OCCUPYLONGBEACH: IN IT FOR THE LONG HAUL–THAT IS, UNTIL THE 10 PM CURFEW
By Dave Wielenga
OccupyLongBeach deployed its first official occupation Saturday at Lincoln Park, where approximately 300 people convened, marched, demonstrated and dispersed without any of the conflict that seemed to have been foreshadowed in prickly press releases from the social-justice movement and the Long Beach Police Department.
OccupyLongBeach is the local spinoff of a national movement that began with OccupyWall Street—itself a spinoff of the so-called Arab Spring demonstrations that ultimately toppled Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak. The movement emerged in Long Beach on Sunday, Oct. 2, with a small planning meeting at Lincoln Park.
On Tuesday, Oct. 4, one of its members, Tammara Phillips, addressed the Long Beach City Council, and received a positive response from council members Suja Lowenthal, Robert Garcia, Gerrie Schipske and Patrick O’Donnell.
On Thursday, Oct. 6, Phillips and Wynton Johnson were interviewed on Greater Long Beach Radio; the show can be accessed from the archives of Cal State Long Beach online station KBEACH.org through this link.
Saturday’s potential flash point was the Long Beach ordinance that declares Lincoln Park officially closed at 10 p.m., after which it is illegal for anyone to be in the small patch of downtown open space. A long rally that OccupyLongBeach had scheduled to begin at 9 p.m. appeared destined to last beyond the 10 p.m. deadline. And organizers seemed determined to stand their ground.
Or so read Friday’s press release from OccupyLongBeach:
“Along with its 11 a.m. rally and noon march, Occupy Long Beach will be holding a second rally at Lincoln Park on Saturday, Oct. 15 at 9 pm. The event will be a peaceful assembly, which includes guest speakers, a statement of intent and an open mic.
Occupy Long Beach is asking for support from the surrounding community. As the park closes at 10 p.m. the group faces the possibility of citations and/or arrests.
A group member identifying himself as Troy Davis stated, “We will assemble and march in peace, and in solidarity with the National day of Action, but we will be violating a city ordinance that says we can’t be in the park after 10 p.m.” He added, “We need our friends and neighbors to support us. You can stand legally on the sidewalk and lend your support to the peaceful Occupiers of Long Beach.”
The group met with the city on Thursday to discuss their plans and have another meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. They hope that a peaceful resolution can be worked out between the local movement and the City Council that will allow for a continued occupation of Lincoln Park, which is located on Pacific Ave. between 1st and Broadway.”
It’s isn’t clear what agreement was reached—or how it was hammered out—but there was no conflict. In fact, by the time the long day had journeyed into night, the once-snippy press releases were cooing back and forth like a couple of kids going steady.
Check out the love in this dispatch from the LBPD:
Members of the community gathered today as the group “Occupy Long Beach” to demonstrate in a peaceful and orderly fashion.
While the mission of the Long Beach Police Department is to protect life and property, maintain order and ensure public safety, the police department also supports the right of every person to assemble and demonstrate in a lawful manner, which was the case in today’s event. Police and city officials had met with organizers of the event and they were informed of the City’s laws and expectations for a peaceful demonstration.
Approximately 250 to 300 people gathered today at Lincoln Park in downtown Long Beach to protest. Shortly after 12:00 pm., the group marched north on Pacific Avenue to 4th Street, and then proceeded to Pine Avenue where they continued southbound to Ocean Boulevard then retruned to Lincoln Park. After marching, the group remained at the park chanting, protesting and expressing concerns.
Later at night, a smaller group formed at the park and set up tents in an apparent attempt to camp out at the park, however, the tents were removed without confrontation upon request, as this violates Long Beach City Ordinance.
The group remained on the sidewalk to carry out their demonstration throughout the night while being monitored by police.
Today’s demonstration was a display of mutual respect between police and the demonstrating community. Demonstrators were able to exercise their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech while obeying all applicable laws. As a result of this peaceful protest, no arrests were made or citations issued.
“Today’s demonstration was a display of mutual respect between police and the demonstrating community. Demonstrators were able to exercise their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech while obeying all applicable laws. As a result of this peaceful protest, no arrests were made or citations issued.”
46 Comments
Demonstrators were able to exercise their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech while obeying all applicable laws
for now.
These occupy Long Beach people are a bunch of wimps. Nobody in New York asked permission from the police. That’s the whole point. To stay and speak – with or without the permission of the powers that be. Asking “Mother may I” of the petty bureaucrats running Long Beach is absurd. You either have the guts to stay and face the consequences or you don’t. Piss or get off the pot.
I think the OLB folks will do their cause far more harm than good by crossing the line into unlawful behavior.
