As Susan Adams has canceled for tonight, I will take a break from the Congressional race to discuss the state of the Occupy Movement. It appears that the occupations have lost their luster in the public view. Is this due to negative corporate media coverage? The loss of political focus within the movement itself? Other causes?
It may be a combination. With the coordinated effort to crack down on occupations across the country, the focus has been away from the 1 percent as the story has evolved (or devolved) into a focus on the occupiers themselves and whether they will be allowed to occupy their spaces of choice with tents and such, and the discussion has shifted, rightly or wrongly, from the economic and political grievances to whether the occupiers have a First Amendment right to camp in protest. That is the focus now as the County has employed the Eureka Police Department (“without adult supervision” as one OWH supporter said to me last night) to protect its lawn.
The big question is, where does the Occupy Movement go from here? These questions and more tonight. Join the discussion at 7:00 p.m.
In the meantime, today is the National Day of Action. Heraldo has it covered.
And Hank discusses the debate among police organizations as to whether you should give notice to occupiers of evictions or take them by surprise – which is safer for all involved?
Sohum Parlance II 
31 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 17, 2011 at 9:26 am
Joe Blow
You’re still rather clueless about what’s going on here, aren’t you?
By the way, if money (dollars) are free speech and corporations are people then sleeping bags, tents and whatever else can be purchased with dollars are free speech too.
If you want to really know where the Occupy Movement is going, take a good look at where it started and see what’s happening there. Good topic to talk about, though.
November 17, 2011 at 9:52 am
interstate media school of fish
90% I read on blogs is information about unruly activity blamed on the protesters via police reports. You tell me, eric, is the movement fading or do they just want to now spread this idea that it is? Who gave YOU the idea?
November 17, 2011 at 10:33 am
Fred Mangels
http://reason.com/archives/2011/11/16/occupy-wall-street-is-not-an-altruistic
November 17, 2011 at 10:43 am
Anonymous
Joe Blow, three paragraphs and you didn’t say shit!
Everyday people, working folks (and those sincerely trying to find work) are not on board with this rabble.
November 17, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Eric Kirk
Who gave YOU the idea?
The poll to which I linked. The letters are blue for a reason. Use it.
November 17, 2011 at 12:30 pm
Bolithio
As much as the Adbusters, dont participate, act outside the box idealism is interesting, it has a major flaw. You cant change things completely from the outside. I think the image of Occupy is not well suited for mainstream American culture. Occupy has to find a way to organize with out loosing their spontaneity. But they wont succeed if they do not plan for everything they saw in phase 1.
They need a mission statement,
a code of conduct,
a homeless policy,
and maybe a dress code.
November 17, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Eric Kirk
Well, here’s the number one “recced post” currently at DKOS – a discussion of “phase 2”
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/17/1037356/-Welcome-to-PHASE-2-of-Occupy-Wall-Street,-now-here-is-a-message?via=siderec
It begins:
The point of Occupy Wall Street is NOT to camp in tents, it is to challenge power and corruption.
And now that our tents are going away I am almost relieved. The tents were becoming a distraction anyway, now it is time for us to focus on how we will place pressure on the corrupt power structure and demand the changes and reforms and accountability we all know is absolutely necessary if we are going to have a viable future for millions upon millions of working class people.
Much more through the link.
November 17, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Matt
The more the story is about camping, the more Wall Street wins
November 17, 2011 at 4:15 pm
Thorstein Veblen
Most people I know are cool with the OWS sentiment, modestly defined as it is. But won’t have anything to do with it due to the prominent display of homeless people, many of whom are druggies and/or mentally ill. Want a higher class of protester, I guess, before buying in.
I’m not sure that media has much to do with it, just driving past, but not stopping in.
November 17, 2011 at 5:39 pm
interstate media school of fish
Fred, while spamming his own blog as usual, goes out of his way to research ways to complain about the protest. The one he just linked places it’s own label on the motivations behind every protester all over the country.
Fred either likes or wants to think so many people, with nothing to gain for themselves in the process, just don’t have a clue as to what they’re doing, whereas he does…constantly complaining about them all over the internet.
November 17, 2011 at 6:09 pm
Fred Mangels
Yes. That must be it.
November 17, 2011 at 6:10 pm
Eric Kirk
Technically speaking, can you spam your own blog?
November 17, 2011 at 6:24 pm
interstate media school of fish
The whole “spam” thing is based on that technicality, Eric. Fred gets around, with nothing better to do than find new ways to complain all day about something he also says isn’t important. Obviously a whole lotta people do. I tip my hat to him for at least showing his face.
