takin it to the streets

so if you're wondering - not that you are - what i think about the occupy wall street thing. first: yes, absolutely.there should in particular be outrage at the activities that sucked money out of the economy without producing anything, and there should be outrage at the excruciating and increasing inequalities of wealth that, first, have nothing to do with anyone's merits or value (or actually are an inverted image; the worse you are, the richer), and second brought the economy to the brink of collapse. also the idea that the movement has no leaders - which the media etc always find incomprehensible - is a very good thing. it's about time someone took to the streets.

now on the other hand, there has to be something in the solution other than state action (which means that the left has got to re-think its basic approach, in place since 1848). that you look at centuries of collusion between state and economic power, or their actual merger (here represented by bank bailouts, quantitative easing, war profiteering, and so forth) and conclude that much more state power over the economy is needed, would suggest a complete immunity of this sort of position from empirical input. and second: for heaven's sake put away the global warming thing. irrelevant. it's not the case that you need (and global warming!) as a parenthesis of every goddamn sentence.

Comments

[Lisa Simeone]

. . . police lured the occupiers onto the traffic lanes of the Brooklyn Bridge and when they were about a third of the way across trapped them with their infamous orange netting.
It appears as if the NY Times changed their story to take blame off the police. If so, the New York Times will be caught by the democratized media that will have lots of video, photos, and blogs describing what happened. Here are screen shots of how the Times changed its story:

http://october2011.org/blogs/kevin-zeese/nyc-white-shirt-police-commanders-entrap-occupy-wall-street-arrest-500-join-occupy

[CB]

But the main stream media is the source of truth and unvarnished accuracy!!!
-Crispin

[Kerry]

I don't especially want to get into another pissing match with you, Lisa. But what makes a blog story, or at least this one in particular, immediately trustworthy? Is there at least the possibility of an "Aw forget it' factor at work in the accounts we choose to accept?

[Philboyd]

Kerry: Obviously this isn't conclusive, but I saw the 'police led us here then arrested us' thing multiple times on Twitter. It also sounds exactly like the sort of thing police would do (while the protesters have been generally positive towards the cops, if a little satirical - applauding their park-inspections and leaving thank-you notes and so on).

[Lisa Simeone]

Kerry, the reason I post links is so people can go to those links, read what's there, and make up their own minds. If you went to the link, you'll see that it takes you to the original NYT story & headline, the changed NYT story & headline, and the many comments by NYT readers who witnessed the arrests and said the police trapped them.

Everyone is obviously free to believe or not believe whatever he likes.

[Lisa Simeone]

Maybe this is why the NYPD are cracking down:

NEW YORK CITY POLICE FOUNDATION — NEW YORK
JPMorgan Chase recently donated an unprecedented $4.6 million to the New York City Police Foundation. The gift was the largest in the history of the foundation and will enable the New York City Police Department to strengthen security in the Big Apple. The money will pay for 1,000 new patrol car laptops, as well as security monitoring software in the NYPD’s main data center.
New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly sent CEO and Chairman Jamie Dimon a note expressing “profound gratitude” for the company’s donation.
“These officers put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe,” Dimon said. “We’re incredibly proud to help them build this program and let them know how much we value their hard work.”
http://www.jpmorganchase.com/corporate/Home/article/ny-13.htm?TB_iframe=true&height=485&width=712

[Kerry]

Of course I went to the link you posted, Lisa--and I appreciate your making it available. I read other on-line accounts of what happened as well. But I wonder if causes aren't much more complex than the pre-scripted (and prescriptive) black/white, straightforwardly A causes B interpretations typically rustled up by both the right and the left.

Take the Wall Street protest story for example. The explanation of what happened in the link you provided, and your implied interpretation of the second link, follows the black/white convention: Cops are in the pocket of Wall Street (so's the NYT), so they hammer Wall Street protesters (and the NYT whitewashes). Full stop.

But surely things just aren't this simple. Surely the explanation for what happened is more complex than this. Some city officials think that NYPD ought to be beholden to Chase, others resent having to accept money from them. Some cops loathe protesters in the street, others may be quite sympathetic to them. Some cops want to hammer protesters, others are more worried about traffic getting snarled on the bridge. Some protesters raise hackles by dissing the cops, other protesters practice nonviolence. Some cops are assholes, some are "respectful." * It just doesn't accomplish anything to use broad generalizations as explanations. But it can be comforting. Who wants to live in a morally ambiguous world?

* http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2011/10/01/2011-10-01_dozens_arrested_at_occupy_wall_street_protest_brooklyn_bridge_shut_down_.html

[Lisa Simeone]

Kerry, agreed. Wasn't trying to claim anything is unambiguous.

