Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
ILOTSMYBRAIN

Occupy Wall Street

Recommended Posts

i think yall are grasping at straws here.

 

if a corporation (a group of people) murders, kills, rapes or commits fraud, they are liable and accountable, just like any other person in a free society. if they do get away with 'dirty deeds' in todays age, it is because of govt privileges. if a government exists, it is supposed to protect rights. which means, if your rights are infringed upon, they are supposed to make sure the offenders are held accountable.

 

liberals have this fantasy that the current system of corporatism in the US is a free market.

 

logical implication of fists' original analogy was that corporations some how today are raping, murdering and stealing and that in todays society or a freer society, they are allowed to do this. that is why the analogy is wrong. if someone tries to murder or steal from me, first they have to deal with my own defenses. they that fails, they will then have to deal with the authorities that are supposed to protect my rights and prosecute such infringements.

 

if you think because it is humanely possible that someone acting under corporate authority can murder someone, that we should abolish corporations, you must also seek to abolish every person on the earth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

christ.

 

what does legality have to do with it if the legality/illegality of something is simply ignored?

 

in the flavor of this thread: wall street--who has spent a single day in jail or paid a fine or been penalized for the inarguable lying, cheating, and stealing that took place over the last 15-20 years on wall st that resulted in the 07 crash?

 

why would these companies act in any different capacity with fewer/no regulations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
christ.

 

what does legality have to do with it if the legality/illegality of something is simply ignored?

 

in the flavor of this thread: wall street--who has spent a single day in jail or paid a fine or been penalized for the inarguable lying, cheating, and stealing that took place over the last 15-20 years on wall st that resulted in the 07 crash?

 

why would these companies act in any different capacity with fewer/no regulations?

 

what does legality have to do with someone if it is ignored?

if someone steals from me, i have a right to get my stuff back. one way or the other. if someone hasnt stolen from me, i dont have a right to go after the same guy because he hasnt committed aggression against me.

 

if you think that a law of some sort isnt effective, and that corporations are not held accountable if they murder someone, why do you think more regulations can create an economically socialist utopia?

 

if there was indeed fraud on wall street over the past years it is because of two things. government granted this power to them. or government is impossible of preventing it and/or has chosen not to prosecute it. in fact, govt implicitly guaranteed EVERYTHING that happened on wall street. it is because of government that it could of even happened.

 

but i'd venture out on a limb and say that most people who believe that 'wall street' 'caused' the housing crash and that government had nothing to do with it, do not understand what exactly fraud is and what it isnt.

 

in 1950, there was DRASTICALLY fewer housing regulations. why didnt the crash happen then? why werent there no doc loans? when my great grandfather bought his land with a mortgage in the 1940, i am told the entire process was done in 1 week. including settlement. fast forward, in 1980, no one could get a loan. it took my parents 6 months to get a loan. with perfect credit. your ilk said no one could get a loan because capitalists were against the poor and wouldnt loan money. your belief set on these issues makes no logical sense. first they were to stingy, then in 2000 they are too loose.

 

the only thing that caused the housing collapse was artificial manipulation of money and credit and the federal regulatory apparatus that created moral hazard which ultimately privatized profits and socialized risks. this is not capitalism, this is economic fascism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think yall are grasping at straws here.

 

if a corporation (a group of people) murders, kills, rapes or commits fraud, they are liable and accountable, just like any other person in a free society. if they do get away with 'dirty deeds' in todays age, it is because of govt privileges. if a government exists, it is supposed to protect rights. which means, if your rights are infringed upon, they are supposed to make sure the offenders are held accountable.

 

liberals have this fantasy that the current system of corporatism in the US is a free market.

 

logical implication of fists' original analogy was that corporations some how today are raping, murdering and stealing and that in todays society or a freer society, they are allowed to do this. that is why the analogy is wrong. if someone tries to murder or steal from me, first they have to deal with my own defenses. they that fails, they will then have to deal with the authorities that are supposed to protect my rights and prosecute such infringements.

