One hundred protesters picked to live in park and stand in the rain for three hours without making a decision.
One hundred protesters picked to live in a park and stand in the rain for three hours without making a decision.
  • One hundred protesters picked to live in a park and stand in the rain for three hours without making a decision.

Last night, Occupy Seattle’s General Assembly planned to vote on giving up its nighttime base camp at Westlake Park and moving to Seattle Central Community College.

If you’ve never been, the General Assembly meets every evening at 6:30 p.m. and makes all final decisions for the “collective.” It operates on a system akin to Robert’s Rules if Robert had, say, just ingested a pound of ecstasy.

When one person speaks, everyone in the audience repeats it (a process called the people’s microphone). This electricity-free amplifier is legal without a permit and keeps you engaged because you say everything that every speakers says, and you wind up digesting the ideas. But the call-and-response makes for slow going. When you agree with a speaker you “twinkle” your fingers (upwards jazz hands); when you disagree, you de-twinkle (downward jazz hands). You eventually vote on proposals, but there is much blocking, revoting, and calls for clarity of process.

And there’s no promise that a proposal passes—even after the assembly rolls on for hours.

Obviously, moving the base camp would be a fundamental shift in tactics in Seattle. Our Occupation has held its ground for three weeks—surrounded by banks and chain stores, despite police harassment and bad weather—because many protesters argue that a move would result in atrophy and defeat. Others contend they must migrate off the granite tundra of Westlake to a more hospitable encampment each night to sustain their movement.

I should add here that The Stranger has also been criticized for publishing complaints about anti-authority, anarchist factions of the movement and glossing over the good. That is, failing to report on the democratic process and the logistical orchestration that makes the international revolution possible.

So I went down last night to participate with 150 other folks, repeat what people said, and wiggle my fingers.

“We’ve been lucky so far that there hasn’t been rain at the General Assembly,” said Phil, a rather optimistic fellow, as he sits down to take minutes on his laptop. And then we begin: Our first 20 minutes is devoted to the people who have been camping overnight in the park—a slim but appreciated minority who keep the proverbial flame burning despite the city’s ban on overnight camping. Each night, cops continue to shine lights at the demonstrators but demonstrators have begun retaliating by shining flashlights back at the police. “The police often turn off their lights,” one man says. “The police often turn off their lights,” we all repeat. “After persistent light warfare,” he concludes. “After persistent light warfare,” we conclude.

There is much twinkling.

Twenty minutes after we start, announcements commence: A coalition of work groups—the logistical doers and strategic leaders of Occupy Seattle, representing safety, communications, tactical, food, etc.—have a joint statement to make. They are researching alternative locations for overnight base camps. (Then there’s a protracted dispute as to whether it was really a joint statement or not. We finally move on.) Justin from the Demands group announces that his group is still working on its first demand—that the city move its money out of major banks—but he repeats several times that this demand “isn’t for sure” and they are only “thinking of making a proposal.”

But some teams are more decisive. As we repeat things and twinkle, many folks are skipping the meeting, off making food, shuttling provisions to the protest, or doing something else. As they quietly work, someone in the General Assembly proposes “Occupy Halloween,” where people are encouraged to come downtown on Saturday dressed as corrupt bankers, corporate zombies, or Captain Credit Union. This is fun, mediagenic, and on-message. There are hoots, hollers, and twinkles galore.

It begins to rain. Phil is now holding an umbrella as he types.

Forty-five minutes after we’ve begun, we get to the exciting part: proposals. But the first proposal is the subject of much detwinkling. It would require the group to keep the name “Occupy Seattle”—i.e., a proposal to maintain the status quo—unless the general assembly votes unanimously at a future regular meeting to change it. The group, after much deliberation, rejects the proposal.

It is still raining.

I mean, it’s really raining.

A man is suddenly circulating with a huge sack of umbrellas. Soon there is another man distributing thin ponchos. We all appear to be wearing giant condoms. It’s 8:30 p.m.—an hour and a half after the General Assembly began—and at long last we reach the proposal about moving the encampment to Seattle Central Community College, located about one mile east of Westlake Park. Many Occupiers believe police would need the college’s permission to evict them, making it more secure than Westlake. But alas, college president Dr. Paul Killpatrick reportedly opposes an occupation of his college.

“He does not support us because he supports the one percent!” someone declares. Still, we vote and a majority support the move.

But then someone blocks the vote. It’s raining harder. The crowd is thinning. Deliberations continue. We must vote again.

After a block, the assembly must vote by a four-fifths majority, or 80 percent. We vote and it’s 89-24, which is only 79 percent. The move is called off. It’s 9:40 p.m., more than three hours after we began. The last measure before the group—a proposal to move to Cal Anderson Park—has been tabled. The crowd has thinned to about 40 people. We have spent three hours and five minutes without making a decision.

