glossary examples from occupy

 

 

Nonviolence seen in the Occupy movement,

from concepts in Metta’s glossary

 

 

 

“Nagler’s law”

Nagler’s law is quite simple:

 

NV + V = V. (Nonviolence plus violence equals violence)

 

A small amount of violence can subvert the nonviolent character of a movement or demonstration, especially if, as is commonly the case, the violence is focused on in the media. An example of this was during the Occupy Oakland general strike held on November 2^nd with an astonishing, peaceful turnout. Several protesters left with tears of joy after its success, but the beauty displayed that day was replaced by a violent confrontation against the police in the early morning. After a day of an estimated 100,000 person nonviolent march, protesters started fires, swarmed vacant buildings and used homemade bomb launchers to fire M80’s at police. This incident carried about by a few protesters separate from the Occupy demonstration ruined the all day effort to remain nonviolent.

 

 

 Nonviolent Moment

A nonviolent campaign can build up to an open confrontation where its nonviolence is pitted against the violence of an oppressor.  Nonviolent actors actually welcome and sometimes plan for such a confrontation, confident that nonviolence will always prevail in the long run.

 

In Occupy demonstrations, UC, Berkeley students were beaten by police and UC Davis demonstrators were needlessly pepper-sprayed.  These cases actually served to point up the increasing militarization of the country, and raised the standing of the students, who remained nonviolent throughout the attacks.

 

A few articles below explain the effects a nonviolent moment can have:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/uc-davis-pepper-spray-incident-reveals-weakness-up-top-20111122

http://blogs.berkeley.edu/2011/11/25/what-is-nonviolence/

 

Person Power

 

In contrast to “people power,” where the emphasis is on numbers, we can use this term to describe the core energy at the heart of a movement, which is the nonviolent commitment of the individuals (or individual) within it.  A million people marching in streets will not confer nonviolent power if they lack discipline and are harboring violence.  The Occupy movement, by teaching nonviolence and allowing individuals to adopt its methods, has provided good examples of person power.

Integrative Power

 

In order to offset the common misconception that nonviolence is a ‘non-something,’ peace theorist Kenneth Boulding developed the model of “three faces of power:” threat power, exchange power, and integrative power that comes into play when one is authentic and truthful, having the long-term effect of bringing parties together.  When a large group of students at Davis were confronted by a small but threatening group of police the students offered them a “moment of peace” to peacefully withdraw, which they did.

 

Trusteeship 

 

Trusteeship was proffered by Gandhi as an alternative to outright ownership.  Not only donations of money but cooking utensils, “the peoples library,” and technological equipment are good examples of things held in trust and used for the common good on the camping sites.  Importantly, talents and capacities that occupiers make freely available to the movement also exemplify trusteeship.

 

In Zuccotti Park a young woman called “ketchup” was given a laptop for her work.  Some occupiers complained, but she explained that the computer was not hers but rather a tool for her use on the site.

 

Boulding’s First Law

 

Because of the prevailing paradigm, most people find it difficult to believe that nonviolent events have happened even if they’ve seen them at first hand.  Out of frustration with this obtuseness Kenneth Boulding coined this law: “If something has happened, it’s possible.”  Many did not believe that a large number of Americans could gather in protest as they have done, turning their back on consumerism to such a degree and remaining largely nonviolent in the face of serious provocation ­­– and some may not believe it yet.   But it is here (and as occupiers often say, is not going away).

 

“Work” vs. Work

 

Principled nonviolence will always have a beneficial effect on its surroundings even if it does not “work” in the sense, get what it wants in the short run.  It may seem that the Occupy movement did not “work” in the sense that it failed to change financial structures and even lost physical ground on most of the sites they tried in vain to occupy, but it has drawn badly needed attention to a serious wrong and shown a path to change.  It has also shown, of course, that people can organize spontaneously and maintain nonviolent witness to get things done.

 

 

 

Return to OccupyNonviolence