 

if you think because it is humanely possible that someone acting under corporate authority can murder someone, that we should abolish corporations, you must also seek to abolish every person on the earth

 

But you make it sound as if its not allowed then it must not be happening otherwise we would hear about it in the news and these corporations would be getting rolled up... This is not the case however, they buy their way out of most "legal issues" they might find themselves in.. Why would the government hold these people accountable anyways if they are funding their campaigns and such? seems to be a bit of conflict of interest and thats the root of this entire issue..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if this stuff is going down, i'd love to see all the dead bodies, raped women and stolen loot.

 

 

the root of the entire issue isnt corporations controlling government, its governments having the power in the first place to do bad things. think about it. a corporation isnt lobbying angelofdeath. why? because i have no legal power to do things im otherwise restricted in doing like the government does. they lobby the government because it grants them extra legal powers, privileges, immunities, handouts, etc. if you are serious about getting rid of a government that is accountable to special interests, you must then join me in saying that if we are to have a government, it must do one thing, protect rights. NOTHING ELSE. you must also support getting rid of the welfare queens, israeli lobby, and whatever other lobbying organizations are demanding more special favors.

 

if you concede government has the power to grant powers to people and groups that individuals dont possess, dont get mad when a group that you dont like, uses it.

thats the root of the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what about the corporations that fund money into african warzones to enable them to get access to minerals they use in high end electronics?

 

I do understand what AOD is saying I just disagree with him (as he knows!) I dont believe the government regulation on the financial markets was strong enough. The banks are taking some of the best minds to create these complex financial mechanisms and products that no one understands (even the regulator).

 

The government failure is they didn't understand the markets and their products, the regulation should be stronger to stop this type of business. It doesn't help that all the huge corporations have their fingers in government to manipulate it to their reequirements.

 

The whole system needs to be changed government, regulation and the financial market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steelers/Ravens?

 

No this is the only divide I will except.

 

In fact all the Steelers and the ''Steeler Nation'' should be exiled from American soil, actually the god damn Planet.

 

Steelers fans arent people, they are robots that believe the number ''6'' is magically and makes up for any embarrasing loses that come their way.

 

Other than that though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what about the corporations that fund money into african warzones to enable them to get access to minerals they use in high end electronics?

 

to me this is on the same level of discussion as 'what if we have murderers?' or 'what if some rich guy buys up all the food and starves the entire world?

 

no system creates utopia nor is there any way possible for the worlds population to all agree on an issue or have every single person on the planet live the same way as ________ wants us to. its absolutely impossible.

 

i dont know the specifics of this 'funneling money into african war zones to access to minerals' but on its face it seems no different than if someone pays you 1 million dollars to enter the ground under your property to get minerals.

 

I do understand what AOD is saying I just disagree with him (as he knows!) I dont believe the government regulation on the financial markets was strong enough. The banks are taking some of the best minds to create these complex financial mechanisms and products that no one understands (even the regulator).

 

 

im supposed to believe that over 100 regulatory agencies that couldnt correct market fascism are going to be able to if we just pass a few more laws? its the same mantra that has been going on for centuries. 'we need just one more law...' and hear we are centuries later with the same mantra. the reason? every law creates unintended consequences which then requires 10 more laws to fix. which then for each of those 10 laws, requires 10 more laws. its a self licking ice cream cone.

 

the leftist argument fails. why? for this simple fact. why wasnt there a housing bubble before the 2000-2008/09 bubble? there was less regulations. why not a housing bubble in 1900 when there was hardly any financial regulations? the only theory that successfully explains this is the ATBC. nothing else explains the cluster of errors.

 

the reason derivatives came about was because of the federal reserve credit which made money cheap and the government regulatory apparatus which implicitly if not encouraged banks to make risky loans.

imagine if you had someone telling you that you could make trillions but you would have absolutely no risk at all, would you act on this? i'd venture to say most people would.

without government, a derivative as we experienced in the housing boom could not exist.

