Last night I marched with thousands of people of all ages, ethnicities, and classes to the Port of Oakland. People were chanting, smiling, speaking about nonviolence, talking about change, and playing Michael Jackson on stereo.
What was most powerful for me was not only the march, which symbolized the need for social and economic equality in our world, but also the spirit of nonviolence that feed so many of us. There was one particular incident where violence could have become a reality.
There were thousands of us standing in front of the Port of Oakland fence. Around 7:40 pm or so an employee of the port tried to drive through the mass of people to get to his job. He was driving slowly, but seemed somewhat forceful with his driving. Within seconds people started to kick his truck, scream at him, someone even jumped on his truck looking as if he was going to kick the windshield in.
However, this violence was stopped within seconds. How? As soon as this happened a powerful chant came from the crowd, “NONVIOLENCE, NONVIOLENCE, NONVIOLENCE.” Though initially our voices seemed low, we were joined by large numbers who believed in the same. The “NONVIOLENCE, NONVIOLENCE” chant turned to chanting, “PEACEFUL, PEACEFUL.” Many of us held up peace signs. Within seconds the majority of us was chanting and standing for peace. The angered man jumped off the truck and protestors stopped kicking the man’s truck. A nonviolent protestor led the man and his truck out of the mass of people. My classmate looked at me and noted that the man who lead the truck driver was Oscar Grant’s relative who he saw speak in Berkeley once. Oscar Grant was a young man killed by the BART police in 2009. This witness was extremely powerful for me. There is power in speaking up for peace when violence surrounds us. Speaking up can literally shift the energy and change a particularly harmful situation.
The media seems to focus so much on the negative events happening in the Occupy movement, but yesterday I was inspired. I saw first hand the power of nonviolent protest in action within this movement. I observed a relative of Oscar Grant extend compassion to a man who could have potentially harmed him. I drove by school children standing next to their school with their handmade signs chanting in solidarity: “We are the 99%!” I’ve heard the testimonies of many and my heart, mind, and soul is moved to compassion and action.
Last night on Occupy Oakland Live-U Stream the brother facilitating the live footage spoke to the police directly after force was expressed on occupiers. He noted, “It is the love and compassion of the fellow protestors that I will remember from this movement. It is not the violence and brutality of the police (or others). Love and compassion will always win over violence and brutality.”
After leaving the port I went back to the Occupy Oakland encampment at Oscar Grant Plaza. I left around 9:30 pm, but followed the reports of violence via live streaming. I had the same sentiments as my friend Sam. He notes, “Reading the news-reports from the middle of the night, it saddens me to hear of what took place. It also convinces me of the importance of continued involvement in this growing movement – the importance of maintaining strong voices for the methods of non-violence, and being open to listening to the anger and the frustration of those who feel compelled to use more violent means.”
The movement needs you, needs us, to step up nonviolently in the call for equality. We need more jobs, equal access to health care, equal access to excellent education, and more. We are the hope! We are the change! We are the 99%!
Now this is the kind of thing the main stream media should be reporting about. I hope this gets “shared” widely. I’ll be the change I want to see and share this immediately. Keep telling this redemptive stories.
This pernicious conflation of passivity and non-violence is vicious and dangerous. If you are willing to challenge global capitalism, capitalism will challenge back. a Scab crossing a picket line is just as violent as some one stopping them by force, only the violence of the scab only supports the boss, the violence of the picketer defends the scab and the worker.
Violence against a window (which was met with beatings, macings and hand-overs to the police) was condemned as “not the work of the 99%” but really as a Comrade from Oakland points out”It breaks down to a willingness apparently, violence is only violence when it’s against glass. When it’s against a comrade, it’s pacifism.”
I would argue that, turning up to an action (strike or other wise) and posing real resistance is going to get violent , the choice is is the violence from the state or is it from the people against capital.
please drop the fake moral high-ground.
Violence is attractive no doubt. America feeds on it. But what are the consequences? The unending spiral of terror and violence which we witness (when the mainstream media allows it (sic – never since Vietnam) throughout the world?
Non-violence though admittedly far more demanding and risky unmasks the pent-up aggression inherent in global capitalism. It is hope the “unmasking” reveals its true face leaving the public to choose what it prefers….
