How to destroy the Occupy Movement and how to prevent it from failing

[pnwmom]

The snippet below is part of a longer article -- well worth reading in its entirety.


The writer, Paul Chappell, is the Peace Leadership Director for the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

http://www.peaceworkersus.org/how-to-destroy-the-occupy-movement-and-how-to-prevent-it-from-failing/

Governments control people by dividing them, and if I wanted to destroy the Occupy Movement the first thing I would do is encourage people in the movement to have an “us versus them” mentality. The government is notorious for planting undercover agents in social movements who intend to destroy the movement from within, and anyone who wants to destroy the Occupy Movement should use agents to increase the “us versus them” rhetoric.

This can be done with signs and slogans that portray all wealthy people, corporate employees, and police officers as evil. Occupy Movement protests in many cities have had signs with the words, “Eat the rich” (which is a message that endorses violence), and during the Occupy Oakland protest a picture was taken of an activist holding a sign, “All my heroes kill cops.” If a government agent wasn’t behind that sign, then a protestor was doing the government’s work for free.

The truth is that police officers are part of the 99 percent, and in many areas they are losing their jobs due to government cutbacks. . . . But there are always good cops. There were the good cops who recognized what we were doing was a benefit to the neighborhood, and who would basically tell us how to deal with those racist and renegade cops in the neighborhood by filing complaints and filing reports.”
Activist Blase Bonpane says, “If anyone in your movement advocates violence, always assume they are an undercover government agent.”

SNIP

If protestors aren’t mentally prepared for the challenges ahead and are expecting immediate results, their frustration will swell and the cries for violence will become more potent. Someone in the movement will say, “We’ve been doing this nonviolence thing for eight months and no significant change has happened. I am starting to get impatient. If we want change, we must resort to violence.” There are certainly people in the Occupy Movement who have this mindset now, but as frustration and impatience increase within the movement their violent rhetoric will gain more traction.

Social movements are long-distance marathons, not sprints, and they all involve a series of victories and setbacks. The better we understand this, the less frustrated we will become, the less likely we will be to lose hope due to disappointment, and the less prone we will be to becoming violent and destroying the movement from within. To be effective in any struggle for peace and justice we must balance urgency with patience, and we must be disciplined, strategic, and well trained.

SNIP

[Cirque du So-What]

1. If protestors had begun taking to the streets years ago

when it most certainly was warranted, I could understand 'frustration and impatience' on their part. The occupy movement is in its infancy, so the desire for instant gratification needs to be suppressed, because we're in this for the long haul.

[Quartermass]

2. The irony is this piece

Sets an us versus them mentality, by stating that anybody who has an independent opinion other than what the movement must be a government agent. In short, it's a false dichotomy.

People who value free speech allows other people to have their own independent opinions. Not everybody is for the government. Some people just like violence and to cause as much chaos as possible, like the Joker in Batman: Dark Knight. Some people just love to watch the world burn and will do what they can to encourage it.

But I do agree that one should be cautious. Because anything a person does can and will be used against them in order to discredit them in any way possible. It's one of the best ways to destroy a message, because if a person is a hypocrite in any way shape or form, then that discredits the message. Most people do go by that standard. Other people can see through that tactic and understand that it is the message that is important, not the messenger.

The big guys have a lot of dirty rotten tricks up their sleeves, and that's something to watch out for.

[pnwmom]

3. Those people who "just like violence" whether they are government agents or not

would destroy the movement from within. The rest of the people in OWS need to do what they can to prevent this.

Free speech doesn't mean people are free to throw bombs.

[Amonester]

4. So if ONE sign shows "All my heroes kill cops" it means everyone

there "wants" the same?

Since when?

That is a stupid supposition.

[pnwmom]

7. Maybe you should read the whole piece. That's NOT what it says. AT ALL.

But if one person puts up a sign like that, and some television camera takes a picture of it, millions of Americans may WRONGLY think this is representative of the movement.

[Amonester]

8. (WRONGLY) I agree that's the problem.

Why is it the problem? WRONGLY educated? (Or/and NOT educated?)

[pnwmom]

10. Partly. Most people aren't very aware of how the media creates the message.

So we have to very disciplined in attempting to control the message -- in not giving them ammunition to use against us.

