More on the Latest APD Killing - - and the MLK Weekend of Rage

The police have released a bit of body-cam video of the latest APD killing. It's disturbing from the outset because the officer involved is prominently displaying and using his automatic rifle during the incident.

The dead suspect, John Okeefe, was said to be armed with a replica old west Colt .45 revolver -- which he may or may not have been -- and he was said to be wearing body armor -- which he may or may not have been -- but even if so, the issue to me is that the police brought out the heavy weaponry and were marching around and firing in a populated neighborhood at rush hour. What's up with that?

Really, there was no concern for civilian casualties at all.

And this is all based on a report of "suspicious behavior" of two men behind a beauty salon? Something's wrong here.

The accounts of what happened are distinctly odd, to say the least, and there seems to have been a deliberate effort to obscure the participation/culpability of the other man involved. He was said to have been arrested, but according to other reports, he wasn't. He was transported to the hospital for assessment of dizziness and shortness of breath, and was released without charges.

According to police, the suspect Okeefe ran when confronted by police who were called to the scene of "suspicious behavior". According to police, the suspect Okeefe fired at officers as they pursued him. According to police, they didn't fire back. They say they lost track of the suspect Okeefe for a few minutes, then found him again running along the alley where he was eventually shot to death.

One of the citizen videos I posted links to in a previous post are alleged to show suspect Okeefe firing at officers, but they don't. In fact, it's impossible to tell from that video whether or not suspect Okeefe fires at all, or even if he has a gun.

It is, however, interesting to note that officer Fisher and officer Oates -- said to be the actual killers -- are not apparently the officers seen in the citizen video chasing suspect Okeefe in the alleyway. Officer Fisher is in fact on the other side of the shrubbery -- he starts out on the other side of the street -- and officer Oates (if I'm reading the stories right, and who can say about that, as I do get confused now and again...) is in the SUV that jumps the curb. So if I'm understanding it right, the officers chasing suspect Okeefe in the alley are not firing, whereas two other officers are firing, one out of camera view in the citizen video, and one arriving in the SUV.

[Note: I crossed out that particular paragraph because it was based on my initial misunderstanding of what the citizen video shows.]

Officer Fisher is apparently the officer running at the left of the scene, outside the shrubbery. It's not clear exactly when he fires at Okeefe, but it appears to happen while he is screened from view by trees. Another officer -- unidentified -- who is probably closest to Okeefe at that time suddenly backs away, no doubt due to the shots being fired. Officer Oates is not located, though he is likely in the scene. One report had it that Oates was in the SUV, but I've not found that report again, and I've seen no confirmation.


The one video released from officer Fisher also does not show the suspect Okeefe at all until after he is dead in the alley. It does not show him firing, though officer Fisher says he is firing. This may or may not be true, it's impossible to tell from the video, but given the frequency of police using the line "Stop resisting!!!" on unresisting suspects who have been tased or are being beaten, one would be wise not to take anything an officer says in a crisis/conflict situation at face value.

Officer Fisher's video doesn't show suspect Okeefe until sometime after he is shot dead and his corpse is surrounded by side-arm wielding officers. When we see Okeefe's body in the alley, he appears to be lying face down, what looks like a gun lying on the ground a foot or two away from his left leg.

The police claim Okeefe was wearing body armor, but that's not clear from the video at all. He appears to be wearing a black or gray shirt. That's all I can discern.

From the citizen video shot at a distance, it appears that Okeefe was trying to climb a resident's back wall to escape when he was shot and killed. There are several bullet holes in the wall. Probably more bullet holes in Okeefe, though.

The media has made a great show of "all the mug shots" of John Okeefe in order to make it seem as if he needed killing, and from certain theories of law enforcement and Führerprinzip, that's true enough. Get out of line, the man don't just come and take you away anymore, the man come and shoot your ass as likely as not.

There's a lot of "Darwinism" in the responses to police killings these days. Those who die, according to the "Darwin" fans have failed at survival of the fittest, too bad so sad. It's just "Nature" -- Natural Selection at work. Police are doing their part in cleaning up the riff-raff, "human garbage disposal" as one APD officer notoriously remarked about his job.

Both officers involved in the Okeefe shooting have had, shall we say, issues in the past. Officer Fisher has been repeatedly accused of use of excessive force, and the city has paid out more than $100,000 in settlements. Officer Oates was one of three officers who opened fire and killed a suspect in a carjacking in 2011.

Was this a "necessary shooting?" No, not at all. The idea that "suspicious activity" behind a beauty salon is worthy of a police chase and killing like this is just absurd. There was no threat to anyone at the time of the call to 911, not even a hint of it. When police arrived, one of the suspects ran. (I wouldn't be surprised if the other "suspect" was a cop, but that's another issue for another time.) The police say Okeefe fired at officers as he ran, but there is no concrete evidence it is so. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but even if he did,  does that automatically warrant a death sentence? On the street? Like that?

Many would say yes. They have been conditioned to believe that police are always justified in killing someone in self-defense. But in this case, even if Okeefe was firing -- and there is no proof that he was -- killing him in the alley like that makes no sense and clearly endangered others. It wasn't self defense, especially if Okeefe was trying to climb a wall to get away. The "race card" can't be used in this instance because Okeefe was Anglo, but because he had a long rap sheet, the killing was automatically justified in many people's minds, whether or not it was self-defense. Simply having a criminal record is enough for many to believe killing is the right remedy.

If this incident means that APD has gone back to its innate tendency to kill, it will mean a very difficult period for Burquenos ahead. When it seemed that maybe, just maybe, the killing had stopped, we may find it has been ratcheted up to a new level.

That would be a tragedy.

--------------------------------------------------
Reclaiming the real legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. is a primary objective of this weekend's celebrations of his life and there are militant demonstrations all across the country asserting that Black Lives Matter and that Martin Luther King, Jr. was far from the rather bland pacifist he's been lionized by white folks as.

The Oakland Federal Building was barricaded for four hours and 28 minutes on Friday in a wonderful display of third world and white ally unity with #BlackLivesMatter. It was great.

Simultaneously with the action in Oakland, the BART stations from the Embarcadero to Powell Street in San Francisco were shut down.

In Boston, I-93 was shut down through the city, snarling traffic for hours.

Actions were taking place all day yesterday throughout the country. More are planned for today and tomorrow.

The protests over the egregious killing of Mike Brown -- and so many others -- have become a Movement to end police violence. The lists of demands are growing, and there is no sign that the protests will cease or that the protesters will back down. The issue is as straightforward as can be:

Justice where there is none, and an end to police violence where there is too much.

Whereas last year it seemed that the issue might not catalyze the public to action, this year it looks like the necessary action is almost certain.

"A Pretty Good Day For The Revolution"

[Title taken from a comment posted at FDL yesterday].

Yes, it was a pretty good day for the revolution (small "r" so far this cycle) yesterday when a coordinated effort by numerous groups banding together with BlackOut Collective seized and shut down the Oakland (CA) police headquarters and held it for 4 hours and 28 minutes as a memorial to Mike Brown and in honor of so many of those killed by police in Oakland and around the country.

It was both a moving tribute and an expression of the full blown disgust and anger so many Americans share at the terror inflicted on fellow Americans by out of control and unaccountable police.

One action does not a Movement nor a Revolution make, to be sure. But the cumulative effect of all these actions all over the country, sustained by determined young people and their allies, is a wonder to behold, and that wonder can lead to revolutionary change in consciousness and behavior -- and that's the point of all these actions.

I saw an articulation yesterday regarding the underlying issues and objectives of the current actions, and I ransacked my own archives. So much of it seemed so familiar. So much of what we were going through just a few years ago with Occupy and police issues has been repeated in response to the outrage and protests over the incessant killings by police, so many of them unarmed black men. Similarity is not identity, but Occupy activists understood quite clearly that the police behavior toward them was merely mirroring what had been going on in communities of color for generations -- it was in no way comparable, but it was a reflection.

So much of what people have been yearning for -- which I have long characterized as "dignity, justice, community, and peace" -- has been cynically thwarted and subverted by a ruling elite which sees its own interests as the only interests that matter. Shooting people down in the streets, as the police so often are wont to do, is simply one of the tactics used by Our Rulers to keep the rest of us in line.

It doesn't matter who they shoot or why; it matters that they shoot, and shoot to kill, so as to serve as a warning to everyone else. It is no longer "Get outta line, the man come and take you away," it's "Bang, bang, you shot me down."

It's been happening in communities of color, especially in black communities, for as long as there has been a United States, and long before that. For as long as Europeans have colonized and conquered the Americas, the Other has been subjected to whatever torments their oppressors choose to indulge in. The original sins and some of the methods of genocide and chattel slavery live on in contemporary America, despite all the calls to "get over it" and "move on."

