How Much Violence With There Be In New York?

As I watched the protests in New York City yesterday I had to wonder how many people will be out during the Republican Convention. More of course. Many more.

This will be a crowd met by hostility, imported hostility, but hostility none the less. So that brings up the question. I am sure there will be violence. I am sure that those who go to protest the Republican's takeover of what was not so long ago a democracy will be met by violence. How bad do you think its going to be?

It is my opnion that thousands will be herded up and jailed, hundreds and hundreds will be seriously injured (night sticks and water hoses mostly) and that some will be killed. What do you think?

to take over New York City. Remember the democratic convention in Mayor Daley's Chicago? I believe it will be a not-so-instant replay of that disgraceful event.

or acts on it is stupid. This kind of action is counter-productive and plays into the hands of the Republicans.

Reminds me of the FBI plants and others in 1968.

Let's not consider protesting their violence with our own. As always in Politics 101: there are three groups, which include those who always will vote for you; those who never will; and the "undecided." The reoublicans are hoping, praying, and planning for violence, as this will tend to result in a "right-wing" reaction among the undecided. OKNancy is 100% correct -- they will have paid agents who will try to infiltrate and disrupt the democrats. Don't fall for it. Instead, we need thousands of people who, be they Christian, Jew, Muslim, or any other reliogious belief, or our "non-religious" brothers and sisters who love their family, appreciate sunny days and music, and believe in the sum total of the laws of the natural universe that I call "God", if all of us protest in a manner similar to the 12-1980 memorial service for John Lennon, or the peaceful prayer-in style protests that King believed in, then and only then will our marches win the hearts and minds of the "undecided" folks who will in fact decide this election.

but if I had expounded on it, I was going to say something like you did. An effective protest would be a "candlelight vigil" or quiet reflective style protests.

That will work to our advantage.

the disruptors who instigated the violence, who made the protesters look bad. There were several groups there, each with their own 'agenda' (I hate that word but it works). Read about Abbe Hoffman. He did a lot to promote the violence that resulted. And it tarnished and sullied those who were there to legitimately protest the war.

And then there were those who went in to deliberately sabotage the protests. Remember, this was a protest against a war, the Viet Nam war. And it was, at the time a democratic President and a Democratic Mayor. So, just think what those in power, who have a much bigger interst (and far fewer scruples) will do. Protesters and marchers need to be very careful, very careful. Because the marches in Florida during the FTAA event proves that non-violence will most certainly be met with violence from this administration.

promote the violence. I don't have to read about Abbie, I knew him pretty well. He was not interested in promoting violence, and the only source of information that would falsely imply that would be the prosecutors from the Chicago seven trial. Good lord, Abbie met repeatedly with city officials to try to negotiate a way to allow protesters to be able to stay in the park at night. To say that he promoted violence is akin to saying a rape victim asked for it.

didn't either.
He was so anti-violence that he spent part of WWII in solitary confinement for being a conscientious objector.

was NOT initiated by protestors or even police plants or provacatuers. The violence was initiated by the cops at every turn, and it is bizzarely historically illiterate to suggest otherwise. The phrase "police riot" was coined to describe what happened in 1968. I mean, there were several journalists who were assaulted by crazed Chicago cops as they were covering the events...

I think at the time most people understood a lot of this, and it made Daley look bad, not the protestors.

these myths must be constantly corrected. This was an all out brutal assault against the protesters.

convention will be met with violence. And people react violently when attacked. The only way to avoid that is through education and organization. Peaceful demonstrators who are met with violence will win their point. But, it will be extremely difficult to keep demonstrations peaceful.

embarrassed Dems either staying home or voting for the other guy.

At what point do you believe violence is not only acceptable, but necessary? Because that line does indeed exist.

Would canceling the elections be that line? Use of military force against the American people?

