Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Did Occupy Oakland Believe Their Move-In Day Would Succeed? [View all]
http://occupyoaklandmoveinday.org/Occupy Oakland publicized their intent to move into a vacant building in advance of their action this weekend. Did they actually believe that the city would allow them to enter and take occupancy in the vacant Convention Center? That seems like a valid question to ask, I think. Clearly, it was an open challenge to the city and the city did respond by sending police to the gathering place in the organization's flyer. I'm sure the city's intent was to prevent any such thing from happening.
It seems to me that Occupy Oakland must have known that they would be prevented from moving into any vacant building, never mind the Convention Center, which was surrounded by construction fences. I don't know what work was going on to that Center, but clearly no city is going to allow people to enter and take possession of such a place.
If Occupy Oakland did understand that the City of Oakland would try to keep them from occupying that building, then the entire goal of the protest action was one of civil disobedience. But, was that conveyed to the people who showed up for the event? Did the attendees know that Occupy Oakland had actually notified the Mayor, Police Chief, and City Council of their intent?
The result was what you'd expect. Police were told that no entry would be allowed, leading to police action that included, as usual, excessive force used. People brought children to the event, so it seems that some, at least, were not expecting a violent confrontation.
I don't believe that Occupy Oakland had any belief that they would actually be able to move into the Convention Center. It just doesn't make sense. I think they had something else planned for that day, and that was exactly what happened. Look at the web site, and scroll down to see the sequence of this. While they have an absolute right to attempt any act of civil disobedience they can conceive of, I think this event may have been promoted in a way that left some people unaware of what might occur during the attempt. If so, that's a serious error on the part of the organizers.
72 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The thugs are the ones who started with the violence from the begining of ows. The protesters
SammyWinstonJack
Jan 2012
#30
As long as they are continually getting publicity and comments/reactions from official,
morningfog
Jan 2012
#46
Ya know, that aint a half bad idea. All the Occupy protestors wear a shirt plainly labeled, LIBERAL
WingDinger
Jan 2012
#17
I'd say they failed to take over the building because our society HAS broken down
Capitalocracy
Jan 2012
#18
Yes, they could've used M-16s, but that doesn't make what they've been doing acceptable.
Capitalocracy
Jan 2012
#36
And they did not get the Pentagon off the ground. It was not the point to do so.
Bluenorthwest
Jan 2012
#39
I suppose there's no sense trying to do anything unless there's a 100% chance of unqualified success
gratuitous
Jan 2012
#22
The odds were much in favor of the attempted takeover as ending the way it did.
randome
Jan 2012
#24
No, I'm not saying that at all. If that were true, few of the large protests I
MineralMan
Jan 2012
#25
Isn't this EXACTLY what the right does that drives us crazy? Or is it OK to be an apologist as long
renie408
Jan 2012
#51
It passed their General Assembly, so a majority of them must have thought it would work.
joshcryer
Jan 2012
#65