Shutting down freeways, shopping malls, bridges and intersections, walking out of work and school, all are effective tactics used during the current period of unrest following the repeated killings by police of unarmed and/or nonthreatening individuals by roided up rangers on a mission of murder. They are not engaged in shootouts with desperadoes. Far from it. They are hunters and killers, not protecting and serving, but seeking out "righteous battle," targeting and executing whoever gets in their sights.

Yesterday's tactic in Oakland was to shut down the police headquarters itself.

According to Bella Eiko who was livestreaming part of the action, previously it had been nigh unto impossible for protesters to get to the police headquarters in Oakland as it had been barricaded by police and traffic was diverted away from it. Yesterday morning, however, a dedicated cohort of black activists and white and Asian allies made their way to the building and chained themselves to the doors; one intrepid soul used climbing gear to successfully mount the flagpole in front of the building and unfurl a "Black Lives Matter" flag showing the images of some of those who have been killed by police in Oakland and elsewhere in the country.

So far as I could tell from the videos and tweets that I saw yesterday, the police were caught completely off guard. Their shields were down; their defenses were penetrated. And the action -- completely nonviolent -- put them in a very bad light indeed. For once, they could not even protect and serve themselves -- the only people who really matter in their universe.

Throughout the country, let it be noted, police and government offices in general have taken to barricading themselves against the public. Police stations are some of the most heavily guarded and barricaded locations, but all government offices sport layers of security and barricades to keep the public at bay. During protests, there will often be phalanxes of police surrounding their "forts" -- police stations and offices.

In Ferguson, I noted that the only places protected by police and National Guard when the Darren Wilson nonindictment was announced were the police and fire department buildings. Everything else was on its own, and where vandalism and arson were being committed, there was no police or fire department presence at all.

The police protect their "fort" and almost nothing else. It's happened again and again, in many other places besides Ferguson.

But yesterday, the Oakland main "fort" was compromised, and the police could do nothing but let it happen.

Well, they did nothing but let it happen.

Whether they could have done anything to prevent it or fight it, I don't know.

Ordinarily, under typical circumstances, they would have used gas and grenades and batons and rubber bullets, the full panoply of hardware and brutality, to break up and disperse the demonstrators and the throngs who gathered to watch.

Ordinarily they would have arrested all the demonstrators -- violently in some cases -- and they would have hauled them all off to Santa Rita where they would have been processed as slowly as possible, and more of them would be assaulted and injured by police and guards.

Though there were preparations and expectations that the police would respond to this action with their typical violence and brutality, they did not. They appeared to be slow to respond at all. Did they not notice what was going on, or were they told to stand down?

As I watched some of the action unfold, I became suspicious that something was going on behind the scenes that curbed the OPD's general penchant for violence in the face of protests. Someone was telling them to cool their jets, put away their weapons, and let this thing play out.

I assume it was the chief. But perhaps someone was telling him to cool it. Perhaps it was the City Manager/Administrator (currently Henry Garner, who I know nothing of) -- who is in charge of the police in Oakland, not the Mayor or City Council.

And perhaps someone in authority over the chief and the city administrator (who could that be?) was telling both of them to stand down.

If that's the case, then I'd say something has finally penetrated the thick skulls of the Highest of the Local Mighty and they got the message: "Back the fuck off or...?" Or what? Revolution? This time they may feel it's real or has the potential to become real if they push against the protests too much.

The point has been made, too, that this action in Oakland was planned and executed by BlackOut Collective together with white and Asian allied affinity groups who consciously used their privilege as a shield for everyone against police violence and brutality. They knew the risks of what they were doing, but they also understood that because they weren't black they would have a certain level of protection from police violence.

And so it was. Not only were they protected from police violence, most of them weren't even arrested, and those that were arrested were released apparently within minutes.

It was as stark a demonstration of the nature of privilege in this society as I've ever seen. Except for a strong presence at the beginning of the demonstration, black folk were kept in a kind of kettle or cage across the street and were allowed to watch while white and Asian allies conducted their action with little or no interference or presence by police. Only the ones who blocked the doors and the street were taken away, but it's not entirely clear that more than a few of them were arrested (25 are said to have been arrested). According to reports, all of  those who were arrested were subsequently released. The ones around the flagpole and the "Flagpole Homie" who climbed the pole and stayed there for 4 hours unfurling the "Black Lives Matter" flag were allowed to leave with neither citation nor arrest, though arrests of all and charges to be filed had been previously announced by the Oakland PD PIO.

Meanwhile, in Washington DC, some of the activists from Ferguson who initially were not allowed to address the crowd assembled for the "Justice For All" rally organized by The Reverend Al Sharpton on Saturday spoke at what looked like a hotel conference room about why they shut shit down, including the rally until they were allowed to speak. They spoke about why and about how important the tactics of inconvenience and discomforting the comfortable are in this struggle.

I think they're brilliant:

 

Broadcast live streaming video on Ustream

This is Bella Eiko's video of the last hour and a half of yesterday's action in Oakland.



Broadcast live streaming video on Ustream

And a link to earlier in the day:

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/56508513

This is a copy of a statement by those who organized the action yesterday:

For those of yall that have seen the action today that shut down the Oakland Police Department for 4 hours and 28 minutes, that was why this was posted this early in the AM, to give context to how this came about. Local black organizers, connected to The BlackOut Collective, Black Lives Matter, and #BlackBrunch, held down the very center of the action, with their message #BlackAndBreathing. Members of their groups were giving overall political direction. Multiple Affinity Groups (teams) of about 200 non-black folks, under the name Bay Area Solidarity Action Team, locked down to doors all around the building, scaled the flag poles and dropped a #BlacklivesMatter banner with the faces of Oscar Grant, Mike Brown, Alan Blueford, and Renisha Mcbride, and Tamir Rice. Blockade team with lock boxes at the base. Other allied POC, including an Asian affinity group #Asians4BlackLives locked to the front doors. Two intersections were blockaded as well, including folks in wheelchairs using them as blockade devices. The logic was allies leveraging their privilege to support the black reclamation of space, especially in front of the #OPD, an institution known for its violence on black lives. By the end, many more people in the streets supporting. Everyone safe, everyone who was arrested is out. Action demands lifted up national demands from #FergusonAction. Lots of lessons and mistakes along the way, looking forward to debriefing and learning more from this experience to keep it moving in a good way.

(h/t hotflashcarol at FDL who was in the thick of Occupy Oakland back in the day and has many stories to tell.)

The key here is that this aspect of the revolution is being led by the young. Those of us of a certain age and background are thrilled to see it. We can't tell them what to do -- and most of us won't try. The young are the ones who will find their way through this period of cruelty. And they're doing it.

They have shown a resolute intent to build a better world for themselves and for the future, and I for one cannot but be filled with respect and admiration.


Their voices have been heard, but we're not to the point of resolution. Not yet.

Just to be clear...

Rob Perry, Albuquerque Chief Administrative Officer, is the central character in the systemic problem of police violence, bloodshed, abuse and corruption in Albuquerque. He is the one who is ultimately in charge of police operations, not the mayor or the city council, nor even the police chief.

Perry is a bully, a dissimulator, a condescending prick -- aka what's known in the vernacular as "an asshole." In that, he's fairly typical of city manager/administrator types I've encountered over the years, except that in Perry's case, the rough edges haven't been filed off. He is what he is. I suppose that's a good thing in that there can be no doubt where he stands. He does not stand with the People, he stands with Authority which he sees as his right.

One thing he said in his condescending, assholic interview with KRQE (in the previous post) was interesting. He said that he didn't believe the people had lost trust in APD; he believed that by far, the residents of Albuquerque trusted the police.

As it happens, a poll was released just yesterday that starkly refutes his claim. The Garrity Perception Survey -- which is widely used and widely respected in New Mexico -- shows that far from the majority of Albuquerque residents trusting the police, two thirds of Albuquerque residents don't trust the police.

The question was as follows:

“on a scale of 1 to 5, with five being very favorable and one being very unfavorable, what is your level of trust of police officers?”

 The poll was taken between the last week of February and the first week of March, 2014, so it didn't cover the time since the James Boyd execution in the Sandia foothills on March 16, 2014.

The poll was taken statewide.

The number of responses to the poll question which fall in the 4-5 range (ie: favorable, trusting of police) has fallen precipitously since 2011, most notably in Albuquerque, where trust in police has fallen from 52% to 33%, and in what's deemed "North Central" New Mexico (not sure the boundaries), where trust  has fallen even more, from 57% to 30%. And this was before the Boyd killing.

In no area of New Mexico did a majority of New Mexicans express trust in police. None. Certainly not in Albuquerque.

For Perry to assert his belief that most Burqueños do trust the police is typical of him, but it also shows that he is completely, horribly out of touch with Albuquerque residents. Of course he doesn't serve the interests of most Burqueños, and he doesn't care what they think. He may or may not know what this poll shows, but whether he does or not is irrelevant to what he believes.