I think they should distance themselves from some of the others around the nation and world who are protesting under the Occupy banner. Some of those others are rioting. Some are looting. Some are spitting on uniformed members of our armed forces and calling those who are present to keep the peace “pigs” and worse.
If they cross some or any of those lines -or some others- I think they will lose a good deal of the respect they currently enjoy within our community. Once they lose that, nothing they say afterward will matter very much.
If their messages are valid and their causes are just (and I think some of them are), they need not resort to lawlessness to convince others that such may be the case.
Evidence of looting and rioting in the US occupy movement? Now please.
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day –- Anarchy, Heresy & Unconventional Thought (Part One)
”Anarchism is founded on the observation that since few men are wise enough to rule themselves, even fewer are wise enough to rule others.” — Edward Abbey
“It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.” — Samuel Adams
“Society has good reason to fear the Radical. Every shaking advance of mankind toward equality and justice has come from the Radical. He hits, he hurts, he is dangerous. Conservative interests know that while Liberals are most adept at breaking their own necks with their tongues, Radicals are most adept at breaking the necks of Conservatives.” — Saul Alinsky
“Our wretched species is so made that those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.” — Voltaire
“Loyalty to petrified opinions never yet broke a chain or freed a human soul in this world – and never will.” — Mark Twain
“We think too small, like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view.” –- Mao Tse-Tung
“If you don’t control your mind, someone else will.” — John Allston
(Source: mentalanarchy.com)
“I think they should distance themselves from some of the others around the nation and world who are protesting under the Occupy banner. Some of those others are rioting. Some are looting. Some are spitting on uniformed members of our armed forces and calling those who are present to keep the peace “pigs” and worse”
former LBPD and DHS intelligence analyst greet spreading lies and RW propaganda about OWS? is anyone surprised? how about you back up your “claims” greet. where in the US has there been looting related to an OWS gathering? where has there been rioting? what reputable news source is reporting military being spit on? when the police act like pigs (nypd for instance) they deserve to be called pigs. sorry if that offends your delicate sensibilities.
@ Jeanine: I am not aware of any rioting or looting in the US that is related to the Occupy movement. I was referring to the rioting and looting that is occuring elsewhere. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2097038,00.html?iid=sl-main-mostpop1?iid=sl-main-mostpop1
howardx: Anonymously insulting as always, I see. Get back to me after you’ve matured a little, wont you?
so you have no proof for your claims of OWS protesters spitting on military members?
who makes a claim like that without proof?
liars do.
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day –- Anarchy, Heresy & Unconventional Thought (Part Two)
“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” — Aristotle
“In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant.” — Charles de Gaulle
“The truth alone has never set anyone free. It is only DOUBT which will bring about mental emancipation. Without the wonderful element of doubt, the doorway through which truth passes would be tightly shut, impervious to the strenuous poundings of a thousand Lucifer’s.” — Anton Szandor LaVey
“Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want rain without thunder and lightning.” — Frederick Douglass
“Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you’re a man, you take it.” — Malcolm X
“Democracy consists of choosing your dictators, after they’ve told you what you think it is you want to hear.” — Alan Coren
“The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don’t have any.” — Alice Walker
(Source: mentalanarchy.com)
Sometimes the main point of a protest is to dramatize the suppression that arises to greet it.
Sometimes the suppression that arises comes from within. What takes the stage then in these demonstrations is uncertainty.
This is a deep-seated problem, with decades of smiling hostility to identify and overcome. And consciousness is arising.
Eventually, uncertainty will leave the stage to more powerful actors.
Gandhi: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”
howardx, I would be only to happy to engage with you in a mature and courteous discussion of the issues, but just like your pals Ruehle and wrongbeach, you seem incapable of such a discussion. Thus, you have no legitimate standing from which to demand anything from me. Nor will anything you care to demand of me be forthcoming. Does that bother you? There is a simple solution…stop behaving like a petulant and disrespectful child.
If you cannot do so, you can easily find the proof of my assertions on your own. I suggest that you do so if, of course, you are really interested in the truth. Your conduct seems to argue against that, however.
im not bothered at all, i knew you were lying. everyone reading can see that you have ignored my question.
im not here to have any sort of meaningful discussion with you greet.
a great man once said
“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also, it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.”
you might reflect on how many times this tactic has worked on you.
i did find this video of military members being spit on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xwoh6g05hj4
howardx, your comments can be described less as ridicule and more as ridiculous. Either way, Charles Simmons once said, “ridicule is the last argument of fools.”
Had he read most of your comments, as well as those of your buddies Ruehle and wrongbeach, however, he might have said that ridicule is the first, last, and only argument of fools.
