Iran & Occupy Wall Street

The president of Iran, according to a recent report, wants to meet with the proponents of Occupy Wall Street. This meeting will occur as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad goes on a media tour during his visit in New York for the United Nations General Assembly.

In a sense this is an understandable political move because such a meeting with American activists will give him an opportunity to highlight discontent within the United States. On the other hand… it seems as if Ahmadinejad may not understand the Occupy movement any better than American politicians. Who exactly would he plan on meeting with? Occupy Wall Street has never had any centralized leadership and having a hundred members of that movement asking him questions or having a dialogue with him would really not be representative of that movement as a whole. This is even assuming the particular occupiers he meets with are not somehow screened in advance for the purpose of political theater.

Occupy Wall Street was largely initiated by anarchists and with anarchistic principles. To a large extent the movement remains anarchistic despite being watered down with milquetoast liberals and Ron Paul fanboys. So what in the world could the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran expect to find in common with such a movement? The corruption of Wall Street and the U.S. government does not at all suggest that the movement is on the same side as, or in favor of, a repressive theocratic government. And let’s face reality… if this sort of movement had manifested in Iran it would have been attacked by the government of that land, and it’s media, just as the movement was attacked by the U.S. government and it’s media. Quite arguably the attacks on such a movement would have been worse in Iran. Also, certainly, the participation of women would have served as extra motivation to crack down on this movement if it had manifested in Iran.

Don’t get me wrong… I’m sure there are plenty of freedom-loving people in Iran. I suspect that many Iranians haven’t even had their ethics or morality corrupted by theocratic interpretations of religion. Iranians deserve peace and prosperity just like all other populations. But the national leadership of Iran, the theocratic rule of the so-called “Leader of the Revolution,” is undoubtedly just as corrupt as the leadership offered by the politicians in the United States. Overt criticism of Ali Khamenei, within the borders of Iran, is likely to be even more risky than overt criticism of politicians within America. Insomuch as the Iranian government works to stay in power by keeping the Iranian population repressed… the Iranians have much in common with those living within the borders of the United States – who are also repressed by politicians doing whatever they can to stay in power. So while I find the government of Iran to be corrupt and abusive of Iranians, I am in solidarity with the common population of Iran in the same way that I am in solidarity with the common populations of all lands.

The issue at hand isn’t whether or not I believe that Iran is threatened by the military forces of the West, it is. And the issue isn’t whether or not Iranians should have self-determination in the lands where they dwell. My point of contention is with the Iranian government – the destructive projects it undertakes and the oppressive tactics it uses to suppress the Iranian people. This is, as an anarchist, the same issue I have with the U.S. government. And so, when the President of Iran wants to meet with a group of representatives from a movement that I’ve generally supported… I am very skeptical of the motivations for any such meeting.

It seems to me that such a meeting is not at all intended to really help either the people of Iran or the people within the borders of the United States. On the contrary, I see such a meeting as detrimental to both populations. As I mentioned in the opening paragraph, this meeting will give the opportunity to present the United States as a corrupt entity to the people back in Iran. The state media in Iran can point out all the corruption that people in the United States must deal with and the generally flawed system under which they live. No mention of the similar corruption in Iran will be mentioned in such a propaganda piece and, therefore, the United States will be presented as a lesser nation than Iran. The idea will be that “things are rough all over and even if you are a bit discontent with this government… the government elsewhere is just as bad or worse.”

In the United States… the Occupy movement, just because a few supposed representatives of that group intend to meet with the representative of such a corrupt and abusive Iranian system, will be painted as naïve (and possibly as being proponents of such a system themselves). And, truth be told, it probably is pretty naïve for members of a liberation movement to meet with a corrupt leader of a foreign government. Sure, he’ll agree with them about every criticism of the United States that is put forward, and yes, the United States often takes an unnecessarily hostile position towards Iran, but the President of Iran is not an ally of humanity. It’s as simple as that. The enemy of your enemy is often not your ally.

In fact, the government of the United States and the Iranian government have much more in common with each other, and work much more closely together, than is often considered. Even the incessant sabre-rattling and talk of war between these two nations may be little more than a tool used to control the populations in these countries. Such posturing would certainly serve to pump up arms sales. And the relationship between the governments of Iran and the United States, as hostile as it may often seem, actually serve to stabilize and control the price of oil. The fact of the matter is that the governments within both nations actually profit (both politically and financially) because of the positions they maintain relative to each other. They shine a bad light on each other to make themselves look more moderate by comparison and, in so doing, they reinforce their own power and control.

If I didn’t know better… it might even be possible to suspect that the American banking industry was financing Ahmadinejad’s meeting with the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Hell, they could even hire their own stand-ins for the movement to ask all the same old questions and present all the same old legitimate critiques. And, again as stated above, this would play out on Iranian television to serve the Supreme Leader’s propaganda interests and in the United States it would be presented as the Occupy movement cozying up with the authoritarian leadership of oppressive governments. However… this meeting does offer some better possibilities.

A real line of questioning from the Occupy movement in the U.S. would go something like this… “How has the Occupy movement manifested itself in Iran and how has the Iranian government dealt with it?” If Ahmadinejad denied it’s existence there, a follow up could be about more general protests there and how the Iranian Assembly of Experts deals with such protests. And, at this point, any proponents of the Occupy Wall Street movement should repeatedly ask about things like “The Chain Murders” and the execution of political prisoners in 1988.

The effect of such a line of questioning, while perhaps seen as impolitic by some, would be to actually show solidarity with the people of Iran. We could show that we know about their struggles and in many ways, they are the same as our struggles. This would solidify the Occupy Wall Street movement as an international movement and not something merely looking for a few reforms in the United States. We can show that we recognize the harm that Wall Street is doing around the world and how it acts in coordination with oppressive governments around the world.

Because of modern social media technologies, it’s likely that these questions and this information would still reach the general population of Iran. Such a line of questioning would serve to undermine the propaganda model that is currently in place which works to keep people under all governments ignorant about ideas of freedom, peace, and revolution. This is a general project which needs to be undertaken while the opportunity is at hand – because we don’t know when new forms of media will come under tighter control by the controlling powers.