But something lovely has happened. Soup! Volunteers are ladling it out of a pot into cups. These tactical groups—the ones that can make decisions about Halloween demonstrations, distribute rain gear, shuttle provisions, make soup, etc.—are efficient and incredible. But at the assembly, it seems that many of the most articulate, smart people are the advocates and defenders of the process. A process so slow and cumbersome that it is, in a way, a liability.

That said, this process has one incredible benefit: This cannot become a cult, enthralled to one charismatic leader with a bullhorn.

The anarchists and agitators that we’ve heard about—people driven by an anti-cop agenda—were silent or absent at the assembly. That said, plenty of people I spoke to were concerned by the persistent division between organizers looking for sustainable occupation and anti-authority types seeking dramatic displays. But there was hardly partisanship at the assembly. Seattle City Council member Mike O’Brien says he sat in one an assembly last week and people were calm and thoughtful. “I’d love to see that energy carry on and for more people to get engaged,” he says.

47 replies on “Three Hours with Occupy Seattle’s General Assembly”

  3. I enjoyed the “needs board” that was up last Thu which listed “tobacco and rolling papers” No.. 3 behind “folding tables” and “folding chairs.”

    Keeping priorities simple and clear will be key for survival of the movement.

  5. Isn’t the point to occupy everything and anything all at once?

    (For myself, I would #OccupyCourtneyStodden if I could, but I hear she’s taken.)

  7. @4, is she one of the Leschi Biscuit-Barrels? What a lovely family. I hear they’re all named in part “Olé” after the patriarch, old Fnidden P’Chippenchip a la Rouge DeVries Biscuit-Barrel fell into the sangria bowl after a particularly rousing bullfight on his holidays.

  8. Does Seattle Central Community College know about this possible move? And specificlly, what did SCC do to create the problems that people are protesting about?

  9. Somewhere, right now, Greek communists and Spanish anarchists are laughing at your finger-waving wussiness.

    Occupying a fucking community college? Really?

    Nice call you zany agents of change: Occupying that very hub of global injustice, that den of economic exploitation, that center of backhanded political dealing: Seattle Fucking Community College.

    Long live your inaction unmovement — and its unresults.

  10. @5 Man, it is always a laugh-riot when people deliberately misinterpret a person or idea just so the punchline of their joke will make sense. Ha ha ha ha!!! That just never gets old, does it?

  11. @8

    Yes, they do, and nothing in particular.

    The occupiers are just looking for an open space that a) they’re not allowed to camp in, and b) isn’t a city park or other place subject to hourly police flashlighting. They want the camp to be in defiance of authority, but in a way that lets them get a good night’s sleep.

  13. #10

    Yes…but you know what is even more rib-splitting.

    When some angry commenter, takes a swipe at someone, without making any sense whatsoever.

    And it’s so rare too…must happen only like every 3rd comment or so.

    It’s uproarious.

    As Gene Shalit said “Laugher Grenades”.

    Please, keep up your tireless crusade of comedy!!!

  14. @11, so they want to camp in defiance of authority, but they want said authorities to respect their ability to sleep, in other words, to force the authorities to accommodate the protesters’ refusal to acknowledge authority? THAT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE. Either camp where you’re not allowed and stand your ground, or shut the fuck up. Whining about sleep??? THIS IS A REVOLUTION. Or so Dominic keeps telling us. You can sleep after the government is overthrown, and you are all celebrated as heroes of the revolution.

  16. Seriously, just go home and occupy your bedrooms, the come back and do your finger jiggling thing all rested and refreshed. Nobody except the city cares if you’re there all night or not, and fighting the city is really getting sidetracked.

  17. I’ll say it.

    This is showing us a good reason why direct democracy isn’t practical or effective. Things don’t happen, shit doesn’t get done.

    It doesn’t help that nobody knows what Occupy is about (as opposed to people putting their own impression upon what they think it is supposed to be about, regardless of what people–either those participating in it or those observing it think it’s about) and nobody knows what Occupy is supposed to actual accomplish, of course…but for all of the inclusion and all of the process fetishism…they now seem entirely bogged down in the details of how simply to keep doing what they’re doing.

    America is not and never has been an absolute democracy–it is and was designed to be a democratic republic. We elect officials to act on our behalf and for the overall greater good–and if we disagree with how they act, we have the right to vote them out–because, in theory, that should be more effective than having everyone vote on everything (especially as most people will merely vote for their own limited self-interest and often without being fully informed.)

    Now, an argument can be (and is being) made that our democratic republic is being perverted by the influence of corporate money and the general divisiveness of constant-war based two party politics–and perhaps that’s what the Occupy movement SHOULD be about…

    …but what they offer as an alternative doesn’t seem like any sort of a solution.

  23. (this is also why Occupy Deep Bore Tunnel Seattle is the obvious solution, especially during a massive factor 9 quake and Rainier mud flow with Tsunami event – many enter, none leave)

  24. @5, like her not being occupied would give you a ghost of a skosh of a chance.

