Has this previous year of global uprising been the opening skirmish of the “final conflict?” At this point, who can say? Who could have answered with any confidence at the start of the successful revolutions of the past? We can only examine events to date in light of revolutionary processes in the past, and compare the “Revolution 2.0” of the past two years to its unsuccessful predecessors in recent decades.
Chris Hedges recently evaluated Occupy in terms of Crane Brinton’s typology of revolutions (“This is What Revolution Looks Like,” Truthdig, November 15). The relevant steps in his list include a public loss of faith in the possibility of achieving change within the system, the inability of states to provide basic services, the undermining of the state’s aura of legitimacy and inevitability when its attempts to suppress dissent by force fail, and the internal fracturing and loss of morale inside the ruling class as its armed enforcers start to defect.
The trajectory from Wikileaks to Arab Spring to the Occupy movement already dwarfs the Seattle movement, and may be surpassing the global movement of 1968 (including not only the American civil rights, antiwar and student movements, but the French general strike and the Prague Spring). And unlike those previous movements, Occupy 1) has a generally favorable rating among a majority of the general public, and 2) coincides with the largest economic catastrophe since the Great Depression.
In its post-campout phase, Occupy is in the process of emerging from its cocoon, with new innovations like “Occupy Our Homes” and other distributed, stigmergic efforts independent of the original movement. Thanks to the helpful intervention of people like New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, it’s been dispersed like dandelion seeds, or (from the ruling class point of view) a metastasizing cancer.
Let’s start with the perceived impossibility of change within the system. Compare US President Barack Obama’s 2008 rhetoric, his near record electoral mandate and Congressional super-majority, with his cozy relationship to Wall Street and the national security state. Part of the fuel for Occupy is that people are finally learning how worthless their votes are.
John Robb recently argued that if the periphery of the Eurozone defaults, the waves from the financial collapse will transform the global Great Recession into Depression 2.0. Imagine if there’d been a networked movement on the scale of Occupy already on the ground when the Depression hit bottom in the early ’30s. Now imagine the gasoline-on-fire effect if a new Depression coincides with Occupy’s takeoff trajectory.
As for the the ability to provide basic services: The fiscally strapped, hollowed-out state has already retrenched on social safety net functions — and Occupy Our Homes, meanwhile, is in the news for filling that void through self-organized efforts to put roofs over homeless and evicted people. Every single time armed goons show up to evict them, the event becomes another morality play, distributed virally via YouTube. It’s the moral equivalent of the house-to-house fighting in Stalingrad, with each separate house the site of a new defensive stand. Neighborhood assembly offshoots of Occupy, on the Argentinian model, will likely soon start taking up the slack for things like reduced trash pickups and organizing mutual aid among neighbors, further undermining the state’s aura of legitimacy.
How about demoralization and defection? There’s a persistent rumor that some 200 NYPD officers — mostly the blue-shirted ones going all wobbly while the white-shirts were really gettin’ into it — called in sick on the day of Bloomberg’s eviction. The viral video of John Pike, I’m sure, was a wakeup call for cops all over the country that they’re living in a different era now, with forms of accountability bigger than Police Commission investigations to worry about.
Could it be that the global networked resistance movement is about to enter a positive feedback loop that will escalate out of sight?
We in Bangladesh are waging the Occupy movement by a sit in demonstration in front of TSC of Dhaka University. The place has been named Freedom Square. Occupy in Bangladesh dates back to 1969 in particular, when Moulana Bhasani waged the Occupy movement against the despotic Pakistani ruler Ayub Khan. Today this is echoed by the people’s movement in many countries of the world, centered at Wall Street.
We are very much with it.
komolkoli@gmail.com
Here's hoping for the best, Kevin Carson. The contrast between the Tea Party and OWS is illustrated by one simple question: Who is getting their heads beaten in by the cops? It isn't the guys in tri-cornered hats. The Tea Party of the 2007 era is long gone; Obama killed it, when a bunch of disgruntled Republican voters swamped the fledgling movement. Any libertarian who thought it had any revolutionary potential after that needs their head examined. I was saying this the moment the 2008 Tea Party era started, namely on the Reason comment section. You can guess how that panned out.
The Occupy Movement, however, has much revolutionary potential. Here they are challenging the powers that be in a genuinely confrontational manner. It is a disparate ideological mix, but there is as much distrust of the State as there is of capitalism-after all, who does the State protect first? As Sheldon Richman stated, any defender of the free society should stand by OWS in spirit-in action, if possible.
I have to respectfully take issue with a couple of things. The occupy movement is basically far left. They advocate big govt & democracy. (See "Occupy Philadelphia: The Kick That the Left Really Needed" http://theinternationallibertarian.blogspot.com/2… I don't see them as giving up on voting, they just want to elect other people.
