Zuccotti Park

Critical Path

/ JillArcangela / 3 Comments

As Occupy camps across the nation are swept up and out, we find ourselves in a puzzling and contradictory state of both expulsion and exaltation.  While we may have been dealt a technical blow, suffering the loss of space and materials, we have gained significant ground.  A revived zeal, cheers of ironic victory, and a hell of a lot of media coverage garnish the beautiful affirmation that we are winning.  Amid the noise of political banter, police actions, and even the underlying hum of counter-Constitutional conspiracy from our nation’s highest office, we tune our senses to the subtle yet resounding message: we are getting to them.  Though public statements made by directed (not independently reasoning) local officials outline reasons to break up the camps that range from public safety to impeding on the picnic spaces of area employees, there are a few very real reasons the powers that be want the movement dismantled, and all of them are odious, not odorous – as they would have us believe.

The obvious reason to break up Occupy camps is our edging closer and closer to our first inevitable victory, one we must win over our most visible adversary: the police.  To do this, the movement needs only to continue to show up.  Peaceful assembly in large numbers, arrests resulting from civil disobedience, and the tactical maneuvers and discharging of weapons by police add up to more than public failure and embarrassment for city officials.  The simple fact is that our cities, fiscally crumbling beneath the economic pillage of the higher-ups, cannot sustain the expense of continued police action against the movement.  The obvious question is then raised, why carry out said action?

Any logical, logistical thinking person would deduce that it would be easier, cheaper, and more pleasant to let the camps stand, cooperating with internal working groups to keep occupations clean, safe, and free of unwanted elements.  Instead, the cities leave occupations to fend for themselves, blaming occupants for problems only reconcilable through cooperation from local officials then wasting city resources in unsuccessful attempts to unseat the movement, citing problems stemming from the city’s systematic failure and political ineptitude in dealing with the camps.  While the cities struggle to pay for actions against Occupy and the public relations necessary to recuperate both the city’s reputation and the personal political careers of those in office, the bottom of the shilling purse fast approaches.  Meanwhile, the only thing these actions succeed in doing is strengthening our resolve and exposing the corrupt ringers of a much larger, far more crooked game – an expense of a different kind, equally unaffordable for the city, but with pressure from the top to dispense the movement, local officials find themselves the scapegoats and puppets of multi-millionaires and are left holding the checking and the smoking gun.

Given the cost and blatant unconstitutionality of these relentless assaults, the indication becomes clearer that those in power are in fact struggling to protect something they feel is worth the increasing social and financial costs.  What they stand in firm defense of is not, however, the things they were sworn to protect: our national sovereignty, our freedom, our people, peace, and prosperity – nationally speaking.  It is to protect the illusion of democracy which serves as a façade for political pirates and their network of corporate accomplices who, with focused intent and great efficiency, have managed to turn our government into a well-oiled wealth machine for an American criminal elite so devoid of ethics that they conduct their business at the cost of human life and liberty, and from behind the protective cover of titles and privilege we unwittingly bestowed upon them in good faith.

Though we, those who comprise and support the Occupy movement, relay our messages to the public in terms more common and understandable terms – buzz words like “income disparity,” “bank bailouts,” and “corporate welfare” – it is essential that we understand our mission will not be completed with the passing of meager legislation that will be torn down and reconstructed to the benefit of these American traitors and capitalistic mutineers.  We must change the structure of our government so that it is no longer possible for the public servants we elect to govern themselves as they are clearly ill-suited for a task of such great moral obligation, having proven themselves unscrupulous manipulators of legality and hoarders of wealth.  We must change the checks and balances of an old system that relied on the goodness of man and was constructed before the design of the economic system that is now our undoing.