[CB]

Kerry there's no necessary "surely" here.

Let's take your claims in order.

Cops are in the pocket of Wall Street.
Yes they are. Lisa demonstrated that fact.

so's the NYT
Yes it is, just look at the advertising in the printed version of the paper. JP Morgan takes out whole page ads several days a week.

This makes it extremely probable that their interest are counter to the interest of the protestors. You're analyzing individual level folks, such as a regular officer, or let's say a regular reporter. But those people report to editors, and chiefs. And those higher ups can only get into their positions of authority if they appease their main sources of funding. Since we are working in a hierarchy the grunts below merely take the orders from those on top, who do what's best for their main source of funders, otherwise they'd be looking for a new job.

This explanation is far more elucidating, than trying to atomize the situation down to the level you're doing. In the attempt to explain systemic problems, but analyzing the narrowly minute, we'll never get to a point where broader patterns - such as Lisa is describing - can even be describe. Yet the macro-theories will remain much stronger in prediction, than the micro-theories.

[CB]

Crispin,

You're always a source of confusion; maybe that's a compliment.

You admit that Wall Streets promulgation of wealth inequality is wrong.

You admit that the Syranian Government is illegitimate.

In the former case, for the state to lend a helping hand is just as wrong.

In the latter case it's morally right.

Help me understand the why and hows here? Please...

[Lisa Simeone]

On Oct 2, 2011, at 10:36 AM, bpvetforpeace@[private email address removed by Lisa] wrote:

High, Folks,
Just spent 8 hours, with 700 of my closest friends, being detained, while Occupying the Brooklyn Bridge.

At 3pm, We started marching around OUR city, when Bloomberg's NYPD entrapped us into using the Brooklyn Bridge roadway, rather than the raised deck of the Pedestrian Walkway. 9, or 10,000 Thousand folks, (like VFP's George Macanamy), were able to use the raised walkway, but those 700 of us on the actual Roadway got tired at the Mid-span of the Bridge, near the famous Neo-Gothic stone Suspension Cable Towers, and we plopped down to study the beautiful Archways built into the Towers, and the lovely geometric designs of the graceful steel suspension cables.

Mayor Bloomies NYPD didn't play that shit.

From 4pm to 7pm, we were absolutely saturated with rain, while the Police were realizing THEY, too, are part of the 99%, as big hits to their Pension Plans are being discussed. Police finally got about 10 big ass MTA busses, because their meat wagons were woefully inadequate, for all 700 of us. They backed the buses up from both the Brooklyn side, and the Manhattan side, and by 7pm, we were all on board the 2nd & 3rd waves of busses, and by 8pm, we were processed and locked into 1 person cells, crammed with 7 or 8 peeps each.

Note to Nate: The Communal "Mic Check" thingy really isn't Maoist brainwashing. We were able to communicate messages to all 20 cells, on opposite sides of the wing of the jail, for Legal Aid ph #'s, messages from the last to get out, to the 1st to get out to spread, and even the cops on the transport busses were using "Mic Check" to communicate to us which of the 3 processing Precincts we were going to, and all the niceties that kids who've never been detained should know.

We sang, laughed, joked, and grooved, until we were released, around 2am, and most of us got back to LIBERTY PLAZA by 3am, a mere 12 hours after our March left LIBERTY PLAZA.

I was honored to be jailed with all the young-uns (y'all wouldn't believe the age demographics of the kids), and it was my SECOND favorite DETENTION since Hosni Mubarak detained 600 of us, in Tahrir Square, on Dec 31, 2009 (13 months BEFORE the Revolution)

Be Well, RAISE HELL !
Bill Perry
Delaware Valley Veterans For America
Disabled American Veteran, VVAW, VFP, VFW, VVA
http://DelValVets4America.org/
http://www.Arlington-Libertybell.net/

[Lisa Simeone]

"UPDATE: VIDEO SHOWS POLICE LEADING PROTESTERS ONTO ROADWAY OVER BROOKLYN BRIDGE"

Same link as first one I posted in this thread.

[CB]

Essentially kerry, it's not the individual behavior that conditions the institutions but the institutions - which exist prior to the Individual - that condition the individual.

[Kerry]

I appreciate what you're saying, CB. But without a more compelling argument, it's not clear to me that the causal flow between individuals and institutions is as unilateral as you claim here. A good case can be made for the case that sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't, and usually it's reciprocal.

[CB]

The case can be made that more often than not it is.

Again, if you think a series of atomized individuals are conditioning the institutions than you have a harder time explaining historically why institutional structures are outliving the individuals that comprise them; yet over long periods of times - many generations - ultimately changing.

