In my opinion, it is key to find a balance, and use force as necessary. Destruction of major corporate, capitalist, and governmental establishments will help expedite the message of peace in the long run. It is entirely ironic the philosophy of human harmony and liberty (Libertarian Socialism) is perceived as the most violent by those who currently run our false-democratic capitalist mainstream media. Global peace can be achieved through the development of a properly thought out revolution.
Why I feel violence is also necessary: To truly ascend in to a 100% egalitarian society with no hierarchy, there will be dissenters, those former 1% - 20%ers or other overly indoctrinated rightists. In the end there will be bloodshed. The people must stand up to oppression by police and elitists. Our voice must be heard, and our march felt. For example, even today (Oct. 19) during the first day of the Greek strike, there was a group of Fascists also demonstrating who fought with Anarchists.
I feel both are necessary. Peaceful protests, especially this new wave of occupation, demonstrates the power of 'true' or 'pure' democracy, as opposed to our representative democracies that govern the majority of the world. These types of protest do this through showing the power of the people's voice when unified. Occupations I find may be even more necessary, as they demonstrate true communism, through the development of community, the general assembly, and the use of the people's 'mic'.
While violence is often a catalyst for change, I think the Occupy movement is growing so rapidly already on it's own. I think all governments are befuddled and trying to figure out how to address this revolutionary force. Some won't figure it out and will resort to violence. Some political entities will try to co-opt it, and that might be cause for violence as every positive populist movement in the past has been co-opted by the major political entities and has died of bullshit poisoning.
we need to be nonviolent for as long as possible.... i AM hopeful that the violence can be minimalized by we 99% remaining calm and that there are lots and lots of calm people in the streets..... bring guitars... every revolution need music
During the looting in London earlier this year, the police took a back seat and took a long time to get involved to stop the violence, now when people are protesting peacefully over a legitimate cause the police kettle them from the word go. I don't think that the peaceful protests will work because the powers that be will not let them remain peaceful. As was seen with the student protests, police began to kettle people when they were protesting peacefully and then violence ensued.
I think that people shouldn't worry about the media blinding people, for example if a protest does get violent and the media start putting down the protesters then people are savvy enough to see through it. The internet gives us transparency and the tools to maybe not accept the information so blindly that the main stream media give us.
The essence of Gandhi's non-violent non-cooperation is that violence used against you rebounds against the perpetrator if you use violence the message is lost. This has been successful in major social changes in the USA (Martin Luther King Jr) nd other causes. The method works, is not new but has evolved into the digital age. Part of it is creating sympathy and friends amongst the police and your enemies (George Soros and Warren Buffet)
I'm worried that if violence starts and the media report it, people who don't actually care about the protests but just want to cause chaos will start rioting.
I think it's too early to feel too pessimistic about peaceful protesting. As you said, let the movement gain momentum. Those people on the streets aren't going anywhere and surely more are to come, it's only been a couple of weeks after all. I think the Occupy movement has more potential of moving huge masses than any national crises in the middle east. My local media (Finnish) has covered the protests relatively fairly many days in a row now, so that may fuel my optimism.
I see what your saying about violence getting the media's attention, and how it may help to spread word, but I think peaceful is the way. I mean you wouldn't teach a child to hit other children, or cheat on tests. And if we give in to being violent, than we're cheating ourselves. Yes being violent would get people going but it would break out and spread like wildfire into something it shouldn't. It would only make the situation worse, not better. Even if more people 'care' it wouldn't be right.
@invaderzimgirl14 Dont you think that it might take the police to start being violent, people would seriously wake up to that. I dont think protesters need to instigate any sort of violence but we've already seen what the police in NYV have been doing.
@Theicemonkeyjr That wouldn't help anyone. That would only injure protesters and the image of authority. No one needs to get hurt in order for change.
I also agree that the attention of those in power will only be caught if violence breaks out, unfortunately. So basically, the options are either be ignored by peacefully protesting, or be over exposed by the media and portrayed as "bad" people when violence and chaos erupts. Sad, really, but true.
