ANDREW HOLT WILLIAMS

As a resident of the DC area and a fellow YDSer, I thought I’d take the time to share a few entries about our nation’s capitol’s response to “Occupy Wall Street.” It’s still at about the same place New York was at two weeks ago, but it at least has some early “spunk,” if nothing else.

As I’ve stated to others previously, I’m still not totally certain of what all of this “Occupy Wall Street” stuff is going to lead to. Sure, I’m sympathetic. Sure, I support the aims of the movement in the broader sense (since it’s diversity makes it impossible to argue for or against point by point). But where is it going? At first I just saw it as a movement devised by the Underpants Gnomes from South Park:
1. Occupy Wall Street
2. …
3. Social Justice!
I admit that I can be a pessimistic person (though can you be a radical and really be that pessimistic?) when it comes to new movements, and the lack of a direction made me cautious. See the article from Ryan Briles and Amber Frost, it sums up a lot of my early feelings on this.

Around the time that this movement began in New York, there were rumblings about a DC equivalent. It only makes sense, for the corporate criminals have no power but for the utter failure of our political and justice system. Once the new “Occupy DC/K Street” (the occupation is happening at the corner of 14th and K) had begun last weekend, I had to make my way down and see what I could see at this revolution. As you’d expect, the group was relatively small, but they had a plan. Or, at least, they were soliciting for one by borrowing from New York’s 99%ers. Thanks to the successful experiments in the General Assemblies and consensus-building activities in New York, a template for sharing and discussing thoughts was already in place. Now, those discussions seemed to range from the mundane (“We need to approve a color for the flyer”) to the extraneous (“Will we take a stance on DC Statehood?” “Can we get vegan cookies to eat?”) to the preposterous (one man had a sign he insisted on sharing reading “I AM A PIECE OF SHIT.” Uh, is that social commentary or are you just self-loathing?) at first. But it helped me realize something:

As a union member and activist, like many other DSA members, I expected more organizational discipline if the movement was going to be successful. What were a bunch of anarchist organizing techniques going to do to help us execute a plan that demanded that we engage against rather than subvert or drop out of the system? It finally occurred to me that the inclusiveness of the GA consensus model was what this movement needed. There’s no real organization driving this, so one must be formed, and it must be inclusive and involve its constituents in its fate. I think we get so used to the success of highly organized political campaigns that we forget that those campaigns are, in their most cynical sense, aimed at selling a brand; be it a person, an idea, or even a movement. But do we properly engage people by doing that? Do we lead them to realize that they are a part of that movement, not simply one worker in a union drive or a voter? The consensus model immediately makes you an active participant in your cause. Outsiders joining the Assemblies are welcomed and, while not overtly encouraged to speak, often are made to feel comfortable enough that they begin to share and participate immediately. Yesterday I and a group of about 50 to 60 people in McPherson Square listened as a former employee of Fannie Mae told of her story of watching her superiors lie about how dangerous the now infamous subprime assets would be, all in the name of keeping the money flowing. It’s going to be the growth into the lives of people who aren’t just the young adults getting screwed that’s going to be imperative to growing the movement. We need the oldsters, rednecks, housewives, and jocks, too. I don’t think we’re to that point of a mass organization quite yet.

Of course, this just gets us to part two of our plan for profiting off of underpants…or promoting social justice, rather. What does this all mean vis a vis electoral politics? We still must deal with that. A movement itself can’t regulate Wall Street or break up banks, but it can provide cover. I still have a lot of worries about how America at-large, the rest of the 99% that could care less about political movements but is still waiting on jobs, will respond to this. I’ll share more about my thoughts on the actual ideological currents I’ve encountered at the growing DC events in my next piece. Stay tuned.