Just take your micro example of the unnecessarily angry cop. Fire him, give me some xanex, maybe send him to a therapist, give him a lover, whatever you want, this won't change the fundamentals of Lisa's point: JP Morgan still gave a massive donation to the police station, and the police stations chiefs, if they are to operate and maintain their jobs, are obligated to keep that money roll flowing, and keeping those institutions happy. In short, the solution to the single angry cop, is not the solution to the systemic problem of power dynamics and institutional structures. It's not even a band-aid. It's a spurious scapegoat to maintain institutional status quo.

[Kerry]

Your second paragraph: huh?

[Rik Little]

The fact that America is fascist police state (and has been for many years now) is coming out on the world wide web. Also the realization that the traditional "fourth estate" was bought and taken over by the power mongers who continue to operate them as a propaganda tool ever increasingly since 11/22/1963. The revolution WILL be televised but the images will not reflect any 'reality' that the powerful don't approve. There is no longer a 'rule of law' and an ARMY of police will ever increasingly face off with young citizens who realize they have nothing more to lose and stand up to "lawful authority" in the Streets. These are 'Political arrests' and the pepper spray in the faces of young girls are 'Political attacks'. The goverment and especially the 'Judiciary' are fascist monsters who are unoriginal Hitler copycats. The kids are alright because they realize the most dangerous terrorists are Americans wearing robes and badges hellbent on protecting the banks that have become the secret wizzard leaders of oue so called transparent democracy. Expect many to be shot with 'probable cause' as defined in the 'second set of books' they have replaced the Constitution with.

[CB]

Okay, I'll try again.

Lisa is essentially stating that if we analyze the behavior of institutions and the roles they play in society, we can accurately predict outcomes on a broad level. Accurately does not mean absolutely.

So, a capitalist institution that is threatened by anti-wall street protestors gives a generous donation to the NYPD, and it's predictable that as a result the NYPD will aid the institution in cracking down on its perceived threat. Essentially that the NYPD will serve the interest of JP Morgan, and not the protestors.*

You seem to be claiming that that causal relationship is spurious, and it's best to analyze the behavior of the NYPD on an individual officer level.

My point in the second paragraph is that, even if we take your claim to be true: a particular angry cop was acting out of line due to excessive anger, and we correct that cops behavior (using drugs, sex, fire him, etc), it won't change the dynamic of the institutional arrangements the protestors are facing, and the inequality of influence one has over the other.

If we attempt to break down the institutional behavior to the mere whims of some individuals, not only will the predictions we make result in poor conclusions, but this process itself will serve as a scapegoat to the institutional status quo of unequal (and illegitimate) power.

So, not matter how much we deal with those "individual" cops who are having a bad day, they will always be answering (power dynamic) to a chief - or higher up. And that higher up will be beholden (power dynamic) to whoever gives the most donation to the NYPD. We can sit around offering all these cops therapy, drugs, leftist pamphlets, motivational seminars, and handjobs, at the end of the day though, if they fall out of line, a new individual will replace them at the behest of the institution as a whole.

* I'm quite chagrined this is even in question!

[Xtab]

I dunno about the entrapment claim. I read accounts from other protesters who said they were fully aware they were under orders not to take the bridge but did so anyways, because there weren't enough police to stop them. They got boxed in later.

Honestly, this whole thing reads like liberal guilt: oh the police are so mean to us. Well, the point is to get them to arrest you. That's what civil disobedience is -- knowingly breaking laws as a means to send a message. For some reason I have a hard time believing 700 people decided to occupy the Brooklyn Bridge because they wanted to "study the beautiful Archways built into the Towers, and the lovely geometric designs of the graceful steel suspension cables."

It sounds like they're just being ironic. Like, *wink* we're just *so* innocent. Well, don't play that game. Own up.

[Stephen]

JP Morgan's donation is nothing. Its 1/1000th of the NYPD yearly operational budget. It runs the NYPD from midnight to 8am one day per year. Besides, this dogshit sum is more done as an income tax write off. Go to a play, art show or symphony in NYC sometime. Its all JPM, MS, GS on the program as donors. Goldman gave 20m to wounded vets, JPM gave 5m to food banks. But this is all tax write offs. It is not charity in a legitimate sense. Not really bribes though either.

CB is right in the larger sense that the NYPD is more on the side of the bankers. Well, the securities industry brings in 12b dollars in taxes to NYC, or 13 percent of the budget.

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/osdc/rpt10-2011.pdf

So, of course we know where the loyalties of the officers lay. They are among the most well paid officers in the nation. Banks pay for a lot of this.

http://www.nypdrecruit.com/benefits-salary/overview.