 

The government failure is they didn't understand the markets and their products, the regulation should be stronger to stop this type of business. It doesn't help that all the huge corporations have their fingers in government to manipulate it to their reequirements.

 

government set the stage to create 'the products.' without it, they wouldnt exist. if a free market simply would result in this, i'll beat the dead horse again, why did it take the greedy capitalists this long to figure out how to create derivatives? whey didnt they do it back when they had hardly any regulations to deal with?

 

the lefts answer is always just a 'few more sensible stronger' regulations. i say its all a self licking ice cream.

market regulations are much stricter. no free market would allow banks to make such loans as they did. no free market would bail out investment banks that made bad bets. no free market would prop up failed businesses. no free market would guarantee solvency of institutions no matter how they behaved. the market would of let wall street collapse for acting in this matter. but more to the point, without the federal reserve, there would of been no cheap inflation to coercively pour the alcohol for the drinking binge. hence, without government, you had a sound free market that never could create the fed induced credit bubble.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things will also never change because everyones too god damn stupid and cowardly.

 

Theres too many faggot ass cops who have no life anyone and enjoy being fascist pig cocksuckers who protect whatever master it is that allows them to feel important.

 

Money talks and everything else walks, those in charge control money that is a made up value and they soak the media with celebrities, ''royalty'' and figure heads who make you feel like a piece of shit if youre not trying to make money, I just never understood how people get so Starstruck over someone theyve never met who wouldnt give their cousin dying of cancer an autograph.

 

Thats why all my heros were broke, did what they loved and said fuck the system.

Fuck all you people who follow any of that bullshit and contribute to the real problem.

 

Sleeping in tents will never solve anything, until people take arms or until people start educating themselves and stop relying on the government for education, news, and culture and wake the fuck up nothings ever going to change.

 

The amount of people who defened the ''1%'' and schoffed at those actually trying to raise awareness make me sick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What cracks me up about libertarians is that milton friedman was a libertarian economist if ever there was one, but unlike his political counterparts he was intelligent enough to repeatedly say not to compare idealism with reality—Something Ron Paul and his followers entertainingly do all the time. On that point, so do 95% of all politicians but hey moving on.

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/01/06/144737864/forget-stocks-or-bonds-invest-in-a-lobbyist

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/12/20/144028899/the-tuesday-podcast-jack-abramoff-on-lobbying

Now AOD, you tell me: Is THAT a free market at work?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What cracks me up about libertarians is that milton friedman was a libertarian economist if ever there was one, but unlike his political counterparts he was intelligent enough to repeatedly say not to compare idealism with reality—Something Ron Paul and his followers entertainingly do all the time. On that point, so do 95% of all politicians but hey moving on.

 

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/01/06/144737864/forget-stocks-or-bonds-invest-in-a-lobbyist

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/12/20/144028899/the-tuesday-podcast-jack-abramoff-on-lobbying

Now AOD, you tell me: Is THAT a free market at work?

 

your post simply displays that you lack any comprehension of what a free market is.

your problem is you think the current economy in america is a free market.

 

basically ideological leftist concludes that anything that a corporation does through government or any government power given (think extra rights) to a certain group is 'the free market.'

america is not a free market. america has had mixed economy for well over a century if not longer. the current system is economic fascism with a good dose of ideological socialism thrown in to round things out.

 

government even having the power to grant extra rights, privileges, immunities and limited liability to various groups of people (rights that they do not even possess in a free society) is all that is needed to show that the examples you tout are not examples of a free market economy. they are examples of a corporatist economy. in a free market there are no bail outs, no favorable regulation, no favors, no privileges and THERE IS NOTHING TO LOBBY.

if you are really against lobbying government you should favor a free society with bare bones to no government at all. then all the problems you hate, that have been created by government do not exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Things will also never change because everyones too god damn stupid and cowardly.

 

Theres too many faggot ass cops who have no life anyone and enjoy being fascist pig cocksuckers who protect whatever master it is that allows them to feel important.