You have said that you are not here to have any sort of meaning full discussion with me. You might have been more accurate to have omitted the qualifier and simply said that you are not here to have any sort of meaningful discussion.
I did not ignore your question. I simply declined to provide the answer you so insultingly presumed to demand. If you desire answers from me, ask in a civil tone as any other mature adult might do. Otherwise, find your answers for yourself. If, in this case, you cannot do so, it will only be because you truly do not desire to do so.
Your rhetorical tactics do not infuriate me, howardx. I simply find them counter-productive and really rather sad.
ok got it, you have no proof to back up your claims about the OWS so you are attempting to cloud the issue with a personal attack. your usual mo. of course my deep lack of respect for you negates any attack you might attempt, i simply do not care what a kapo like you thinks about me.
You assume I have no proof to back my claim. You assume a very great deal about a lot of things and, as in this case, quite incorrectly.
If you feel insulted when someone suggests that you conduct yourself in a more mature and courteous manner, then I suppose you should ask yourself why that might be.
Unlike your constant ridiculing commentary, it is not my intent to attack you but, rather, to encourage you to behave as any courteous and respectful adult might behave when engaging in discussion and debate. You seem to take issue with that encouragement. So be it.
it would be so easy just to post a link, yet you cant seem to bring yourself to do that. why is that? readers please draw your own conclusions.
It would be so easy to conduct yourself in a mature, courteous, and respectful manner, yet you can not seem to bring yourself to do that. Why is that?
because you dont deserve maturity, courtesy or respect. why else?
for someone who accuses others of being ” petulant and disrespectful child.”
you sure do spend a lot of time playing “i know you are but what am i”
Isn’t it interesting that you -and others who deal with others as you do- feel your petty and juvenile accusations are completely valid and appropriate, yet you consider the truly valid and appropriate criticisms others lodge against you to be childish rhetorical games. How very convenient for you.
I suppose we could go back and forth like this forever, howardx, but in truth your childishness and pettiness is pretty boring.
As I said before, I would be only to happy to engage with you in a mature and courteous discussion of the issues, but just like your pals Ruehle and wrongbeach, you seem incapable of such a discussion. Thus, you have no legitimate standing from which to demand anything from me. Nor will anything you care to demand of me be forthcoming. Does that bother you? There is a simple solution…stop behaving like a petulant and disrespectful child.
Citizen Journalist Quotes of the Day –- Anarchy, Heresy & Unconventional Thought (Part Three)
“You know, a long time ago being crazy meant something. Nowadays everybody’s crazy.” — Charles Manson
“People do not consciously and rationally choose the form of their society. Societies develop through processes of social evolution that are not under rational human control.” — Theodore Kaczynski
“Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them.” — Frederick Douglass
“When you see me smash somebody’s skull, you enjoy it.” — Mike Tyson
“Every normal man must be tempted at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.” — H. L. Mencken
“Christ died for our sins. Dare we make his martyrdom meaningless by not committing them?” — Jules Feiffer
“You can get more with a kind word and a gun than you can with a kind word alone.” — Al Capone
(Source: mentalanarchy.com)
so still no link, 24 hours later.
As I said before, I would be only to happy to engage with you in a mature and courteous discussion of the issues, but just like your pals Ruehle and wrongbeach, you seem incapable of such a discussion. Thus, you have no legitimate standing from which to demand anything from me. Nor will anything you care to demand of me be forthcoming. Does that bother you? There is a simple solution…stop behaving like a petulant and disrespectful child.
That’ll be the last time I try to explain to you the benefits of keeping a civil tongue in your keyboard, howardx. Time to man up and try to behave like an adult. You are a man aren’t you? It’s impossible to know for certain, hiding behind your anonymity the way that you do.
The Occupy movement is not nearly so spontaneous or grassroots as some would have us believe:
http://avery.morrow.name/blog/2011/10/the-rise-and-fall-of-occupy-wall-street-part-1-planning-a-spontaneous-movement/
does that mean youre not going to post a link?
“You are a man aren’t you? It’s impossible to know for certain, hiding behind your anonymity the way that you do.”
actually im not, im a lab rat that was trained by researchers at stanford university to argue with conservatives on message boards, the theory being conservatives and rodents share so many of the same traits ie leaving a trail of urine behind them, the ability to swallow just about anything no matter how rotten and incredibly tiny brains that it should be a breeze to teach a rat to best conservatives in verbal combat. and so it was.
Citizen Journalist Quote of the Day — Sweet & Simple
13. “So it goes.” — Kurt Vonnegut
(Source: 15 Things Kurt Vonnegut Said Better Than Anyone Else Ever Has or Will — avclub.com)
How do we organize a society to provide maximum benefit to the most people?