This pernicious conflation of passivity and non-violence is vicious and dangerous. If you are willing to challenge global capitalism, capitalism will challenge back. a Scab crossing a picket line is just as violent as some one stopping them by force, only the violence of the scab only supports the boss, the violence of the picketer defends the scab and the worker.
Violence against a window (which was met with beatings, macings and hand-overs to the police) was condemned as “not the work of the 99%” but really as a Comrade from Oakland points out”It breaks down to a willingness apparently, violence is only violence when it’s against glass. When it’s against a comrade, it’s pacifism.”
I would argue that, turning up to an action (strike or other wise) and posing real resistance is going to get violent , the choice is is the violence from the state or is it from the people against capital.
please drop the fake moral high-ground.
Thank you Phillipe for the comment. I do believe stories like this can be helpful with moving forward in the Occupy movement. Thank you Tom for your comments on nonviolence and the reality of having the option to choose what we prefer.
Matthew, I equally appreciate your comment. Challenging nonviolence and equating it with pacifism is extremely common. On the ground at Occupy Oakland there have even been fliers given out questioning, “Are you a Pacifist?” But, also fliers shared acknowledging practical ways to stay nonviolent when challenged with violence.
In response I will speak to not just the specific incident I blogged about, but nonviolence within the movement in general. As a trained nonviolence educator for Pace e Bene nonviolence service based in Oakland this question of nonviolence and pacificism comes up often. If we want to think “scholarly” about this in Moral Man & Immoral Society: A Study of Ethics in Politics Reinhold Niebuhr argues that violence is not intrinsically evil and nonviolence is not intrinsically good. In contrast, Muhatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. offer the Gandhian principle of nonviolence called satyagraha (truth force, love force) as a commitment to a way of life. In “Pilgrimage to Nonviolence” King notes that nonviolence actually calls up resources of strength and courage that people may not know they have. This can reach the opponent and stir their conscience so much so that reconciliation becomes a reality. In the essay King actually acknowledges that before discovering the teachings of Gandhi he questioned the philosophy of nonviolence. However, the effectiveness of satyagraha and the morality that you speak about redirected his questions.
In regards to the occupy movement nonviolence is extremely important and can be effective strategically. For decades it has been evident that the most effective means of building successful movements have been those who kept a nonviolent discipline. These movements actually build people power.
A peace worker for over 20 years quotes:
“The Occupy movement is still in its infancy. If it allows this kind of “highjacking” of the peaceful intention of thousands, I’m afraid the end result ultimately will be a smaller and increasingly fading effort. Many people will stay away (physically and psychologically). Many may very well ask themselves, “What kind of a society would such forces build?” and decide that backing this movement is too risky and even too frightening. Hence, such outbursts will severely undermine movement success, which depends, not on creating the illusion of civil unrest, but on alerting, educating, winning and mobilizing the populace to withdraw its consent and cooperation from the status quo and to generate people-power for a constructive alternative. It is understandable that people who are frustrated with economic inequality would use provocative violence — this is what our violent society teaches us is the most effective way to deal with problems. This is the irony–those who say they want change are mirroring (and thus reinforcing) the status quo and the paradigm on which it depends. The Occupy movement must make a decision. Either it will permit this kind of behavior (mostly by inaction) or it won’t. I would hope that the movement’s general assemblies and press releases would firmly and publicly oppose this violence, firmly and publicly name Occupy as a movement committed to nonviolent change, and help make these decisions real by creating nonviolence guidelines, a pledge of nonviolent action, promotion of nonviolent action training for all participants, and organizing nonviolent peacekeepers.”
With all of my heart, mind, activism, intellect, knowledge, frustration, and as one committed to fighting for justice: we must fight nonviolently.
-Argrow “Kit” Evans
Your “peace worker” friend sounds like a cop.
Hi Matthew,
Thank you for your comment. His name is Dr. Ken Butigan (http://paceebene.org/user/10). He is the director of Pace e Bene nonviolence service and professor at DePaul University and Loyola University in Chicago’s Institute of Pastoral Studies. Practically speaking it would be nice if cops and Occupiers were all on the same page. We would all be protesting together working for change. However, this is not the case.
In Peace- Argrow “Kit” Evans