Because of the way city government is organized, removing Perry is very difficult. A better approach is to shame him. We've seen that he's immune to shaming by people like Nora Anaya, let alone David Correia, so something else is necessary. He doesn't care about people, he cares about power. And one way to shame people like him is to demonstrate they are factually wrong. Demonstrate his ignorance and arrogance, and point out the consequences his ignorance and arrogance have for ordinary people.

Not only does he not know what he's talking about, he doesn't seem capable of recognizing any fact which doesn't fit with his pre-conceived notions of his own power.  He's also apparently incapable of recognizing the harm his ignorance and arrogance can cause. Needless to say, this attitude has been with him for many years (42 pg pdf, class action lawsuit against Perry and NM Department of Corrections which he headed).

Terms like narcissist and sociopath are thrown around with great abandon on the internet, and for that reason, I tend not to use them, but there are cases where they are appropriate. They were certainly appropriate in the case of Oakland's city administrator Deanna Santana and her choice for police chief, Howard Jordan. Jordan was an inveterate liar and Santana had nothing but contempt for most of the people of Oakland. Both acted to compound the damage already done to Oakland and its residents by years of police corruption and civic outrages against the People. Their lies and contempt reached a point of unsustainability, despite the fact that most of the elected city officials, including the mayor, supported them. They both had to go, and eventually they did, but not before they had done their level best -- or worst -- to destroy what little trust remained in civic institutions. Theirs were shameful performances in every way.

It's hard to say whether Oakland is on the road to recovery after their disastrous reign.

Albuquerque's situation is somewhat similar, in that the police chief and the city administrator are operating contrary to the interests of the People, in a way that harms the civic body rather than helps it. Like Oakland, Albuquerque is a gritty, working-class city, beset with poverty and all the consequences of poverty, overlaid with some extraordinary enclaves of wealth and privilege. The economy of Albuquerque has sputtered and faltered badly during the Endless Recession, partly because of its dependence on government for so much of its economic activity and well-being. There have been so many cutbacks in government contracting and employment over the now nearly-decade long economic downturn, and there has been little private sector economic development to take its place.

Burqueños are poor and getting poorer. That's not the worst of it, though. New Mexicans can cope with poverty; they've been doing it since long before the advent of Norte Americanos and tourist-trapping "The Land of Enchantment." Families, culture, deep roots in a harsh but beautiful land, all contribute to communal strength and an ability to cope with adversity.

When civic authorities set out to make things worse, however, as Mr. Perry and members of his police force have done routinely, through their blind allegiance to power, and their gross misuse of power to harm residents and bring disrepute to the city and its citizens, it's time for them to go. It took several years to dispose of Deanna Santana and Howard Jordan in Oakland, but they were eventually replaced with officials who seem to have the greater interest of Oakland's people in mind rather than service to unelected power.

What people in office such as Mr Perry tend to forget it that New Mexicans are quite as capable of dealing with people like him, just as they are more than capable of dealing with other adversity.

It's time for him to retire...

Successful De-legitimization of Authority -- But Then Losing the Plot

De-legitimizing authority is one of the principal agents of civil change known in political circles. It's used all the time. It's the foundation of the many "Color Revolutions" that led to the break up of the Soviet Union, and it was used many times by Occupy demonstrators, most particularly in Oakland, during the time before Occupy transitioned to its current iteration of public service.

De-legitimization of authority is one of the key aspects of the current efforts by a coalition of community and victim groups in Albuquerque to... tame shall we say... an out of control and bloodthirsty police department.

It was also very much an aspect of the J28 (2012) actions in Oakland (along with many other actions before and after that). In Oakland, unfortunately, the J28 activists did not press their advantage once they had successfully de-legitimized the authority of the police and the civic bodies. In fact, they almost immediately threw it away.

The danger is that activists in Albuquerque may follow in the same path, even though they seem to be much more aware of the pitfalls than Occupy Oakland activists were back in the day.

What's going on in Ukraine, to the extent we in far distant lands can puzzle it out, seems to follow the pattern of de-legitimization of authority and pressing the advantage that is the hallmark of successful revolutions. True enough, the so-called revolution in Kiev is not on behalf of the People, it's on behalf of a select group of oligarchs and their western European and American co-conspirators. We understand that. The ideological motor for this revolution is Fascist right out of the '30s and '40s of the previous century, and one of its most powerful and effective elements is Nazi, in the form of the Right Sektor thugs who seem to be allowed to patrol and kill at will.

Oh yes, they are most definitely pressing their advantage, what with the ongoing "anti-terrorist" operations in the restive and rebellious Eastern Regions of Ukraine.

I keep thinking that if Yanukovych had done anything like this, there would have been an immediate NATO bombing campaign on the lines of what was done to Serbia.

But he didn't. Instead, he kept trying to negotiate with the rebels aligned against him, and he kept yielding to their demands, until it was apparent he and his government had ceded all their authority to the rebels and it dawned on the Kremlin that it was time for him to go.

On the other hand, when the Yatsenyuk "government" was installed in place of the Yanukovych debacle, he and they immediately set out to consolidate their power (which initially was only in Kiev, practically only in the Maidan) and to press their advantage through some of the most over-the-top belligerence and anti-Russian propaganda since the hey-day of Fascism and Nazi-ism in Europe. It looked to be right out of the Nazi playbook. For those of us who have some knowledge of what that was like and for those who lived through it, the implications are ugly and chilling.

Ugly, yes. But effective in that it was and is relentless. There has been no let up of belligerence and propaganda since the installation of the coup-regime in Kiev. In fact, doubling down is a way of life for this crew, even when something like the Odessa Massacre might have blown the whole thing to smithereens. They don't care. They are intent on securing their power no matter what.

Their scheme is grand -- once they find their footing and crush the rebellion in the East -- and they have the backing of every Western government and their plutocrat sponsors. This is an extraordinary advantage, and despite many missteps and that unpleasantness in Odessa (reflected if not matched by arbitrary civilian deaths and injuries elsewhere), they are making the most of it every day.

(Side note: Busheviks did this, too, once they were able to seize the operations of government after the 2000 "election" in the United States. They were relentless and, despite the disaster of their reign, they were successful in changing governance. So successful, their principles of rule are now standard and institutionalized in DC. It's really quite remarkable.)

The J28 activists in Oakland set out to liberate the long vacant Oakland Auditorium/Kaiser Convention Center for use by the community for educational and organizational purposes. From my perspective, it looked like they wanted to set up an alternative civic headquarters, one that would host the kind of civic services and deliberative bodies the citizens of Oakland could not find and did not have at City Hall.

It was a Big Idea. One that perhaps wasn't entirely worked out in advance, though there had been many precursors in Oakland itself and throughout Northern California. What they wanted to do, move into a vacant space and set up a viable social service and justice alternative to the rigid and essentially captive and useless city government, looked to be a direct outgrowth of the intentional community framework of the Oakland Commune -- which had long existed -- and Occupy Oakland which was tied in with OWS and the Oakland Commune.

My understanding is that the activists involved in the J28 Oakland action were divided from the outset, and many were not kindly disposed to taking over the Kaiser Center -- when, that is,  they found out that was the goal on the day of the action. Apparently, the destination was kept secret from all but a few of the activists until the moment they set out to liberate the Center. And when they faced the barricades, police lines, tear gas and more, some of those involved were... dismayed.

They were prevented by police from taking possession of the Center, and so about a thousand of the activists re-assembled nearby on Oak Street in front of the Oakland Museum, where the infamous -- and important -- Battle of Oak Street took place.

This battle was the moment when the authority of the police and Oakland civic bodies started to collapse.

When the activists were repulsed again, they shortly reassembled, and these incidents would go on all over the city until well into the night, when several hundred activists were kettled outside the YMCA building and were placed under arrest.

Meanwhile, there had been some minor vandalism at City Hall.

Oh. Dear.

Nothing could be more emblematic of the successful de-legitimization of authority that day than the sight of the Mayor fretting over the overturned model of her fief.

Hundreds were arrested in Oakland the night of January 28, 2012, but nearly all were the victims of an out of control and chaotic police force and a civic administration that had, for all intents and purposes, collapsed.

Had the makers of the day's -- and night's -- events understood what had happened, they might have taken advantage of their success. But apparently, they saw it as a failure, because they didn't achieve their objective of liberating the Kaiser Center, and so many hundreds were arrested. More pointedly in the aftermath, the media focused on the burning of the flag at City Hall and the minor vandalism that took place there, rather than on the day's repeated acts of violence and chaos by the police.

The sense of failure was thereby multiplied in the minds of many of the activists to the point where, during subsequent post-mortems, the recriminations were unremitting. Ultimately, rather than press their advantage, the Oakland activist community fell on one another and then fell apart.