The BIGGER picture is that the banks fuck over every single other city in the union through their corrupt shit. I dont care if NYPD is with the banks. The banks pay much of their salary, so, no shit.

As for the NYTimes, I will defend them. This much is sure- Joe Nocera, Paul Krugman and Gretchen Morgenson wrote bravely on the bailout of the banks. All three of these writers were writing vehemently for all insolvent banks to be put into receivership, that is, for them to be zeroed out. This would have included Citi, BofA, and possibly Goldman and JPM. This could have been done quite easily.

That was in 2008. Frankly, I support the protesters sentiment in full. They are right to be protesting, and they should continue to protest, but this should have been done three years ago. The NYT did its due dilligence a long time ago, and if no one listened to them then, well, I can understand a bit of snobbery at this point. Go ahead and close the barn door, fellas, but that horse is gonna be pretty hard to catch now. But, don't misinterpret my words... I support the protests.

But there are honest folk out there. Check out Bernie Sanders latest rant on Wall Street. And the NYTIMES article on Eric Schneiderman from this weekend is great. Fuck, I wish I could shake that man's hand. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater on this one.

[Kerry]

CB--
I get your point, and I don't totally disagree with it. But I think you're strawmanning my position. I'm neither claiming that that there's no causal relationship between financial gifts to the NYPD and what happened on the Brooklyn Bridge nor that it's best to analyze the behavior of the NYPD on an individual officer level. Either of these would be precisely the sort of black/white causal analysis that I criticized in my earlier comment. My argument is much more modest: causal chains are complex and it's the worst kind of reductionism to presume a linear and unilateral flow when analyzing social phenomena such as power struggles. I'm not denying power dynamics. I'm not denying an imbalance of power between institutions and individuals. I'm not defending an atomism. I'm simply suggesting that individuals, like institutions, exert causality, and that this causality needs to be part of the equation. Moreover, I'm not defending what you call "atomism." I agree that it's an incomplete perspective. But so, I would argue, is any sort of institutionalism that risks reducing individuals to relatively passive variables.

At the end of the day, I don't know that you and I are in radical disagreement. I'm just a bit more cautious than you are about drawing conclusions. As someone who's been a peace activist since Vietnam, I've grown weary and wary of formulaic explanations and scripted responses to events that smooth over the complexity of the world.

[Stephen]

"As someone who's been a peace activist since Vietnam, I've grown weary and wary of formulaic explanations and scripted responses to events that smooth over the complexity of the world."

Kerry, your judicious, intelligent argument has no place here. As the end of the day, what matters above all is what you say and not what you do. The main goal of life is idealogical purity.

[Lisa Simeone]

"causal chains are complex and it's the worst kind of reductionism to presume a linear and unilateral flow when analyzing social phenomena such as power struggles."

Totally agree.

FYI, for anyone who's interested, a working draft -- DRAFT -- of the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City from the NYCGA -- the New York City General Assembly:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/10/02-1

[Lisa Simeone]

And Xtab, of course civil disobedience includes the risk of arrest. We all know that. I don't know what happened on the Brooklyn Bridge, neither does anyone who wasn't there, and even those who were there have differing accounts.

There are people who are willing to risk arrest and people who aren't. There are a lot of jobs to be done in this fight and no one way is the right way to do them.

No one is "complaining" about getting arrested. People are rightly complaining about police brutality when it occurs. And the fact that thousands -- millions -- of people all over the world have suffered far worse in their struggles doesn't diminish this struggle, doesn't make the protesters somehow lesser, and doesn't give the PTB a free pass because "so many others have had it worse than you" (just heading this argument off at the pass, cause it appears at EVERY blog, whether left, right, or anywhere else). And yes, I agree that the "graceful arches/architecture" blah blah blah is bullshit in this context.

And yes, Stephen, bravo to Bernie Sanders and to Eric Schneiderman!

[Lisa Simeone]

Take a look at these comments, some from eyewitnesses:

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/covering-the-march-on-foot-and-in-handcuffs/

[Xtab]

Yeah, Lisa, I agree with all of that. Except one thing: there are different ways of doing things that are better than others. What's good about the Wall Street protests is that there's no central authority telling people what the ways of doing things are gonna be. So the best ideas should (in theory) rise to the top.

[Karl]

Posted by: Rik Little | October 02, 2011 at 02:28 PM

I'm with Rik

[Karl]

Bernie Sanders is a pro-empire, pro-Israel gatekeeper. Eric Schneiderman is the male equivalent to Elizabeth Warren -- meaning, not going to rock the boat more than a tiny, nearly imperceptible amount.

Not really worth saying "Bravo!" too, either of them. They're a couple of "me too!"-ers... like Alan Grayson.