Just what the title says. The video is more geared towards hunters and sports shooters, but it is solid advice all around.
Nov 17, 2011
Tip of the Day: Occupy but Don't Rely on Fixed Ground
I haven't done a "Tip of the Day" for quite sometime, but after recent events and discussion with old comrades, I just had one lesson of guerrilla warfare relevant to the current Occupy movement(s).
It increasingly seems as though there is a coordinated, perhaps federally effort by cities across the country to forcibly remove Occupy encampments and the allegedly constitutionally-protected protesters. Occupy Oakland is the closest to my heart, having been brutally dispersed twice, but also Occupy San Francisco, which as I write this is expecting a raid before the sun rises. Occupiers need to stand their ground and attempt to hold it.
But if they cannot, it is important to remember that as a smaller force facing a larger, technologically superior army of fascist enforcers of Captial, the Occupy movement must not rely on fixed ground. This is the strength of a leaderless, non-hierarchical model; the ability to be amorphous and mobile. If a group cannot keep a camp established, they must organize quickly to re-group and decide on a course of action.
You cannot stomp out a wildfire, it will spread.
By not relying on fixed ground but instead being able to regroup and act quickly, you will stay ahead of the forces of repression. If a group has the cohesion and direction, establishing new camps, continuing marches and direct actions, and taking the next logical step to occupying BUILDINGS and the means of production is both possible and, in my view, they only way to move forward with the Occupy movement(s).
It increasingly seems as though there is a coordinated, perhaps federally effort by cities across the country to forcibly remove Occupy encampments and the allegedly constitutionally-protected protesters. Occupy Oakland is the closest to my heart, having been brutally dispersed twice, but also Occupy San Francisco, which as I write this is expecting a raid before the sun rises. Occupiers need to stand their ground and attempt to hold it.
But if they cannot, it is important to remember that as a smaller force facing a larger, technologically superior army of fascist enforcers of Captial, the Occupy movement must not rely on fixed ground. This is the strength of a leaderless, non-hierarchical model; the ability to be amorphous and mobile. If a group cannot keep a camp established, they must organize quickly to re-group and decide on a course of action.
You cannot stomp out a wildfire, it will spread.
By not relying on fixed ground but instead being able to regroup and act quickly, you will stay ahead of the forces of repression. If a group has the cohesion and direction, establishing new camps, continuing marches and direct actions, and taking the next logical step to occupying BUILDINGS and the means of production is both possible and, in my view, they only way to move forward with the Occupy movement(s).
Nov 8, 2011
A Critique of the Authoritarian "Peace Police" and How to Defend against Them
Having been attending street protests and other direct actions in the San Francisco Bay Area since I moved here, I thought I had a pretty good pulse on how thing went on the streets. Then the #occupytogether movement started. Suddenly the context and participants in street actions have changed dramatically.
The most notable development that has come with the rise of OccupySF and Occupy Oakland is the presence of what have been termed "'peace' police," self-appointed protest marshals who try to stop people from "being violent." Their presence, in my opinion has been extremely disruptive and divisive to the movement, creating conflict between protesters at moments when unity is needed. I feel them to be an authoritarian force and a threat to the movement; as such we must learn to defend ourselves from the "'peace' police" and mitigate their harmful effects.
There has been much speculation as to whether or not the "'peace' police" are in fact police or acting on their behalf. To me this question in irrelevant, whatever their motives may be, their effect is the same, disruption and distraction; they turn people against each other in the streets, in the midst of the moment they sew confusion and chaos amongst the ranks of protesters
Also when activists start accusing each other of being "agent provocateurs," this only serves to create divisions and strife within the movement. COINTELPRO used this tactic to great effect. We don't need to do the pigs' job for them; don't accuse other activists of working with the cops unless you have evidence or eye-witness testimony.
The occupy movement is by design a leaderless, non-hierarchically organized movement. The "'peace' police" act in extremely authoritarian and often violent ways. These people have not been delegated the role of march marshal by any group or assembly; they are enforcing non-existent rules, effectively imposing their ideas on tactics and strategy on other protesters, simply because they feel as though they are right.
The "'peace' police" often claim to be enforcing a consensus decision on group adherence to non-violent tactics. Assuming this is true and that somehow people are bound by the consensus process of a GA they may not have attended, this does not mean that people can appoint themselves to be enforcers of that decision. Largely absent from the discussion and completely ignored in consensus at these assemblies are two important things: A) an agreed upon definition of violence and non violence and B)what are acceptable tactics under these agreed upon definitions.
These contradictions are played out on the streets. Here are some examplse of actions protesters have taken which others have deemed to be "violent," "dangerous," or "against the movement": use of snap and pop and party poppers during a march, being loud and boisterous, banging on trash can lids, yelling at cops and calling them names, using profanity, blocking police vehicles with bodies and barricades, graffiti.