Where does that line exist, for you? I'm just curious.

but the Republican Convention is not one of those times. And the elections won't be cancelled. It's self-centered to think that the present times we are living in are the worst they've ever been. It is not.

the protestors and the conventioneers will not be contfronting each other directly. certainly not in big numbers.

violence would be very bad for the CITY in many ways and the police will not be on the offensive

will there be isolated pockets of conflict? probably. some will be coming for exactly that. but most of those coming will be to protest peacefully and they will be an incredibly diverse group in terms of age, etc.

military families, 9/11 families, firefighters, and thousands of just average folk. it's not a 'student' demonstration.

so thousands will be herded up and jailed, hundreds and hundreds will be seriously injured and that some will be killed

as a long time NYer, I do not see this happening. and I certainly certainly hope you are wrong.

on edit: typos and additions

NYPD will absolutely not be looking to start trouble

Why would ANY ONE think that demonstrations against the RNC in NY will be met with less violent repression than the demonstrations against the FTAA in Miami? Actually, I think that Miami was intended as much as anything else as a warning that if you try to protest a major establishment event in 2004, this is what you get.

If you'll recall, Miami was the first major use of the "paramilitary model" of crushing peaceful demonstrations. Hundreds of people were arrested. Police used rubber bullets on peaceful demonstrators, tasered teenagers (including some people that I know), subjected people to disgusting treatment in detention cells, etc., etc., etc.

Maybe the RNC will be different from Miami since the NYPD are so notoriously professional and non-violent? As I recall, the NYPD is one of the police departments in the entire country most notorious for police brutality (think plungers, think "American skin," etc.), plus they'll probably be collaborating with the Secret Service (which was sued a few months back by the ACLU for systematically working with local police departments to curtail free speech by demonstrators at Bush visits around the country) as well as the Vance security guys the Bush campaign has hired, who usually spend their time as strike-breakers busting heads at picket lines. Plus, the RNC has already been declared a "national security event," which means arbitrary detentions, pens "no free speech zones" and all the rest.

Don't get me wrong, I stronly doubt that any protestors will engage in violence, even in self-defense. But they can just do what they did after the Battle of Seattle, painting a riot by the police against a peaceful demonstration as a "violent demonstration."

I'm not discounting Abner Louima and so on--that behavior was deplorable. But I really think Mayor Bloomberg will have the ass of any officer who starts trouble, and will make this abundantly clear ahead of time. NYPD is used to handling huge crowds (New Year's, etc) and I really think they'll do a fine job for the most part.

Not to mention that last time I checked, the 30,000 odd officers are regular people, and the vast majority of people living in the city will be against the RNC.

(not from NY metropolitan area) and potential provocateurs (read "plants").

I was at yesterday's rally and march. Very peaceful and subdued despite strong feelings.

As Emeril would say, "Turn it up a notch," with regard to the Repug Convention. First of all, our town will be overrun with repugs, who don't even like us just because we're in New York. Second, * will be on our turf. Third, we New Yorkers may be able to "behave" ourselves, but we can't be entirely responsible for "visiting" protestors. We don't know what's going to happen. Unfortunately riots can be touched off in a flash. Fourth, visiting protestors may not be protestors. There has been a history of "hired guns" by the Repugs, FBI, etc. to dress up like protestors (in the tradition of "narcs") and try to get individuals to break the law in order help the police arrest them.

Chicago in 1968 wasn't organized for the sole purpose of violence and mayhem. But it left negative impressions of political dissent.

I would not want this summer to be a similar situation. The Repugs (and FOX) will only use uncontrolled and ugly media events to prove what's wrong with Kerry. I certainly don't want to help them with this endeavor.

"Chicago in 1968 wasn't organized for the sole purpose of violence and mayhem. But it left negative impressions of political dissent."

We all know that the police over-reacted, however as I sat in my PolSci class that spring, I got into several arguments with SDSers. I felt like a seer or something, because everything I told this one particular fellow came through ( he was an arrogant jerk too...complete male-chauvinist-pig). It was really hard for me to argue as well, since I was just a young girl coming into my own and feeling my way through the new feminist thought.

