January 8, 2012
Occupy LA debates nonviolence vs. diversity of tactics
Unlike some of the other big city Occupations in America, like those in Oakland and New York, Occupy Los Angeles has typically worked within the constructs of the system.
Started by older, more traditional labor activists in early October, the group got a permit before its first march. And when they set up camp in the park outside City Hall, they did so with the blessing of the Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council. There was even a council resolution passed supporting the protest.
And OLA has, as a group, always worked hard to play by the rules, as demonstrated by their principles of nonviolence they read at the beginning of each general assembly meeting.
“As a non-violent movement, we have agreed to refrain from violence against any person, from carrying weapons, and from destruction of property. We reject violence, including property destruction, because we recognize that it undermines popular support and discourages the broadest possible participation among the 99%. We believe non-violence promotes unity, strength of message, and an environment in which every one’s voice might be heard.”
But in late November, the city changed its mind about the movement and on November 30 some 300 people were arrested when the police moved to end the encampment.
Since then, many involved with Occupy Los Angeles have sought to alter their statement of nonviolence to better reflect what they say are the needs of the movement.
“The movement here is at a crossroads,” Dele Aileman, an older black man who spoke with a thick Caribbean accent, told me as he explained the internal debate within Occupy Los Angeles between its current policy on nonviolence versus adopting one that would allow for what activists call a diversity of tactics.
“It’s been a bit of a controversy here,” said Ruth Fowler, who has proposed amending the statement of nonviolence to remove the language that speaks to property destruction. The group will debate the idea for a fourth time on Monday night.
Fowler, and others, don’t believe that property destruction should be equated violence. Especially, she said, when the local authorities use such definitions against the movement by claiming that ruining the park lawn or dripping candle wax on a sidewalk are property destruction.
“I don’t believe we should go around smashing windows,” she said, noting that there are those involved with Occupy LA who do. “But I do believe in breaking a lock on a foreclosed home or tearing down a fence.”
Fowler, originally from England, said when she first came to the United States she was a traditional political liberal who worked for the Obama campaign.
“I saw that that doesn’t work,” she said. “We should be more like Oakland. That’s what I’m advocating for, a diversity of tactics.”
Occupy Oakland is well-known within the Occupy movement for its refusal to adopt a statement of nonviolence and instead supporting a diversity of tactics.
Other activists in the Occupy LA movement disagree with the notion of a diversity of tactics.
Diversity of tactics, in activists parlance, typically means committing property destruction for the sake of fighting against injustice. George Lakey, a well-respected nonviolent activist who has worked for social change for decades, described diversity of tactics as the implication “that some protesters may choose to do actions that will be interpreted by the majority of people as ‘violent,’ like property destruction, attacks on police vehicles, fighting back if provoked by the police, and so on, while other protesters are operating with clear nonviolent guidelines.”
Elise Whitaker, a youngish, blond-haired woman who appeared on the Keith Olberman Show when OLA was being raided, said she doesn’t agree with the idea.
“It casts us as dangerous counter-culturals,” she said. “It allows a lot of the 99 percent to write us off. The phrase diversity of tactics really allows for a lack of accountability, and accountability is really important in this movement because that’s one of the things we are accusing the big banks of lacking.”
She said she would support replacing the word property destruction for vandalism in OLA’s nonviolent statement because that would exclude picking a lock to occupy a foreclosed home, something she would support, but would rule out vandalism and graffiti, actions she does not support.
While a diversity of tactics in political protest is as old as the Boston Tea Party, if not older, it became part of the extremist activists’ lexicon during the late 1990′s when radical environmentalists took a different tack from the traditional tree sits and other actions of the day, such as the arson against the Vail ski resort expansion and other destructive fires at timber plants and horse meat packing plants in Oregon.
The term gained popular prominence during the anti-globalization protests in Seattle in 1999, at which storefront windows were broken and violence ensued between police and protesters.
“Since the Seattle demonstrations, proponents of diversity of tactics in the Canadian anti-globalization movement have argued both for an escalation and for a diversification of tactics beyond the routines of lobbying and legal, stage-managed demonstrations,” wrote Janet Conway, a political science professor with Ryerson University in Toronto. “They have argued for the valuing of a wider range of political activity especially in the institutionalized power centres of the movement such as labour unions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).”
Occupy Wall Street activists have by and large avoided the notion of diversity of tactics because of the way the Seattle anti-globalization protests were perceived by the public and the media. That action, seen as an early precursor to the OWS movement, drew then of thousands of activists to Seattle in November of 1999 for the annual conference of the World Trade Organization. The event has been dubbed the “Battle in Seattle.”
While a relatively small group of anarchists from the Eugene, Oregon area were said to have caused much of the property damage, the entire protest has since been cast as a violent action against corporate interests and globalization efforts.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.
give some more information on non violence in against