And, finally, I should point out that this proposed meeting between Ahmadinejad and the proponents of Occupy Wall Street first came to my attention on the Drudge Report – which continues to be a very popular source of news and which is generally considered to be right wing website. So the negative association between the Occupy movement and the Iranian government is undoubtedly already being put forward.

Julian Assange’s: World Tomorrow. (Episode 7: The Occupy Movement)

Don’t Go?! Get Real.

The Mifflin Street Block Party has become a right of passage for many students at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Think what you may of it, it’s a persistent event and has proceeded annually on the first Saturday in May since the 1960’s. Although attempts have been made by the city and business interests to co-opt it, it will continue to take place with or without sanction.

The party had its origins in the sixties as an anti-war protest against the school’s complicity with the military-industrial complex — particularly in regard to the Dow Chemical corporation which was recruiting students to make napalm and agent orange. Additionally, the event became a dance party in the streets to show solidarity with the rebellion in France in ’68. Police responded violently to the party, as is their wont, and the students fought back. This is undoubtedly part of the reason why Madison earned the reputation as being the “Berkeley of the midwest.” 

As the party continued to manifest annually, thanks to the rebellious spirit of youthful students, it continued to have political messages tied with it. For example, in 1984, a commemorative t-shirt design was opposed to U.S. involvement with Nicaragua. And, of course, this was fitting for an event such as this one in a progressive city such as Madison. 

However, over the years, the authorities have attempted to co-opt the party. The city has given tenuous approval (of an event it couldn’t stop) and businesses have been allowed to set up stages and push corporate booze. It might even be argued that the city and the university has encouraged drunkenness and apolitical revelry at this event. This is effectively what has happened (by design or not).

And, when you really think about it, the University and City officials have an interest in maintaining a culture of drunken revelry — not that I’m opposed to that revelry either, mind you. But, as the economic engine of the city, those institutions may not necessarily be opposed to drunken students taking 5 years to graduate (or more) — as long as those students keep paying their tuition fees. 

But even without such an insidious conspiracy, what kind of product is the University offering? Is it really worth the decades of debt that so many young people now face? Increasingly, that answer seems to be “no.” Recent polls have indicated that the majority of recent graduates do not find employment in their fields of study (if they find work at all) and many are underemployed. Even when a fitting job is found… the debt often remains an incredible burden. 

The rise of tuition costs has far outpaced inflation and the effect of this has had many negative effects — not all of which are obvious.  Because of the incredible cost of higher education, students are no long as able to question the authority of the evermore corporatized campus administration. Walk-outs and involvement with campus protests are much more risky and potentially expensive. So students are in a catch-22. The administration can continuously push for harsher campus policies and students can’t risk their academic careers in protest because they’re heavily invested, indebted even, and they are forced to think more about their future careers in the technocratic system (which may never even pan out for them). This effect even extends into their professional lives because the student debt prevents them from challenging their employers over unethical practices. Essentially… higher tuition makes indentured servants of students whether they ever reap any rewards from the system or not. 

For these reasons, and many more, I am not incredibly opposed to the students at the University of Wisconsin (or any other university) attending an event like the Mifflin Street Block Party. Obviously, the worst drunken behavior is to be frowned upon — but that type of behavior occurs anyway, and even at university-approved events (like the football games). So… it was no surprise when the UW Madison Dean of Students, Lori Berquam, was so panned for telling students to “don’t go.” But, ironically, her condescending message was potentially the best thing to happen for the Mifflin Street Block Party in years. Her video message served to inspire an anti-establishment sentiment that had been waning over the years. Of course her disapproval was going to be met with mockery by the student body! The event has never really been sanctioned by the University, or the city officials, and never needs to be. 

And why should the students of UW Madison respect the administration?! The officials of the the university have been making a mint by corralling young people into debt without much promise for any real compensation. It’s an evermore apparent reality that university students are being conned into buying an increasingly expensive and faulty product. At the same time… corporations are subsidizing the curriculum and the Madison isthmus has become one of the most policed jurisdictions in the country. Essentially, the pitch of UW Madison should be this… “Come buy an expensive degree that will hardly guarantee you employment, go into incredible debt without having anything tangible to show for it, and stay in line… or else.” 

So the question is not whether students should gather and party at the Mifflin Street Block Party, but rather… why?  Frankly, I’m not opposed to students merely gathering to defend their right to party. However, that motive can undermined and self-defeating. But we can look to the past and see ample reason for having a party in protest. Moreover, we can look at contemporary student movements around the country, and around the world, which are rising up, en masse, to challenge their university systems. Students in Montreal, Canada, have been on strike for weeks now and have rallied with tens-of-thousands in the streets — all because of a proposed increase in tuition to US$2500/semester. Last year, in the UK, students made international news with their protests against anti-education policies (after storming the Tory party headquarters the year before). In Chile there have been major protests over the cost of education. In California the students have occupied buildings and suffered police brutality in their efforts to defend access to affordable public education.  Similar protests have occurred in South Korea, Argentina, and elsewhere.   

Madison, with a history of progressive and radical protests, seems like the next logical place for people to stand up and defend their rights to an affordable education. Last year’s mass protests at the capitol prove that Madison can bring people into the streets. And many of the issues related to that protest are incredibly relevant to the students as well — with the Governor proposing $250 million dollars in cuts to the the UW system over the current two year period. Governor Walker also proposes to remove Madison from the UW system while taking immediate personal control over the Board of Trustees by appointing 11 of the 21 members. So… the question is whether students want to allow the University (along with all other levels of education) to suffer massive budget cuts while becoming evermore corporatized.  If not… this alone might be a good reason to protest.  And if you do protest… you’ll have the support of people all across the state, country, and world. 

The choice is yours, as students, whether or not you want to tolerate the status quo or stand up for yourselves and your future. And you should be aware that the issues raised here are but a small sample of the growing problems you will face in your lifetimes.  So a revived spirit of protest around the Mifflin Street Block Party should only be the start of radical changes that need to take place. Rising tuition costs are actually just second world problems, at worst. If you want a better world, and a better future, you’ll need to take a stand and fight for all your rights.

