Occupy Oakland damages itself more than ports

[themadstork]

77. Just a few months ago

seems like many DUers were convinced that the general populace was too lazy and apathetic to actually get out in the street and fight economic injustice.

Now that they actually are, we get the chorus of DUers who are convinced that they know the One True Way to Protest, and who seem very eager to see OWS "flame out."


First, I think generally you should be very suspicious of anyone who claims that in order to be successful OWS must use one certain tactic only, or conform to one line of thinking only. I'm not sure if it stems from simple narrow-mindedness and ignorance re the history of protest movements, or from some other less innocent desire to see OWS fail, but it commits the basic error of mistaking the simple answer for the accurate one. It would, after all, make protesting a hell of a lot easier, wouldn't it, if one certain protest-strategy were proven to Always Work? If there were one true way?

Second, I think something underpinning a lot of this is a general distaste for the masses, in the mode of our founders: the "great beast," etc. The masses are too lazy and stupid to protest. . . and when they do protest, they're too lazy and stupid to do it "correctly". . . There are some who will always be pointing out what the masses are too lazy and stupid to ever do.

It's a pretty normal reactionary impulse to think of the masses in that way. People in huge groups are stupid, loud, and stinky. Right? Why should we even consider trusting their judgement? Why should we value their collective action over our precious armchair quaterbacking?

In scanning the various criticisms of OWS (here and wherever) I think it's worthwhile to try and determine what amounts to authentic constructive criticism and what comes from a place of automatic contempt for the masses. And if anybody is surprised by the "with us or against us"-type replies, it's probably because your post came off as being the latter.