by Chris Hedges
Featured Writer
Dandelion Salad
Truthdig
Feb. 6, 2012
The Black Bloc anarchists, who have been active on the streets in Oakland and other cities, are the cancer of the Occupy movement. The presence of Black Bloc anarchists—so named because they dress in black, obscure their faces, move as a unified mass, seek physical confrontations with police and destroy property—is a gift from heaven to the security and surveillance state. The Occupy encampments in various cities were shut down precisely because they were nonviolent. They were shut down because the state realized the potential of their broad appeal even to those within the systems of power. They were shut down because they articulated a truth about our economic and political system that cut across political and cultural lines. And they were shut down because they were places mothers and fathers with strollers felt safe.
Black Bloc adherents detest those of us on the organized left and seek, quite consciously, to take away our tools of empowerment. They confuse acts of petty vandalism and a repellent cynicism with revolution. The real enemies, they argue, are not the corporate capitalists, but their collaborators among the unions, workers’ movements, radical intellectuals, environmental activists and populist movements such as the Zapatistas. Any group that seeks to rebuild social structures, especially through nonviolent acts of civil disobedience, rather than physically destroy, becomes, in the eyes of Black Bloc anarchists, the enemy. Black Bloc anarchists spend most of their fury not on the architects of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) or globalism, but on those, such as the Zapatistas, who respond to the problem. It is a grotesque inversion of value systems.
Because Black Bloc anarchists do not believe in organization, indeed oppose all organized movements, they ensure their own powerlessness. They can only be obstructionist. And they are primarily obstructionist to those who resist. John Zerzan, one of the principal ideologues of the Black Bloc movement in the United States, defended “Industrial Society and Its Future,” the rambling manifesto by Theodore Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, although he did not endorse Kaczynski’s bombings. Zerzan is a fierce critic of a long list of supposed sellouts starting with Noam Chomsky. Black Bloc anarchists are an example of what Theodore Roszak in “The Making of a Counter Culture” called the “progressive adolescentization” of the American left.
In Zerzan’s now defunct magazine Green Anarchy (which survives as a website) he published an article by someone named “Venomous Butterfly” that excoriated the Zapatista Army for National Liberation (EZLN). The essay declared that “not only are those [the Zapatistas’] aims not anarchist; they are not even revolutionary.” It also denounced the indigenous movement for “nationalist language,” for asserting the right of people to “alter or modify their form of government” and for having the goals of “work, land, housing, health care, education, independence, freedom, democracy, justice and peace.” The movement, the article stated, was not worthy of support because it called for “nothing concrete that could not be provided by capitalism.”
“Of course,” the article went on, “the social struggles of exploited and oppressed people cannot be expected to conform to some abstract anarchist ideal. These struggles arise in particular situations, sparked by specific events. The question of revolutionary solidarity in these struggles is, therefore, the question of how to intervene in a way that is fitting with one’s aims, in a way that moves one’s revolutionary anarchist project forward.”
Solidarity becomes the hijacking or destruction of competing movements, which is exactly what the Black Bloc contingents are attempting to do with the Occupy movement.
“The Black Bloc can say they are attacking cops, but what they are really doing is destroying the Occupy movement,” the writer and environmental activist Derrick Jensen told me when I reached him by phone in California. “If their real target actually was the cops and not the Occupy movement, the Black Bloc would make their actions completely separate from Occupy, instead of effectively using these others as a human shield. Their attacks on cops are simply a means to an end, which is to destroy a movement that doesn’t fit their ideological standard.”
“I don’t have a problem with escalating tactics to some sort of militant resistance if it is appropriate morally, strategically and tactically,” Jensen continued. “This is true if one is going to pick up a sign, a rock or a gun. But you need to have thought it through. The Black Bloc spends more time attempting to destroy movements than they do attacking those in power. They hate the left more than they hate capitalists.”