Well the media doesn't get viewers by showing people peacefully walking down the sidewalks with brooms, but if they ignore the peaceful protesting and show the violent and chaotic scene of cars on fire, people will surely tune in to watch. The peaceful protesting would have a chance, if the police would allow it. The protesting would not become violent without police forces trying to interfere, which (I believe) is not going to stop, and will force the scene to become violent and chaotic.
We should avoid violence at any cost but as you said, sometimes violence is the catalyst to move forward. Why prod the police to cause injury? The only gain would be media coverage, which could then be used against the movement. It's so complicated because both options have consequences. Stay quiet, get ignored and bashed. Make a ruckus, get bashed even worse.
Regardless, the movement has begun. Whatever path it takes we won't know until it happens. Good thought-provoking podcast.
I really hope that peaceful protests work. I don't want this to have to end in bloodshed. I am proud to say that I was part of Occupy Together. I am also proud to say that the police in our area were very supportive of us.
@WayhoRachel I don't think it's necessarily a forced choice between peace and 'bloodshed'. You can be no-peaceful in ways which don't involve attacking people (property destruction for instance).
In my opinion, it is key to find a balance, and use force as necessary. Destruction of major corporate, capitalist, and governmental establishments will help expedite the message of peace in the long run. It is entirely ironic the philosophy of human harmony and liberty (Libertarian Socialism) is perceived as the most violent by those who currently run our false-democratic capitalist mainstream media. Global peace can be achieved through the development of a properly thought out revolution.
EquanimityJohn 4 months ago
Why I feel violence is also necessary: To truly ascend in to a 100% egalitarian society with no hierarchy, there will be dissenters, those former 1% - 20%ers or other overly indoctrinated rightists. In the end there will be bloodshed. The people must stand up to oppression by police and elitists. Our voice must be heard, and our march felt. For example, even today (Oct. 19) during the first day of the Greek strike, there was a group of Fascists also demonstrating who fought with Anarchists.
EquanimityJohn 4 months ago
I feel both are necessary. Peaceful protests, especially this new wave of occupation, demonstrates the power of 'true' or 'pure' democracy, as opposed to our representative democracies that govern the majority of the world. These types of protest do this through showing the power of the people's voice when unified. Occupations I find may be even more necessary, as they demonstrate true communism, through the development of community, the general assembly, and the use of the people's 'mic'.
EquanimityJohn 4 months ago
FTP!!!!
metalbagger2012 4 months ago
While violence is often a catalyst for change, I think the Occupy movement is growing so rapidly already on it's own. I think all governments are befuddled and trying to figure out how to address this revolutionary force. Some won't figure it out and will resort to violence. Some political entities will try to co-opt it, and that might be cause for violence as every positive populist movement in the past has been co-opted by the major political entities and has died of bullshit poisoning.
whiskersneighbour1 4 months ago
we need to be nonviolent for as long as possible.... i AM hopeful that the violence can be minimalized by we 99% remaining calm and that there are lots and lots of calm people in the streets..... bring guitars... every revolution need music
liagog 4 months ago
During the looting in London earlier this year, the police took a back seat and took a long time to get involved to stop the violence, now when people are protesting peacefully over a legitimate cause the police kettle them from the word go. I don't think that the peaceful protests will work because the powers that be will not let them remain peaceful. As was seen with the student protests, police began to kettle people when they were protesting peacefully and then violence ensued.
sheppardguitars 4 months ago
I think that people shouldn't worry about the media blinding people, for example if a protest does get violent and the media start putting down the protesters then people are savvy enough to see through it. The internet gives us transparency and the tools to maybe not accept the information so blindly that the main stream media give us.