Anyway, to be back on point, this guy was certainly advocating violence and predicted that it would happen.

to use the demonstrations to paint the left as "radical, violent, and anti-American. The scenes of the police instigated violence at the '68 Chicago convention were used to marginalize the left, dismissing the majority of religious groups, military veterans, mom & dad groups, and many community based protest organizations. This, essentially, provided a sense of phony support to Kissinger and kin, many of whom are still involved within this administration, that led to the death of thousands of more American GI's.
We can look forward to a repeat. There have been many warnings of authorities infiltrating demonstrations so far this year. I have a great fear that we may see a horrific "event" staged for just this purpose.
It is very important that organizers on any protests and events this year inform the participants to be on the watch for "newbies" displaying an overabundance of anger and aggression.
I propose that there should be designated photographers at all events documenting these infiltrating participants for future litigation. Many of the police infiltrators are identified in this way and it may be necessary to have this "evidence" for future litigation.
When we win, and we will win, we need to bring all the parties who would have usurped our rights to trial and justice!

The Bush gang picked NYC more on Chicago 1968 than on 9/11. It certainly is a plan. A Republican plant will bust a Starbucks window. Staged from start to finish. This scene will be played on Fox/CNN 20 times a day from August to November.

The Dems should ignore the convention completely. Think about it. If the demos are peaceful, the media will lowball the numbers and give us zero coverage. If there's "trouble" it will be covered around the clock. There's no upside here for us.
They want a riot. They will provoke a riot. They will stage a riot, if necessary. We shouldn't give it to them.

Chicago/We Can Change The World
(Graham Nash)
So your brother's bound and gagged
And they've chained him to a chair
Won't you please come to Chicago just to sing
In a land that's known as freedom
How can such a thing be fair
Won't you please come to Chicago
For the help that we can bring

We can change the world - re-arrange the world
It's dying - to get better

Politicians sit yourselfs down
There's nothing for you here
Won't you please come to Chicago for a ride
Don't ask Jack to help you
'Cause he'll turn the other ear
Won't you please come to Chicago
Or else join the other side

We can change the world - yes we can change the world
Re-arrange the world - re-arrange the world
It's dying - if you believe in justice
It's dying - and if you believe in freedom
It's dying - let a man live it's own life
It's dying - rules and regulations, who needs them
Open up the door

Somehow people must be free
I hope the day comes soon
Won't you please come to Chicago show your face
From the bottom of the ocean
To the mountains of the moon
Won't you please come to Chicago
No one else can take your place

We can change the world - yes we can change the world
Re-arrange the world - re-arrange the world
It's dying - if you believe in justice
It's dying - and if you believe in freedom
It's dying - let a man live it's own life, yeah
It's dying - rules and regulations, who needs them
Open up the door

We can change the world, we can change the world ....

Hostility between groups does not necessarily lead to violence. i think the event will be well policed, and the protestors primarily peaceful. I'm not sure why you would default to fisticuffs here, other than to tune down or discourage protestors.

- marksesNYC

Nor should you. NYC is with us, many of the cops are with us, and if you mean that there will be hostility from the conventioneers, they will be few in numbers, comparatively, and they will be shielded from the sight of motley protestors. Not to worry. NYC in August will be a model of peaceful protest.

be aware that there will be agitators promoting it. Some may encourage violence with plans before the event and there will certainly be plenty of agitators in the crowd to be sure that something gets started.

Everyone needs to be aware of this certainty and inform others who plan to attend that it is their duty to know that they will be provoked but they must stay nonviolent or all is lost.

American TV viewers hate protesters, but that doesn't mean they vote against them. Americans are so sensitive to unrest that they're prone to domestic appeasement at any cost.

Whoever is in power is ALWAYS blamed for violence--I cannot think of a recent case where someone was elected to take a hard line with protest. Nixon and Gov. Reagan talked tough about black and student "unrest" while actually caving in every way they could. (Check out growth of the welfare state under Nixon) In 1968 Nixon was seen as the peace candidate (sad but true) and by 1972 American insurrection was much reduced from 4 years earlier.

Kent State was the last nail in American support for Vietnam.

The 1968 Dem convention finished Humphrey. (He, not Nixon, was the enemy of the peace movement at the time)

IMO the LA riot was a significant factor in forcing Bush-I out of office.

August in New York is notoriously hard on tempers, and this is supposed to be the hottest August on record.