Power and authority were given back to the police and civic administration, although in the years since, there have been a number of important developments and upheavals, including the abrupt resignations and replacements of city administrators and police chiefs and fundamental reforms of the police department ordered -- if not implemented -- by federal courts and monitors.

Nevertheless, the city of Oakland appears to be mired in a permanent condition of missed opportunity, malaise, poorly considered priorities and continuing police brutality and misconduct. Nothing the established powers that be in Oakland do seems to be able to change that. It doesn't have to be that way, but it is that way -- in part because it's "always" been that way, and no one has yet come up with an effective means and mechanism to change things. Instead, there is continued deterioration and despair on the one hand, and lower key activism for social justice on the other. The status quo has been maintained and reinforced.

Albuquerque's situation is not unlike that of Oakland, in that it's a gritty and largely working class town in which a handful of very wealthy and powerful individuals hold sway over a large and more and more impoverished and desperate underclass, an underclass which is beset by all the domestic horrors of poverty and family disintegration one can imagine, and also by an out of control and bloodthirsty police force.

For decades, these problems have festered, and efforts at reform seem to get nowhere. It's not as if nothing is done, it is that nothing that is done seems to change things for the better. Police seem to kill people at an ever greater clip, impoverishment expands, and the domestic situation for so many Buquenos deteriorates.

Nothing seems to correct what's wrong. From a statistical point of view, conditions may not be getting worse overall, but they're not getting better, either.

So what do you do? Activists in Albuquerque have been demonstrating, protesting, proposing reforms, and trying to move things in a better direction for decades, and they've had some successes, there's no denying that. The problem is that a success in one aspect doesn't solve the overall problem, and declarations of victory often dissipate the necessary energy for change. And worse, the rate of killing by police continues unabated.

Something more is needed if that bloody record is to change.

I've seen that the mayor's office and the city council, even the police department itself, have once again been goaded into action by some of the agitation of the people and the DoJ's devastating report -- even if the action is only talk at this point. There are task forces, commissions, councils and community meetings all the time now. But the killing continues. There are disruptions and protests all the time now. But the killing continues. There are many proposals and suggestions from the public and the power structure, but the killing continues.

Something more is needed if this bloody record is to change.

Authority is de-legitimized in Albuquerque in ways that are potentially even more profound than other examples given, but so far it is not clear that full advantage can or will be take of this interlude.

For whatever reason, these days the advantage is almost always seized by proto- and actual Fascists.

The King Has No Power That The People Don't Give Him

I've been re-reading Barbara Tuchman's 1978 book "A Distant Mirror," and I'm struck by the social and political parallels with now -- much as I was struck while reading the 1938 polemic "The Peril of Fascism." I may be seeing things that aren't there, but at the same time, I'm certain that societies and people don't change that much over the generations and the centuries, and that certain relationships and hierarchies are almost immutable.

One of the things that is so striking to me in "A Distant Mirror" is that despite all the many rebellions of the era, almost all of which are put down -- ruthlessly, of course -- in many cases, the rebels yield to a pathetically weak King, who -- if he were stood up to -- would be more likely to yield.

And I'm wondering why do rebels so often back down when they have the upper hand? Why, especially, do they give power back when they have successfully taken it away from the King?

I've seen it happen so many times in connection with Occupy it no longer astonishes me, but even in Anaheim, the protesters and the community have done it repeatedly. See this video for an example:



The setting is outside the Anaheim City Hall after the crowd was denied entrance to the City Council Meeting on July 24, 2012; the police are clearly purposeless and confused, and the crowd has the upper hand, even though some of the police have their BigBad Weapons out. The crowd chases the police, shouting insults, while the police form a desperate skirmish line. The crowd presses closer and shouts at the police. And then a line of protesters links arms in front of the police facing the crowd, telling the crowd to cool it, to back off, to "de-escalate." They give the power back to the police.

I saw it happen in Wisconsin, I saw it happen in Davis, I saw it happen in Berkeley. I saw it happen in Oakland. I saw it happen in many places with regard to Occupy. It seems to be the universal response when it looks like the established authority will really be overthrown. People seem to instinctively want to restore that authority before it has fully collapsed.

It was certainly happening in the 14th Century in Europe as documented in "A Distant Mirror," and it was happening in Europe in the 1930's and 1940's as Fascism was briefly triumphant, and it is a persistent factor in the various uprisings and rebellions that have taken place in this country since the Wisconsin Thing more than a year ago now.

The People -- once they have the Power -- give it back to those who have persecuted them. They'll even protect their persecutors.

Why?

This isn't a simple matter of Stockholm Syndrome, it goes much deeper than that. I think it may have to do with the fact that most people, most of the time, don't want to believe that those who are oppressing and exploiting them, and sometimes murdering them, are really "that bad," or that there is no way on this earth to convince them to be... better. It seems to have something to do with "identity."

Jeremy Rifkin gets into it somewhat in "The Empathic Civilization."



We are wired to identify "us" in others. It's the origin of empathy, and it is part of our nature, ineradicable. But who we identify as "us" depends on our understanding of who or what is an integral part of our own society or tribe if you will and who or what is "alien." Consequently, if, say, the king is identified as "one of us," as the king almost always is, the urge to yield to his orders or blandishments will be strong, stronger than any fear of what the king might do. And what the king did to rebels who yielded was not pretty, even after promising leniency or pardon.

To the king, of course, the rebels are not only not of the same tribe, they're not even the same species.

Such is the case with the king's police as well. Some rebels may instinctively see them as a fundamental part of "us" and so they might identify with them and try to protect them ("You are the 99%!"), but from the king's police perspective, the People are essentially of a different species altogether. Every possible means is utilized to prevent identification and empathy with the People, much as military troops are conditioned to objectify "the enemy." The gulf is not unbridgeable, but it cannot be bridged through obeisance.

The video below shows a confrontation between Oakland police and a well-known (in Oakland) livestreamer, Bella Eiko (Jessica Hollie). In it, there are several reversals, as the police draw their guns on two young black men walking on Broadway (thus dehumanizing them), while the police in turn are verbally challenged by Bella Eiko (NSFW, she tends to be even blunter spoken than Frank Lopez). It's clear that to her, as well as to some of the other witnesses on the street, the OPD is definitely not part of "us."


(h/t hotflashcarol at FDL)

The police try to appeal to the idea that in fact they are "human" and even open and willing to engage the public, etc. Of course, by that time it's too late, they've lost any appeal they may have had; they literally lost it long ago, and given all the murder and mayhem since then, there's little chance this police force can ever regain their reputation with the community they have been abusing and exploiting all these years. The gulf is too great.

And yet, no matter what the OPD does to the Oakland community, the Oakland Powers That Be (in the place of the king) are fine with it. From the empathetic point of view, the police are part of the king.

It may be hard to watch that confrontation between Bella Eiko and the OPD. She is fierce and relentless in denouncing the officers, and she knows her rights, too. She yields nothing at all to them. She's taken the same tack toward the City Council and the City Administrator.

The main problem with that tack, however, is that ultimately she is ignored by the Powers That Be; the police won't dare shoot their suspects with her watching and recording everything they do and denouncing them so fully while they do it. Thus, it's possible she's saved some lives, just as she might have in the video above. But her verbal assaults on the police don't really affect them since they have already long since classified her as nothing but an annoying Un-Human.

On the other hand, if she used "non-violent communications" as a weapon, the way Our Betters do, she could have a real and lasting impact..

Whether she's verbally assaultive or "non-violent" in her communication doesn't matter as much as making a clear distinction between those who oppress, exploit and murder members of the community, and those who are "us."

Many rebels in the past and now haven't been able to do that. Not yet.

Bella Eiko Runs Her Mouth At The Public Safety Committee of The Oakland City Council, May 22, 2012

And not for the first time, either.

This sort of thing goes on at the Oakland City Council every week, though not usually with so much dramatic passion.

Of course the Council, in its majesty, pays no attention to the ravings of the rabble.

Text:

http://occupiedoaktrib.org/2012/05/29/jessica-hollie-aka-bella-eiko-speaks-to-the-oakland-city-council/

Civic authorities in Oakland long ago discredited themselves in the eyes of anyone with a functioning brain, but it's still going to be a while before the People of Oakland are able to establish an independent parallel social governing and operating system. They're getting there.

In the meantime, there are scenes like this. Week in and week out.

A Passing Incident In Oakland

Video streaming by Ustream

Bella Eiko recorded this incident on May 26th. Although she says that she first noticed something was going on when she was in a car driving by on the way to the Oscar Grant/Frank Ogawa Plaza -- a man on the sidewalk was being beaten by police and was taken in handcuffs to one of the police cars on the scene, she didn't start recording until she got out of the car she was in, so none of the police brutality or the arrest she witnessed is shown.