“Their thinking is not only nonstrategic, but actively opposed to strategy,” said Jensen, author of several books, including “The Culture of Make Believe.” “They are unwilling to think critically about whether one is acting appropriately in the moment. I have no problem with someone violating boundaries [when] that violation is the smart, appropriate thing to do. I have a huge problem with people violating boundaries for the sake of violating boundaries. It is a lot easier to pick up a rock and throw it through the nearest window than it is to organize, or at least figure out which window you should throw a rock through if you are going to throw a rock. A lot of it is laziness.”
Groups of Black Bloc protesters, for example, smashed the windows of a locally owned coffee shop in November in Oakland and looted it. It was not, as Jensen points out, a strategic, moral or tactical act. It was done for its own sake. Random acts of violence, looting and vandalism are justified, in the jargon of the movement, as components of “feral” or “spontaneous insurrection.” These acts, the movement argues, can never be organized. Organization, in the thinking of the movement, implies hierarchy, which must always be opposed. There can be no restraints on “feral” or “spontaneous” acts of insurrection. Whoever gets hurt gets hurt. Whatever gets destroyed gets destroyed.
There is a word for this—“criminal.”
The Black Bloc movement is infected with a deeply disturbing hypermasculinity. This hypermasculinity, I expect, is its primary appeal. It taps into the lust that lurks within us to destroy, not only things but human beings. It offers the godlike power that comes with mob violence. Marching as a uniformed mass, all dressed in black to become part of an anonymous bloc, faces covered, temporarily overcomes alienation, feelings of inadequacy, powerlessness and loneliness. It imparts to those in the mob a sense of comradeship. It permits an inchoate rage to be unleashed on any target. Pity, compassion and tenderness are banished for the intoxication of power. It is the same sickness that fuels the swarms of police who pepper-spray and beat peaceful demonstrators. It is the sickness of soldiers in war. It turns human beings into beasts.
“We run on,” Erich Maria Remarque wrote in “All Quiet on the Western Front,” “overwhelmed by this wave that bears us along, that fills us with ferocity, turns us into thugs, into murderers, into God only knows what devils: this wave that multiplies our strength with fear and madness and greed of life, seeking and fighting for nothing but our deliverance.”
The corporate state understands and welcomes the language of force. It can use the Black Bloc’s confrontational tactics and destruction of property to justify draconian forms of control and frighten the wider population away from supporting the Occupy movement. Once the Occupy movement is painted as a flag-burning, rock-throwing, angry mob we are finished. If we become isolated we can be crushed. The arrests last weekend in Oakland of more than 400 protesters, some of whom had thrown rocks, carried homemade shields and rolled barricades, are an indication of the scale of escalating repression and a failure to remain a unified, nonviolent opposition. Police pumped tear gas, flash-bang grenades and “less lethal” rounds into the crowds. Once protesters were in jail they were denied crucial medications, kept in overcrowded cells and pushed around. A march in New York called in solidarity with the Oakland protesters saw a few demonstrators imitate the Black Bloc tactics in Oakland, including throwing bottles at police and dumping garbage on the street. They chanted “Fuck the police” and “Racist, sexist, anti-gay / NYPD go away.”
This is a struggle to win the hearts and minds of the wider public and those within the structures of power (including the police) who are possessed of a conscience. It is not a war. Nonviolent movements, on some level, embrace police brutality. The continuing attempt by the state to crush peaceful protesters who call for simple acts of justice delegitimizes the power elite. It prompts a passive population to respond. It brings some within the structures of power to our side and creates internal divisions that will lead to paralysis within the network of authority. Martin Luther King kept holding marches in Birmingham because he knew Public Safety Commissioner “Bull” Connor was a thug who would overreact.
The Black Bloc’s thought-terminating cliché of “diversity of tactics” in the end opens the way for hundreds or thousands of peaceful marchers to be discredited by a handful of hooligans. The state could not be happier. It is a safe bet that among Black Bloc groups in cities such as Oakland are agents provocateurs spurring them on to more mayhem. But with or without police infiltration the Black Bloc is serving the interests of the 1 percent. These anarchists represent no one but themselves. Those in Oakland, although most are white and many are not from the city, arrogantly dismiss Oakland’s African-American leaders, who, along with other local community organizers, should be determining the forms of resistance.