This brings us around to the battle of Antietam, something I mentioned in a previous letter.  At the birth of the American Civil War, Confederate and Union soldiers fought in one of the bloodiest wars the world has ever known.  At the time, the goals of President Lincoln were solely to preserve the nation, keeping the North and South united.  However, it was in the wake of this battle that Lincoln realized that the hardships already faced and those to come amounted to a war that would not be worth the end prize of a rejoined but unimproved Republic.  It was necessary to make the nation greater, stronger, and more just that it ever was before the secession of the South.  It was through this effort, this weighing the ferocity of the fight against the victory to be won, that the abolishment of slavery was decided upon, an act Lincoln believed would create the better society he so desired for us and justify the critical path that our nation was forced to forge by other circumstances.  From this we learn that it is not enough for us to simply correct tax law and imprison a few stuffed suits from various financial institutions.  Doing so would only mop up the puddle created by the leak in our roof.  It in no way corrects the real problem or secures our ability to weather future storms.

Those who have risen to power, occupying offices won in backhanded games of democratic manipulations and shadow deals by mystery men, now sit atop the world’s most dangerous con.  They peddle propaganda about the merits of capitalism and publicize dramatic political epitaphs laden with invented terminology and imaginary economic science, all the while stuffing down our throats values of materialism and servitude to the market.  They sit in secret meetings, gathering insider information that translates into stock market trading tips.  At the end of the day, the rearrange their personal portfolios, using privileged information to amass obscene personal wealth, something any citizen would be locked up for, but they do legally, protected by laws and exemptions they have created for themselves.  This is why Willy went to Washington.  This is why they clamor to serve, clawing their way through mudslinging elections (an insight into their true, frayed moral fiber), to grasp in the mêlée public offices that pay less than $200,000 annually.  Not because they feel an earnest sense of duty to their nation; not because they hear a calling to serve their neighbors and community; not because they could not make this much or more money working for the companies that own them, but because it permits them access to money making opportunities far beyond anything they could ever tap into on their own or take advantage of legally.  In exchange for access to the money machine and their resulting personal fortunes, American politicians repay the people and corporations who funded such opportunity by placing them and their private agendas into positions of power and priority, creating business networks and removing legal barriers so their financial backers can bulk their own treasuries without limit, at any cost, and at our expense.

To stand up and say that we want our grievances with these outside industries addressed by the people we have entrusted with our political process is like telling the wolf that the fox ate our chickens.  He simply doesn’t care, but he’ll lick his chops of his portion crumbs and promise you anything to keep the henhouse guarded as is.  We, as a movement, do not want our government to hear our grievances.  We want it to hear our wrath.  We want these criminals to scamper futilely under their fancy oak desks, pulling in those big leather chairs behind them in helpless panic, as we storm the capital, cuffing every profiteer who has abused our trust and capitalized on our former ignorance.

We must organize in greater forms and with loftier goals, fueled by the apparent desperation of our cities as they tip of their hand, revealing their struggle to contain our movement and our message.  This is not a plea to be heard.  This is a change in ownership.  Remember this in the days ahead.  We are not a protest to be stifled or stymied by the confiscation of books and tents.  We are here to overthrow the criminal hijackers of Washington as well as Wall Street.  Change will not – cannot – come from within.  It can only come from us.  It starts in our streets and ends on the hill.  Aim high, think big, and keep your feet on the ground… marching, park or no park, tent or no tent.  Ours is a critical path.

“Firing Back” Article Backfires

/ JillArcangela / Leave a comment

The cover article of the NY Post’s November 3rd issue drew my attention and a bit of hostility as well.  I wrote the following letter to the Editor.  Whether they publish it or not remains to be seen.

Dear Editor,

I couldn’t help but notice a front page article on the Post’s November 3rd issue.  I was confused by the title and subheading, proclaiming that the “other 99%” (as though there could be two 99% portions of a 100% whole, but basic mathematics aside…) is fed up with the OWS presence in Zuccotti Park and how the movement has been “hijacked by criminals.”  I should start by reminding readers that if being hijacked by criminals was reasonable enough cause to shut down well-intentioned political movements then the doors on Capitol Hill should’ve been closed decades ago.  However, somehow, of the three journalists who cooperated to assemble this piece, not one is complaining about that stench.

Another thing that reeks is the language used to describe the OWS occupants and their camp.  Words like “chaos,” “filth,” “thuggish,” “motley,” and “mob” all litter this article; words with negative connotations used explicitly to paint a bias and unfair portrait of the occupants and – in turn – their cause.

