- Andy Haynes
- Hundreds of people were arrested.
What seemed to be a very promising day at the Occupy Wall Street protests ultimately did not turn out that way. It all began, for me, at around 3 p.m., when I arrived back down at protester village right as the Saturday afternoon General Assembly was finishing up (thank god/sorry). Organizers were announcing the march plans, and telling people what to do if anyone was arrested. I kind of resigned myself to ending the day in cuffs. Internal monologue: At least this time I won’t be drunk, DAD!
Unlike other days, Zuccotti Park was packed to the brim. The crowd was well into the thousands, and was the most diverse yet. The stinky hippie thing I’ve hyperbolized—that was not what Saturday’s crowd was about. It was young and old, all colors of the rainbow, seemingly anyone not wealthy enough to be threatened by the occupation’s goals. (And some hippies too.)
- Andy Haynes
- New York Rep. Charles Rangel, minus the monacle.
Randomly, right before the march started New York Congressman Charles Rangel tried to speak to the crowds—but was quickly booed off the stage for looking like the black version of the Monopoly guy, minus a monocle and top hat. I mean, click on that photo and look at the outfit Rangel wore to the protest. He should’ve had a brandy snifter and cigar, too. (But shouldn’t we all?) As he retreated, the crowd teased him and a redheaded man tried to rush him, yelling something I couldn’t hear. But I’m sure it had something to do with being a ginger.
I was jealous of Rangel. I’ve never had that many people laughing at me. Maybe he should get into stand-up.
The crowd then began to walk north up the sidewalk on Broadway, which was lined by hundreds of cops. At about three blocks in, the march went east. I still can’t say whether the cops made them turn, or whether the marchers turned on their own, but in any case soon we were headed for the Brooklyn Bridge. I thought: This kinda seems like a stupid idea, a great way to be forced into a small space and then arrested. Oooohhhh, FORESHADOWING….
Minutes later we were funneling onto the Brooklyn Bridge and people were acting triumphant. I even felt a little swell of emotions as the crowd began to chant “Whose bridge? Our bridge!” Later on the cops would show us whose bridge: the New York City Department of Transportation’s bridge. TOO MUCH FORESHADOWING…
- Andy Haynes
- Raging grannies: not the fastest marchers.
Anyway, I was on the bridge’s walkway, with a majority of the marchers, but soon a group broke off and took to the eastbound roadway, LED BY THE POLICE. That’s important. The marchers on the roadway were moving much faster than us on the walkway, because we on the walkway were being led by one of those “Granny-Something” groups, which is not a good idea, because grannies are slow. Sorry Grannies, I love you, but let’s be real.
As we marched and chanted, the crowd on the roadway came to a stop—because the cops stopped them. Soon more cops showed up and cut these marchers off from behind. The orange netting came out and the cops began to arrest the protestors on the roadway, wrestling them away one by one. Those of us on the walkway cheered for all of them, and each of them yelled their name, in case they were disappeared (as if we were in Nicaragua).
- Andy Haynes
- Tricked by the cops.
Anyways, the cops basically tricked a couple hundred protestors onto the bridge, and then arrested them. The last thing I saw was the police backing city buses onto the bridge to take the protestors to… Nicaragua???
This basically ruined the march, because we stopped marching and instead started watching people get arrested. Nice move, cops! Good thing you make all that Wall Street money! Oh wait, you don’t? Why the fuck are you not on the side of the protest? Nevermind, I know the answer: Lizard people control the world.
We walked in a diminished crowd over the Brooklyn Bridge to a park on the other side, where a couple hundred people were rallying again. One of the grannies was lying on cardboard on the side of the group. I thought she was dead. She was napping.
I couldn’t feign excitement for the severely smaller group that made it to Brooklyn (and hey, I know I’m not in charge, but I’d just like to say the other side of the Brooklyn Bridge is a long way from Wall Street). So I headed back to the village. People were dancing, it began to rain, they continued to dance, and I headed home. This protesting thing, even when you’re just observing it, is exhausting.
- Andy Haynes
- This may look like the WTO, but it’s not.
On the way home, I thought about a question someone in Seattle had asked me: How does the Occupy Wall Street effort compare to the WTO protests of 1999?
They’re different animals, obviously. But as far as I remember—and, I think, romanticize it, because I was seventeen at the time and just dying to throw things at cops—but as far as I remember, the WTO really shut down the city of Seattle.
Occupy Wall Street has taken over one block. One park, really. And on Saturday, it managed to march a few thousand people about a half a mile before hundreds of those people were arrested and the rest of the march became a leisure walk.
I think the WTO was true protest, true civil disobedience, all out chaos at certain points, and because of that it garnered a lot more attention. The cover of Newsweek, for instance. I don’t know for sure, but I think there was also a lot more organization behind what happened in Seattle in 1999. I remember a couple hundred anarchists coming to my mom’s house before the WTO protests so that my sister and other organizers could teach them resistance—and build those arm guards so cops couldn’t take them away. I don’t think Occupy Wall Street has grown out of the same kind of organization, resources, or advance planning. I also don’t think it’s affecting Wall Street, or New York, to the point where it’s forcing everyone to get involved in some manner or another.