 

Money talks and everything else walks, those in charge control money that is a made up value and they soak the media with celebrities, ''royalty'' and figure heads who make you feel like a piece of shit if youre not trying to make money, I just never understood how people get so Starstruck over someone theyve never met who wouldnt give their cousin dying of cancer an autograph.

 

Thats why all my heros were broke, did what they loved and said fuck the system.

Fuck all you people who follow any of that bullshit and contribute to the real problem.

 

Sleeping in tents will never solve anything, until people take arms or until people start educating themselves and stop relying on the government for education, news, and culture and wake the fuck up nothings ever going to change.

 

The amount of people who defened the ''1%'' and schoffed at those actually trying to raise awareness make me sick.

 

 

Aint that the truth. Props given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about providing an example of this idealism? I am certainly talking about reality when I comment on libertarianism, I would imagine most others are also. Libertarian arguments are generally centred on two major themes; justice and efficiency. Both of which are concerned with improvement of current practices rather than fantasising about a perfect world. In fact it is that libertarians tend to recognise the systemic complexity of any given political/legal system or solution that actually makes them less idealistic than their contemporaries, who tend to think they can fix the world one piece of legislation at a time.

 

These articles support, rather than refute, a case for limiting the scope of government.

 

You and AOD are agreeing with Fist, which leads me to believe that libertarian arguments are actually only centered on one major theme: It's all about the post count. I should probably say JOKES, because this is all srs bsns with you, but anyway.

 

Now I like to argue on the internet more than anyone, but I like to keep it to one internet argument at a time. If everyone's in agreement that there should be no lobbying, awesome. Now what are we arguing about—If Lobbying represents the government's hand in the market, or the market's hand in the government? I dont get why anyone would care. I get why libertarians would care, because they HAVE to frame every fucking argument as pro market, anti government as if one's water and the other's oil and it's oil's fault for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what you're saying is there shouln't be lobbying.... which means you agree with fist.

 

/endAODderailment

 

in an abstract way there shouldnt be lobbying in the sense you are talking about.

however my preferred method of achieving this is much different. i say the government shouldnt have the power to dole out. and you dont trample peoples rights to say....make movies about statist political candidates before an election. you guys say the government should be able to do anything it wants and its powers be unlimited, just a corporation cant lobby for it, but unions, welfare queens, and liberal groups or whatever can get their share of the pie. i say get rid of the pie. and that the regulations that, for centuries, havent effectively created your economic utopia (because of the unintended consequences and market distortions) will effectively be able to limit a corporation from lobbying government. the only way these laws can create the effects you want is if you take them to the logical conclusion and just make government own everything. lets face it, the soviets were very good on regulation, there wasnt any. they owned everything, people didnt.

this is a fundamental difference in the leftist critique of lobbying and mine.

 

lets not forget that the first amendment guarantees the right to petition ones government for a redress of grievances. in effect 'lobbying.' there is nothing wrong with telling the government (or lobbying if you will) to leave people alone. this is essentially 'constitutional.' the problem comes when you lobby government to do things it doesnt have the power constitutionally to do. despite the flawed constitution, but as it was written, it did effectively limit the lobbying power of X groups until the 20th century because it had very little favors to hand out if any. because you can flap all you want about getting some privilege from government, but if they dont have the power, they cant give it to you. although the internal improvement debates started when the ink was still wet. big government types wanted govt to pay for internal improvements. small government constitutionalists didnt. this was effectively the first acts of both corporate welfare and extra constitutional powers being used by the government.

 

the very act of being able to speak freely and say ask your government to do something is actually the mark of a free society. the difference being in the ideal case, government doesnt have the power to dole out said favors. for instance a free society allows people to advocate for socialism and they can even set up voluntary socialist arrangements, they just cant force others into their arrangement. a socialist society doesnt allow one to advocate or engage in capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understood it early on (last September?) OWS was primarily about corporate greed and a little bit about confronting class issues.

 

The funny thing is that no one realized that tents and consensus based governance aren't the answer, at least in the short term. It's still early on yet but there's a lot of unlearning left if people really mean to live differently...it's easy to see here on 12 oz, since I'm a libertarian but I also know that I don't have to fuck people over to survive or live free...oh well, I guess I don't represent the stereotype.