If you’ve enjoyed this article… you may also like a previous article I’ve written (on similar subjects) entitled Values of a College Education.  And, as always, I hope you’ll consider sharing this article and subscribing to the blog.  Cheers! 

There is a difference between a declaration of martial law and a draconian crackdown…

I would like to challenge everyone to examine more closely what martial law actually is, and then… consider what has effectively been declared with the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 — especially when taken together with previous legislation like the Patriot Act.  I won’t condescend to explain here what the NDAA or the Patriot Act is (follow the links), but I’d really like people to take a moment for consideration about the implications of this growing body of overtly authoritarian, and even totalitarian, legislation.  While most cities and towns don’t have tanks rolling through their streets every day, and while curfews are rare, I’d suggest that there are more subtle factors to martial law than these things.  Additionally, while a widespread crackdown and purge of assorted “radicals” hasn’t occurred yet, I’d like to point out that the legislation in question allows, and paves the way, for precisely that.  This legislation is, effectively, a declaration of Martial law by the U.S. government.  While arguably few people have been subjected to the worst effects of this legislation, the declaration has been made and many people are, basically and technically, existing in violation of current U.S. law.  If you are living within the borders of the United States of America, you are living under martial law at this very moment. 

Finally, while I don’t want to argue too much about definitions… the U.S. has more prisoners per capita (and in total numbers) than any other nation on Earth.  Wiretapping and other broad surveillance measures have been codified by the state.  American citizens can now be arrested by the military, detained, and imprisoned indefinitely without the right to a trial.  All of this amounts to the very definition of a totalitarian police state.

#OCCUPYWALLSTREET: Pacers, and leaders & spokesmen! Oh my!

As an early supporter of the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET protest movement, I wrote a request a few days ago to the protesters involved with that movement. While waiting to for a good time to make that request public, an online acquaintance put forward a statement (from a conservative perspective) which covered some of the same points I wanted to make… so I put it off a bit more. But now, I feel I need to put out the statement in a timely manner — because my concerns expressed therein suddenly feel more justified. I will post that statement immediately before this one and point out, once again, that I was spreading information about this protest while few others were and have consistently done so from the beginning. And while I certainly claim no ownership of this movement (I can’t and wouldn’t), I humbly request that those involved with the movement read these messages from an early supporter.

Today, while looking at the Guardian’s “live coverage” of the protest, I came across some statements and words which heretofore I had not regularly seen in association with this movement. The first was a statement by someone name Christopher Longenecker who was identified as the “head of march planning and tactics.” This title in itself struck me as odd in the context of a heretofore leaderless movement but then the quote given from this person was even more shocking: “We don’t do illegal actions.”

What? Double take. Really? So all the people up until now, on the first days of the protest, who made this occupation happen from the first day, who left the sidewalks and took to the streets in violation of official orders, who were they? At best, this Longenecker person seems confused. Civil disobedience has been a known ingredient and accepted tactic of this protest movement from the get go. And, surprise, civil disobedience is illegal. So… who was this Longenecker speaking for when giving quotes to the Guardian? How was this person given such authority and such a title as “head of march planning and tactics.” I highly doubt such a title and role was granted by the consensus process. I’d bet dollars to donuts that it certainly wasn’t granted at a meeting with all of the protesters heretofore involved with the occupation.

So then this Longenecker person continues to accuse “provocateurs” of misleading the march onto the Brooklyn Bridge Saturday when 700 people were eventually arrested. He speaks of “pace-keepers” who were “scattered throughout the marches, including the one on Saturday,” and says that “One of the pace-keepers was standing between the march and the highway and she was yelling as loud as possible that what was on the road was an illegal autonomous unplanned action – that the legal route was over the walkway and they weren’t supposed to take the highway.” Well, if that’s the case, if these protest officials, under the title of “pace-keepers,” were at the march… then why weren’t people listening to them? Could it possibly be that the protesters simply ignored their directions and chose to take the more bold route where a bigger story would inevitably be made? One person at the protest on the bridge had a sign that read, “NYPD, please respond civilly to civil disobedience.” Why would this person have such a sign if illegal civil disobedience was entirely unplanned? Are we to believe this person might have been an agent provocateur? Get real.

And so then… another person, Thorin Caristo, was identified by the Guardian as an “OWS media spokesmen” and apparently said they were working through video to identify provocateurs. But, at the same time as pointing out so-called provocateurs, this person said, “We are a really open democracy here. Saturdays situation happened really quick and showed the vulnerability of a group that has no leaders.” So what if these supposed “provocateurs” are merely offering a more appealing course of action? What if people are choosing by their own volition to take the more aggressive and unpermitted protest routes — with the implied understanding that it might entail more risk? What if some people calculated the risks for themselves and knew that the Brooklyn Bridge march would even further put this protest on the map? And so what if someone is arguing for such action, direction, and tactics? That does not make them a provocateur in the negative sense, it makes them an agitator — and fairly successful ones at that.  It’s possible, and they might have been provocateurs, but that hardly seems proven and actually seems to the contrary.  

So… I’m sorry (not really) if other protesters aren’t heeding the “heads” and “spokesmen” and “pace-keepers” and other supposed leaders of this movement. But obviously they don’t need you and are putting this protest on the map despite you. And while I might be accused of being divisive, I’m not the one accusing those who don’t heed your orders (or those who are offering different plans) of being agent provocateurs. And I’m not the one attempting to hamstring the movement by making such spurious claims about it not engaging in illegal actions. And while I’m also not making any direct accusations, I’m reminded of the anti-war protests a few years back in Oakland where the police actually took on the leadership role in protest marches. That’s something to keep in mind.

In my other article on this subject I wanted to bring up the recent demonstrations in Madison, Wisconsin. Those protests had potential but they essentially failed because of the leadership. While the recall election didn’t really change much, a general strike was in favor amongst a lot of the rank & file and would have shut the state down until Walker was ousted from office. But that’s the thing… the Wisconsin protests were hindered by the leadership and an unwillingness to truly inconvenience business as usual. This has not seemed to be the case so far in NYC — and this protest movement is growing as similar occupations pop up around the country.