What she does show is fascinating, though. Through attitude and threats, both real and implied (note the female cop keeps reaching for her taser), the police in this incident demonstrate over and over why so many of the people of Oakland despise them as a violent and unaccountable occupying force.

On the other hand, note that at least some of the people of Oakland are not afraid of these goons.

Meanwhile, Chris Moreland was released, after spending three days in jail on bogus charges of battery on a police officer and assault with a deadly weapon for this incident:



The video is long, starts with the lies if Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan at a community meeting called to answer questions about the shooting death of Alan Blueford. Jordan is confronted by the people assembled, one of whom is Chris Moreland, one of the more outspoken participants in Occupy Oakland.

Moreland continues to challenge the Lies of Howard Jordan with his bullhorn as Jordan gets into his car in the parking lot, smirking at the crowd and the tumult in his wake as is his way, and drives off. Other police officers are challenged by others in the crowd; there is no physical assault by those challenging the police whatsoever.

As the crowd disperses, Chris and a few of his friends head on foot to a nearby BART transit station where they are to be picked up by other friends. At that point, officers arrive in police cars and arrest Moreland on the bogus charges previously mentioned, which lead to bail being set at $105,000, which in turn leads to Moreland being held at Santa Rita Jail until arraignment, at which time, not surprisingly, the charges are reduced to "disturbing the peace," and Chris is freed on $2,500 bond.

This sort of thing goes on all the time, and not just in Oakland.

hotflashcarol has more about this incident and about Alan Blueford.

Disastrous New Model Policing of Occupy by OPD

I've hesitated to post anything about this as I didn't see the videos until the day before yesterday, and it was hard to imagine reports of "arrests" in Oakland in connection with the May Day marches and rallies and visualize this as what happened:



But this is only part of it. From this video, it looks like just random mayhem by the OPD, snatching and grabbing likely targets at will, with neither cause nor reason, and firing a few rounds of flash-bangs and tear gas pretty much at random as well. This is what the New Model OPD crowd control response, ostentatiously announced by Interim Chief Howard Jordan in the days before the May Day events, looks like. What a mess.
But there is more:



These are the same events, but in greater detail. The randomness and the terror tactics employed by the Oakland police in so-called "crowd control" operations like this are obviously not controlling disturbances -- there were none before the police commenced their attack -- they are causing disturbances. And there are provocateurs -- assumed to be police agents -- in the crowd. Many of them according to witnesses.

At 4:06 you can see one casually pick up a dropped police club and hand it to an officer.

The random firing into the crowd -- a crowd which includes police officers -- looks like a panic move. Given the chaos precipitated by the police, panic among them would be almost expected.

It's Oakland, of course, so the crowd is chanting: "We are not afraid."

Some actually are afraid, though. And inspiring fear and dread in the crowd is part of the botched Plan we see being implemented.

Yet another -- and still longer -- view of the same events. Notice, there is no disturbance in the street until the police create one. These events are taking place as part of the march is about to arrive at Oscar Grant/Frank Ogawa Plaza in front of the Oakland City Hall (where the encampment was, and close to where Scott Olsen and others were injured by police firing into the crowd on October 25).



We don't know what precipitates the cops running forward, but from my perspective, they look like they are trying to get ahead of the crowd, perhaps to form a skirmish line of some sort to prevent something. This is how they operate.

But starting at 0:39 we see a bicyclist cross in front of them. She is jostled and then assaulted by police, pulled from her bike and thrown to the ground, screaming in shock and pain.

(Of course it's possible the bicyclist was deliberately trying to interfere with the police charge. Oh, these things sometimes happen. But I don't know. From appearances, she was simply riding her bike from one side of the street to the other and quite possibly didn't even see the police charge in progress until she was assaulted.)

If the police were intending to form a skirmish line at the Plaza for some reason, they wind up forming a messed up "force protection line" instead as they arrest and drag off the bicyclist. The crowd is highly agitated by these events but they do not respond to police violence with violence of their own (well, apart from their ever-present verbal contempt of the officers, which is not only routine, it is often quite rude. Oh my.)

A tall unhelmeted officer is seen at 2:22 and frequently throughout the rest of the video; he seems to be directing the action. He looks familiar from previous videos of encounters with the Oakland police, I'm thinking especially of one really stupid event when the police confiscated the sound equipment being used by demonstrators in front of the City Hall. IIRC, he was actually the officer who dealt with those who were protesting this police action with a certain unusual level of diplomacy and aplomb. But maybe it wasn't him.

At any rate, it's obvious from this video that the OPD is completely at sea; not only do they have no training or leadership in conducting this sort of operation (which they shouldn't be doing anyway), they are scaring themselves with their own incompetence. It's hard to maintain an aggressive posture when you don't know what you're doing.

They are holding on to each other for dear life, even though the crowd is not physically threatening or assaulting them at all (compare and contrast with Greek anti-police actions.) Really. Americans, no matter how pissed they are, wouldn't even think of doing something like that to American police.

So-called "nonviolence" advocates, of course, used to get their panties all in a wad over the merest suggestion of rudeness toward the police, accusing "OO" of engaging in "violence" because protesters confront the police assertively and loudly (oh yes, and some of them wear bandanas, also a mark of "violence.") I say "used to get" their panties bunched up because they have mostly shut the fuck up. Well, "mostly." There have been a few diaries over at dKos lately excoriating the "black block" for breaking windows, but even those have been taken with a grain of salt. We still don't know who actually committed the vandalism in San Francisco on April 30th for example, and there is a case to be made that it was the work of either the police themselves or hired thugs in order to further diminish participation in Occupy and other protest events.

At about 3:10 in the video you can make out the crowd chanting "Pigs go home!" as the police retreat. This has become a routine chant in Oakland because statistics show that about 90% of the OPD don't live in Oakland and couldn't care less about what happens to the city or its people. They function as a mercenary squad ("Mossos d'Esquadra") on behalf of the city authorities and their owners. They have no commitment to the People because they have no connection with them; thus they have a tradition, an institutional culture if you will, of acting with murderous impunity. Of all the many anti-police chants used in Oakland, "Pigs go home!" seems to hit them the hardest. Truth hurts.

Some members of the crowd use metal shielding against police aggression (actually, in the video, it is being used rather cleverly to contain the police). At about 3:48 you can hear the crowd chanting "We are not afraid!" as the police continue to retreat.

At 6:23 the police, under the apparent command of the tall unhelmeted officer, start to become aggressive. Two police vehicles have just left the scene -- we assume one of them contains the arrested bicyclist, but that's not entirely clear. Their aggression is incomprehensible, but many of the police actions in Oakland have made no sense for years, and thus the city has paid out many millions of dollars in compensation to victims of police incompetence and brutality, and the OPD is under Federal Court reform orders (which are being ignored or violated daily) and threat of Federal receivership for failure to comply. This has been going on for years. And years. And years.

What we're seeing in these videos are OPD's futile attempts to meet some of the requirements mandated by some of the repeated demands of the court orders.

At 7:08 you will notice a Black Clad One pass between two officers on the street. He his patted on the back by one of the officers, and it is only natural to ask whether he is one of the many (many) police plants and provocateurs in the crowd. I have no idea whether he is or not, but given the swift and brutal action of the police toward other Black Clad Ones -- and their apparent indifference to this one -- it makes you wonder.

Shortly after 7:14 we hear the sound of some kind of munitions being fired, startling everyone, including the police. The camera pans and we see smoke or tear gas rising from the street. Almost immediately, the police among whom the round went off, throw someone to the ground (not Black Clad) and begin the process of arresting him. One of the officers who throws him to the ground is carrying what looks like a bean-bag weapon, but it's not clear exactly what sort of munitions he's armed with. (Side note: during a local protest action, I witnessed a caravan of police arrive at the courthouse and assemble on its steps. Several of them carried automatic weapons, machine guns. There were no protesters anywhere near the courthouse.)

In the video, others are promptly grabbed and thrown to the ground; a melee ensues. But it is all a melee of police aggression. At 7:53, one officer is seen manfully pushing against the protester's metal shield (behind which there are several women). It appears that people are being thrown to the ground and trussed up all around, but there actually weren't very many arrests. This is another reason to suspect that at least some of those being manhandled and "arrested" were actually police in training...

Shortly after 8:08 in the video another round of something goes off while some hapless individual is being manhandled on the street. What it is and why it is being fired is unknown, but members of the crowd react as if there was shrapnel in the munition, whatever it was. The police drag their quarry away, and as he passes the camera, a splash of yellow paint is seen on his jeans. In an earlier video from another angle, police officers are seen splashed with yellow paint. Whether this fellow is one who was throwing the paint, who knows, but his trussing up and dragging away is quite different than that of some of the other arrestees. He is, for example, placed in metal handcuffs which were applied while his hands were in front of rather than behind him. He is dragged away by his cuffs, but then is aided to stand up on his own (seen in another video) after which... what? I haven't seen any video that shows what happens to him, but it does make you wonder.