The explosive rise of the Occupy Wall Street movement came when a few women, trapped behind orange mesh netting, were pepper-sprayed by NYPD Deputy Inspector Anthony Bologna. The violence and cruelty of the state were exposed. And the Occupy movement, through its steadfast refusal to respond to police provocation, resonated across the country. Losing this moral authority, this ability to show through nonviolent protest the corruption and decadence of the corporate state, would be crippling to the movement. It would reduce us to the moral degradation of our oppressors. And that is what our oppressors want.
The Black Bloc movement bears the rigidity and dogmatism of all absolutism sects. Its adherents alone possess the truth. They alone understand. They alone arrogate the right, because they are enlightened and we are not, to dismiss and ignore competing points of view as infantile and irrelevant. They hear only their own voices. They heed only their own thoughts. They believe only their own clichés. And this makes them not only deeply intolerant but stupid.
“Once you are hostile to organization and strategic thinking the only thing that remains is lifestyle purity,” Jensen said. “ ‘Lifestylism’ has supplanted organization in terms of a lot of mainstream environmental thinking. Instead of opposing the corporate state, [lifestylism maintains] we should use less toilet paper and should compost. This attitude is ineffective. Once you give up on organizing or are hostile to it, all you are left with is this hyperpurity that becomes rigid dogma. You attack people who, for example, use a telephone. This is true with vegans and questions of diet. It is true with anti-car activists toward those who drive cars. It is the same with the anarchists. When I called the police after I received death threats I became to Black Bloc anarchists ‘a pig lover.’ ”
“If you live on Ogoni land and you see that Ken Saro-Wiwa is murdered for acts of nonviolent resistance,” Jensen said, “if you see that the land is still being trashed, then you might think about escalating. I don’t have a problem with that. But we have to go through the process of trying to work with the system and getting screwed. It is only then that we get to move beyond it. We can’t short-circuit the process. There is a maturation process we have to go through, as individuals and as a movement. We can’t say, ‘Hey, I’m going to throw a flowerpot at a cop because it is fun.’ ”
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig
Chris Hedges spent two decades as a foreign reporter covering wars in Latin America, Africa, Europe and the Middle East. His latest books are Death of the Liberal Class, and The World as It Is: Dispatches on the Myth of Human Progress.
see
Interview With Chris Hedges About Black Bloc by J.A. Myerson
Chris Hedges: Black Bloc Could Kill OWS
Disturbing Video: Riot police violently disperse Occupy DC with batons
Michael Moore, Chris Hedges, Kevin Zeese & More: Occupy 2012: Battle for our Freedoms
Chris Hedges: Occupy the Courts + Citizens Unite for a Constitutional Amendment By Dennis Kucinich
An Archaic Postmodern View of Occupy Wall Street by Joseph Natoli
Occupy Wall Street on Dandelion Salad
http://vodpod.com/dandelionsalad/tag/occupy+wall+street
http://vodpod.com/dandelionsalad/tag/oakland
Filed under: Anarchism, Crime, Crime and or Corruption, Dandelion Salad Featured Writers, Dandelion Salad Posts News Politics and-or Videos 2, Death-destruction, Police Brutality, Politics Tagged: | Activism - Protests - Boycotts, Agent Provocateur, Black Bloc, Chris Hedges on Dandelion Salad, Jensen-Derrick, non-violence, Occupy Everywhere, Occupy Wall Street on Dandelion Salad, Police State on Dandelion Salad
















[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] Hedges’ Truthdig column, “The Cancer in Occupy” was a searing condemnation of Black Bloc as part of the Occupy movement. This article comes [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
For those of you who think that Hedges is wrong about this , you might want to take the time to go over and read his books and interviews . There is a thread in his work about the dangers of ”externalizing evil ” instead of dealing with it within ourselves. well …OK , there may be some paid agents infiltrating the movement . so what ? the govt. is wasting their money . the movement will implode on its own if does not understand that they have to drop this US and THEM mentality . ”we have met the enemy and it is us” , as Pogo used to say . its that wisdom that will make for a lasting effective movement .