That said, I don't really know. I worry about it. I also worry about people on either side who talk a lot about violence being inevitable or suchlike; I wish more people who say such things would examine themselves and ask whether secretly they *want* there to be violence, because it's exciting, affords opportunities for martyrdom, vents aggro fantasies, etc.

The Bush campaign is spending $1.5 million on Vance International, a paramilitary contractor providing private security and also known for disrupting strikes and protests.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/3/20/185433/933
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/3/19/22135/3823

"From the strikes at Pittston Coal, to Caterpillar, to Detroit Newspapers, if there was violence on the picket line of a high-profile strike, it was most likely provoked by the maladjusted ex-soldiers, angry cop wanna-be's, and CIA rejects who wear the jack-boots of Vance's Asset Protection Team."

Any other questions?

Organizers *need* to have a plan of action in place for dealing with these sorts of thug-tactics.

Videotape *everything*.

If someone is seen trying to instigate violence, have "security teams" ready to intercept them, document their identities (photograph their faces, license plates, etc) and, if necessary, physically prevent them from disrupting the event.

Enough of the kid-gloves treatment for these thugs. We all know what to expect. It's long past time to take all appropriate steps to stop their tactics from succeeding.


MDN

I have trained as a trainer in non-violence and have offered trainings/workshops particularly in regard to protests. This thread makes me think that it would be very advantageous for people to do some non-violence training in preparation for the RNC in NYC. Even having a few folks trained in a crowd can make a difference. Going over possible scenarios with others and discussing what one might do in certain tense situations can be incredibly valuable. There are methods of de-escalation which could be very helpful. I'm thinking as the time grows closer this could be a very important discussion topic.

There is nothing like being prepared.
---------

in the mean time, here is some food for thought:


www.thekingcenter.org/prog/non/6principles.html

Derived from "Pilgrimage to Nonviolence" in Dr. King's book Stride Toward Freedom, Harper & Row, 1958.

Martin Luther King- Six Principals Of Nonviolence

Six Principles of Nonviolence

--Nonviolence is a way of life for courageous people. It is active nonviolent resistance to evil...

--Nonviolence seeks to win friendship and understanding. The end result of nonviolence is redemption and reconciliation...

--Nonviolence seeks to defeat injustice, not people. Nonviolence recognizes that evil doers are also victims.

--Nonviolence holds that suffering can educate and transform. Nonviolence willingly accepts the consequences of its acts...

--Nonviolence chooses love instead of hate. Nonviolence resists violence of the spirit as well as the body. Nonviolent love is active, not passive. Nonviolent love does not sink to the level of the hater. Love restores community and resists injustice.

--Nonviolence recognizes the fact that all life is interrelated.
Nonviolence believes that the universe is on the side of justice. The nonviolent resister has deep faith that justice will eventually win.

Six Steps for Nonviolent Social Change

--Information Gathering: In order to understand and articulate the issue, problem or injustice facing the community, you much first research, investigate and gather all vital information that will increase your understanding of the problem. Know all sides of the issue, including the other party's position.

--Education: It is essential to inform others about your issue. This minimizes misunderstandings, and gains you support and sympathy.

--Personal Commitment: Eliminate hidden motives and prepare yourself to accept suffering, if necessary, in your work for justice.

--Negotiation: Using grace, humor and intelligence, confront the other party with a list of injustices and a plan for addressing and resolving these injustices. Nonviolent communication does not seek to humiliate, but to call forth the good in an opponent.

--Direct Action: Used to morally force the opponent to work with you in resolving the injustices, direct action imposes a "creative tension" into the conflict.

--Reconciliation: Nonviolence does not seek to defeat the opponent, but to seek his/her friendship and understanding. It is directed against evil systems, forces, policies and acts not against persons.
------------------------


www.commondreams.org/views04/0119-05.htm
Dr. King's Gauntlet: Nonviolence or Nonexistence

by Father John Dear

and I've got to say, while I won't instigate anything, I'm going to be REAL touchy if they try to herd me 10 blocks away to some "free speech" zone. But I don't think the police are going to provoke the protesters too much -- most I know aren't big fans of the president.