Meanwhile, in this video, another round of something goes off behind the metal "Gender Strike" shield at about 8:27. The camera pans and we see only one person holding up the shield in a cloud of smoke. Others come to help, and an officer pushes the shield over. The tall unhelmeted officer passes by another Snatch and Grab installation on the ground (by now, it is looking somewhat... shall we say... "artistic") talking on his radio or cell phone (hard to say). The crowd has thinned somewhat, and he turns to the circle of officers surrounding their latest quarry. There are two people on the ground, lots of photographers, and plenty of people standing around wondering WTF. The unhelmeted officer paces while he chats on the phone or radio. A member of the crowd approaches the officers screaming. As I say, by now, this scene has become something of a performance art installation.

At 10:00 in the video, the man on the ground is seen clearly, and he's actually one who was being arrested earlier, well before the munitions were fired. In the following video, he is asked his name by one of the livestreamers, and he says he doesn't want to be on camera, and he won't give his name, and I think I hear him saying "Put the camera down!". Of course, it is too late. But his size and appearance raise some questions in my mind, in addition to the fact that his desire not to be on camera or to give his name -- while not unheard of among arrestees -- is somewhat peculiar, as is the fact that he was kept on the ground for so long while munitions were being fired at the crowd (which included police.)

A police officer is seen holding one of the iconic Oakland garbage can shields, which is curious, but there you are. Meanwhile, the video ends with a close up of one of the officer's "less lethal" guns, officers splashed with yellow paint and an announcement: "We need you to clear the intersection".

Yes, well...

By this time, practically the only ones on the street are the police and the photographers...

I will wrap this up with OakTownPirate's video from within the melee. At one point, he is shoved to the ground by aggressive police but he yells that he's a journalist and they seem to leave him alone after that.



And of course none of this would have happened at all if the police hadn't decided to become aggressive against peaceful demonstrators. Police aggression was the sole reason for the melee.

It may be Oakland, and people may be used to it by now, but it is still wrong.

This Is What A Police State Looks Like (Redux)

By now, it should be clear that the Authorities have been busy during the Occupy semi-hiatus over the winter. Oh yes. Oh. My. Yes.

The other day, the Oakland City Attorney sued one of the local Occupy activists for vandalism for acts he is alleged to have committed in Oakland on the night of General Strike Day, November 2. Cesar is one of the gentlest and most generous people I know. He says that on that night, he was not committing vandalism in Oakland at all. He was trying to protect himself from police munitions fire by "liberating" a piece of plywood covering a window to use as a shield. Cesar was arrested that night for vandalism and failure to disperse, but he has not been charged criminally. The video evidence the city says they will produce more than likely is ambiguous about what actually happened, but it's obvious the City of Oakland is using this case as a weapon to keep "outside agitators" out of Oakland. Message: if people from elsewhere show up in Oakland and something happens, the outsiders will be charged for damages. Sort of like the Hotel Tax, I guess.

Not content with merely charging outsiders for damages, the Alameda County District Attorney has filed criminal charges against a number of UC Berkeley students and one professor for their participation in the iconic protest demonstrations at Sproul Hall on November 9, 2011. It's worse than the Daily Cal reported above. Nancy O'Malley -- the now notorious Alameda County DA -- has charged a total of ten students who participated in the protest at Sproul Hall, some of them charged after the UCPD gained access to their records at the University medical center where they went for treatment of the injuries sustained when they were beaten by police. Only two or three of those charged by the DA were arrested that day. One of them was Celeste Langan who is seen dressed in purple, at the extreme left of the video at the beginning, "resisting" arrest.



http://youtu.be/kNHXuf6qJas

Cute. Her arraignment is scheduled for tomorrow, I believe. Should be quite a show.

These are links to raw footage of some of what was going on that day at UC Berkeley.

http://youtu.be/NSat-nRefXY (Langan is seen in this video, the second person thrown to the ground and trussed up by police at about 3:40; at the end of this video, she is shown being hoisted up and starts to be led away)

http://youtu.be/cEcqsLyX-vI (In this video, which shows nonsequential events, Langan appears at about 2:17 being led away. The determination of the students in the face of what was seen at that time to be outrageous police violence is impressive.)

http://youtu.be/SN7WOsvepUg (This video is sort of the Highlight Reel; early on a female likely Cal student is heard repeating "You're hurting him!" while a protester is being beaten nearby. She is then heard saying to someone "That's how we train them to fucking stop us. We pay for them to fucking hurt us." Which is absolutely true. The UC police and the Alameda County Deputies were actually training not far from this very site a month or so before -- I've read it was with Israeli trainers -- to conduct this kind of action. Celeste Langan is shown in complete shock being led away in flexicuffs at about 3:20.)

The picture used in the article about Israelification of Occupy suppression is of course of the UC Davis pepper spray incident that happened a week after the Cal police riot. After numerous delays, an official report on the incident was supposed to be released on March 6, but the UC Davis police officers union sued to prevent it and got a TRO which is currently in effect. They claim that release of the report will compromise the rights of officers who might be named therein. This matter is also supposed to be heard in court tomorrow.

The NYPD is notorious for spying on various suspect groups including Muslims and Occupy Wall Street, but now, according to In These Times, they've gone further than usual by arresting people for "thought crimes" or "pre-crimes." This practice was more-or-less institutionalized during the RNC convention in St. Paul in 2008 prior to which and during which dozens of arrests were made and property was seized of people who were suspected of making preparations to protest. There is apparently a grand jury empaneled in Chicago that has been trying to develop terrorism charges against some of those who were arrested in Minneapolis and St. Paul four years ago, but many of those subpoenaed have refused to cooperate.

This is a compilation video of some of what was going on in Minneapolis/St. Paul prior to and during the Republican convention.



Notice anything? The exact tactics have been used and are being used against Occupy. At the time, in 2008, what was going on in Minneapolis/St. Paul was seen as way over the top. The rallies and marches and protests during the convention were peaceful, even routine in the context, yet the police were on some kind of hair-trigger/steroid alert against the protesters constantly -- even before the convention, and they have stayed that way afterwards -- and they behaved with what was at that time shocking brutality and over kill. People were being kettled and arrested en masse -- whether or not they had anything to do with protesting -- hundreds were held for days, they were not allowed any sort of contact with the outside, nor did were they allowed medical attention for injuries or other conditions; people were arrested for doing nothing at all, but merely because they had been identified as "potential" protesters. Flash bangs and tear gas were liberally employed against nonviolent protests. Police brutality was commonplace. It was a war zone in which only one side -- the police -- was fighting. The protests were nonviolent. The police, however, employed what were at that time considered extreme levels of violence against them.

And it's going on in much the same way against Occupy.

What gives?

The political conventions are what's called National Special Security Events, during which, essentially, the Constitution is suspended. During National Special Security Events, a form of martial law can be and often is imposed; violent and otherwise unethical or illegal means are typically used to suppress protest. While I've written about National Special Security Events and the nature of policing during them, I'm not at all sure that many Americans actually understand what is going on.

More likely, they see the suppression and assume it is due to something the protesters have done, which is simply not the case. The suppression tactics and the "threat display" aspects of officials are policy during these events. The policy doesn't change based on what the protesters do or don't do. The policy is to suppress, to prevent, and to tightly control the public -- no matter what they do.

Since the October 25 assault on Occupy Oakland, it's looked more and more like the Occupy Movement has been categorized as something that requires NSSE-type suppression. The clue came much earlier, however, when fully armored up riot squads were deployed night after night against a handful of local protesters who were peacefully engaged in civil disobedience. Night after night after night, dozens of riot cops (sometimes up to 70 or 80), squad cars, paddy wagons and so forth were dispatched to round up ten or two or, on one occasion, one protester sitting on the sidewalk refusing to "disperse" at plaza "closing time." It was an absurd goon show that became a joke. But not a funny one. Eventually, even the police recognized how foolish they looked in their little riot get-ups and their ridiculously over produced arrest-theater, and scaled back their overkill, and when the hundreds of thousands of dollars it was costing was released, they stopped doing it altogether. The DA refused to prosecute, and in the end, all the charges against demonstrators were dropped, although there has been an attempt to assess "fees" against those who were arrested multiple times (typically around $300).

As someone pointed out, had the police used their discretion and not engaged in this nonsense to begin with, there wouldn't have been any costs to the city at all. Duh. But no. Civil disobedience must be suppressed. Violently in too many cases.

But even when there isn't police violence during Occupy suppression actions, the official intent is to intimidate and disable. For example:

Occupy Miami raided by SWAT teams (VIDEO) (h/t teri49 in comments)

Objectively, this is just insane. The official fear level about the Occupy movement -- and apparently any other civil disobedience -- has reached a fever pitch. The fact that people are so pissed off and no longer fear saying so seems to have hit a raw nerve among the ruling classes and their enforcers.

