In theUnited Statesthe default position of protestors in the Occupy Wall Street movement has been one of non-violence. This position is not viable and is the micro-chip of implosion for the movement. Non-violence is less about actual violence on the streets on this particular day or protest, and more about potential and political impotence. If knowledge and power are viewed as co-foundational tenets of revolutionary potential, then a brief excursus into each is necessary in the current horizon of political action.
Knowledge and power have been terms co-opted from their inception into language. The relationship between knowledge and power is filtered through the process of articulation. Articulation toward knowledge as the kernel of power is the first division between the political subject and himself. This division can be understood as the original contradiction of the political body, individual and social.
This contradiction is the foundation of the political self that is inescapable. Violence and intersection with the idea of violence is an idea that plagues the burgeoning American Left. As I write this, there are thousands of occupiers in lowerManhattanflooding the streets. Several sitters occupy the intersection ofNassauand Pine, and there are reports of police brutality, even before the tentative opening bell. Hegemonic authority rests in the police not because of their legitimacy, but in their potential in violence.
The police, in New York as much as anywhere else in theUnited States, are part of a fragmented body of violent potential. The police, and hence authoritative power, cannot be adequately matched or have its power wrested from it until the political body of dissent comes to grips with the nature and knowledge of violence.
“Reclaiming democracy” and the anti-foundational myth of the American people:
It is five minutes past nine and the Occupy Wall Street protestors have kept Wall Street from opening. This movement is indicative of the supreme skill and ability of the movement to come into symbolic contact with economic power. As traders are turned away from the floor and police mount an assemblage of barricades along the old narrow streets, it is unclear who is being held away from what. In a protest that seems to have all of the ear-markings of a nascent riot, who authorized the caveat of “peaceful protest”? As it turned out, the opening bell still rung and trading continued. Pedestrian traffic closed, and we have to ask ourselves, what does it mean to be political in a world where direct action is contingent on the pacifism of power?
The pacifism of power is a concept of underestimation on the part of the hegemon (the “1%” as the Occupy movement has popularized, but I will say the actants of capital and its derivative forces i.e. the police). On the live feed there are comments on the sidebar saying “come on protestors, look at people in other countries: start throwing rocks already.” In response there was comment that said “we don’t want a riot.”
This is the question of the movement: why not talk about violence, why not make the 99% the 92%, why are we so resistant to rioting? In the recent eviction of ZucottiParkon November 15th, the mayor and the police demonstrated their body was couched in overt control over the occupation. It is difficult to conceive how we might determine ourselves as directly confronting the bodies of power when we are determined by police barricades and court rulings. Only after the movement comes to grips with the nature and importance of mobilization can it comprehend the logic of the “other side.” In short, dancing has gone on long enough; distinctions must be made between friends and enemies. We’re either within the bounds of current American power structure or we reject them. If we reject them then we are not subject to its ruling, and we radically reclaim the narrative of the American people for the people rather than submitting to a retroactively mythical conception of it.
Throwing guns over our shoulders is not at all what violence means in this context. Coming to grips with American force means coming to grips with the actual state of affairs instead of tossing around a lot of pre-determined rhetoric about “the people” and “our rights”. If we want to see our rights then we must realize that they have been systematically revised and condensed as political development has
In spite of ourselves, we are still American. As we sing the National Anthem in the streets of lowerManhattan, an electronic current flows before us in a rush that we the people cannot catch up with in time. We tell ourselves and each other that we are making history, and what an American thing to do. To take an historical example: during the constitution of the American political body in the 1760’s through unanimous consent to claim independence, the American people were conceived as manifest in sprite of concrete concerns. The American people were “actually” American even thgouh they were externally British citizens… it was the purported duty and right to claim oneself as an American by defying the external powers. In this way, the Occupy Wall Street protestors have tapped into a legacy of pre-figurative determination in much the same way although only in symbolic measures thus far.
As noon approaches, there is an increasing tension between advocates for riot and those who wish to remain peaceful. AsZucottiParkis opened, protestors have removed barricades and faced violent reactions from the police who have reportedly lunged and hit members of the press. Brookfield Security has reportedly left the vicinity, and about half of the people are chanting “No riot here, take off your riot gear,” although the police are not in fact wearing riot gear, only helmets.ZucottiParkis closed off on the north side and they continue to be torn down. What will the fate of a non-violent protest be? How can we look at the 99% the same? There are people who will “riot” and there are people who will not.
Ignorance of violent submission
The distinction between rioting and protesting is a liberal notion, and the use of the word liberal is not meant to be pejorative but perhaps in the future we will come to think of “peaceful protests” as a foolish concept and an impossible position. On the fliers for #N17 posted last night the tagline said “Resist austerity. Rebuild our economy. Reclaim democracy.” This slogan was taken down in lieu of “Resist Austerity. Reclaim the Economy. Recreate our Democracy.” Perhaps we are learning that to peacefully demonstrate does not require a terminal obedience to an authority who is not so determined to keep things bruise-free.
Perhaps we won’t always submit ourselves to slavery in the name of freedom dripping from the faucet.