 

So should we add polarization to that list? Seems like something worth discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about polarization old man Shai?

 

How would you like to go about discussing it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AOD, you went there. You took a neat little discussion about the pros and cons of lobbying/corporate personhood and went all crossfire on crossfire. I get what you're trying to say "if we didnt have a government then there would be no congressmen to lobby to." But think for a second how abstract and hard that argument is to win compared to just weighing the pros and cons of lobbying. Think damnit, think!

 

Should we start a libertarian thread? Or is that what ron paul thread is? I feel like this is getting away from Occupy Wallstreet.

 

 

Frank I hope you see the irony in posting, "cool story bro" in response to me saying you're all about making posts that lack substance. God you're dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AOD, you went there. You took a neat little discussion about the pros and cons of lobbying/corporate personhood and went all crossfire on crossfire. I get what you're trying to say "if we didnt have a government then there would be no congressmen to lobby to." But think for a second how abstract and hard that argument is to win compared to just weighing the pros and cons of lobbying. Think damnit, think!

 

Should we start a libertarian thread? Or is that what ron paul thread is? I feel like this is getting away from Occupy Wallstreet.

 

 

Frank I hope you see the irony in posting, "cool story bro" in response to me saying you're all about making posts that lack substance. God you're dumb.

 

 

i have thought about it and that is why i have come to the conclusion that even if the federal government were reduced to constitutional boundaries, (not your characterization of having no govt) there is nothing to lobby.

thinking that a few more laws can eliminate any influence on the biggest most powerful coercive organization on earth that has the power to do anything is naive at best. if the corporations have all this power and control the government, how can you control the corporations with government?

 

sure i went crossfire on crossfire.

if we have people presenting opposing views in the ron paul thread, you are going to get opposing views in the OWS thread. if RP people are defending positions in that thread, you should be prepared to defend OWS type positions in this thread.

just sayin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those interested, I found a video summarizing Romney in the SC GOP debate.

 

 

If you can vote, you're gonna want to look at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop bickering. Everyone knows the government maintains class divisions in society, duh. People who own tons of capital created the government to protect their property from jealous leeches (like the 99%). Haven't you fuckers ever read Adam Smith? He stated,

 

"as the necessity of civil government gradually grows up with the acquisition of valuable property, so the principal causes which naturally introduce subordination gradually grow up with the growth of that valuable property ... Wherever there is great property there is great inequality. For one very rich man there must be at least five hundred poor, and the affluence of the few supposes the indigence of the many. The affluence of the rich excites the indignation of the poor, who are often both driven by want, and prompted by envy, to invade his possessions ... The appropriation of herds and flocks which introduced an inequality of fortune was that which first gave rise to regular government. Till there be property there can be no government, the very end of which is to secure wealth, and to defend the rich from the poor."

 

 

 

In related news, Occupy protesters take a symbolic swipe at the bourgeoisie in San Francisco. An abandoned hotel gets occupied and a Bentley/Lamborghini dealership gets trashed! The anonymous communique reads:

 

 

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/01/22/18705350.php

 

January 20th - SF

 

The nerve of these rich motherfuckers is unbelievable. Their Lamborghini/Bentley dealership, sitting a block away from one of the highest concentrations of poverty and despair on the west coast, clearly demonstrates their contempt for us. Of course we smashed their fucking windows, just like we destroyed the property of wells fargo and bank of america: to challenge their arrogance is to teach them to fear us.

 

To everyone who shut down banks in the morning, to the building occupiers, to the rebels who threw bricks at the police when we tried to break their line; we all comprise the force that will soon strangle the social order that suffocates us, burying it once and for all.

 

[/Quote]

 

Those fucking bastards. LONG LIVE THE 1%. INDUSTRIAL MAGNATES AND BANKERS UNITE!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw this go down yesterday and read this today. Interesting times...

