Maybe you should look into the actual decisions of the Occupy movement before you start making claims about its decisions. The truth is that there was a broad consensus toward a multiplicity of tactics, and towards an occupation of abandoned buildings. My reading of the situation is that the occupation had some rather substantial problems, and there were some actions in response to the police at that moment, which weren't exactly thoughtful, particularly the person who set stuff on fire (now that is a potentially very dangerous action.) However, all of this stuff is really sketchy. I saw a really interesting document investigating the Tralfalger Tax Riots, which tried to put the day's events together in a more cohesive manner. Perhaps something like that would help in understanding the strike. However, let's be honest. The real provocation was the general strike itself, an event that cost more to the state and capital than anything that was done by these random individuals.
To step away from Oakland for a little bit, I remember the first property destruction that I ever saw at a protest. It was the newspaper strike in Detroit. The protesters literally destroyed every newspaper box on the protest route. The ILWU, who everyone loves, has brought baseball bats to protests, and have engaged in substantial property destruction. I've seen random folks on the street throw concrete chunks at Nazis, and scream homophobic abuse at the police. None of this stuff had been decided on collectively, but no one flipped out about it. To tell the truth, most of the provocative behavior has been done by people who haven't been active in protest movements, not anarchists. There's every possibility that the crazy stuff that occurred late at night was similar. I don't know. The point is that none of you do either. (Unless there was a witness on the list....)
robert wood
> I haven't undertaken a lengthly investigation of OO, or O-anything, for
> that matter. But there's enough scuttlebutt in criticism of the BB to
> indicate a consensus was lacking in some measure. I could be wrong on the
> empirics. Whether I'm wrong on the principle is a different matter.
>
> As noted before, there are two issues: 1) Whether democratic procedure
> was
> followed or affronted, and totally aside from that, 2) whether any
> property
> destruction was a good idea. If they agreed unanimously to burn down a
> police station, I would have to say that is probably not a good idea (#2).
> Or as George Carlin said in reference to 9-11, "not funny."
>
> It should be obvious that the wisdom of an action has nothing to do with
> the sterling moral character of those undertaking it, the extent of their
> sacrifice, nor with the admirability of the decision-making process.
>
> And, pro tip from an old fogie, one sort of police agent is the type that
> insinuates him/herself into a group by being the most diligent, selfless
> worker and a totally non-disruptive presence. (Another type is someone
> who
> is a constant pain in the ass. Still another is the lefter/more militant
> than thou type who encourages people to commit crimes.) There should be
> no
> doubt that a development as important as OWS is attracting such attention
> from the authorities.
>
> If a listserv is not for kvetching, I don't know what it is for.
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Joseph Catron <jncatron at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Max Sawicky <sawicky at verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> I make no claims as to who agrees or not with me. Never did.
>> >
>>
>> Not explicitly, but you have been harrumphing about how OO should go
>> about
>> enforcing a consensus that, from what I can tell, has never come close
>> to
>> existing. You want to skip the hard part - convincing enough people to
>> agree with you - and go straight to implementing the agreement. (To be
>> fair, I sometimes think that sort of thing would be nice, too!)
>>
>> Meanwhile, I have a vague idea that some of the Oakland Black Bloc have
>> put
>> a hell of a lot more time and energy into building the occupation
>> movement
>> than the vast majority of what Carrol appropriately calls the
>> "kvetchers"
>> here. If you want to influence the direction of a movement, doing the
>> work
>> helps. And as I've said before, work's one thing anarchists are great
>> at.
>>
>> --
>> "Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen
>> lytlað."
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>