>The early wave of occupiers that I interviewed were hardly
>anarchists of developed ideology. They were unemployed 20-somethings
>with no political past who were just pissed off and wanted to do
>something. Sure anarchists were important, but they're claiming
>ownership of a much more diverse phenom.
That characterizes a lot of Oakland too. What happened in Oakland was a great mix of old and new. Workers at the port agreed to the general strike early on. There's regional differences with this stuff. As far as I know, Eric is in Austin, where anarchists might loom larger since Austin is a wonderful oasis in the middle of a very large and very reactionary state. That's not necessarily the case in New York or Oakland.
^^^^^^^ CB; In the practice of the Occupation there has been substantial unity between anarchists, socialists , communists and novice anti-capitalists. We should probably emphasize that. Left Unity !
I could be wrong but I don't think anarchists ( and of course there are by definition variety of specific ideologies among anarchists , pluralism, independent thinking) consider the state and the bourgeoisie to be identical, do they ? In OWS , anarchists are giving priority and emphasis to protesting the bourgeoisie at their non-state location. So, we extend our hands in solidarity to our anarchist comrades in this movement.