<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<header class="entry-header">
<h1 class="entry-title">How to Think During an Eviction<br>
</h1>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nicholasmirzoeff.com/O2012/2012/03/18/how-to-think-during-an-eviction/">http://www.nicholasmirzoeff.com/O2012/2012/03/18/how-to-think-during-an-eviction/</a><br>
</p>
<div class="entry-meta"> <span class="sep">Posted on </span><a
href="http://www.nicholasmirzoeff.com/O2012/2012/03/18/how-to-think-during-an-eviction/"
title="9:15 pm" rel="bookmark"><time class="entry-date"
datetime="2012-03-18T21:15:46+00:00" pubdate="">March 18,
2012</time></a> </div>
</header>
<div class="entry-content">
<p>Once again, we reflect after an eviction. In the face of
violence and violent speech, how do we respond?</p>
<p>The actions by the NYPD yesterday were <a
href="http://www.truthout.org/re-occupation-and-police-raid-zuccotti-park-set-tone-radical-spring/1332097105"
target="_blank">plain old-fashioned violent</a> (see below).
They evicted people from a 24 hour park without stating any
offense that had been committed. They erected a barricade around
the park that is still up at the time of writing, in
contravention of an earlier court decision. They refused medical
care to a woman having a seizure. Public transport buses,
brought up in advance, were used to take protestors to jail. The
message here is very simple: no action that is or appears to be
an occupation will be tolerated in New York, legal rationale to
follow.The political culture of New York is macho and violent.
It takes its cue from its paymasters on Wall Street. Remember
the “masters of the universe” on Wall Street in Tom Wolfe’s <em>The
Bonfire of the Vanities</em>? They became the “big, swinging
dicks” in Michael Lewis’s <em>Liar’s Poker</em> and last week
the hapless Goldman Sachs apostate Greg Smith described how
traders like to “rip the eyes out” of their clients. No wonder
there are few women at the top of these firms.</p>
<p>A week or so ago, I happened to be in an open meeting with a
senior New York City elected official about a zoning issue where
I live. In a clearly studied way, the man became incensed at
what he deliberately took to be a provocation and talked about
“tearing [us] a new arsehole.” In a more public example, Police
Commissioner Ray Kelly, <a
href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/nyregion/kelly-head-of-nypd-fights-back-at-council-hearing.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=raymond%20kelly&st=cse"
target="_blank">when queried by the City Council</a> over the
stop-and-frisk policy that led to over 600,000 frisks of people
of color last year responded with what even the <em>New York
Times</em> called a “pugnacious assault.” Elected officials
may not question the police in New York.</p>
<p>Such talk is supposed to indicate an awareness of reality,
whether at the elite level of city planning or the street level
of minority neighborhoods. To “get things done,” verbal and, if
“necessary,” physical violence must be used–the metaphors are of
knocking heads, breaking balls and so on.</p>
<p>After a few hours sleep, I headed to <a
href="http://www.leftforum.org/" target="_blank">Left Forum</a>
at Pace University this morning, hoping to get some perspectives
on the moment. I found three. My panel on “Environmentalism and
Occupy” was, once again, all male. The next time this happens I
will just have to make a public protest. It seems that the
injunction to respect diversity, so prevalent in 1990s political
and academic culture, has been forgotten, except by the Occupy
movement. What I initially experienced as Occupy’s continuity
with academia looks more like a bridge to past (not always
successful, to be sure) efforts. However, at Left Forum the all
day prevalence of violent language, shouting, pointed fingers
and so on served as reminder of how much remains to be done.</p>
<p>In a more positive vein, both on my panel and the following
discussion about the general strike, it was stressed that the
place of the global south was central. While the general strike
question was mostly discussed in the context of the May Day
action in the U. S., Gayatri Spivak stressed the need to think
it in relation to the global south. Spivak’s train of thought
was multi-faceted and hard to summarize. Her main points were
that finance capital is digital so that it cannot be blockaded;
further global trade is a relatively small component of gross
global product; and that it no longer makes sense to speak
simply of “the working class,” in a manner she derived from
Marx’s <a
href="http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/"
target="_blank"><em>Critique of the Gotha Program</em></a>.</p>
<p>All that would be to say, then, that the general strike is an
impossible demand, not a quantifiable project, whose “success”
can be measured by the number of strikers. It needs to
“surprise” us (to quote Spivak again).</p>
<p>Certainly, there will be no surprise to find a vast array of
police on May Day and every time we step out of the places
allocated to us. The repeated representation of that injunction
is the arrest of a demonstrator who steps, whether deliberately
or by accident, into the roadway.</p>
<p>Claiming our own place will be interpreted as “violence” by the
state because it is the language that they speak and understand.
Prefiguring a horizontal world not configured by the command
means adopting ways of acting and speaking that at once insist
on our right to say what our place should be, rather than be
allocated one, and to do so in ways that we understand as
non-violent. That does not preclude non-violent direct action.
It is to say that if another world is possible, we need to start
living in it.</p>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1332097488.6838.152.camel@wTHING" type="cite">
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>