Bones are thrown to the masses from time to time, but it doesn't stop the protest and actions. Suppression doesn't stop it; in fact, action seems to be on an increasing curve as more and more activists pick up on the Occupy movement's strategies.

This is not going away, despite the institutionalization of the Police State -- which looks to be full-time and permanent now. The ruling class and its bought and paid for government and enforcers are in a pre-panic state. They do not know how to suppress it, and they don't know how to fully control it. But they don't want to actually listen the voices of the People and do the right thing, either. They still don't think they have to. After all, they have NDAA and HR 347.

We got nothin', right?

We'll see about that.

Battle of Oakland -- The Video

The Battle of Oakland from brandon jourdan on Vimeo.


This video covers the events of January 28, 2012, from the perspective of the Oakland Commune/Occupy Oakland; it tracks closely with other depictions of the events and even with most of the mainstream narratives.

It's 20 minutes, be warned. But it's worth the time.

This is what's going on, and it's [what] has so many people so frightened.

What About Those Who Don't Want Revolution?

For some time -- quite a few years, in fact -- I have been writing and commenting about the need for Americans to rise up in opposition to the screwage we've been undergoing first as playthings of the neo-cons, then for a change of emphasis, as neo-liberal objects of utility. Or disposal, as the case may be.

"Rising up" is typically characterized as Revolution, and I've written extensively on that topic, too, a good deal of which was written during the Bush Regime.

As far as I know, most of what I wrote about Revolution wound up in Salon's archive dumptster and I have no access to it now, but the point I argued most often at the time -- going back to 2001 -- was that the Busheviks were themselves a Revolutionary force or cadre; they achieved power through a judicial coup and they were using their power to implement a Rightist Revolutionary program, a program that included the institutionalization of an Imperial State, the extinction of the Constitutional Republic once and for all, and the implementation of a corporate-kleptocratic economy.

The Busheviks and their neo-con hangers-on were Revolutionary in part because they could be, in part because they wanted to be, and in part because they were embarked on a transformational crusade from which they could not be dissuaded.

Their opposition, such as it was, in that context was counter-Revolutionary, primarily interested in accommodating the Revolutionaries' demands and preserving what they could salvage of the status quo.

At the time, many people did not see and refused to believe how truly radical and Revolutionary the Busheviks were. Soon enough, especially after the attacks on 9/11 and the subsequent clearly domestic Anthrax attacks, the government of the United States was completely overhauled and transformed into that of an Imperial War-State, run out of the White House bunkers, served by an impotent and compliant Congress and an ambivalent court.

The People, to the extent they were considered at all, were at best considered accessories and props to the Pageant of Empire, to be manipulated and controlled by an enthusiastically complicit media into believing anything the Imperial Headquarters wanted them to. And they did, in their multitudes. They didn't rise up against what was being done to them, they embraced it.

Millions of people in the streets, "singing songs and carrying signs," in protest against the Iraq War -- a full-on, up front, balls out, Imperial war of aggression -- were ostentatiously ignored, protest of any kind was corralled, mocked and dismissed. Remember "Free Speech Zone" and directives from the Busheviks and their spokespeople about what sort of protest and protest message was "acceptable?"

The public treasury was promptly and efficiently looted -- these people do know how to plunder -- and taxation on the favored corporate and wealth sectors was virtually eliminated.

The People did not rise up even after they became uneasy about the course of events when some of the horrors being perpetrated in their names in Iraq and elsewhere became known, when their rights as citizens were dispensed with, even when the economy imploded.

The People were passive, nearly mute. There was no rising up, no People's Revolt, nothing.

When you think about American history and especially the history of resistance to tyranny and exploitative authority, this situation was distinctly odd. The whole country, and its entire tradition and systems of governance was being turned on its head, and the People did nothing. They continued to drudge along quietly, performing the rituals of voting as if they still mattered, becoming obsessed with candidates for office while their pockets were being picked by the corporate raiders who were the real powers behind the Throne.

It was so eerie that people abroad were amazed. "What is wrong with Americans that they resist not, neither do they rise up, nor even do they complain except in the most servile fashion?"

During the Bushevik reign, the Revolutionary changes in the Nation's state of being became normalized.

Most people either didn't notice or they didn't care.

But when the economy collapsed like the house of cards it was, the meme of Change took hold, the need for redemption was recognized, and Barack Obama was sent to sit on the Throne.

It was clear to me during his campaign that his principal role, once in office, was to manage the masses, to keep them in line during the forthcoming unpleasantness. He demonstrated many times that he was a master at it. The People who had grown weary of the Busheviks, their casual cruelties, their plundering ways, and their lies, saw salvation was nigh, and so Obama won the election.

It's impossible to imagine that Crabby Old Man and Herself, the candidates who stood against him in the election, performing the role he was assigned and doing it even a fraction as well.

That said, an ersatz "populist revolt" against him was engineered immediately after the 2008 election and was put in operation through numerous radio and some television ads. It was called "Grassfire, We Resist" (I've mentioned it before, no point in going into details here) and that revolt was transformed into the Tea Party shortly after the inauguration, and we know what that led to: an intensification of the neo-liberal economic follies, and even greater institutionalization of the Imperial Security State. That done, the rebels rested.

Except that another, unexpected, populist revolt got under way last September, Occupy Wall Street that almost immediately spread across the entire nation and overseas. This was the first real mass uprising the nation had seen since the Sixties, and it was clear the authorities had no idea what to do about it.

From very early on, Revolution was in the air; nonviolent Revolution to be sure, but Revolution just the same.

Not a counter-Revolution that would try to reverse the Bushevik-Obama Imperial Revolution, and return to some idealized status quo ante. No. This would be a real Revolution, forward thinking, not going back to anything in the past but forging a brand new path into the Future.

"We are unstoppable; another world is possible."

Six months into it, some people are recognizing the beginnings of success, especially in the more militant outposts of the Movement -- like the O-Place, Oakland.

And it is understandably terrifying.

Many people who signed up for Occupy This or That didn't sign on to Revolution; many who thought that Revolution was called for didn't think this would be it. But there's a Revolution going on anyway, no matter what they thought they were signing up for, and in Oakland, it's getting really scary.

"Victory" is nigh. Is Oakland what a successful Revolution will look like? They aren't there yet, so it's hard to say. They've achieved the first-level victory of de-legitimizing civic authority, but where does it go from there? Either nobody knows or nobody's saying.

A first-level victory standing alone, without a sufficiently coordinated and militant follow up is not ultimately a Revolutionary victory at all.

For example, the militant students at UC Davis achieved a spectacular first-level victory by delegitimizing the authority of the campus police and the administration during and immediately after the Pepper Spray Incident.

They thereupon called for the disbanding of the UC Police, the immediate resignation of the chancellor and a cessation of tuition increases. They held a huge campus rally which I attended, at which they heard contrition from the chancellor and her pledge to do better, they vowed to reestablish their encampment and press their demands relentlessly until they were met.

They might have done so except for the winter break that came swiftly, emptying the campus, but not before the students literally ceded power right back to the administration that had abused them. They did it at a town hall that combined both contrition and control by the administrators in one of the slickest events of the kind I've seen.

By appearing to listen and repeatedly expressing contrition for past misdeeds, and by vowing "full investigation of what happened," and promising that nothing like the Pepper Spray Incident would happen again, the students' emotional demands were satisfied, and the power of their anger was defused.

Not to say this was a totally fraudulent show -- I'll let Nathan Brown say that -- but apart from mitigating the overt brutality of the UC Police, and allowing (even enabling) the re-establishment of the encampment, very little change has actually taken place, and few or none of the students' other demands have been met; there are no reports, for example, and conclusions from the 'investigations' are long past due. Tuition increases have not been mitigated or cancelled. The campus is quiet; the rebellion has been tamed. Linda Katehi is hailed far and wide for successful management of the situation. Voila! No Revolution in Davis.

See how this works?

That's how a Revolution is defused, but in city after city, with Oakland as a sort of Revolutionary pivot, authorities have responded to the militancy of the Occupiers, with ever increasing levels of violence, destruction of property, brutality and mass arrest of demonstrators. That is how authority adds fuel to the fire of Revolution.

What happens to the people who didn't sign up for Revolution who are caught in the middle?

We're seeing the tragic results of what can happen play out in places like Libya and Syria, where the People rose up, believed they could achieve real change through non-violent means, were ruthlessly cut down time and again by what I metaphorically refer to as "The Tsar's Cossaks", which led soon enough to an armed insurrection which in Libya turned into a civil war, the conduct of which was very bloody, the outcome of which was determined by the intervention of outside interests through NATO.

In Syria the nonviolent resistance campaign was met with extravagant levels of state violence and bloodshed, which in turn triggered an armed insurrection which is being countered with even more state bloodlust, inspiring more armed resistance as well as outside intervention on behalf of the rebels -- or so the intervention (sanctions for now) is being propagandized.