By all means… stay Gandhianif that’s what you, and the other protesters are cut out for. But don’t confuse Gandhian non-violence with pacifism. The weakness of non-violent activists in recent years, however, has been precisely because of that confusion. Non-violent does not mean obedient and within the confines of legality. If you want to have a non-violent protest, or even a non-violent revolution, people are going to have to take risks and be prepared to sacrifice. But you don’t need a figure-head or a leader like Gandhi, or MLK, or Ralph Nader, or Christopher Longenecker to act together in solidarity.

I’d go further to say that those who don’t go along with the non-violent tactics should not be condemned out of hand, but I don’t know if my point will be understood. I’m thinking about the unemployed guy whose brother died in Iraq, whose grandfather had his pension stolen, whose grandmother had her house foreclosed, whose sister is imprisoned for trumped-up drug charges, and whose mother lost her job to downsizing despite record profits at the corporation she works for. Such people exist, and may act rashly, but who are any of us to condemn them for acting out in that context? I’m not necessarily saying I would condone any or all actions they take, but I might not entirely disown or condemn them. Further… I don’t see harm to non-sentient inanimate objects as violence. I see property destruction more along the lines of civil disobedience. But I digress, and don’t want to confuse the issue. My simple opposition to corporate fascism by itself opens me up to criticism by itself (as it does others) without being criticized by those who I would consider as my allies.

So, by all means, you people involved with the #OCCUPYWALLSTREET movement should keep up the good work. Continue with your Gandhian tactics as you see fit. Consider tactics that might disrupt business as usual without so many of you getting arrested. And be wary of leaders who would hamstring your movement, marginalize you, and claim to speak for you as a whole. This arose as a leaderless movement and should continue to be so! Keep up the good fight! Your numbers are growing, the public supports you, and you just might get the revolution you seek.

For The #OCCUPYWALLSTREET Protest Movement, A Simple Request

First of all, I’d like to say that I’ve been supportive of this protest since Adbusters initially put forward the idea back in July. I was regularly using the hashtag when few others had, I created a daily aggregator of tweets for the NewsworthyNewsTwitter feed, blogged about it, and have supported it in various forums from the get go. I also attended the local manifestation of a solidarity protest in my own city. And while there is certainly nothing at all wrong with being a “Johnny-come-lately” in regard to this protest, I’d just like to point out that I have supported the movement and watched it grow from the start. And, certainly, much more credit for organizing goes to again to Adbusters for initially inspiring the protest, to others who have helped organize (both online and off), and to those who have been in the streets of New York inspiring people around the world. All I’m trying to say is that I’ve been supportive and I have one simple request of those who are occupying Wall Street….

Please, do not let this protest movement get co-opted. The strength of this movement has been in it’s protest of the general system, overall, in its totality. Those who are intent on watering down this protest by trying to draw focus to a single-issue or to a mild reformist agenda, those who would pull people from the streets to instead pass petitions, or those who would take charge and posture for political gain, are all potential drains on the energy of this movement. The “stone soup” model of protest has worked wonderfully so far. People are coming together and adding to the mix because they are all getting screwed over — in not a particular, single way, but in every way! I do not need to list again the plethora of grievances that so many people across the country have with the corporatism that masquerades as democracy in America. Continuing with the metaphor of the stone soup… What I fear is that someone will somehow poor a gallon of cold milk into the protest stew just as it really starts heating up.

These may be well-meaning people, those who would have us focus on a single issue like campaign finance reform or healthcare, but they are missing the point that bigger problems will still effect us all and catch up with broader society if there are not fundamental changes to the structure of power in this country. And this protest must continue and grow until we get such a revolution. This is what’s solidarity is about! It’s not about standing shoulder to shoulder until your particular grievance is addressed! That’s the trap of reformism and it is, truly, a death trap.

To those who would demean other protesters, or the protest in general, because they don’t look like corporate lackeys in the service industry, or because an occupation can leave people disheveled ofter a few days, well… they can take their bourgeoisie ideals back to the mail room as far as I’m concerned. People look different, they have different aesthetics, different cultures, and different styles. And this is an occupation, a protest, and potentially a revolutionary movement. As the old saying goes… a revolution is not a tea party. Nor is it a fashion show, an entrance exam, or interview to be white collar worker in some corporate hierarchy. The important thing is that people show up, not what they are wearing when they do.

Worse than those would dictate fashionable aesthetics however… are those who would attempt to keep people in line, on the sidewalk, and in compliance with the directives of the authorities. As Naomi Wolf points out… “A real protest blocks traffic.” It’s as simple as that. At the bare minimum, that is what’s required. And it’s supposed to be a constitutional right! It’s the “right to peaceably assemble” not “the right to peaceably assemble unless it inconveniences people.” A protest is supposed to inconvenience some people! And the idea that safety vehicles can’t route around a large known protest is hogwash. They can whenever there are other large events or road construction projects and they can during this protest as well. The real safety issue is what the corporate-sponsored government is doing to the health and freedom of everyone on the planet! So, since you’ve already taken to the streets, please do not let pacifying interlopers guide you back to the sidewalks. Tactical withdrawals at some points in some instances may, unfortunately, be necessary… but the goal is occupation, not capitulation, not compliance, not obedience to corrupt authority.

Obviously, and I’m sure many of you involved with the protest have already discussed this, the opportunity for a true general strike may arise. Starting in NYC it could easily spread across the country and around the world. We are talking about an unprecedented international general strike! And the motivation would be, and needs to be, for a fundamental change to meet the needs of humanity for the sustainable future. So while the general strike is not here yet… but the potential is. There are a couple things to always be mindful of in that regard and I don’t mind pointing them out here…

The police state in the “land of the free” is historically unprecedented. More people are imprisoned in the United States per-capita (and in total numbers) than in any other nation on Earth. Surveillance systems have progressed as the height of technological innovation. Wikileaks founder Julian Assange points out that we write our own profiles on corporate websites and the government is given ready access to those profiles. It’s a simple truism that 1984 was almost thirty years ago. And I’m reminding you all of this so that you stay mindful and are prepared for police violence or other forms of disruption from the state.

