1. Our solidarity will be based on respect for a diversity of tactics and the plans of other groups.
2. The actions and tactics used will be organized to maintain a separation of time or space.
3. Any debates or criticisms will stay internal to the movement, avoiding any public or media denunciations of fellow activists and events.
4. We oppose any state repression of dissent, including surveillance, infiltration, disruption and violence. We agree not to assist law enforcement actions against activists and others.
Of course #3 violates Constitutionally protected freedom of speech and freedom of the press-- two things I will never allow a group of people to arbitrarily declare I don't have. Especially when they don't follow their own rules.
Backlash against tonight's vote to overturn has been threatening, as is par for a strategy-less course.
The first principle has been twisted to sanctify violence or using a crowd as a shield, like in this video I caught the other day:
Watch this video and see the tent builders, who know damn well that erecting a tent is a beacon for police brutality. They cowardly only commit to this tactic during peak foot traffic hours, like when a crowd is present for Michael Moore. They want to put the crowd at risk. The unwitting crowd is a necessary prop for them.
At 1:20 he declares himself a "revolutionary genius". He is an attention-seeking moron. I hope he enjoys the negative attention he'll receive from this post :)
The idea is that they will get on the evening news to show the world that the police will bust in because of a tent. They use the numbers of the crowd to dip in and out of sight of the police while antagonizing them. It is unethical (to say the least) to use an unwitting crowd as a shield for a brainless tactic, geared towards the emotional masturbation of pissing off the pigs. All of this happens under the umbrella of the first principle. As you can see in the video, some members of the public have already caught on to the tactic and are alienated from participating in the demonstration.
Regardless, it is a democracy and your participation will help protect the space from the recklessness of people with no foresight or strategy. This is about the future and longevity of the demonstration. Please speak out in the name of common sense.
If you need a primer on the difference between above ground and underground movements, I suggest you read Deep Green Resistance which outlines the difference between the two. These anarchismos should redirect their energy towards something productive. Read it and you will that there is no room for this kind of reckless violence in sustaining an above ground movement. It's only result is the alienation of the 99% from participating and making unwitting participants props and targets for police brutality. Go underground. Continuing to risk annihilating the possibility Occupy provides, which is the possibility of spearheading an alternative community that can get off the Wall Street tit, thwarts popular support where popular support is actually needed.
I eagerly await the cowardly, anonymous threats from the emotional masturbators. If y'all could please put your full name in your threats, I'd appreciate it. I hate that the number one threat to Occupy is within Occupy but I will submit to threats. I will resist.