Moving on to the "revolution" & the people at large, I don't see them giving up on the system we have. They may sympathize with the occupy movement & agree with some of their criticism of the system but that doesn't mean they agree with their program. (Fortunately, most Americans aren't socialists.) Note that there has been no big opposition to the govt evicting the occupy movement . Maybe, if we go into Great Depression 2.0 that will change.
Which leads to a thought about the future & the if above. If the occupy movement takes off it will only result in another New Deal, only this one will be even more socialistic. One reason the occupy movement was tolerated as long as it was was because it was useful to the 1%, if not actually a controlled opposition: "Fascism Now: Occupy Wall Street's Call for Transaction Tax Taken Up by Congress"
(snip)
If there is any single thing that shows Occupy Wall Street is a controlled opposition, the idea that its ideas resonate within weeks with the US Congress and the larger global power structure should at least give one pause.
(snip)
It is no coincidence that everything OWS's non-leader/leaders suggest, lawmakers in America, anyway, begin to act on. OWS is in this sense a kind of elaborate charade, a shadow play organized by the elites to implement their world-spanning agenda. http://thedailybell.com/3180/Fascism-Now-US-Congr…
Hopefully, the occupy movement is the left's last gasp & we can move on to some real solutions like liberty & free markets.
My recent post Tea Party Visits Occupy Philadelphia (video)
occupy movement is not far left…in fact many in it are independents.
in america there is no left or right just illusion of choice.
I agree with focusonpeace's take — Occupy:______ is all about tinkering, change from within, keeping most things the same but electing different folks. Occupy:________ will lose steam if Bernie Sanders' stupid legislation to vacate/vitiate Citizens United v FEC takes hold. Occupy:_________ basically thinks the problem is "corporate" blah blah blah and doesn't really understand much about power, individual rights, or what will work long-term.
I admire their willingness to "do something" but I fear their goals and dreams are a bit too much of the Same Old Thing With Different Faces. Remember, a lot of Occupy:________ people were Obama supporters and likely would again be gulled by some phony "progressive" like Elizabeth Warren or Dennis Kucinich.
My recent post Treblinka, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, Auschwitz
"How about demoralization and defection? There’s a persistent rumor that some 200 NYPD officers — mostly the blue-shirted ones going all wobbly while the white-shirts were really gettin’ into it — called in sick on the day of Bloomberg’s eviction."
Yeah, I have heard the NYPD "blue flu" rumor too. Then there was the news that police in Albany, NY basically refused to remove OWS demonstrators from the capitol area. And during the Madison, WI "Walker" protests, police were reportedly joining protests after their shifts ended. If police start to refuse to do other things–like arrest non-violent drug offenders or write shitty seat belt tickets–then I will be more enthusiasitic.
On a personal note, there was a time not so long ago that I was considering law enforcement jobs. Other protective services jobs to, but I was pretty serious about policing for several years. But during the last couple years I became more and more demoralized. Now I have opted to "defect" even before I got a job offer. I know there are many others out there like me who finally just said, "fuck it, you can have that job."
I will not be used as a bludgeon against harmelss people the state regards as "undesireable." I won't put a marijuana user in a cage. I won't pepper spray passive protesters. The days may be coming when fewer and fewer people will show up for those early morning police recruit tests that I endured for a number of years. And police staffing will dwindle, and not just because of local budget issues. And then people will be more inclined to seek alternatives.
Dawn, I can't speak for all the occupies but the one in Philly was definitely left wing. Yes, there were some libertarians/Ron Paul supporters around. They had their tent broken into, their literature & CDs stolen, & the thieves took a dump in the tent to boot. Then a socialist decided to protest their presence & many occupiers accused them of being racists. It was obvious that liberty wasn't welcome at Occupy Philly.
My recent post Tea Party Visits Occupy Philadelphia (video)
To clarify: OWS advocated originally for changes in specific laws that are known causes of the current recession. The separation of investment and commercial banks (glass-seagall) was designed to decrease conflicts of interest; does the name Jon Corzine mean anything to you? The only real issue that OWS has a problem with is people in power, specifically financial and/or political, deregulating markets for their own selfish gain. While OWS may at times seem far-left and radical, particularly instances of violence or theft (or poop), it is unfair and unwise to judge the purpose of a movement based on the actions of a few. Implying ludicrous and far-reaching conspiracy without evidence is counter productive to finding the most effective solution to the issues. Maybe the real reason OWS seems to resonate with everyone is because the world is sick of the same old issues that never seem to go away.