The second issue is really a combination of issues. It’s the idea that government, using the corporate media, will attempt to get people to “rally behind the flag” — either by increasingly portraying the protesters as unpatriotic traitors or by creating (or heightening) an international incident (i.e. war). The issue of patriotism is a tricky one, because who and what is a real patriot? I’m reminded of Abbie Hoffman in the American flag shirt. So, while I personally find such patriotic symbolism distasteful, it will probably pop up somewhat naturally anyway and shouldn’t confuse us in regard to who our true comrades and allies are. The second issue, of the state intensifying wars, is obviously of a more serious nature. But the anti-war message is intrinsically woven into an anti-Wall Street protest and, if a general strike manifests, ending the wars will certainly be one of the motivations and possibilities for it. We need to recognize that very few people actually want war and we can work to persuade people from participating in the wars.

And those are my hopes, and that is my request. Please, do no let this revolutionary protest movement get sold short and co-opted. Again, I’m merely one the 99%, but I’ve been involved with related struggles for some time now and so, even if it seems extravagant, I hope you’ll excuse this one simple demand.

Stay strong! Keep up the good fight! Occupy Wall Street! Occupy everything!

#OCCUPYWALLSTREET (A shift in revolutionary tactics.)

 

For more information see:
Adbusters: A Shift in Revolutionary Tactics
The #OCCUPYWALLSTREET Update
Search for the hashtag via Twitter. 

Subtle Factors of a Global Revolution: From Athens to Cairo to Madison and Beyond

As someone who has long been involved with revolutionary politics, I find the insurrectionary activities that are currently manifesting around the world to be quite heartening.  Have no doubt that the hour is getting late in terms of turning back the tides of environmental degradation, industrial warfare, and the authoritarian subjectification of populations around across globe.  Nevertheless, if only for matters of dignity, it will never be too late to take a stand against the oppressive and destructive forces which are laying waste to the world.  The intention of this article is to analyze modern revolutionary tendencies and their potential for bringing about fundamental changes to society.

If I may be so bold, so as to substantiate this current analysis, I would like to point out that my analysis written in early December accurately predicted unrest in the Middle East — well before the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings occurred and well before any widespread tendencies for such activity was broadly acknowledged.  In particular… I pointed to Yemen and Saudi Arabia as potential focal points — but I was generally assessing the revolutionary potential of that particular region of the world.  Take that for what it’s worth, but I am not the most prolific writer and have been humbled and awed by the events manifesting in that region.  In the original draft of this article I had written facetiously of “egg on my face” because it was not Yemen or Saudi Arabia which had yet risen up — but things have suddenly started to heat up in those locales as well, and I am truly humbled by the courageous actions of the people in that part of the world.  I make no claims as a prophet with a crystal ball, but merely as someone who has been paying attention to current events and historical context.  My analysis hardly approached the accuracy of a Nostradamus, but who else was truly, and overtly, predicting such events (roughly two months before they happened)? 

Perhaps this prefacing reminder is simple vanity, but people seem to have a short memory and often only acknowledge the work of ivory tower academics or prominent celebrity journalists — while ignoring those of us who have been in the streets and who regularly play a part in promoting radical perspectives.  Rarely have I felt so justified in tooting my own horn.  So… I beg the forgiveness of any readers for that unbecoming indulgence while I now proceed to the current analysis.

What inspires a protest, a riot, an insurrection, or a revolution? 

The last major incident of widespread unrest in the United States was arguably the Rodney King Uprising: 

“…sparked on April 29, 1992, when a jury acquitted four white Los Angeles Police Department officers accused in the videotaped beating of black motorist Rodney King following a high-speed pursuit. Thousands of people in the Los Angeles area rioted over the six days following the verdict. Widespread looting, assault, arson and murder occurred, and property damages topped roughly US$1 billion. In all, 53 people died during the riots and thousands more were injured.”

The key word in that assessment is “sparked.”  People across the country were not up in arms because they loved Rodney King so much that this particular injustice drove them into the streets!  Rather, it was the systemic injustice which they had all witnessed, experienced, and could relate to on a daily basis.  The excessive force applied to Rodney King was a recorded symbol of what could happen, and what had already happened, to countless others.  In this case… it turned out to be the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back — cities across the U.S. experienced riots.  Symbolic sparks like this are almost always present whenever a protest, a riot, an insurrection, or a revolution occurs.

Regarding recent events in the Middle East, it must be acknowledged that the information released by Wikileaks was not the sole reason (or even a central reason) behind the recent revolutionary activity there.  Nevertheless, I think strong arguments have been made which suggest that the Cablegate documents did provide clear new insight about the corruption taking place in the region — and Wikileaks was on the tips of tongues throughout the Mideast.  Even amongst dignified populations (as have been revealed in  Tunisia and Egypt), a revolution will need more than kindling, more than a fuse, and more than even central issues waiting to explode — revolutions need sparks.  Such sparks are somewhat intangible, and very hard to quantify or measure, but they are necessary.  I maintain that Wikileaks created such a spark.      

Beyond sparks, the exact conditions which will cause a population to revolt are impossible to specify with perfect accuracy.  The various factors leading to an insurrection are infinite and come together in different ways, in different individuals, within different populations, at different times, in differing locales.  However, when conditions are just so, and when all the factors combine in the right way… the revolutionary force of humanity is unleashed.  The potential energy of this latent force is always present — and at times like these it becomes obvious and undeniable. 

If revolution were a simple matter of dignity — and if people had a more general intolerance of injustice — most of human society would already be organized in a fundamentally different manner.  If it was simply a matter of meeting basic human needs… class warfare would already be far more noticeable and the poor would be fighting far more ferociously.  If it were simply a matter of wanting to be free… police states around the world would never have been allowed to get so out of control in the first place. 

The sad fact is… revolutions are not often brought about by the slow degradation of living conditions or the crawl of creeping fascism.  Like the proverbial boiling frog, humans are embarrassingly tolerant of slowly lowered standards of living, the slow removal of basic civil liberties, and even the destruction of their home in the biosphere.  And, even when we are burdened with these indignities at a more rapid pace… we can still be distracted by the old “bread and circuses” routine.

Have no doubt that modern rulers (leaders only by default) have a keen understanding of these principles regarding mass psychology.  Further… technologies for control and distraction are more widely dispersed and more effective than ever. 