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
These people are paid provocateurs – assuming they are individuals expressing themselves is just silly. The thing to do is to work to expose these government-paid storm troopers and the institutions paying them. This isn’t rocket science, it is what the government was so obviously going to do to discredit the protestors – easy and effective.
Come on, Mr. Hedges, these aren’t mischievous citizens out to make trouble – they are paramilitary agents of the government.
Ok, this article does not represent any of what I have actually observed first hand or independently researched for myself. There was a black bloc action here in Austin and the majority of participants were female, or self avowed male feminists. It included an age range form under 14 to over 60. Many were pacifists, non-anarchists and active members of the local Occupation since day one. The continued abusive treatment of the police, especially with the local “1,000 paper-cuts” strategy against us. For me it isn’t an issue of weather or not I “agree” with every thing they say or do. Agreement and solidarity have NOTHING to do with each other, and I’m in solidarity with all of my fellow occupiers. I’m not an anarchist, but I stand with anarchists. I’m not a communists, but I stand with communists. I’m certainly not a libertarian, but I stand with libertarians.
Even after the first and second times we were attacked we maintained a collective position of “police neutrality”, however the local police here largely destroyed that. Not “agent provocateurs”, not “anarchists”, not anyone else. Even if they were pushing for it in the beginning, it was the behavior of our local police that destroyed that neutrality. The intimidation techniques, arrests, brutality, sending violent and disturbed individuals to our occupation, indifference and refusal when we did come to them for help, letting one of our occupiers be set on fire while they watched, asking an individual to show their genitals because they didn’t identify as “male”, bullying a child on a bicycle, all effectively crushed everyone’s good will toward them, at least as an institution, one by one. After our eviction the closest thing to opposition when someone mike checked “F*** THE POLICE” was “I thought we were police neutral, oh well”.
The police are not our friends, your friends, or anyone’s friends for that matter. They are a security force for the moneyed and the property owners and an enforcement and intelligence agency for the government, local, state or national. There is a reason tyrannical regimes are called police states. Once, what now seems like so long ago I sincerely believed they were here for my own, and everyone’s good, ultimately, despite whatever flaws the system might have. However now I can’t say that with any sincerity or certainty.
It took the police here trying to arrest a veteran, west point graduate, school teacher for trying to film them for people here to even start to have the courage to bring public their stories of police abuse. It’s a systemic problem, and one that’s systemic across our entire country. I still hope they’re wrong when they say that there very institution of law enforcement in irreparably corrupt by it’s very inception, and that it’s simply a flaw of our particular country or point in history, but I can’t take that position with full sincerity, not after what I’ve seen and heard.
Thanks for sharing your personal experience, Carey.
“Agreement and solidarity have NOTHING to do with each other, and I’m in solidarity with all of my fellow occupiers. I’m not an anarchist, but I stand with anarchists. I’m not a communists, but I stand with communists. I’m certainly not a libertarian, but I stand with libertarians.”
I agree with you 100% comrade. I am an anarchist, but I stand by all sincere revolutionaries, whether they go to protests with black flags, hoodies, and masks; or with their families, colorful posters and a non-confrontational demeanor.
What those who use black bloc tactics need to keep vigilant of is the wishes of the protestors around them. I’m not saying most do or most don’t, I have seen evidence online of them doing both. For example, from what I have seen and read about the black bloc and shield wall used at occupy Oakland last week is that when the march ran into a police line, those who weren’t willing to get in a confrontation hung back while those who wanted to try to attempt to push through chose too keep going. This way only those who were willing to jeopardize themselves were the only ones who took the risk. I wasn’t there but that is what I garnered from the articles I have read and videos i have see.
It’s not fair when people start rioting in the middle of, or even too close to those who either:
A: Don’t agree with destruction of property as a tactic, either because they view it as ill advised strategically for that situation or have a problem with it ideologically.
B: Just don’t want to risk getting in trouble with the law.