 

There's a demo happening in Oakland this weekend...if anyone locally is interested in attending I think things kick off around noon Saturday at the Plaza (14th and Broadway).

 

Now that I've taken a nice long break from everything I'm ready to get back into the mix. Let's see where things go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this[/url] today. Interesting times...

 

There's a demo happening in Oakland this weekend...if anyone locally is interested in attending I think things kick off around noon Saturday at the Plaza (14th and Broadway).

 

Now that I've taken a nice long break from everything I'm ready to get back into the mix. Let's see where things go.

 

Yo Shai, did you go to this?

 

 

 

From Bay of Rage:

 

Aiyup4GCAAAbSP6.png_large.png

 

An enormous banner reading “Occupy Oakland — Fuck the Police” was unfurled at the corner of 14th and Broadway, in preparation for the first of a weekly series of marches against the police and their repression against the Oakland Commune. From the hours of 7 to 9 pm on Saturday, January 7th, the crowd kept growing – notably different than many of the largely white, activist groups that have become so predominant in the Occupy movement. This had a completely different character: a rowdy, largely young group of people pissed off about the recent police repression. The police were taking this night more seriously than other demos – whether it was because the night was the 3rd anniversary of the Oscar Grant Rebellion or simply because they knew that the pigs’ current campaign of harassment and arrests was fostering a culture of resistance and anger against them. All evening there were unmarked SUVs full of Oakland police cruising around the downtown area, as well as sheriffs and motorcycle pigs hanging around the periphery of 14th and Broadway.

The energy built up with chants, heckling of the cops standing in lines across the street, and a ferocious freestyle session. Soon after 9, the group flooded into the street, heading south on Broadway. Banners declared “Better to die on your feet than live on your knees”, “Not gay as in happy, but queer as in fuck OPD” and “Police nowhere, liberation everywhere”. People donned masks as we neared the OPD headquarters, Wiley Manuel Courthouse and Glenn Dyer detention center on 7th St. Upon arrival, it was clear the pigs weren’t going to allow a fireworks show like the New Year’s Eve noise demo. Up to 50 pigs were stationed in one-deep lines, directly in front of their headquarters, with more pigs down Washington Street defending their vehicle lot, and others near Clay St. Judging by their arrangement, they were ready to surround and arrest us, to kettle the confrontational crowd. The mood was strange, quiet as we stood before the OPD’s fortress. The gap between the rage we wanted to unleash on the police and the reality of our suddenly indecisive crowd facing off a line of armed cops was unsettling. Our lack of confidence, of memory of overt collective resistance weighed heavy on us that moment. We milled in the street, someone shoved a shopping cart towards the cops. A few bottles were thrown. The hostility towards the police was too diffuse and they were too prepared in their defensive position for the immediate situation to escalate in a way that could benefit us.

 

Soon the decision was made to stay mobile, and we headed back to Broadway. The crowd took a left, and as we headed up the street several black-clad hooligans attacked two police cars that were stopped on the street, slashing their tires, and bottles were thrown at the pigs once more. At this point the divide in the crowd became evident — with OakFoSho who livestreams many Occupy Oakland demonstrations shouting “I wish I could catch the motherfuckers who are throwing shit on film”, and a few others decrying the bottle throwers. While militant tactics are not above critique (and there’s definitely much tactical learning and evolution to be done), threatening or filming people fighting back against the police is doing the pigs’ work for them.

 

ftpsign.jpg

 

Despite the unclear intentions of the group as a whole, some agitated for the march to turn towards the cop shop again, and ultimately it took a left on 9th Street and headed back to Washington. Strolling among the holiday-light bedazzled trees of the Oldtown commercial district, the chants of “Kill Pigs” and “A.C.A.B — all cops are bastards” lent a dissonant affect to the moment. Yuppies gawked from the upscale bars and restaurants as the active minority of a discontent populace streamed past them. We can only hope they enjoyed the sound of the Starbucks plate glass window shattering as much as we did. A few blocks down a Wells Fargo received an equally warm embrace. Shortly after that we passed a KTVU news van. It was swarmed by several people, some puncturing the tires, some scrawling a circle-A on the façade and others tearing the cables from the exposed switch board. This gesture should illuminate our relationship towards the media – they will never be our allies, we are not interested in pandering to them. This is war, and they are on the wrong side.

