Naomi Wolf: The People Versus The Police

[tpsbmam]

<snip>

Suddenly, the United States looks like the rest of the furious, protesting, not-completely-free world. Indeed, most commentators have not fully grasped that a world war is occurring. But it is unlike any previous war in human history: for the first time, people around the world are not identifying and organizing themselves along national or religious lines, but rather in terms of a global consciousness and demands for a peaceful life, a sustainable future, economic justice and basic democracy. Their enemy is a global "corporatocracy" that has purchased governments and legislatures, created its own armed enforcers, engaged in systemic economic fraud, and plundered treasuries and ecosystems.

<snip>

Protests should model the kind of civil society that their participants want to create. In lower Manhattan's Zuccotti Park, for example, there is a library and a kitchen; food is donated; kids are invited to sleep over; and teach-ins are organized. Musicians should bring instruments, and the atmosphere should be joyful and positive. Protesters should clean up after themselves. The idea is to build a new city within the corrupt city, and to show that it reflects the majority of society, not a marginal, destructive fringe.

After all, what is most profound about these protest movements is not their demands, but rather the nascent infrastructure of a common humanity. For decades, citizens have been told to keep their heads down -- whether in a consumerist fantasy world or in poverty and drudgery -- and leave leadership to the elites. Protest is transformative precisely because people emerge, encounter one another face-to-face, and, in re-learning the habits of freedom, build new institutions, relationships and organizations.

None of that cannot happen in an atmosphere of political and police violence against peaceful democratic protesters. As Bertolt Brecht famously asked, following the East German Communists' brutal crackdown on protesting workers in June 1953, "Would it not be easier ... for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?" Across the United States, and in too many other countries, supposedly democratic leaders seem to be taking Brecht's ironic question all too seriously.


More at Op-Ed News.

[Uncle Joe]

1. I believe Naomi makes a good point.

Many protesters insist in remaining leaderless, which is a mistake. A leader does not have to sit atop a hierarchy: A leader can be a simple representative. Protesters should elect representatives for a finite "term," just like in any democracy, and train them to talk to the press and to negotiate with politicians.

Thanks for the thread, tpsbmam.

[sabrina 1]

2. What is different historically is how the people of the world

are united against, what she correctly describes as the 'purchase of governments'. I don't think the world's people have ever been united like this before.

Eg, members of the Tunisian Revolution left comments on the FB page of President Obama asking why he has not condemned the violence of the police against peaceful protesters.

It's a good question. Why would our government not condemn such brutality against the American people? 'The whole world IS watching'.

Corporate Greed is the issue and its presence in governments around the world.

[Fire Walk With Me]

3. Huge K&R!

[mmonk]

4. Recommended. Got this by email while I was out driving today.

Thanks for posting it.

[gratuitous]

5. The commentators have not fully grasped this because . . .

They get paid a lot of money not to grasp the Occupy movement. As long as they can observe the Occupiers and maintain the mien and demeanor of a dog watching a card trick, they will continue to draw a fat paycheck from their masters. If they start conceding that legitimate points are being made, and that the protests are a multi-pronged reaction to a host of things wrong with the way our system is currently "working," they become traitors to their posts, and their summary dismissal will not be far behind.

The numerous examples of those who have gone before and lost their position have served the desired deterrent effect, and the commentators - at least in the major media - are determined not to understand what's going on. So far, they're safe mouthing obvious facts, but their complete mystification over what the Occupiers want and what their goals are is absolutely necessary if they're to hold on to their sinecures.

[tpsbmam]

7. You've hit the nail on the head in many instances. In others,

it reflects the vapid nature of the "news" personalities. And that's what too many are -- primped & packaged personalities. Journalism isn't what they're about -- info-tainment is. And there are plenty who buy into the corporate news as if they're real journalists which, of course, they're not in any traditional, truly professional and honorable sense of that word. To be real journalists would require questioning of the news as presented by the corporate masters, critical thinking and yes, as you so eloquently noted, the courage to break out of the corporate constraints & tell the truth.

[louslobbs]

6. K&R n/t

Lou