Humans are the most domesticated of all the animals. 

Another factor, which needs much more consideration, is the fact that Homo sapiens simply did not evolve to deal with the extent of the crisis which has been forced upon us in a relatively short amount of time.  Remember that 10,000 years (the approximate amount of time which the project of civilization has been underway) is not much time at all in evolutionary terms.  And the conditions of civilization have changed more in the last 100 years than in the previous 10,000.  For most of humankind’s existence we have not had to deal with traffic jams in urban populations.  We have not previously had to deal with e-waste, a surveillance state, the threats of nuclear waste & fallout, global warming, an oceanic garbage vortex, water shortages, et cetera. 

This is to say nothing of the sudden shift in the structure of our social arrangements.  The breakdown of the extended and, now, even the nuclear family — for example.  The idea of sending the kids off to school while you head to the cubicle or assembly line is a fairly recent development in terms of evolutionary behavior — and the efficacy of such behavior is far from proven to be beneficial for any involved.  Even if you believe in the myth of a stark hierarchical power difference between a primitive chieftain and the rest of the tribe… it’s nothing compared to the inequality between some corporate CEOs and their employees on sweatshop assembly lines!  It’s nothing compared to the difference between the inner-city cop and the inner-city youth.  It’s nothing compared to the difference between the U.S. Department of Defense and the innocent civilian populations around the world who get destroyed in unnecessary imperialistic wars.  (According to a 2001 study by the International Committee of the Red Cross… since the mid 20th century, modern means of warfare have killed 10 civilians for each military casualty.) 

The causes and need for revolt are relatively new in the grand scheme of things while, at the same time, generations of humans have slowly been conditioned to tolerate the increasing burdens which generally threaten their ways of life.  Homo sapiens are the most domesticated of animals — and domestication usually implies docility and/or obedience.  However, somewhat paradoxically, it is the educated and cultured amongst us who are most likely to recognize the full extent of the threats facing humanity.  Continuing with this line of thought, but more to the point… will those who recognize the multitude of threats be able to effectively organize and fight back against those who have been trained and conditioned for violence and obedience?  That last question begs another…

Who is it that the human police dogs obey — and how did those abusive masters gain control of their pets?!  

It may seem tangential, but I feel that the human species was something of an aberration.  Their success thus far has arguably been the result of an obsessive-compulsive technological mindset and a potentially related tendency towards violence (demonstrably more violent than other species).  It has been suggested by modern anthropologists that Homo sapiens were not the most intellectually developed members of the Homo genus when they appeared on the Earth.  Rather, they may have simply had longer legs, higher levels of testosterone, and more violent tendencies than the Neanderthals (who had already been making use of advanced linguistic abilities and simple tools).  So, despite an inferior intellect, Homo sapiens, with their obsessive compulsive proclivity to make sharper spears (along with more of an inclination to rape and pillage), may have wiped the Neanderthals out.  In any event… these characteristics often appear to be prevalent in modern Homo sapiens. 

Admittedly, the speculative ideas presented in that last paragraph can be debated (or even dismissed entirely).  And since I’m not trying to make modern humanity seem irredeemable (everyone on every continent comes from the same genetic stock), the question more appropriately should become…  why do the worst among us — the most violent and domineering — rise to positions of power and influence?  If human society thrives on the basis of mutual aid and cooperation, how did we get to the full-spectrum crisis which we are now presented?  The answer which seems most valid to me is explained by the science of ponerology. 

In general terms… the idea of ponerology suggests that psychopathic tendencies are a genetic defect which appear naturally in about one percent of any given population (regardless or race, location, or social structure).  Traits of the psychopathic condition include the inability to feel empathy or to have true sympathetic concerns for others.  On the contrary, sadism is far more likely to appear in psychopaths.  But while some sadistic psychopaths are revealed in the form of serial killers (or as lesser sadists), others exist in more functional and socially influential roles.  This latter group operates in a Machiavellian manner by their very nature.  They accumulate wealth and power easily because there is nothing they won’t do to achieve their goals (and some of them do get exposed).  However, because cold-blooded acts and bald-faced lies are not the social norm, it sometimes becomes inconceivably difficult for others to recognize what these individuals are doing.  Ergo… people found Ted Bundy charming and friendly while others believed that Hitler couldn’t really have meant all of the things he proposed.  Along similar lines, if one looked into it, they could probably find countless examples of successful businessmen throughout history who were willing to do anything to get ahead.  And the rest of the populace trusts in these people because they are successfully discreet and effective at getting what they personally want.          
  
The relevance of these ideas becomes apparent when one considers any, or perhaps all, of the modern world leaders.  The depths of their corruption never seems to be fully plumbed.  Around the world it is the same story about how oppressive, cruel, and shortsighted most world leaders are.  As wars rage, and as the biosphere collapses, it’s amazing that these people never seem to take a truly meaningful moral stance.  They have power… but the bombs still fall, famines continue, resources are extracted, pollution accumulates, and these people only become more wealthy and prestigious.   

Worse still is the influence which these world leaders (again, only by default) have on their populations.  When they have seized the technological podium of modern mass communications… they are effectively presented as reasonable and well-intentioned people.  And this prestigious presentation of psychopathic ideas has a psychological effect on the rest of society — creating cognitive dissonance about their leaders and their best interests.  In the U.S., for example, we are still told that we’re free despite the fact that more people in are imprisoned per-capita (and in total numbers) than in any other nation in the world.  Statistically, in per-capita numbers, police in this country kill more people than the Egyptian police did under Mubarak.  And, if you want to talk about torture, imprisonment is quite exactly that.  But the mainstream media, propped up by THE PATHOCRACY, always misdirects the local population with the idea of external threats (real or imagined) and coaxes them into continued support for further atrocities. 

Regarding the use of cutting-edge technology for such purposes… it perhaps ought to be remembered that Adolf Hitler was the first person featured in a live international television broadcast (opening the 1936 Olympics in Berlin).  This is a very obvious example of a corrupt regime using cutting edge media technology, but the same principle had already been put into place — and has certainly been utilized to this very day. 