While the movement, I’m sure, apologizes to small businesses in the area surrounding Zuccotti Park and all camps worldwide, there are a few things that should be understood to give a little depth to the situation; not the least of which is that the OWS occupants have been thus far unable to build a positive rapport with local officials largely because of repeated attacks and incidences of police brutality against them.  This problem is hindering their ability to acquire the things they need and curtail the problems mentioned in the article.  Things as simple as portable toilets and generators to those as dynamic as police cooperation to help them rid themselves of bad elements within the group would help support the encampment and make the situation more livable for all, both inside and out.

Moreover, had any of the collaborating writers of this piece done any research into the countless examples of similar movements in American history or even into the psychology of a setting such as the OWS camp, they would have discovered that there is nothing unusual about the problems OWS faces at this early stage of their occupancy.  All movements, especially those that have brought such large numbers of people into such close quarters, have had problems like this at the outset.  It takes time for activist leaders and the group population to develop the courage, understanding, and systems required to forge safer environments and better community relations.  This type of work is coming into focus for the movement, but it is unfortunately stalled by the time and resources occupancies all over the country are expending on resisting the countless attempts to remove them and deny them their first amendment rights, which in most cities means withstanding unnecessary brutality from the police – a group that should be working with them to defend their rights and ensure their safety.  Instead the camps are forced to face these problems alone and while fighting an uphill battle.

If anyone can be blamed for the “filth, stench,” and safety issues surrounding these camps, it is the city officials who have failed these occupants.  Rather than call for dramatic action to evict this camp, which I can guarantee you will not only create violence but fail in its mission to discourage or relocate the movement, I would implore the city to cooperate with OWS to increase a sense of security for residents, tourists, and occupants alike, and to reduce problems like filth and crime around the camp.  After all, reduced tavern traffic and offensive odors aside, the people of OWS are just as entitled to their presence, sanitation, and security as everyone existing outside of the barricades.

Jill-Arcangela M. Kopp

Author of “Letters to the Occupants” (blog @ WordPress.com)

Jenkintown, PA

Chain of Fools

/ JillArcangela / Leave a comment

Last week, I wrote about the violence that overtook the city of Oakland, violence that left a two-tour Iraq War Veteran with a brain injury and so far unable to speak.  A couple days ago, I wrote about the shining example set by the Albany Police Department that refused to evict the occupants camped in Albany, an action which forced the city to communicate with the occupants and has begun to build a working agreement between the Occupy Albany group and the city officials.  Then, late last night, I tuned into the appropriate media channels, none of which are on the television – by the way, to check up on the Occupy camps around the world.  What I found was yet another attack being carried out against the Occupy Oakland group, which had organized a general strike that shut down the Port of Oakland for several hours.  Before this night of violence ended, a civilian was killed.  Even after all this, I woke up this morning to an article in the New York Post about the way in which businesses around Zuccotti Park are suffering as a result of the Occupy Wall Street movement’s encampment there (foot traffic supporting these businesses was made impossible because of recently removed police barricades around the area).  The article discussed the continued pressure from those seated snuggly in their political offices demanding actions be taken to clear out the Occupy Wall Street movement.  What kind of “action” do they have in mind, exactly?

There are, after all, only two real options in the situation.  Thus far, with the exception of Albany (whose hand was forced by the wisdom of Police Chief Steve Korkoff and his support staff) and Philadelphia (whose days of peace are numbered as a construction deadline for the plaza they occupy is quickly approaching), few if any cities have made the correct choice so far.  With so many examples of what-not-to-do in a one-of-two selection set, it seems – I’m sorry to say – plainly moronic that the great city of New York is still debating and not already underway in their course of just and cooperative action.  Personally, I’m marveling at the apparent ineptitude of the political officials presiding over lower Manhattan and their complete inability to understand the situation.  If this chain of command cannot understand what the one and only appropriate course of action in this situation is then they are, in fact, a chain of fools.  But let’s play fair, put the kid gloves on, and walk them through their options, shall we?