Too bad, because Occupy Wall Street is fighting something just as big and complicated and well-defended as the WTO.
- Andy Haynes
- Andy Haynes
- Andy Haynes
What’s this Tea Party protest about this time?
And Seattle’s “protest” did break out groups.
This is fantastic. I think it can grow and make a difference if kept up. We need this.
So…what’s the goal here? Other than “tell people we’re upset”? I’m all for protest, but I’m not seeing any end goal in sight. Just a beacon to attract malcontents.
This is how these things work and how the Tea Party went from “we don’t like this bank buyout” to “OMG TAXES R EBIL”. We can all say that we dislike X, but unless we’ve got a clearly explained alternative then the crazy people who dislike X will converge. And the crazy people will hate X A LOT MORE than us sane people ever could.
The Seattle protests were well organized – and prepared months in advance. The Occupy Wall Street has been more of a spontaneous uprising. I don’t think it’s useful compare these two completely different events.
the WTO protest achieved nothing. Most of those protesting buy computers and printers and iphones made in taiwan and china. or they drive hondas or toyotas. they had no real policy presecription, trade continues, china continues to grow, so you have to blame them for pushing a protectionist agenda that’s not realistic, among other things, why should we deny a factory job to the millions of ultra poor chinese? they should be able to get $300 a month in a factory or whatever it is over starving back on the farm, and americans and the protesters are clearly buying all their crap. it was also a mistake to protest a world organization where poorer nations like brazil and india have a voice and together have more votes than the richer nations. if any group is going to set world minimum standards, it will be an international group that evolves into that and the anti wto thing didn’t help. in fact, we need less soveriegnty to hve world standards but the protesters were all hiped up about loss of soveriegnty being right in line there with, say, pat buchanan.
the occupy wall st. folks are lacking a political party that speaks for the unemployed, the poor and the 99%. in this we can’t blame republicans, they say they’re for rich people, instead blame democrats who are pussies, have no plan, don’t to crap about wall st. and invite wall st. into the white house to rule over us and take our money.
@4 You honestly don’t know what their goals are? They want Wall Street’s corrupt influence out of our government. Really wasn’t that hard to figure out.
@7 Maybe post #4 wasn’t sufficiently clear for someone of average intelligence to understand, or maybe you just enjoy being a patronizing asshole. At any rate, the real question, obviously, is how exactly fucking with the cops and briefly blocking a right-of-way is going to do anything to achieve the end of shutting down the greedy bastards on Wall Street.
And my additional question would be: how much proof do we need that street protests accomplish absolutely nothing before we finally give up on them, and put the same amount of effort into something that might actually achieve results, such directly harassing public officials (within the law), or filing (nearly) frivolous legal claims, or any of the other effective strategies that the other side regularly deploys?
@7
First, Wall Street has as much right to representation in government as any other segment of the population. That financial intersests are over-represented we can probably agree on. That they aren’t entitled to any, I’ll respectfully disagree with you.
Second, removing the influence of big money from government won’t happen because a lot of lazy whining entitled jerks camp in a park or block streets. All that happens is that the folks you target laugh at you from their high rise offices, and everyone else just trying to do business in Seattle or New York gets pissed off at you.
Third, irrational statements that the vast majority of Americans find absurd don’t help. You aren’t the 99%, or anything like it. You don’t represent any but those who think citizenship confers the right to housing, food, child care, medical care, a job at terms you set rather than your employer, retirement. Basically, most Americans don’t want the cradle to grave nanny state you do, and acting like they do is counter productive to your cause.
Finally, yes, you do have to articulate what you want if you want to attain it. Some vague ‘get Wall Street out of government’ doesn’t cut it. You don’t get to punt the question and hope it works out the way you want. At least you don’t get to do so and then get mad when things don’t go your way.
I’ve written this before, but-
Work for you education, and postpone vacations and new cars and expensive apartments and families until you can afford such things. Save money, don’t go into debt, live on the income you make not what you wish you made. When you’ve done all that and still can’t get health insurance and food on the table and a college education for your kids, come and talk to me about how Wall Street and Republicans and your boss are messing you up. But it won’t happen, since people like that are far too busy living a life they enjoy to camp in some stupid park in New York and yell at those willing to work.
Yeah what do silly protests accomplish anywho?
Like that one where grown men dressed up as Indians and dumped tea into a harbor.
Nothing came of that little masquerade, now did it?
There’s an interesting piece in the NY Times today by Nicholas Kristof that gives the protesters some advice for what their demands should be:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/opinio…
@7 “We want Wall Street’s corrupt influence out of our government” is not a tangible, clearly defined end goal. There is no explanation of an alternative. There’s no one showing a road for us to follow that will give us a specific victory.
When LGBT activists go out in the street to say, “We don’t want bigotry to control our lives”, grand. Great. But that accomplishes nothing except making people aware of the protest. It’s when the activists say, “We want THESE rights and THIS legislation is how we’re getting it”, that change starts to happen.
