more people are realizing there is no hope in the political system. So we are getting things like The Zeitgeist Movement and Anonymous, that cater to those who have given up on politics, and give them something to ”˜join”™ or ”˜follow”™ so they can pretend they”™re ”˜doing something”™”¦
“The latest of these vehicles of co-option is the Occupy Wall Street movement. This one”™s really a humdinger. It has all the right slogans, and an appealing internal process. Its success is not surprising, because it is the latest version of a formula that has been thoroughly tested and refined ”˜on the ground”™. We might call it the ”˜twitter formula”™, and we”™ve seen it in the ”˜colored revolutions”™ that were used to bring about various desired regime changes, and more recently in the ”˜Arab Spring”™ movements, that soaked up lots of energy and prevented unwanted regime changes.
“Four years ago progressives found hope in Obama. This time around they”™re finding hope in the Occupy Wall Street movement. In both cases, this ”˜hope”™ became available all too easily, was accompanied by all the right mainstream publicity, and offered easy ways to join in and become not only a follower, but an active participant. This is what co-option looks like.”
My own reasons for pulling back from a physical occupation are here:
http://reinhabitsandiego.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/ows-being-co-opted/
http://reinhabitsandiego.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/from-disappointment-to-departure/
That said, just last night Richard sent me yesterday the most encouraging piece thus far about the Occupy Process :
http://cbmilstein.wordpress.com/2011/10/26/occupation-in-philly-day-19-october-24/
Indeed, this post about Occupy Philly, in part at least framing itself as an initiative to recreate the Commons is very powerful. What if all of these Occupations were framed not as occupations but as Commons-creating activities?
After having come across the work of the Portland placemaking organization, City Repair (http://cityrepair.org/how-to/placemaking/ and http://youtu.be/qVq0exoGySc), I”™ve wondered if the City Repair folks have identified a large part of the way forward in a post-civ world: recreate the village effect right where we live? And in the process do an end run around all the injustice in the world, spend less time fighting the old and instead creating the new?
And perhaps what Occupy Philly is doing is a form of more conscious placemaking (at least in part)?
Great comment raffi, and really thought provoking.
For me, here’s the thing. Occupy needs to be doing it’s thing. I see it as an invitation. It is up to people in power to use that invitation and ampliofy it, take it to policy making places, to legislatures, to regulatory hearings.
The only revolution that is possible in the democratic capitalist world is one of incremental shifts that eventually move to the heart of the matter. Soviet Union and Iran are not good examples to compare with because the systems of control are completely different.
What does it mean to revolt in a society that is built on freedom? That is the question, and for me the answer is not clear but it includes something like “a massive diversity of tactics of action and conversation.”
Occupy is ONE of those tactics. Hope is another. Maybe Obama is another. conscious placemaking, opening space, practical decolonization…anyone waiting for the definitive moment of overthrow in THIS society will be waiting a long time. better to get out there and do something and let the diversity of resilience overwhelm the cynicism of injustice.
Chris and raffi:
So far, I”™ve resisted writing anything about the occupy movement but one thing from each of your posts has prompted me to take some time and let my fingers do some walking. Rambling (or is it ranting?) thoughts continue below ”¦
I think my resistance to engaging has much to do with my own energies which are much like how raffi expressed it, very brilliantly I might add: “I find myself so confounded by what I prefer to call the Occupy Process that I find myself supporting, opposing, and being frighteningly agnostic about it all at the same time.” Your words adroitly capture the mix of feelings swirling around inside me ”“ including whether the central occupy message of the 1 % and the 99 % is even true and useful.
The second is the really brilliant question you offer, Chris: “What does it mean to revolt in a society that is built on freedom?” That”™s a crucially important question ”“ one I”™ve been asking myself at times, during the last half year, well before Occupy began.
