Frances Bula header image 2
← →

The history of a long, strange campaign that got Occupied

November 14th, 2011 · 65 Comments

My weekend story about the history of this campaign, that started with casinos and chickens.

And a side story with thumbnail sketches of the issues being ignored.

Categories: Uncategorized

←  Older Comments
 →
  • IanS

    Sadly, as I recall, the trough was empty at the time, Chris. But I’m sure you recall that and, of course, there’s no point in repeating old arguments.

    I just couldn’t help but chuckle the irony, that’s all.

  • Chris Keam

    “the trough was empty at the time”

    That’s not true Ian. C’mon man, if you’re going to interject yourself into a conversation between two other people, don’t lower the signal to noise ratio.

    thx

    CK

  • IanS

    “That’s not true Ian.”

    We will have to agreed to disagree on that one, Chris.

    But I do apologize for the interjection. As I said, the irony of your statement was worth a chuckle.

    But please, carry on.

  • spartikus

    More sage observations on #Occupy (IMHO of course)

    The idea inherent in much of the OWS strategic commentary is that information-age social networks could help the occupiers build up a strategic infrastructure through viral replication. Rapid and wide-ranging infrastructure generation is made possible by the low transaction costs of communication and organization that network technologies and forms of organization make possible. This is undoubtedly true. A system, driven by its own dynamics, can rapidly generate infrastructure, especially given an operating concept as tailor-made for economic and political downturns as the concept of the “99%.”

    However, such an infrastructure, once built, has its own upkeep costs—which can be steep. An encampment is not a 4Chan server that people can virtually peruse. It’s a real place where people have to be clothed, fed, and kept warm, clean, and safe, and there are important organizational and tactical decisions that have to be made every single day. In short, maintaining this infrastructure requires resources, physical and intellectual labor, and organizational acumen. Maintaining the infrastructure is also a cognitively draining task, especially when the organization itself is fractious and has important fissures as to how to allocate resources. These problems are not exclusive to political activists camped out in New York. Crisis management and the daily minutia required to keep a system running squeezes out strategy and long-term thinking in defense too. But there’s a crucial difference between DoD and Zucotti: even relatively small pieces of the DoD budget could put all of the OWS up in five-star hotels and drinking more Cristal than Jay-Z and Kanye West combined.

    Organizations with resources have more of a cushion to compensate for becoming consumed with their own internal dynamics. Whatever the political decision-making problems the US currently faces, it is still the richest and most powerful nation-state in the history of the state system. It isn’t a good thing that we can’t seem to make crucial decisions about priorities, but it’s drastically worse for OWS.

    The organization is caught in something of a trap. Without a plausible means of satisfying its amorphous demands or at least realizing a goal that would allow it to “declare victory and go home,” it must stay within its camps to maintain the infrastructure and media attention it has built. But the logistical costs inherent in maintaining the infrastructure indefinitely are fearsome. And although it uses public land, the movement cannot expect the public, however sympathetic to their aims, to allow a disruptive presence to remain in perpetuity—especially if the disruption imposes basic quality of life costs.

  • IanS

    @spartikus #54,

    I think that all makes sense, but would also add that, in the absence of coherent goal or strategy for achieving that goal, the whole protest eventually becomes about nothing more than sustaining itself, ie maintaining that purposeless “infrastructure”. Viewed in the most positive light, it’s a terrible waste of energy.

    Once again, I think that right wing ideologue Gary Trudeau has the right of it:

    http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/archive/2011/11/10

  • Joe Just Joe

    Am I following this correctly?
    They are asking that we are to house/clothe/fed/ these free thinkers as they work on developing a utopian society for mankind?
    Think this was done before in history…
    Doesn’t seem much different then today either with professors in ivory towers, only difference is you have to earn a spot and not just turn up. Mind you most of this occupy stuff is too deep for me, I’m sure I’m missing the point again.

  • Bill

    “They are asking that we are to house/clothe/fed/ these free thinkers as they work on developing a utopian society for mankind?”

    Maybe the Hollyhucksters could pay them to work on their 500 year plan.

  • Roger Kemble

    You obviously didn’t read Matt Taibbi carefully Spartikus @ #54. And if I may humbly, very humbly, infer you do not understand the cause and effects of mass movements, revolutions and civil wars.

    You are trying to intellectualize something that is unconsciously somatic.

    Understandable: we haven’t had one! They do not happen over night. OCCUPY certainly has the seeds of long and violent struggles ahead.

    Take for instance the Mexican Revolution (IMO, a civil war). El Grito was Miguel Hidalgo’s battle cry as far back as 1811.

    And thru all the turbulence, rise and fall of Iturbide, empire, Juárez, Maximilian y Charlotta, then back to Juárez, the long Porfiriato all through the nineteenth century until 1911. Thinq of it, a hundred years of people pissed-off and then boom.

    And it all started in little country farming pueblo called Guanajuato with The Cry, El Grito, from a country priest.

    You are a literary man: read “The Death of Artemio Cruz by Carlos Fuentes, my favourite author. It’ll help you understand today. ¡Miso Glissie,tambien!.

    OCCUPY is just the beginning and if history is any indication it will prevail.

  • Chris Keam

    Roger Kemble:

    I think we locked horns way back and so it goes, but I admire you for not falling into the trap so many people do as they move through life, of becoming more and more conservative and unable to accept change and new approaches.

    Fair winds,

    CK

  • Norman

    I would be a lot more supportive of Occupy Vancouver if the occupiers made it drug and alcohol free.

  • Higgins

    CK #47 and others…
    LMAO! Having a hard on for Glissy?
    Man, oh, man is maybe time for you to take your head out of your behind and take a full breath of fresh air.
    What difference does it make who Glissando is, he’s right, you could simply go and check the facts, and then judge for yourself.
    How good is it for you, in terms of … we know who you are, if what you generally say is BS, innuendo, makes no sense… blah, blah, blah… other that we know who you are.
    Ha!

  • Chris Keam

    Higgins:

    Glissando Remmy sez we should listen to him because of his background and experience. It stands to reason one might ask for proof of same. Quite simple really.

  • Roger Kemble

    Chris Keam @ #59

    “I admire you for not . . . becoming more and more conservative . . .”

    Thanxqz Chris but this isn’t really about me.

    “. . . we locked horns way back . . . Oh, I hope not . . .

  • Andrea C.

    Norman:

    I gather you avoid the Granville Mall in the evening as religiously as I do, then.

  • Norman

    Andrea C: Concentrating the bars in one place was a bad idea in my opinion, but why confuse the issue?

←  Older Comments
 →