Option One: Work with them.  I know many politicians both local and more removed from the situation do not want to exercise this option because the movement has called them out on the corruption that has put and kept these people in office.  It has also voiced focused scorn toward the corporations whom these politicians are now indebted to for their professional successes and thus essentially sworn to serve.  However, considering the alternative (see Option Two) and the perhaps realized but not yet accepted fact that these groups and this movement aren’t going away, one would think that the city officials would chose to employ this option.  Meet with them.  Ask them to develop a working group to communicate and cooperate with the city in securing the space and items required to exist without filth, violence, and disruption to local businesses and residents.  What’s more is that if the city took measures to protect these camps, helping them manage the threats of outside criminals, and stopped the nightly evictions and attacks, people would feel safer approaching these areas and patronizing the areas businesses despite the tents in the park across the street.  Clearly, however, the city, state, and eerily silent federal governments have chosen not to follow the course of peace, liberty, and sanity.  So let’s see what’s behind door number two.

Option Two: Fight them.  So far, the use of aggressive policing, harsh enforcement of city ordinances, manipulation of local and state laws, application on non-lethal weapons, agitation of the camps, mass arrests, attempts to blind the public by manipulating media outlets, and bullying have been the mode of operandi for city officials.  This has left many police and “protesters” (I despise the word) injured, rendered a veteran literally speechless, indirectly caused the death of one citizen, cost what is now probably totaling in the millions of dollars collectively, and violated the constitutional rights of thousands upon thousands of American citizens.  Still, despite all of the blood, sweat, tears, and money thrown down on both sides of the line, this option has left us, as a nation, no closer to solutions for the problems the Occupy movement stands against and no closer to a conclusion of the events themselves.  Instead, the occupancies grow larger and more organized, the message of the attacks spurs outsiders to extend greater support, the perpetrators of the actions find themselves the victims of technological counterattacks, and the feeling of necessity to complete their mission becomes stronger inside the movement as the corrupt and their ringers out themselves with their increased volume and harder lines against it.

Even after such a short period of time, fewer than three months since the first tent was erected, it would seem that our government, both local by their actions and larger by their failure to defend the people, has taken the same stance on our grievances and assemblies as the governments in Libya and Egypt did not so long ago.  Our government has failed to heed its own words, to follow its own advice, and to protect the constitutional liberties entitled to us from birth.  This will force us onto a long and difficult path.  However harsh this course may be, however, we must understand that in their actions, thus far, the government has established its loyalty to a system without justice, without ethic, without respect for the people to whom this nation truly belongs, and hence without peace.  Their failure to cooperate and communicate with us, to hear our grievances, to aid us in our aim to mend our Republic and eliminate political corruption and corporate maleficence, and to protect us from the brutality that has been carried out against our camps, is their signature of approval on an agenda for continued abuse of our nation, our freedoms, our economy, our planet, and our people.  If our politicians will not hear us now that we are living and screaming in their streets, now that we are calling for reform, now that we are tolerating and reconvening after nightly physical assaults, now that we are expressing keen awareness of the political and societal atrocities being committed by corporate bedmates, now the American citizens have been injured and killed in this fight for freedom, when will they hear us?  Perhaps it is time to take their orders to disperse us, and the deafening silence of those in our nation’s capital who could defend us, as all the proof we need to know – truly know – that our government has nothing of the democracy from which it was birthed nor the republican practices for which it was groomed left in it.  With every moment of silence on the hill, with every tear gas canister fired, and with every night of violence carried out against people attempting to exercise their first and most basic human and American rights, they sound their call to war.

I believe, with every piece of my being, that our ability to stay peaceful – even when staring into the drooling jowls of the dogs of war – will be the key to our success.  For every occupant struggling to maintain his composure in the face of unadulterated violence, there are countless others on the outside watching.  As long as we remain peaceful, we can continue to prove to the growing audience that we are not the animals that politicians and their media paint us to be, and that we are not here to destroy the nation as they say we are.  We are here to restore democracy.  We are here to save our nation and our planet.  We are here to be the peace and justice we want to see in the world.  We must be committed to this path of peace if we are to succeed in our mission.  Let the chain of fools run themselves into the ground, burning up their resources and exhausting their men.  With poise and patience, we will out wait them and out will them.  And when the tear gas clears, when they have nothing left with which to try to tear us down, we will still be there – ready to do what we came to do.

“Do your worst,” Churchill said, “and we will do our best.”