From my historian”™s viewpoint, the occupy movement seems so boringly predictable. A real sense of déjà vu. A “been there, done that” feeling. And not just harkening back to the protest movements of the 1960s and 1970s, but it also reminds me of movements like the blanketeers and Chartists in early 1800s England. There”™s a long history here of similiarities stretching back through time ”“ same underlying systemic movement and processes at play. And the powers that be (media, government, kings, etc.) then and now, acted and are acting in very predictable ways too ”“ simply because they can”™t (and won’t) see with new eyes either.
I think Chris spoke truth in saying Occupy needs to do its thing (like all those 19th century protest movements needed to do theirs) and get “people in power” to amplify it to make change. Occupy for me, is really just a pinprick and on its own won”™t really change anything (and hence my ambivalence towards it). But when combined with (hopefully) more of these in the future, society may evolve. Another pinprick that comes to mind is Otto Sharmer”™s essay on Capitalism 3.0.
My possible answer to your question Chris, however, points me in a radically new direction, one away from large social movements, away from external causes and solutions, away from parts (1 and 99) and wholes. It points me inward, towards myself. And maybe a rephrase is needed: How do I find my authentic freedom in a society built on freedom?
Admittedly for some, the knee-jerk answer would be to buy the semi-automatic, load up on food and camping supplies and head for the mountains, taking their “no one is going to mess with me, mister” attitude with them. And who”™s to say they”™re wrong or right (the mountain men in the early 1800s US West certainly would have agreed)? It might be appealing.
However, for me, and my desire to stay connected; the inspiration I take is that of Victor Frankl, a man who got trapped into an ultimate horror ”“ the Nazi concentration camp system — simply for being Jewish (for being authentically true to himself) and who, while there, found an almost indescribable personal freedom, breath of choice and deep meaning very few of us have ever found in our “free” society.
Maybe for me the answer comes down to three inter-related beliefs (that my good friend Louise LeBrun enunciated some time ago):
– Respect ”“ respect for myself and the intention and identity I hold. Respect for how others view and move through the world.
– Integrity ”“ know that when I treat others badly I am hurting myself. Know that when I treat myself badly I hurt others. Accept the integral connection of all things.
– Generosity of spirit ”“ act in ways that support my becoming and the becoming of others.
In this “occupy” context this means respecting all those still in the parks and underneath tarps fighting for their view of the world AND also those of the 1 % and how they see and move through the world too. Understanding that even small predicatable pinpricks can make me react! And finally, share the conversation with others as to what this all means to me.
Thanks to both of you for the opportunity to engage in a meaningful way for me.
Allister
Chris, Allister- greetings!
Thanks for your thoughts.
I like the context in which you place the Occupy Process; that it’s one of the pieces.
I’d love to hear more what you mean, Chris, by a society built on freedom.
For me, we in North America are a society built to a significant degree on the illusion (or perhaps notion) of freedom, or with a romantic picture of it. Yes, we don’t fear (yet) speaking our mind in public. (and depending on who we are, we feel more or less free.)
As best as I can see the US constitution was never really an operative document, it (see Walker v US http://www.article5.org/) But perhaps you mean freedom in a different sense?
I saw an interesting blog post (http://t.co/LcJieJBp) the other day underlining the importance of naming the context we’re in. And that our context is “plutocracy.”
Nevertheless, that said, it’s an excellent question, “What does it mean to revolt in a society based on freedom?”
And I like, Allister, how you bring it back to each of us.
I guess it doesn’t matter if the reality or the illusion is freedom. Freedom is the story. For a society that has that as its core operating principle. things proceed differently from one which is based on repression or totalitarian paranoia.
In those contexts, there is one point of power that can be struck at and so the strategy is to hit it hard and repeatedly. In Societies like ours, freedom has allowed governments, corporations, institutions and others to create a network of shared power that allows for more openness but does raise questions about ownership. When it is time for those conversations, such as right now, the correct tactic is multiple actions in multiple sectors. One straight plan won’t do.
Thanks, Chris!