Unfortunately for the Occupy protesters’ messaging, this guy is right:
Based on the videos I’ve seen, I pretty much agree. The Boston Police did show restraint, although that one guy just getting pushed over seemed unprovoked.
However: It’s clear that there’s a lot of propaganda coming out of the city now, between blaming the arrests on “anarchists” or evicting “to protect the plants.” It’s clear to me what this was: a show of force to tell Occupy Boston “we’ll let you have your little crappy plot of land next to the big ugly vent, but don’t think about getting any bigger.” The lawn next to Dewey Square was just a big barely-utilized field before, so who cares if a bunch of tents pop up for (as the city thinks) a couple weeks? But if they’d allowed the tents to remain in the next park, Occupy would have quickly outgrown that area and would have continued to move down the greenway. Occupy Boston is a manageable protest right now. If it remains manageable, nothing will come of it. Nothing will change if everyone’s still comfortable.
Did you see this? I liked it from top to bottom!
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/to-the-barricades/
"And sit through long meetings in an attempt to reach consensus on whether or not to hold another meeting. That plus marches pretty much fills up the calendar."
oh god so true
Yes, when I read that line I thought of your last post.
I looked up the Occupy Vermont info and when I read about the meetings I got all tired. The fewer constraints on a meeting (where constraints = number of people, time, a clear goal, and often a profit motive), and the less leadership it has, the less productive it is. It has to be done, but getting there, oy vey.