Note: the original title of this post was "Dear MoveOn.org: We Would Like to Take This Moment to Say 'Fuc*k Off' - Truly, #OccupyWallStreet." The title was derived from the image contained below. However, after seeing the poll results, it was changed in order for the central issue, and for a more positive dialogue, to better emerge.
--------§--------
Many people are beginning to ask this question: how can the Occupy Wall Street movement embrace support from unions, politicians and political organizations without being co-opted? How can the movement maintain its democratic, non-partisan character as large, hierarchical structures add their boisterous voices of support?
It's an important question as Occupy Wall Street expands beyond anyone's wildest imagination, with events and occupations planned in almost every corner of the country, and with both local and national media looking for people who can "explain" what is being witnessed.
Politicians have begun stepping forward to express support for #ows. Unions have stepped forward in great numbers. And political organizations, with clear party alignments, have stepped forward to support the movement. To be sure: all of these developments are positive, and reveal the power of this expansive revolution. However, such support from entities that are organized from the top down, and which have loud, strong voices, does present perilous problems for a General-Assembly-driven movement.
This tension being felt by #ows activists between a) appreciation for support of the movement, and b) dismay at attempts to co-opt the movement is well represented (though neither diplomatic nor GA-approved) by the below image:
--------§--------
It's important to note, given the subject of this post, that no General Assembly in the movement approved the above image. (Thanks to artisan for making me realize this caption needed to be added.) That said, the image does represent the tensions that currently exist, regardless of whether or not it has been "approved."
Matt Sledge in the Huffington Post interviewed several activists about this exact issue. Here is one response he received:
"We're very excited to have our union brothers and sisters march on the heart of greed," spokesman Patrick Bruner told HuffPost before a 10,000-strong Wednesday march organized in coordination with labor.
“We don’t necessarily think that the way they’re structured is the best,” Bruner said, referring to the unions' top-down organizational style. "But we believe the 99% needs a voice, and they're one of the few remaining."
Here is another (in response to Ben Bernanke's mention of #ows on Tuesday):
"Nice to know he feels he has to say that," replied David Graeber, an anarchist anthropologist who has been involved with the protests from the beginning. "Otherwise meaningless."
"Obviously we welcome support from anyone," Graeber continued in an email, "but yes, [being co-opted is] a serious concern because a huge part of our message is our own internal democracy. The moment you even have a funding base it seriously limits what people feel they can say and do. And a top-down organization will always try to co-opt you. So we have to be very careful and insist people come on our terms or not at all."
This question of co-opting is one that is particularly prescient, as we at Daily Kos – a progressive blog which explicitly aligns with the Democratic party – become intensely focused on Occupy Wall Street.
Not only have we occupied the Rec. List in recent days, Daily Kos itself has (to my great joy) begun to help with the organization of occupation events around the country
The work Chris Bowers has done, and is doing, is tremendous, and should continue. However, as it continues, a parallel question should be asked: how can unions and political organizations and politicians lend support to Occupy Wall Street without killing it?
How can we fan the flames of revolution without extinguishing them with our own breath?
---------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter @David_EHG
---------------------------------