Beyond the media being used to legitimize wars or corrupt social regimes, modern humanity has been conditioned in far more subtle ways (that may prove to be at least as harmful).  I won’t reiterate the various social changes that may have altered and manipulated the consciousness of modern humanity, but I will quote Mark Twain:  “If you ever find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause, and reflect.”  I always remember this quote when confronted with the popular ideas that property is sacrosanct, agriculture is benign, and technology is neutral. 

So… after power has been centralizing for thousands of years; after a dramatic shift away from relatively sustainable human societies; after being manipulated by modern forms of media; and after another probable evolutionary shift in the last 10,000 years; why would humanity revolt?  How can humanity revolt?  Is it even possible for humanity to revolt?  Can those who recognize the modern crisis overcome the psychopaths who have seized power, the masses who unwittingly empower them, and the human attack dogs who obediently follow the orders of their psychopathic masters? 

Can a broadly comprehensive revolution occur in the modern world? 

The necessary cultural shift — the fundamental change necessary for human survival — is not guaranteed to occur.  However, it is the position of this article that such a revolutionary shift is possible.  The need for such a fundamental revolution is already recognized by a few and, to some extent, steps toward the shift are being taken. 

The key may be to connect seemingly disparate and widespread uprisings so that the participants can see that all of our struggles are actually connected — despite the artificial lines (such as nationality, race, and religion) which are used to keep us apart.  And this has already been happening (to an extent) as some modern communication techniques have, at least temporarily and partially, come out from the control of the pathocrats.  I refuse to overstate how much of a role social media has played in recent events, but I can not be as dismissive as some have been.  Uprisings around the world have been connected around the world (despite language barriers) and the causes, the hopes, the dreams, and the solidarity of people everywhere has been shown. 

As Egyptians rose up, many Americans (and the international community) offered, at least, our moral support.  When the U.S. President Barack Obama initially supported the dictator Mubarak, it had to be clear to him that this was quite an unpopular action.  Simultaneously, the public interest in Egypt demanded that journalists from this country cover the events of the revolution.  Further… the people of this country would not morally condone the abuse of American journalists any more than the abuse of Egyptian journalists.  On top of that all, or underlying it, we had the social media resources to reveal much of the falsification that the mainstream corporate media tried to present to us.  When the politicians here supported the dictators there…  they were revealed for what they were — and many of us sided, in varying tangible degrees, with the people of Egypt. 

Now… fast forward a few weeks to the largest labor protest in years taking place in Madison Wisconsin.  Although the comparison on placards was sometimes derided… the comparison between the Egyptian President Mubarak and the corrupt Governor Scott Walker was accurately made.  Of course the issues involved are not exactly the same… but both of those politicians were beholden to corporate interests and the police state.  Both politicians were behaving in as corrupt a manner as they thought they could get away with.  Both were diminishing the power and influence of regular people while promoting their own self-interests and the corrupt interests of other wealthy individuals.  In any event… the people of the Egypt became aware of the struggles of the people in Wisconsin.  And, in a watershed moment, pizza was ordered locally, from a call made in Egypt, to feed the people who were camping in the state Capitol.  Such a seemingly token act of solidarity should not be taken for granted.  It became apparent that many of us are aware, at least to some extent, of the struggles taking place around the world.  The Egyptians realized we were in solidarity with them, and they, in turn, showed some solidarity with the people in Wisconsin.       

Similarly… there have been connections made between the struggles in Greece, London, Libya, Bahrain, and beyond.  We are all being made aware that the prominent political leaders around the world are all thoroughly corrupt.  Beyond that… we’re observing and learning various protest tactics from our brothers and sisters around the world.  So, for example, the people in Greece are now considering the tactic of holding a key area of Athens in much the same way that Egyptians held Tahrir Square in Cairo. 

Furthermore, we can see how key struggles are directly connected across international lines.  To give another example from Madison… it’s been suggested that bringing home 151 Wisconsin soldiers from Afghanistan would more than pay for Wisconsin’s supposed “budget crisis” (while ending the war altogether would save Wisconsin $1.7 billion dollars).  And how much of a threat has the Al Queda bogeyman really ever posed to Wisconsin?  And how would that justify killing Afghanistan civilians in the first place?!

Beyond international solidarity, local issues must be looked at as a collective whole.  The same government in Wisconsin which is now threatening the collective bargaining rights of unions has also presided over the creation of the most racist prison system in the United States.  More minorities are imprisoned in Wisconsin, per capita, than in any other state.  And the system which has allowed both these injustices to manifest is also the same system which allowed Madison’s water supply to be contaminated by the 4th highest levels of Chromium 6 in the United States.  These may all seem like unrelated issues… but these are all realities which have been brought about by a system which has obviously not functioned well for a long time.  It is imperative that all these issues be looked at collectively — otherwise people will only end up hacking at Thoreau’s “branches of evil” while the root of the problem continues to thrive.  And, mind you, I’ve been writing about Madison Wisconsin — regularly voted as one of the best places to live in the United States! 

Whose side are you on?

A lot of people promote pacifism, and a non-violent revolution would be ideal.  While I personally was once something of a firebrand, I haven’t directly participated in violent or illegal protest for over a decade.  I simply don’t have the stomache for it anymore and I’m not cut out for it. The vast majority of my political activities I would now consider to be wholly non-violent (and I fully expect them to continue being so).  Nevertheless… I will not condemn those who have had their lives wrecked and then choose to fight back against the system.  I wouldn’t even condemn a vanguard who fought on their behalf — because we are all in this mess together. 

So, for example, let’s think about an individual in Madison Wisconsin who quite possibly may have lost a brother in Afghanistan, whose uncle was incarcerated for a trumped-up drug offense, whose father drank too much of the carcinogenic water, and whose mother might now lose her job with the state.  If such an individual smashed a window at the bank which foreclosed on his grandmother… I would not condemn them. 

First of all, I don’t consider the destruction of non-sentient (or non-essential) property to be violent.  Secondly… I wouldn’t condemn this individual even if they resisted arrest for their action.  The real crime is the injustice of the system and the person disrupting “business as usual” is not the villain.  On the contrary, it is the person who perpetuates and protects this corrupt order of things that is really the violent criminal.  Those who get this backward are the same individuals who perpetuate the Orwellian ideas that war=peace, freedom=slavery, and Big Brother loves you. 