In both of these tragic examples of what can happen when nonviolent resistance is met with gross state violence and bloodshed, rather than any attempt at listening to and "taking steps" demanded by the rebels, thousands of noncombatants caught in the middle are paying for someone else's Revolution with their homes and their lives.

There is no sign at all that Occupy will in any way turn into an armed insurrection, but nonviolent demonstrations are being met with increasing levels of police violence, in which many hundreds have been wounded and some nearly killed. Many people who did not sign up for this sort of resistance and the violent response of the police have been caught up in it, and many are conflicted about it and are speaking out.

For the most part, they want "the violence" to end; and most don't want a Revolution at all. The question becomes one of how to stop it, or whether those engaged even want to stop it.

Defusing a Revolution is simple enough if it is done early on; the longer the struggle continues, the harder it is to defuse. What if the authorities don't want to defuse the situation, they want to crush the rebels? And what if they are prepared to do it through any means necessary, including jeopardizing the safety of the non-Revolutionary minded?

And what is the responsibility of the Revolutionaries for the safety of those who are caught in the middle of the conflict, a conflict that potentially can't be defused (because it's too late or because the authorities don't want to defuse it)?

While the issues surrounding Violent/Nonviolent action and reaction are being worked on by various elements in the Occupy Movement, there are somewhat bigger issues looming. The question of responsibility for the safety of non-Revolutionaries in a conflict situation is one of them.

Witness -- The Defenestration of the Oakland City Council, February 7, 2012

The highlight reel: Elaine Brown and Oakland Elle give the Council a verbal thrashing they will never forget. Guaranteed. http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/20296265/highlight/239708

There is no way for them to recover from this level of shaming.

So. What Do We Replace the Collapsed Systems With?

Oakland Commune banner on General Strike Day, November 2, 2011. Image from:Anarchismo.net where there is as intense a discussion of what's going on as you'll find anywhere.

While my perspective on OO's Victory in de-legitimizing the authority of Oakland's civic authorities is still the minority view, the notion that something truly amazing -- and in the United States, almost unprecedented for a very long time -- is happening there is gaining traction. I'm not sure at this point that more than a few of Oakland's activists would agree with me about the "level-one victory" I've been writing about in part because there is so much more to do and it is premature to celebrate. It's still the "beginning of the beginning." (Of course I've commented extensively about the online tendency to be "always at the beginning" of something or other, as if there is no learning curve any more. "I'm beginnning to think..." "We've only started to..." "This is starting to look like...")

That said, the necessity of formulating and having ready something else again to take the place of the collapsed systems is becoming more and more critical.

Thanks to Pathman in comments, I got to thinking about and re-considering Gene Sharp's "From Dictatorship to Democracy," (pdf) and the larger picture he lays out. I haven't looked at it for quite a while, and in light of recent events, his pioneering work seems almost simplistic now. That's probably because so much of what he was writing about has simply been internalized over the course of the many uprisings and revolutions that have shattered the complacency of dictatorships around the worlds since the end of the Soviet period. We're in a new world now, and the past seems almost naive to us pioneers and Revolutionary Sophisticates (haw!)

Some things to keep in mind: we do not live in a Classic Dictatorship, nor are Oakland's civic authorities Classic Tyrants. We don't have a totalitarian system, for example, for there is still a remarkable freedom of thought and potentially a great deal of freedom of action as well. Though the levers and wheels and gears of our rather antiquated political system are currently frozen in place by their owners and sponsors, it is at least conceivable that they could be made to move again. And as I've argued more recently, many of the attributes of Nonviolent Resistance have been adopted by the Overclass in treating with the Lesser People, particularly Nonviolent Communications, which are now used by the Overclass as weapons against the People. (Again, this is a minority viewpoint about what's really going on; many colleagues in the field are horrified that I would even broach such a topic. But that's another essay for another time...)

In other words, lots of the elements of the Color Revolution process that Gene Sharp lays out don't apply directly to our situation, nor would they necessarily work if they did. (I won't get into the debate about the nature of those Revolutions at this point, except to say that what was done in the Soviet Union between 1991 and 1993 was a criminal betrayal of the People that will live in infamy -- and it wasn't the Communists who were doing it.)

The question remains: What do we do now?

Oakland already has something of an alternative system in place. It's called the Oakland Commune. This video doesn't really tell us as much as we might want to know, and it only deals with some of the activism of the Commune up to just before J28 but it gives us an idea of the scope of alternative systems thinking in Oakland that's been there for a long time and has been crystallized by the Occupy Movement:



An informed person observing from the outside would say, "Of course, this is basic Social Democracy."

In part. Communes are much closer to the People, and in theory they can be quite autonomous as well as self-governing. You can see the outlines of the structure of the Commune in the video; if you think back to the Black Panthers and how they operated and what they actually did (I'm old enough to remember... well, sometimes!) particularly their service to the community, you can see how the pattern for alternative social and political systems has long been in place in Oakland, and I would venture to say in many other cities as well.

Not all cities can adopt the Oakland Model, nor should they, as each city has a character and social consciousness of its own which can be developed on the commune or a cooperative basis; the elements are already in place in many cities through the networks of nonprofits that have proliferated over the last few decades of declining government support for people's needs.

The problem with the commune model or the autonomous collective in a civic setting -- at this time anyway -- is that it lives on the surplus of a materialist system, in our case, the leavings of American consumerism. You see that made starkly clear in the encampments. Obviously, that can only go so far before the surplus is used up. Then what?

I'm sure many would say, "Don't try to overthink it right now. It's only the beginning...." And that's right as far as it goes, but I would suggest that the question of "then what" is going to loom large sooner rather than later, and the answer may lie in acknowledging Oakland's strict class and social divides and doing something about them.

Oakland's ruling class perches in the hills, its working class drudges along in the flats, the rejects and those the ruling class deems to be parasites are disposed of in the marshes of West Oakland.

The Oakland Commune has stepped in to serve the people at the margins of this deeply divided class system, and that has caused more than a little heartburn among those who rule the roost. It's caused something of a meltdown among the city's officials, much nervousness among its long suffering working class, and what looks like stark panic among the High and the Mighty; yet the Commune includes participants from all those sectors. Support for OO activism appears to be much broader than the media wants you to believe.

The dissension over "violence" in the Occupy Movement, particularly as it applies to Occupy Oakland, really looks to me more like a class division, not an ideological one at all. The Oakland Commune is militant to be sure -- as it must be -- but that militance should not be conflated with a Violent Resistance Campaign because it is nothing like that at all. Note: OO activists are not openly armed, they do not demonstrate bearing arms, they do not threaten or use arms in their actions, they are not involved in nor do they advocate any sort of armed insurrection, nor does anyone involved Occupy Movement or Occupy Oakland advocate or engage in the use of deadly force to achieve their objectives.

Yet they are constantly beset by internal accusations of using or advocating or supporting "violence" and there are constant threats to withdraw support and participation if "violence" is not renounced forthwith and "violent" participants are not immediately expelled.

Yes, well...

I say this is more an matter of a class division than an ideological one because the constant cat-calling and hot-headed accusations are coming primarily from people who are socialized to be the teachers and monitors of Nonviolence in order, I argue, to control the masses and their use of Nonviolence. In this class based version of Nonviolent Resistance, Nonviolence is fine, Resistance is not. In fact, actual Resistance of any kind is defined as "violence," and occasional acts of vandalism, mischief, and provocative acts like "throwing things" are considered so "violent" that they either must be harshly suppressed and those who commit these acts must be strictly disciplined or expelled or support will be withdrawn.

There are people who insist that self-defense against police assault is "violence." Or that even confrontation with authority is "violence." Some of these people may be sincere in their beliefs based on the faith they have in the merits of Gandhian Satyagraha, and when that is the case, I have a good deal of respect for believers and practitioners. But given what I have experienced and have seen happen to others when that faith is challenged or alternatives to it are proposed, I sincerely doubt that most people insisting on others' adherence to "Gandhi and King" are true believers themselves. The violence of their rhetoric against any challenge gives them away.

These accusations, demands of strict adherence, and threats to withdraw support are consistently being used as weapons to control the activism of the masses and as attempts to ensure the masses do not develop effective tactics against the present ruling class.

There is Class War within the Occupy Movement. Surprise!

In Oakland, it's quite obvious.

Many observers and participants call the whole thing a distraction, and they have a point. It has become something like a typical Twit-War with mutual anathemas and denunciations flying, but with no particular object -- apart from virtual "control" of The Other.

It's nearly to the point of becoming a "meme," and thus a joke.

Meanwhile, I'm hoping to see many more demonstrations of that Better World That's Possible. The Oakland Commune is on the path of creating it -- on behalf of all of us.