“We want Wall Street’s corrupt influence out of our government” without a real, concrete political movement behind it with goals and ways to measure success is about as useful as, “We don’t want bigotry to control our lives.” Yeah, it sounds great. Now show me what that really means and how you’re getting there.
For those who say there is no central message, here it is – The Declaration of Occupy NY:
“As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power.”
@8 – you are right to call for the additional tactics you mentioned. It should be an all out offense from all sides. You are absolutely wrong when you say “that street protests accomplish absolutely nothing” I challenge you to name one major paradigm shift in history that occurred in the absence of street protest.
@13
I have no idea where you got this bit of nonsense, but to be helpful here are the flaws in it.
“As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members…”
First, this statement is erroneous. ‘We acknowledge our opinion’ is what they’re doing. Reality isn’t in the eye of the beholder, though most liberals seem to think it is.
Second, this isn’t a statement of goals. It’s a meaningless high sounding blurb.
“..our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights.”
This statement of the righteousness of mob rule, or the kind of Randian super individual world these folks presumably despise (to the extent that they’re capable of reason, admittedly a low bar) is anti-democratic on its face. As proof, it’s immmediately undermined by “that a democratic government derives its just power from the people.”
The first is a justification for riots, looting, and the wholesale disenfranchisement of civil rights of those not in the mob. The second is a paraphrase of why we have a representative democracy. The one excludes the other by definition.
“but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth..”
Yes, they do. The very act of legal incorporation is a permission to act. The state or federal governments recognize their legal right to do so in accordance with whatever other laws are operant on them.
Put another way, I can plant a pear tree in my backyard and extract the fruit of that tree in the fall. I don’t need to ask my neighbors if I can harvest the tree. I don’t need to ask my local city council. The fact that the tree is on my land, planted by me, gives me that right. Similarly, a corporation can acquire mineral rights and extract the minerals covered by those rights. They can employ people to manufacture a car or shirt and profit from that labor, provided they act within the law.
While I fully realize that private property rights are meaningless to you, they are among the fundamental foundation stones of any civilization.
“..no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power.”
This statement isn’t complete, which makes it innacurate. Economic power modified by the stated civil rights we have as citizens of our federal or state governments are one of the key reasons we engage in society. I work hard for what I own, and give up absolute liberty for limited security of my things and person. If however I give up both liberty and the security of my property I’ve made rather a bad deal. At some point such a society will collapse from that flaw. For reference, look at the USSR. Or don’t, since it no longer exists.
@15
What brand of tin foil do you favor for your hats and window coverings? I’m looking at some investing, and the manufacturer should be doing VERY well just off of your personal use purchases.
BTW, I’m waiting for the howls of outrage at the death threats to Paulsen et al from the good Sarge.
Still waiting.
Yeah, still waiting.
oh look a bunch of dirty, jobless hippie parasites (most are prob on welfare) are whining because job creators who have worked hard all their lives are getting more handouts than they are
these socialist traitors should be shot
I’m going hiking, but Sarge, here are some helpful tips.
When you take off the hat you can re-use the tin foil to store or prepare food! You shouldn’t really do that with the stuff taped over your windows, since it’s too difficult to properly sanitize. I know, you tell yourself that cooking or freezing will kill whatevers on it. But the government has invented new heat and cold resistant bacteria targeting your studio apartment specifically, so I wouldn’t chance it if I were you.
Maybe make little balls out of it for the 23 cats you own to play with?
There are lots of reasons to criticize Rangel and doubt his sincerity. That he dresses formally is not one of them. I can only hope you are wrong, and his barrackers were assailing him for his record of being a corporate tool and for his well-publicized problem with reporting assets and paying taxes, and not for his sartorial elegance.
Re: “Too bad, because Occupy Wall Street is fighting something just as big and complicated and well-defended as the WTO.”
Wall Street is much, much bigger, far more complicated and many-times more defended than the WTO. The WTO is just a trade-treaty arbitration group that came under scrutiny for being too much of an old boys club. Wall Street controls the financial fate of nations.
While I would go to the protest if I was anywhere near it (fun!), we must acknowledge that the protests are not a strategy for changing or shutting down Wall Street. They can be a tactic that brings people together in the name of shifting away from financial products. They could also bring people together as a voter base that refuses to elect politicians that support Wall Street-friendly laws. But a protest is never a be-all end-all solution.
Wall Street will, someday in the not-immediate future, shut down on its own, after all the capital has been wasted away. Between now and then, the people of the USA will start to re-learn how to grow their own food and manufacture their own products. Protests may be fun, but the global economy facilitated by Wall Street provides Americans with a disproportionately large share of the earth’s natural and human-made resources, and as Wall Street self-destructs those privileges will be lost.
Who’s privilege? OUR PRIVILEGE!
@21 and 22
I get this overwhelming impression of unfilled prescriptions from a psychiatrists office…
@12 Hmmm, maybe they’d like the end of corporate personhood and the start of completely publicly financed campaigns that keep special interest money out of elections? Again, is that such a giant leap to figure out? I can find occupiers calling for these things everywhere I look on the web.
@13 You mad, comrade?