While enforcing their imagined code of non-violence, these "'peace' police" often get very aggressive and even physically violent. I had a "'peace' pig" in one breath tell me not to be violent and in they next breath be in my face saying that if I wanted to be violent, he would kick my ass with martial arts. At the Oakland general strike, one protester kept attempting to defend windows from being smashed and at one point picked up a broken flag pole and swung it violently towards other protesters and media; in other words to defend this bank, to defend a corporation's property from "violence", this individual was willing to violently attack human life.
Simply put, the "'peace' police" are self appointed enforcers of rules that are poorly defined and non-binding in nature, in authoritarian and often violent ways.
People active in the moment who are dedicated to anti-authoritarianism and a diversity of tactics, must learn to defend individuals and the movement against these divisive agents of "peace." There are a number of things I have found to be effective:
•Don't allow them to provoke you. Once you engage them in argumentation, they have done their job. They have distracted you from whatever you were doing and created a hostile confrontation during the event.
•Stick together. If you see a comrade being harassed by the "'peace' police," back them up. Stand with them and show solidarity. They often go after who they see as individuals being violent and are surprised that others support them and will back off then they become outnumbered.
•Be assertive. If the "'peace' police" are getting in their face, stand your ground and assert your autonomy. If they start trying to physically move you or restrain you, yell "Get your fucking hands off me!" or "You are in my face, YOU BACK UP!" If they tell you to stop being violent, respond "protecting corporations is violence!"
Good luck comrades! Stand together!
The most notable development that has come with the rise of OccupySF and Occupy Oakland is the presence of what have been termed "'peace' police," self-appointed protest marshals who try to stop people from "being violent." Their presence, in my opinion has been extremely disruptive and divisive to the movement, creating conflict between protesters at moments when unity is needed. I feel them to be an authoritarian force and a threat to the movement; as such we must learn to defend ourselves from the "'peace' police" and mitigate their harmful effects.
There has been much speculation as to whether or not the "'peace' police" are in fact police or acting on their behalf. To me this question in irrelevant, whatever their motives may be, their effect is the same, disruption and distraction; they turn people against each other in the streets, in the midst of the moment they sew confusion and chaos amongst the ranks of protesters
Also when activists start accusing each other of being "agent provocateurs," this only serves to create divisions and strife within the movement. COINTELPRO used this tactic to great effect. We don't need to do the pigs' job for them; don't accuse other activists of working with the cops unless you have evidence or eye-witness testimony.
The occupy movement is by design a leaderless, non-hierarchically organized movement. The "'peace' police" act in extremely authoritarian and often violent ways. These people have not been delegated the role of march marshal by any group or assembly; they are enforcing non-existent rules, effectively imposing their ideas on tactics and strategy on other protesters, simply because they feel as though they are right.
The "'peace' police" often claim to be enforcing a consensus decision on group adherence to non-violent tactics. Assuming this is true and that somehow people are bound by the consensus process of a GA they may not have attended, this does not mean that people can appoint themselves to be enforcers of that decision. Largely absent from the discussion and completely ignored in consensus at these assemblies are two important things: A) an agreed upon definition of violence and non violence and B)what are acceptable tactics under these agreed upon definitions.
These contradictions are played out on the streets. Here are some examplse of actions protesters have taken which others have deemed to be "violent," "dangerous," or "against the movement": use of snap and pop and party poppers during a march, being loud and boisterous, banging on trash can lids, yelling at cops and calling them names, using profanity, blocking police vehicles with bodies and barricades, graffiti.
While enforcing their imagined code of non-violence, these "'peace' police" often get very aggressive and even physically violent. I had a "'peace' pig" in one breath tell me not to be violent and in they next breath be in my face saying that if I wanted to be violent, he would kick my ass with martial arts. At the Oakland general strike, one protester kept attempting to defend windows from being smashed and at one point picked up a broken flag pole and swung it violently towards other protesters and media; in other words to defend this bank, to defend a corporation's property from "violence", this individual was willing to violently attack human life.
Simply put, the "'peace' police" are self appointed enforcers of rules that are poorly defined and non-binding in nature, in authoritarian and often violent ways.
People active in the moment who are dedicated to anti-authoritarianism and a diversity of tactics, must learn to defend individuals and the movement against these divisive agents of "peace." There are a number of things I have found to be effective:
•Don't allow them to provoke you. Once you engage them in argumentation, they have done their job. They have distracted you from whatever you were doing and created a hostile confrontation during the event.
•Stick together. If you see a comrade being harassed by the "'peace' police," back them up. Stand with them and show solidarity. They often go after who they see as individuals being violent and are surprised that others support them and will back off then they become outnumbered.
•Be assertive. If the "'peace' police" are getting in their face, stand your ground and assert your autonomy. If they start trying to physically move you or restrain you, yell "Get your fucking hands off me!" or "You are in my face, YOU BACK UP!" If they tell you to stop being violent, respond "protecting corporations is violence!"
Good luck comrades! Stand together!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)