The Elephant in the Tent for the Occupy Movement.

As the Occupy movement gathers steam, there's been one side that I have been reluctant to cover. Reluctant because of the concern that it might break solidarity and that it might be misconstrued. It is, as i see it, the elephant in the roomtent for the Occupy movement, and it's something we're going to have to at least acknowledge. If we don't, we stand the risk of crumbling from within.

That elephant stems from the fact that we don't know many within our movement. While we can't be guided by fear and distrust, we must acknowledge that there will be elements among us that are just as corrupt, just as suspect in their motives, and just as greedy as the people we are protesting. It has long been my observation that often socialist activists are quite confident that they will be part of the power structure in the socialist government they are trying to create. And I have little doubt there are similar motives to subscribers of other "isms", which is precisely why we cannot allow that talk to coopt the movement. It's not that their positions are necessarily wrong, just that their own hearts can be coopted, and they have a tendency to carry that unknowingly into the discussion.

Those who accuse us of being socialists do so because they see socialist signs in the pictures and videos released of the protest. Those who accuse us of being violent to so because they have trusted the word of those who say we were acting violently, even absent video proof (to my knowledge, there has not been credible video evidence of widespread violence, although I will acknowledge there may be a few acting on their own who have participated in violence). Similarly, other criticisms stem from people seeing what they want to see an being unwilling to discard evidence to the contrary.

So, there's the crux of the problem, how do we combat it? I have personally been trying to encourage opponents to dialog, to discuss, to understand our points of commonality and points of disagreement. I have found, for instance, that when Citizens United is explained/discussed, we get a strong majority who agree with that one point. Corporate greed is a little more divisive, but I'd still say it's a strong selling point.

We must not confuse solidarity with subservience. Trading one master for another just makes us continue to be slaves, albeit with fancier chains. We are growing to the point where legitimate criticisms need to be discussed, or they will become the very fissures that ensure our on defeat. I still support the Occupy movement 100%, but that does not mean I support the individual actions undertaken by all of its members, even if those members happen to be organizers.