I see the merits in the black bloc as a tactic and would use it myself the strategic opportunity presented itself, but if I did I would have the courtesy to do it far enough away from peaceful protestors.
Reblogged this on genuiNEWitty.
Thanks for reblogging, genuinewitty.
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
Thank you Chris- your article helped take a lot of pressure off of me, and the pressure has been harsh…
I learned about the Black Bloc just a few days before the launch of Occupy Vancouver when someone posted this video on our Facebook page:
The video is from a debate about the “Heart Attack” incident where Black Bloc smashed the windows at the Hudson Bay company during the Vancouver Olympics. This was a disastrous event that scared away the majority of the anti-Olympic movement- driving the middle class home and killing the movement.
Most of use were horrified with this video- particularly the use of race & gender to shut-down Derrick O’Keefe’s opinon. This is a pattern that continued once the video was posted. It went so far that a woman of Asian descent who disagreed was told to stop talking because she was a “privileged male”. (On the Internet nobody knows you’re a dog!)
Many of us have faced an enormous amount of abuse for talking out on this issue. Personally, there has been a letter published against me on the Internet slandering me and making accusations about my being hateful and a stalker. Even when I left Vancouver, and moved to Cortes Island, a letter was sent to the resident of the island saying I was dangerous and mentally ill. (I’m a perfectly healthy pacifist)
All of the people who know me can see through these attacks- but, they have made it particularly difficult for me at times when meeting new people who have found this information. Basically, the attacks on me have had a giant impact on my life…
So, when you published this article, it was like watching rays of sunlight beginning to poke through the clouds. Your article has helped me overcome the abuse and slander- people who don’t know me personally are beginning to come back and apologize for accepting what was said about me.
I’ve always enjoyed your work. The first direct action I led at Occupy Vancouver was a (polite and nonviolent) occupation Kevin O’Leary’s book signing back in October- we all brought Chris Hedges books for him to sign.
But, now, you are truly my hero Chris. Thanks, your writing has had a deep personal impact on my life.
Could I ask for your permission to re-publish this article on my blog?
Thank you for sharing your personal experience, genuinewitty.
Since you are using WordPress, all you have to do is click the Reblog button on the top of the page. Chris doesn’t respond to comments here as his work is republished on many different sites.
Thanks, and thanks for the “like” on my article! I thought I should share, Derrick O’Keefe is a respected activist and writer who works in a similar genre to Chris Hedges. Thought I’d share a link about him for those who may be interested:
http://rabble.ca/taxonomy/term/2646
Thanks for sharing the link, genuinewitty.
[...] The Cancer of Occupy by Chris Hedges [...]
I ran into the guys pushing black bloc last week at Washington square park when OWS was there camped. I could see it as nothing more than instigation at its finest, regardless of the speakers true intent. Black bloc needs to be confronted and exposed now, and distanced from OWS now!! Chris Hedges is right.
Good, as far as it goes. Opposition to organization is however generalized within the movement, and marginalizing it. There’s a lot of monolithic thinking getting in the way of organizing. To name just one, the fear of being co-opted. I’m of the opinion that Occupy is in the right place at the right time, and has everything it needs to co-opt existing structures through which to effect the change its participants want, but will not accomplish until its participants become members of an organized movement.
Applause for Hedges commitment to nonviolence.I’ve tried to show how nonviolence can be even more powerful that it currently is practiced by Americans. I went to court with 18 other in October for a nonviolent protest arrest at the White House last March where Chris was arrested, too. All but 4 of those other 18 refused to even discuss with me how nonviolence could be more powerful. I seem to be the only person in the US who advocates pleading guilty and suffering in jail to touch the heart of the adversary. This was Gandhi’s approach. My efforts to get Chris to join the discussion fell on deaf ears.Please visit my facebook page ” Gandhian Resistance”
Excellent, David. Non-violence is the only way to go. Cheers!
David , right on ! the reason why power structures hate non violence is that they know how effective it really can be . IT IS PRAGMATIC TO BE NON VIOLENT ! even if you don’t believe in non violent resistance.