On a related note, while others have had much to say on this subject, a particular phenomenon at recent protests in America should be mentioned… Some protesters have served the role of the “peace police.”  They preach non-violence, and demand peaceful protest in accordance with the constraints of “their” protest (over which they feel complete ownership), but they are quick to point out to the authorities (or even help subdue) anyone else who may be engaged in any illegal protest activity.  Non-violence is only demanded of their fellow protesters and they are very quick to justify, tolerate, or even assist the violence of the police — who are the ones overwhelmingly engaged in violent activity during recent protests.  Those people who claim to be non-violent and then assist the state with violent actions are amongst the worst types of hypocrites.  They are like lapdogs who serve their masters with barking in much the same way that the attack dogs in riot gear do.    

Also, there seems to be much cognitive dissonance about the violence of contemporary (and historical) revolutionary struggles.  For example… many people people credit the success of the civil rights movement in the United States, and the struggle for Indian independence from Britain, solely to the non-violent efforts of people like Martin Luther King & Mohandas Gandhi.  The reality is that there were widespread militant riots during both of their respective movements — and that certainly played a part in the repressive authoritarian regimes modifying their positions.  Similarly, some people seem to believe that the recent revolutionary activity in Egypt was non-violent — but the documented reality of events shows something very different.  The uprising in Egypt began on January 25, 2011 on a national holiday which Mubarak had instituted a couple years earlier as National Police Day.  On the 26th, police stations started to burn.  Throughout the revolt, many of the police forces in Egypt were overwhelmed by masses of protesters.  The idea that it was a non-violent revolution merely conforms to the church & state-approved methods of how a revolution should be conducted.  They want the masses to believe that non-violently is the only way for a revolution to succeed — but the details of history paint a much different picture.  

In any event… you need to ask yourself — whose side are you on?  Are you serving the interests of your family and community?  Are you on the side of innocent civilians around the globe?  Or, are you on the side of the psychopathic state and the corrupt system which is laying waste to everything in it’s path? 

Closing Thoughts

Previously I’ve submitted some ideas about how I think a revolutionary community could be maintained in the United States, and I stand by those suggestions.  But at this time I’d just like to urge the general public to become slightly more involved in basic revolutionary struggles.  I realize that not everyone, including myself, can always be on the front lines of the struggle.  But we can at least try to stay abreast of developing events around the world and, at least in spirit, we can try to support contemporary revolutionaries. 

Also… my earlier statements in this article were not at all intended to be entirely dismissive of non-violent revolutionary actions.  On the contrary, I think such tactics could be highly effective, or at least pragmatically useful, if they were broadly utilized.  My major issue with the modern proponents of such tactics is that they are often inconsistent, sometimes hypocritical, and apparently not willing to make the deep sacrifices that effective ahimsa requires.  Few seem willing to do anything even as pedestrian as, say, blocking traffic — and few things today seem to compare to the Freedom Riders or Gandhian tactics of the past.  In fact, non-violence is often conflated with legality when it should be remembered that MLK & Gandhi were both, technically, criminals (according to the state).

Finally, I would like to apologize again for any potential arrogance or presumptuousness on my part.  I realize that my perspective is not complete, my analysis sometimes has flaws, and there may even be mistakes with my grammar or spelling.  But I strongly wish to encourage discussion about the ideas presented in this article and would be more than willing to have a dialogue with people on the forums at Infoshop News, Anarchist News, and/or via Twitter.

For A Revolutionary Uprising,

Nihilo Zero

A Brief Comment on The Protest In Wisconsin: General Strike or Get Off The Walker!

The biggest American labor protest in years is currently taking place in Madison Wisconsin.  Although it would undoubtedly be getting more coverage if it were another inane Tea Party rally, the mainstream media is starting to cover the event which has already seen a second day of protest (with 13,000 protesters at the Capitol building on Wednesday the 16th) to coincide with a strike by the local teachers union (which shut down the local school district).  People are camping at the Capitol tonight and Thursday is certain to see large numbers out protesting again.  The new Governor, Scott Walker, has already threatened to call in the National Guard to quell any potential disturbance to business as usual.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that people are reading the situation incorrectly (in terms of Governor Walker having made a political blunder by aggressively attempting to gut worker’s rights so early in his term).  Perhaps he has blundered, and maybe he is the naive idiot which he seems to be, but his move may have been very calculated — and the labor unions may end up getting suckered.  By making such an extreme proposal in the legislative terms which he has laid out… he is now in position to pull back from the legislation and appear to be moderating his position.  So the workers would then still end up taking a big hit but, because it’s no longer quite so devastating in it’s effect, the unions may be somewhat placated by the toned-down legislation — and thus they might be likely to give up a little ground while thinking they’ve won the larger battle.  It’s basic politics and Walker has put himself in a position to win either way.  If there was no protest, Walker would get everything his right-wing heart desired.  Since there has now been a protest… Walker can tone down the extremist legislation and appear to be somewhat reasonable as the legislation is modified from being terrible to merely awful.   

As this proposed legislation has energized labor unions more than anything else in recent years… they should make a point of not wasting the current opportunity they’ve created with their protest.  Rather than accepting a toned down version of the legislation, or even a complete scrapping of it, they should be the ones demanding concessions at this point!  They should be demanding even more labor rights and the right to organize more easily.  It’s as simple as that.  Labor has held, and does hold, most of the cards in modern society.  If they choose to shut the city down, or even the entire state, there is little that can be done about it.  And then how will Governor Walker react?  It’s quite possible that the National Guard, made up of workers, won’t carry out his orders.

So my advice to the Wisconsin workers is this… General strike or get off the Walker!  If you accept any concessions with the currently proposed legislation you’ll be opening the door for further concessions — you’ll be practically asking for them.  What you need to do is show the Governor who is really the boss in Wisconsin — the people, the workers, the everyday Jane & Joe.  You have the power and the ball is in your court — what are you going to do with it?

Toronto G20: Will Police Be Held Accountable After Scathing Ombudsman’s Report?

An important video from the Real News Network @ TheRealNews.Com