Changes in the past 30 years of GINI coefficients and other econometric measures clearly show an increasing measure of American productivity going to an increasingly smaller proportion of American citizens. Our society, as presently organized, is providing maximum benefit to fewer and fewer people. The rich are getting richer, the rest of us are getting poorer. This is especially true for the young adults among us, newly plunging into an adult world that is much poorer in opportunity than was the world their parents prospered in.
When the actions of Congress and the White House can be more accurately predicted by surveying corporate executives instead of surveying American citizens (glaring, signal example—the refusal by Obama to even consider single-payer health care for this country, when the overwhelming majority of Americans favored it), representative democracy will not long survive.
It’s not an issue of envy. It’s primarily an issue of understanding that Plutocracy doesn’t give a rat’s behind about American democracy, and that your effectiveness as an American citizen to effect change in our society is being methodically reduced on a daily, drip-by-slow-drip basis.
If you don’t want a society organized to provide maximum benefit to the most people, become an apologist for the status quo, because that mission is all but accomplished.
John, what conditions in your judgement would justify non-violent civil disobedience? When would *you* participate in it?
-Pan
Howdy Pan!
I think there are many conditions which could (and have) justified civil disobedience. The conditions that were rampant during the pre-revolutionary war period…those prevalent during the civil rights movement.
I think the current trend toward socialism in our local, state, and national governments could argue loudly for a healthy dose of civil disobedience. i would certainly participate for that reason!
Thanks, John.
Would you say that this state of authority, in itself, is worthy of active opposition?
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/10/financial-giants-put-new-york-city-cops-on-their-payroll/
There are many local jurisdictions around the country (none in California) that allow their police officers to work off-duty but in their police uniform as paid security personnel. I strongly disagree with these policies.The potential for abuse is self-evident and should be avoided at all costs.
This places the police authority in the hands of whomever may be willing to pay extra for it and this is neither the spirit nor the letter of what municipal law enforcment is supposed to be.
Because police authority is derived from the people, sworn police officers should always and only represent the people, as they are, in turn, represented by duly elected governmental authority (such as a City Council), not whatever private special interest happens to seek to hire them.
I know that LBPD has strong policies and strict guidelines about side-jobs its police officers may seek (referred to as “collateral employment”.) LBPD officers can, for example, work as private security officers, but they are not allowed to wear any insignia related to LBPD or use any equipment issued by LBPD when they do so. They must also be state-licensed for *that* profession and are not simply allowed to work in the field solely under the auspices of their state-issued law enforcement credentials.
To your specific question, the short answer is, I do not know. The article you have linked offers little if anything in the way of definitive proof that the private security personnel in question were representing their city or their police force to any degree or in any manner.
If they were, then that practice should cease immediately because the clear conflict of interest and potential for abuse is just far too great.
Should such a “state of authority” be opposed? Sure. If it can be proven that these were off-duty cops, enforcing laws as on-duty cops but in deference to a private employer, then certainly this practice should be opposed as illegitimate.
The question, then, becomes, “how should such a state of authority be properly opposed?”
Should a protestor actively and physically resist such a state of authority? I would say this depends upon the manner in which that state of authority is being exercised. As mentioned, some police officers in California choose to work off-duty as private security personnel. When they do so in full compliance with the laws, rules, and restrictions that apply to the private security profession, then their actions are legitimate and should not be resisted.
If, however, as *could* be the case in NYC, these officers are attempting to exercise their authority as police officers, just wearing a different shirt and representing their *private* employer, then I would say this is an illegitimate exercise of their police authority and it should be both passively and, if necessary, actively resisted.
Such a resisting protestor will no doubt eventually be arrested. And he or she will then have access to a court of law to plead his or her case of whether the security personnel were exercising legitimate and lawful authority or not.
An arrest deemed unlawful is a very serious matter, whether the arrest is made by a police officer or a private citizen. Any off-duty police officer who is working under the color of hir or her on-duty authority and who makes an unlawful arrest can lose his or her job, treasure, and even his or her own freedom.
What people can or can’t do with what they consider their own private property is a social construct that is debated and decided on every day in legislative bodies throughout or country. It’s called legislation.
What people can or can’t do with what they consider their own private property is a social construct that is debated and decided on every day in courtrooms throughout the country. It’s called civil litigation.
Changing our minds as a society about what people can do with what they consider to be their private property is not socialism — it’s American democracy. That is the genius contained in our founding documents. That’s true regardless of what party holds power.