[firehorse]

12. 25 reps of the media got taken to jail, beaten and bashed the other day - some are trying.

If you are a journalist, your story has to get approved by an editor. You do not just get to hang out wherever you want all day and hope a story emerges. Freelance writers even for major papers get just a little bit of $ per story. And that story has to have an interesting hook and something different from competing stories of the day before to get published. I have friends who are reporters. Murder scenes on 120th street may take precedence over the jay walking ticket across from Zucotti. He's got to write several stories a week just to pay the rent.

Not all media is coiffed blondes on Faux news.

[sufrommich]

11. Do you feel the same way bout the widely shared and

deservedly mocked signs from the Tea Party rallies? Of course signs matter.

[Amonester]

13. The TeaRoarists' signs R almost all the same

and spelled wrong.

[firehorse]

5. The other way to ruin the movement would be to install leaders, hierarchy and endorse politicians

Good point about these movements being "long-distance marathons, not sprints with a SERIES of victories and setbacks."

So many people want the movement all controlled and tidy and wrapped up, as if its something that should be cleaned and polished then stored within the pages of coffee table book, printed and delivered by christmas.

[Fumesucker]

6. A clear case of nutpicking..

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nutpicking


The practice of sifting through the comments of blogs, email threads, discussion groups and other user generated content in an attempt find choice quotes proving that the advocates for or against a particular political opinion are unreasonable, uninformed extremists.

[Hutzpa]

14. kick

:kick:

[woo me with science]

24. That's exactly what it is. nt

[OneGrassRoot]

9. K&R! n/t

[deucemagnet]

15. I believe OWS reached critical mass some time ago.

There's no stopping it now.

As far as the "good cops", if they're providing refuge for the violent ones behind the blue wall of silence, then they're not really good cops.

[pnwmom]

19. Same thing for the OWS people.

If they were to provide refuge for any violent people in their midst, then they're not really good people either. Hopefully, they'll continue on a peaceful path, no matter what the provocation.

[KT2000]

16. Keep it leaderless

for success as well. Keep the face of it the people who show up and are interviewed. "They" are frustrated they do not have any individuals to discredit.

[Zorra]

17. After a few more years of self debriefing, the author may

understand why OWS has not and will not ever become violent.

It seems like he is on a good path.

I hope he joins with us, and just listens for awhile.

I'm quite sure he'll get it.

[JDPriestly]

18. The author of the article means well but is thinking in an old paradigm.

I watch the protestors. They are a totally different from prior protestors.

They are better educated, more focused on communication with each other and more patient than prior protestors.

They are not focused on an "issue." They want to change the structure of society.

Their demands are not the usual laundry list -- rights for this group or that, but rather a request for a change in the power structure of society.

Oddly enough, these mostly young people who have grown up in the internet age are ready for a more democratic form of governance. And even more strange is the fact that our Constitution can easily accommodate that more democratic form of governance.

So, this generation, the generation we see on the streets, is what our Founding Fathers wished to become.

It's a strange convergence of historical and contemporary consciousness.

That is how I see it. This social movement is democracy in action. It's peaceful demeanor is intrinsic to its nature, not something that is adopted as a strategy. It is nonviolent because it is about nonviolence not because it is using nonviolence to get something.

That is how I see it at this point. The violence of the police places stress on the movement, but so far the intrinsic nature of the movement remains staying non-violent and democratic, allowing each to be heard in their turn, in the face of that stress.

[October]

20. I agree, except that this isn't generational -- the protestors of OWS are of ALL ages.

/nt

[JDPriestly]

22. True, but they meet on the internet, stream on the internet and are

an internet, I-phone phenomenon. Their organization is more like a chat on the internet or the I-phone, more like Facebook than like traditional "meetings."

[OneGrassRoot]

21. I don't think people take the time to read anything more than four paragraphs...

either that or my perception of what we're reading, versus the perception of most here at DU, has become so far apart that I feel like I'm on a different planet.

Now I have no planet.

:(


Edit to add that I thought this was an excellent piece, and see this man as very much FOR OWS. He just gave a lot of interesting background and tidbits, not necessarily commentary on OWS but upon society in general in a historical context based on his experience.

:shrug:

[applegrove]

23. There are so many types of inequality to talk about too. Inequality is an inclusive term.