November 17, 2011 at 6:52 pm
Anonymous
Whatver this “Occupation” “Movement” was initially about is long since forgotten.
In reality, how many of the “99%” support in the actions of these people, the occupiers?
Photos of people shitting on an Ameican Flag, a police car? What kind of person would take a dump in front of hundreds of people with cameras? This is supposed to impress us? Motivate us? I don’t want to have any association with people like that.
November 17, 2011 at 6:59 pm
interstate media school of fish
” It appears that the occupations have lost their luster in the public view. Is this due to negative corporate media coverage? The loss of political focus within the movement itself? Other causes?”
eric says it appears the occupations have lost their luster in the public view. due to media coverage? He then replies to me that he got the idea himself from media coverage. One source, to be exact.
I’m not saying you belong to the insterstate media school of fish, eric, but how do you think stuff like propaganda gets around? Do you think our government’s covert propaganda days are behind us? I’ll assure you, after decades of careful study, it’s more effective than ever.
November 17, 2011 at 7:57 pm
pathetic actually
from a BBC report today…
At least 300 people were arrested just in New York, many of them as trouble flared near the stock exchange.
Occupy Wall Street activists started the day by marching through the city’s financial district and later rallied at subway stations during rush hour.
Thursday’s nationwide protests were seen as a test of Occupy Wall Street’s momentum, as the grassroots movement against economic equality marked two months since it began.
November 17, 2011 at 11:01 pm
ED Denson
Strangest thing on the news this evening. OWS has lost its support says the newsman as thousands of OWS supporters demonstrate in every major city in the USA. If there’s no support, who are all those people marching, sitting down in the streets, heckling Karl Rove, hanging signs on the 101 overpass at Garberville, standing by the courthouse in Eureka, on the HSU campus…. ?
November 17, 2011 at 11:05 pm
Sally
http://www.commondreams.org/further/2011/11/17-0
Stuff like this should keep OWS alive, I would think!
November 18, 2011 at 9:00 am
Erasmus
A fine show — only the discussion of the Federal Reserve lacked plausibility (although Eric’s viewpoint mirrors mine, except for the fact that the Fed is far less independent of politics than commonly believed; the Chairman is appointed by the President, after all).
November 18, 2011 at 9:31 am
Bolithio
Ya, there are lots of good ideas. Its “time” for this and that. But I think we need a condensed, realistic approach with like 1 or 2 short term goals that can actually happen. The list from the KOS link is all over the place. Like; “Tax the rich”. That message wont work. It needs to be taxing certain activities, not individuals. It may be that only certain individuals (the rich) engage in such things that will be taxed, but it sound better to the right-leaning moderates, many of whom feel the rich support them and dont want to simply tax their providers.
November 18, 2011 at 9:57 am
Eric Kirk
eric says it appears the occupations have lost their luster in the public view. due to media coverage? He then replies to me that he got the idea himself from media coverage. One source, to be exact.
I’m not saying you belong to the insterstate media school of fish, eric, but how do you think stuff like propaganda gets around? Do you think our government’s covert propaganda days are behind us? I’ll assure you, after decades of careful study, it’s more effective than ever.
To quote from Wag the Dog – “The war’s over. I saw it on TV.”
Whether the cause is the media coverage itself, or the subject matter being covered, the point is that the polls have reversed themselves in terms of popular opinion. Now you can dismiss the polls as corporate media fabrication and just keep charging the same way, or you can look at the situation and develop a media strategy.
The other problem with your thesis is that much of the media has actually covered the movement fairly, particularly with regard to the incidents in Oakland.
November 18, 2011 at 10:29 am
interstate media school of fish
Great reply, eric. You spell out well enough to know where you don’t really stand about anything.
November 18, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Anonymous
on the wane ! Old Hat !
November 18, 2011 at 5:08 pm
Not A Native
Eric ‘stands’ with whatever he thinks other people want to hear. He’ll reverse himself in an instant whenever he sense a groundswell of criticism. Essentially, Eric primarily wants to be aligned with a majority, regardless of what postions that requires of him. Thats why I’ve written that he aspires to elective office, though he’s denied it, in the past.
FWIW, here’s a great editorial about the nature of the US political divide, with links to source material. Read closely and you’ll find the scripts that Libertarian conservatives here routinely invoke as the baseline of their ‘truths’:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/18/exceptionalism-argument-may-prove-potent-for-republicans/
November 18, 2011 at 7:38 pm
moviedad
Felix has more balls than those of us who call ourselves: “Progressive”.