 

On this second approach, riot cops had formed a line blocking the way down Washington to the court. This was their technique in the early days of Occupy Oakland, when there was often almost no police presence at marches, until they approached 7th and Washington. But at this point we had more momentum than before, there was no way we would simply turn back. The “Fuck the Police” banner-carriers stepped up directly to the line, behind them a small bonfire was lit, and people let fly more bottles. But even though the energy had been high, there was no solid black bloc and those who were more confrontational were vulnerable to identification. Soon, the cops advanced, pushing the banner back and stomping out the fire. After they advanced, they began clearly pointing out and shining lights at those they wanted to target for arrest. Whether because of the fire or having sensed the tactical weakness of the group, the pigs suddenly charged.

 

ftpfire.jpg

 

It was a flurry of huge men moving faster than one would think possible. They clearly went after specific individuals, as well as those who were trampled or fell behind. They beat a few people badly with batons, and shot others with rubber bullets and bean bags that left a colored mark on clothing. The crowd was generally pushed north, and many escaped, but a group was kettled on 9th Street between Washington and Broadway. This kettle was eventually given a dispersal order and allowed to leave, although there was another police charge as people were walking north on Broadway. After this, the night ended uneventfully, though there were still cops posted up en masse at the North end of the plaza for some time. 6 people were arrested, 3 of whom were released without charges, and one of whom who is facing five felonies and one misdemeanor. Saturday night was a change of tactics for the OPD. In keeping with the intensifying direct repression of the Oakland Commune, this was the first time they had relied on snatching and kettling. Their sudden charges also seemed out of character, as though our stubborn resistance enraged or unnerved them. The OPD also tailed one person as they were leaving the march, and pulled them over to harass and search them.

 

The apparatus of the police is what holds us back from so many of our dreams. It is only logical that occupiers and other rebels have made a habit of marching between the plaza and the bastion of law and order: the former a hotbed of subversive conversation and anti-capitalist scheming, the latter the organizational center of a reactionary, murderous force and a node in the network of confinement and criminalization. By establishing a circulation between the radical social center of our city and the compound where the attack on that dangerous sociality is staged, the occupation has expanded on territorial battles that were already present in Oakland. In dead urban space, Occupy Oakland created a flourishing social space that was — is — antagonistic to the city’s control. While OPD asserts their sovereignty in East Oakland by murdering and beating people of color, in downtown they do it with tear gas and rubber bullets.

 

tumblr_lxh0ngegcx1r3qtlq.jpg

 

But while it is useful to encroach on the pigs’ territory as much as we can, there’s a danger of falling into an unthinking pattern. 7th and Washington isn’t the only place that crystallizes the relationship of power between us and the state — what we’re up against not only goes far beyond those buildings, it’s more than the police. It remains to be seen if these weekly marches will become something else entirely or fizzle out, but either way we need to think through our tactics and strategies. We cannot take on a fully armed counter-insurgency force directly. If we want to keep our commune alive in the streets and foster rebellion in the metropolis of the Bay Area, it will take some serious discipline and creativity. Our demonstrations must shift in form and content, and be able to adapt to contemporary circumstances. The time has already come to attack what represses us, seize what we need, and strike in unexpected ways. If we cannot provide for ourselves and create new forms of living in Oscar Grant Plaza, we will do it elsewhere. Now that we have tasted the joy of gathering defiantly in the open air and molding our own worlds, we can’t go back. In the words of some Spanish comrades, “the greatest violence would be returning to normality”. The police intend to enforce that normality. We, however, refuse to accept it, and wager instead on the rebels of Oakland.

 

Long live the Oakland Commune, freedom to our comrades and all prisoners!

 

Here is some footage of the January 7th demonstration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...