At CounterPunch, Alexander Cockburn has an article about the Occupy movement. Although Cockburn makes some valid criticisms, I think he is too dismissive of the movement as a whole. He writes, “People have written complicated pieces trying to prove it’s not over, but if ever I saw a dead movement, it is surely Occupy.” In fact there are still Occupy groups all over the country, and many of them still hold regular meetings. It is true, however, that the movement doesn’t have as strong a presence as it did last winter. It’s possible, I think, that the movement might be in better shape if some things had been done differently.
In hindsight, I think it was a mistake not to put forward clear demands. The argument that I often heard for not doing so was that demands would lead to disagreements, which would lead to divisions. Yet disagreements and divisions happened anyway. Political clarity was sacrificed in order to attain an impossible ideal of group harmony. The greatest division, it seems to me, was, and is, between those who favor Black Bloc tactics and those who advocate Gandhian non-violent resistance. These two approaches are, in fact, mutually exclusive. This can not be covered up by platitudes about “diversity of tactics”. Some tactics are incompatible with others.
I suspect that this exaggerated fear of division is what drives the insistence upon a consensus approach to decision-making. The argument was that consensus, although time-consuming, will bring everyone into harmonious agreement. Yet some people became dissatisfied and left anyway, as would have happened under simple majority rule. So, what has been gained by having consensus? Nothing that I can see.
Then there is the pretense of “leaderlessness”. The truth is that some people become unofficial leaders, either because they are very good at making arguments, or because they possess specialized skills that are useful to the movement, or because they are simply both willing and able to devote an enormous amount of time and energy to the cause. Wouldn’t it make sense to acknowledge this and make these people directly accountable to the entire group?
Cockburn makes one point that strikes me as particularly salient. He writes:
- Where was the knowledge of, let along [sic] the respect for the past? We had the non-violent resistors [sic] of the Forties organising against the war with enormous courage. The Fifties saw leftists took [sic] McCarthyism full on the chin. With the Sixties we were making efforts at revolutionary organisation and resistance.
Yet when one [sic] raised this history with someone from Occupy, I encountered total indifference.
Typographical errors aside, what Cockburn says here is true of much of the U.S. left. How many American leftists have even heard of A.J. Muste? Or the Dodge Revolutionary Union Movement? Or C.L.R. James? (Although you can always find an anarchist who is willing to talk your arm off about Kronstadt.) On left-wing British websites you can find informed discussions about such topics as the Battle of Cable Street, the 1926 General Strike, or Trotsky’s conception of the united front. We have nothing quite like this here in this country. There is little effort among the U.S. left to learn from the successes and failures of the past. It’s as though we must continually re-invent the wheel. What’s more, this historical amnesia makes us vulnerable to all kinds of dishonesty, as when, in Capitalism: A Love Story, Michale Moore reminds us of the 1936 Flint sit-down strike – only to make the false claim that F.D.R. sent in National Guard troops to defend the strikers from the police. In fact, they were sent there to intimidate the strikers.
These are just some thoughts I have had about the Occupy movement and about the U.S. left in general. I would be interested to hear what other people have to say about these topics.
July 8, 2012 at 11:11 am |
The Occupy Movement in the UK is dead as well. I saw a few dozen demonstrating in the City of London in May and their Day of Action came to nothing. The only real social movement of this type with real importance was the Spanish indignados. But that too seems to have had to chnage when the economic and social crisis there got really serious, and it is, in my view, far more significant and interesting than the US or UK Occupy stuff.
July 8, 2012 at 10:14 pm |
Occupy in the US is not dead, but it has lost some steam.
July 24, 2012 at 4:15 am |
Well, Spanish Prisoner, you made a few typos yourself in the above piece–haven’t gotten around to reading others. The thing about Cockburn was, he wrote fast. And CounterPunch is notoriously unedited. Cockburn was classically trained, and used literary metaphor brilliantly, and often with humor. He would talk with anyone, including me, when I called on a visit to Petrolia a couple years back.
Alexander Cockburn was a great writer and thinker, and his presence will be missed by many.
Sue S
July 24, 2012 at 6:29 am |
At the time I wrote this, I didn’t know that Cockburn was seriously ill, Sue Skinner. You can find my views on Cockburn here: https://thespanishprisoner.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/alexander-cockburn-1941-2012/.
September 21, 2012 at 6:48 pm |
@Sue Skinner. Are you the Sue who worked at the EDP in King’s Lynn?
John Fleet (johnfleet1@hotmail.com)