This “socialism” bunk is so tiresome. Anyone who thinks Obama is a socialist has extreme selective attention to what he has done while in office and is willfully ignoring his servile obeisance to the extremely rich.
John, thanks for addressing the question in depth. Useful and interesting.
Are police officers required to respond to reasonable questions by citizens – given that they are at a relative state of rest, not in the middle of performing some aggressive enforcement function?
That is, if one were to walk up to a “white shirt” and ask him directly if he was currently on the clock as a security officer of a private client – or if he were operating solely as a command level NYPD officer on the public’s dime – would he be required to respond truthfully to the question, do you think?
US Blues
Do you think John sincerely believes there is a socialist threat, versus, say, that he might be a paid flack for some think tank or other ideological cultural agent?
-Pan
socialism is everywhere!
“Amid complaints about high taxes and calls for a smaller government, Americans paid their lowest level of taxes last year since Harry Truman’s presidency, a USA TODAY analysis of federal data found.”
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2010-05-10-taxes_N.htm
“In a bid to remake the enforcement of federal immigration laws, the Obama administration is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants and auditing hundreds of businesses that blithely hire undocumented workers.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration’s 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush’s final year in office.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/25/AR2010072501790.html
and so, by moderating comments but not actually moderating comments you have killed all conversation here.
These people are not zombies at OLB, Lincoln Park 24/7, but an interesting and organized mix of people motivated for a better future. Also, I heard they may go before the City Council and petition to sleep in the park overnight, which would help the effort.
Pan: In my view, police officers who are employed part time as private security officers are not considered police officers in the eyes of the court (or the legislature) when actively engaged in their part time employment.
I think police officers should be responsive to direct questions from the public whenever it is safe for them to do so but neither need they be as forthcoming with facts during active criminal investigations as some seem to expect that they should be.
Security officers employed by private companies are private citizens and, as such, should not be expected or compelled to be answerable to the general public except in the context of abiding by all laws, rules and regulations that apply to that profession.
Pan,
I’m operating with the assumption that John watches a lot of Fox and repeats the socialism threat trope without actually looking at how Obama conducts business and what is actually gettting done in DC during his watch.
I have older relatives who watch Fox uncritically and they sound a lot like John when he brings this up, but they are out to sea as soon as you start talking about what’s actually going down regarding Congress and the White House. And the Supreme Court. Fox gives them no objective context.
In regards to John being paid by DHS or some law enforcement think tank to promulgate the views he does or monitor discussion here, it’s an open question to me. I read his comments with the assumption that he is paid to make them, given previous discussions, though I don’t have proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Thank goodness life is not a courtroom, or we’d never get anything done. I don’t tend to leap for conclusions when confusing evidence is presented to me. But the views he presents are probably a good fit for him.
I have noticed that lately he seems to be more on point, less digressive and boilerplate, and more stimulating — it’s as if someone at a government agency is editing him properly, or that he finally took to heart the injunction that less is often more.
(gosh this is a long post . . .)
Fox, MSNBC – it’s all mostly status quo.
The status quo content of Fox is generated from its original design (led by Roger Ailes) to be the propaganda arm of a reactionary right political movement now in full ascendancy.
The status quo orientation of MSNBC is generated from its marketing decision to be the opposition to Fox. At present, it’s riding Fox’s coattails. It’s not really a progressive voice, it just plays one on TV.
MSNBC had much to do with getting OSW wider media attention, and that can’t be minimized. But their feverish carpentering to make Democrats of all stripes into misguided or ineffective FDR types is ludicrous. You can’t look at the career of Chuck Schumer (D-Wall Street) and think for a second he’d align himself with “socialists.”
The OSW effort is helping to show people that USA politics has been rapidly converging to a one-party system, maintained in place by the shaddow-playacting of Democrat vs. Republican, when the real competition for power is between the 1 percent and the 99.
or OWS . . . (dyslexia is grand)
2010 US workforce stats:
Total population: 308m
Total workers: 150m
Full time: 112m, (local, state, federal – 18m; private sector – 93m)
Ave salary total workers, (150m): $26,350
Ave salary gov’t federal workers, (2.15m): $85,000
Ave salary gov’t state/local workers, (15.7m): $50,000?
Total Social Security recipients: 53m
Summary: 93m full time private sector workers averaging less than 26k, (when you take out 18m higher paid gov’t workers), supporting 53m Social Security recipients, 18m gov’t workers and 158m non working people.
Houston …
Sorry, what I mean by average salary of $26,350 for the 150m workers is 75m making more and 75m less. Also, I left out the 38m part time workers, so when you balance them with the 18m robust paid gov’t workers, the average is still around $26,350.
What this means is either or political system changes or “our” economic one does … next.