And thank you “Matt”, you nailed it. It’s all about: “Camping” and homeless people who are a mess, attaching themselves to the protesters. Nothing about the system that leaves people to die on the streets in winter. Talk about dysfunctional.
November 19, 2011 at 10:52 am
interstate media school of fish
The internet has been occupied for over a decade now. Fred occupies the internet with his constant dissatisfaction of the government. Bolithio occupies the internet with his constant dissatisfaction of the governemment. Flag waving and flag burning anonymi alike occupy the internet with their constant dissatisfaction of the government. Since the dawn of blogs, our newest “news”, we all see that just about everybody’s dissatisfied with our government. The proverbial 99%. Even on a techincal level, computerized screens are X” square, and these countless rants and ongoing dialogs of dissatisfaction occupy a virtually infinite space, complete with the constant presence of advertisements and corporate prescribed headlines that occupy everybody’s frame of reference without falter as well.
Eric, you’re more naive than ignorant…open your eyes to what’s going on right in front of you. Go to oakland with a megaphone and get people to do what you’re suggesting. They’re INDIVIDUALLY protesting THE SAME THING YOU ARE. It’s idiotic to suggest millions of people do what you say, rather than you do what they say? Protest is what we’re all doing…I’m all for it. Support them in spirit and in print.
In school we all learn that violent revolutions are how peaceful countries have secured themselves. Through violent revolution, the core of “our” government has bombed and blasted, experimented and brainwashed, lied and manipulated themselves into the positions they now secure. The bad guys have won bigtime. They’re still bombing and blasting, bulldozing and brainwashing their way into even more power. I support the proverbial 99% unconditionally. Shame on anybody who dismisses the homeless voice as well.
November 19, 2011 at 1:41 pm
skippy
The Occupy message– what’s left of it– has been all over the board.
Fellow readers: sharing a bit of the lesser reported news and local Occupy Haps archived in the Humboldt Sentinel column here has been a steady work in progress– with your comments and criticisms not only being appreciated, but sought after. Please give it a read, offering some valuable feedback if you’re so inclined. Thanks.
November 19, 2011 at 3:47 pm
Erasmus
I was puzzled by the reference to “Hoovervilles” in Skippy’s column. Why is “Obamaville” not a more appropriate term? Is our president blameless?
November 19, 2011 at 8:34 pm
skippy
Erasmus, you make a notable point– depending on one’s point of view. Opinions differ.
We know how the colloquially-named Hoovervilles came about: During the Great Depression millions of homeless people settled in teeming communities of makeshift shacks named derisively after President Herbert Hoover whom they blamed for their plight. Newspapers that the homeless used to cover themselves were “Hoover blankets,” empty pockets pulled inside out were “Hoover flags,” freight cars used for shelter were “Hoover Pullmans,” cardboard used to line a shoe with the sole worn through was called “Hoover leather,” and an automobile with horses tied to it because the owner could not afford gasoline was called a “Hoover wagon.”
It was a horrible time for most. Between 1929 and 1933 mortgage foreclosures, delinquent taxes, and sharply rising unemployment were the experiences of many. A hundred thousand businesses failed across the nation. Racial minorities, women, and the unskilled were the first to lose their jobs. By the time President Hoover left office in 1933, 13 million were unemployed, about 25% of the work force. Some unemployed became transients, searching for jobs and food. Families doubled up in apartments, others were evicted and built makeshift houses. Thus the proverbial term of ‘Hoovervilles’ came to the fore describing these shanty towns and the unemployed living in them. But you and fellow readers already know this.
Granted, these were different times, circumstances, and conditions. Or were they? One of the real dividing differences between then and now is the stock market. The DJIA is currently flirting around a fairly respectable 12,000. Compare that to the average person losing their job and/or home due to unemployment– and the list of this year’s exorbitant corporate bonuses soon be published. Is history repeating itself with failing businesses, unemployment, and mortgage foreclosures of our New Depression? Is President Obama really the true source of blame for the growing disparity others have pointed out between the 1% and 99% over the past decade?
November 19, 2011 at 8:51 pm
Anonymous
“Opinions differ”, e, you had better listen to skippy.
November 19, 2011 at 9:24 pm
Eric Kirk
Eric ‘stands’ with whatever he thinks other people want to hear. He’ll reverse himself in an instant whenever he sense a groundswell of criticism.
God, I wish that was true. It would make life so much easier for me.
(sigh).