KennedyWalker1 4 months ago
The essence of Gandhi's non-violent non-cooperation is that violence used against you rebounds against the perpetrator if you use violence the message is lost. This has been successful in major social changes in the USA (Martin Luther King Jr) nd other causes. The method works, is not new but has evolved into the digital age. Part of it is creating sympathy and friends amongst the police and your enemies (George Soros and Warren Buffet)
markwhalanaus 4 months ago 2
I'm worried that if violence starts and the media report it, people who don't actually care about the protests but just want to cause chaos will start rioting.
JustJessicaOx 4 months ago
Well a part of me also feels maybe it will take violence, but id love for it to work peacefully, however Libya was defiantly not peaceful.
Theicemonkeyjr 4 months ago
martin Luther king, that was peaceful and that worked
rlaxx1 4 months ago
I think it's too early to feel too pessimistic about peaceful protesting. As you said, let the movement gain momentum. Those people on the streets aren't going anywhere and surely more are to come, it's only been a couple of weeks after all. I think the Occupy movement has more potential of moving huge masses than any national crises in the middle east. My local media (Finnish) has covered the protests relatively fairly many days in a row now, so that may fuel my optimism.
HnrGl 4 months ago
I would like to believe that change can come about without violence breaking out, but in reality I'm not too sure that can happen.
embury 4 months ago 7
I see what your saying about violence getting the media's attention, and how it may help to spread word, but I think peaceful is the way. I mean you wouldn't teach a child to hit other children, or cheat on tests. And if we give in to being violent, than we're cheating ourselves. Yes being violent would get people going but it would break out and spread like wildfire into something it shouldn't. It would only make the situation worse, not better. Even if more people 'care' it wouldn't be right.
invaderzimgirl14 4 months ago
@invaderzimgirl14 Dont you think that it might take the police to start being violent, people would seriously wake up to that. I dont think protesters need to instigate any sort of violence but we've already seen what the police in NYV have been doing.
Theicemonkeyjr 4 months ago
@Theicemonkeyjr That wouldn't help anyone. That would only injure protesters and the image of authority. No one needs to get hurt in order for change.
invaderzimgirl14 4 months ago
I also agree that the attention of those in power will only be caught if violence breaks out, unfortunately. So basically, the options are either be ignored by peacefully protesting, or be over exposed by the media and portrayed as "bad" people when violence and chaos erupts. Sad, really, but true.
omgitsbrutalbri 4 months ago
Well the media doesn't get viewers by showing people peacefully walking down the sidewalks with brooms, but if they ignore the peaceful protesting and show the violent and chaotic scene of cars on fire, people will surely tune in to watch. The peaceful protesting would have a chance, if the police would allow it. The protesting would not become violent without police forces trying to interfere, which (I believe) is not going to stop, and will force the scene to become violent and chaotic.
omgitsbrutalbri 4 months ago
We should avoid violence at any cost but as you said, sometimes violence is the catalyst to move forward. Why prod the police to cause injury? The only gain would be media coverage, which could then be used against the movement. It's so complicated because both options have consequences. Stay quiet, get ignored and bashed. Make a ruckus, get bashed even worse.
Regardless, the movement has begun. Whatever path it takes we won't know until it happens. Good thought-provoking podcast.
TreeFrogTownPerson 4 months ago
@TreeFrogTownPerson Like ive said to others i think it might take the police to prod us first, and it to be caught on film.
Theicemonkeyjr 4 months ago
Comment removed
TreeFrogTownPerson 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Theicemonkeyjr That's true, it could be either side. With the internet and live-feed any news will spread in seconds.
TreeFrogTownPerson 4 months ago
I really hope that peaceful protests work. I don't want this to have to end in bloodshed. I am proud to say that I was part of Occupy Together. I am also proud to say that the police in our area were very supportive of us.
WayhoRachel 4 months ago 8
@WayhoRachel I don't think it's necessarily a forced choice between peace and 'bloodshed'. You can be no-peaceful in ways which don't involve attacking people (property destruction for instance).
MisterAlexGabriel 4 months ago