    @13, you do realize that you change your profile pic more frequently than a new user registers, you freak? What that means is that as my eye glides down the comment list, it is all the more efficient to bypass images I don’t recognize (except for this rare instance when I answered the phone and let the scroll glide to a random stop that included two of your useless comments on my giant screen, allowing me to take a multitasking little swipe).

  25. Ahhh, do they want to be closer to hipster town on Capitol Hill? Way to be even more irrelevant, but closer to the bars and cool people I guess.

    Until someone douses themselves in gas and lights a match, I’m not buying that this is anything more than a circle jerk for bored white collge kids.

  28. If most organizations had to reach an 80% majority vote, they’d never accomplish anything. Also, if everyone can hear well enough to do the repeating to make the peoples’ microphone function, why is it necessary in the first place? It does have the unfortunate side effect of making them seem kinda kooky to anyone listening or watching YouTube videos…

  29. That moronic “people’s microphone” is enough to fry my last nerve. What, are they taking cues from the Catholic mass? I tried to make it through an NPR story about Occupy this weekend, but then the people’s mic started up, and I had to switch the radio off.

    But then again, I’ve yet to make it through the whole two hours on either Sat or Sun morning without hitting some eye-roll inducing deal-breaker. NPR sure knows how to epitomize itself.

  30. One thing I find interesting about The People’s Mic is the explanation that it allows everyone to hear when a gathering doesn’t have a permit for amplification.

    Yet for OWS, the organizers not only planned and initiated the protests without permits, they in fact refuse to obtain them (in Seattle, the City unilaterally issues permits to OS).

    If the whole point of Direct Action is to do things without permission from the authorities, why explain The People’s Mic as a concession to local law?

  32. The 99% are not anti-consumerist. The 99% are not anarchist. The 99% do not want to go camping in the rain. The 99% do not want to fight with cops. The 99% do not want to sit on the ground and wiggle their fingers in the air. The 99% do not want consensus. The 99% want leaders, and hierarchies, and a process that doesn’t pretend it’s not a process.

    The 99% know shit’s fucked up and bullshit. The 99% are glad OWS is raising a ruckus about shit.

    But the 99% knows damn well that OWS isn’t the way of the future.

  38. You all should be thanking Dominic for his apt description and the fact that you can all pretend like you know what you’re talking about while NEVER having to experience it for yourself.

  39. as someone who was there on monday and continues to be there…
    hey DOMINIC! anarchists and anti-authoritarians were present and speaking, in fact a few were facilitating!
    anarchism is in ABSOLUTELY no way defined by anti-police struggle.
    what would have had to happen for the anti-authoritarian current to be visible to you?
    i spoke up as well as many of my comrades.
    black bloc isn’t an ideology, it’s a tactic so unfortunately us anti-capitalists and anti-authoritarians aren’t always going to be so easy for you to pick out of a crowd.

  40. @40 Eh, now that you’ve identified yourself with the scarlet letter, prepare for uppity fauxgressives to get all “practical and wise” on your ass.

    I think Dominic would’ve liked to clutch his pearls to movement of police barricades or cones or breaking of See’s Candies’ windows. He came away disappointed that his stereotyping wasn’t reinforced.

  41. I’m not an anarchist, but I’m tired of innarcurate reporting about the anarchists. Most of them actively backed the SCCc proposal, and have been tirelessly working to build up the occupation. You only “see” anarchists when you think they’re going to engage in violence, not when they patiently participate in the General Assembly, raising good ideas.

    The strategy behind the SCCC move is to reach out to students, faculty, and staff to grow and reinforce the movement, and then to focus on regular outreach and direct action focused on banks downtown. Several actions at banks are also planned this week – other news media besides the Stranger managed to pick up this point. This is not a retreat. Stay tuned.

  43. Anarchists were not absent at the general assembly you went to – who’s idea do you think it was to move the occupation to Seattle Central Community College?

  46. You haven’t been criticized for emphasizing the “bad” and glossing over the “good.” You’ve been criticized for sloppy reporting – making value judgments based on hearsay, using anonymous sources as mouthpieces for your own biases (or maybe allowing yourself to be a mouthpiece for theirs) failing to clearly state which events you’ve witnessed and which you’ve only heard about, and for a general disregard of the concerns brought by people of color. Please understand – these criticisms of your reporting are NOT all coming from within OWS. I am not a participant in the protests, and I can see how you’ve short-changed the coverage by relying on assumptions and supposition. For example, if this was your first time attending a General Assembly, why exactly did you feel so confident characterizing the events at previous assemblies?

  47. @47) You’re wrong: This wasn’t my first General Assembly. I’d attended six GAs before this one, but was reporting from the sidelines. As for my biases, I assume you’re referring to my unwavering support for OWS and Occupy Seattle. I’m sure you wouldn’t let a few critiques here and there distract you from all the supportive coverage.

Comments are closed.