“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” So states the First Amendment. What has happened to the right to peaceful protest? Has the Occupy Wall Street movement terrified the powers in charge so much that they will do anything to prevent opposition?
Police in riot gear, swinging batons and using teargas, have arrested noisy but generally peaceful protesters. Even in Berkeley, of places! Encampments across the country have been bulldozed. After a two-month occupation, over 1,000 police descended on Zuccotti Park in NY in the early morning hours of 11/15 to clear out the protesters. Granted, Zuccotti Park is private property, but was a surprise and overly aggressive raid at 1am by so many cops warranted? Should personal property have been confiscated or destroyed? Within hours after the eviction, OWS protesters got a court order allowing them to return and to re-erect tents. As of this writing, that decision was overturned and protesters cannot set up camp.
What has happened to freedom of the press? Journalists covering the OWS events across the country including writer/activist Naomi Wolf have been arrested for doing their jobs, even though they were wearing press badges at the time. Arrests have occurred at New York City, Chapel Hill, NC, Atlanta, Nashville, Milwaukee and Richmond, VA. The Society of Professional Journalists and the New York Press Club have condemned the arrests and issued formal protests.
Besides arrests, reporters have been prevented by police from getting “too close” and filming evidence of abuse of power. Police brass are preventing the witnessing of massive shows of force and violence against the protesters. Isn’t this what is done in third world countries and dictatorships? The New York Police Commissioner is a Special Forces wannabe who has secretly built an incredible operation since 9/11.
In addition to journalists, noted educators and politicians have been arrested including Professor Cornel West of Princeton and Ydanis Rodriguez, a New York City Council Member. Mr. Rodriguez was hit in the head during the 11/14 raid and claimed that he was held without access to legal counsel.
The same pundits who call the Tea Party protesters patriots, emulators of the Founding Fathers and true Americans consider the OWS protesters to be rabble, Socialists, leftist losers and much worse. Most of these pundits are members of the 1% and they have convinced a majority of their viewers and readers that the main ideals of OWS (end corporatism, tax the wealthiest of Americans on a fairer basis, create jobs) are somehow not in their best interests. Real Americans should be afraid of those lazy, dirty Commies. It’s their own fault they don’t have jobs.
The Occupy Wall Street movement includes drum banging idealists and opportunistic troublemakers. However, the majority is comprised of the 99% of us – average people who are struggling with earning enough to pay the bills, those who have lost jobs and homes, and others who have never had enough. Even capitalist tool The Economist recognizes the lopsided inequity between the top 1% and everyone else and the danger of it. (http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/10/income-inequality-america)
To go back to the beginning, what has happened to the right to peaceful protest and freedom of the press? The First Amendment Center documents the free speech issues and marked increase in journalist arrests during the Occupy Wall Street movement. Free speech is hard and sometimes painful. It must be protected and witnessed.
Mary Casey is a student in the MS in Business Leadership and Management program at CUNY School of Professional Studies and is an alumna of Lehman College. She is an administrator for a university in NYC. She loves to travel and wants to see as much of the world as possible. Mary has more comments on the SPS blog than she received on the community/political blog that she created and maintained from 2002 to 2004.
13 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 23, 2011 at 12:11 pm
Rick
More fundamentally, why are the police even there at all? It’s a peaceful protest, as you said. Nothing about it calls for a police presence, and the only thing people with batons, guns, and arresting powers can do is use them. They have nothing to contribute to the cause, the safety of the protesters, or to the safety of the public.
For that matter, I’ve never seen a situation where the police showing up helped a situation. In an unarmed, peaceful assembly, it just means that suddenly people with guns and a propensity for using force are there – when before they weren’t – so the stakes just go up.
November 23, 2011 at 12:32 pm
MVCasey
You are so right, Richard. Why were 1,000 police needed to agressively remove sleeping protesters because of health and safety violations? Why did police at UC Davis pepper spray peaceful protesters in the face? It’s all about power.
November 24, 2011 at 9:31 pm
momizms
I agree that the Constitution guarantees the right to peaceful assembly, but what’s peaceful about commandeering public parks and violating the rules for their usage. What’s peaceful about disrupting the ability of people to get to work, school, or carry on with their daily activities by blocking off large areas of public right of way? What’s peaceful about leaving a huge mess for the taxpayers to clean up? Yes, law enforcement officials use force because it is their job to enforce the law. In every instance of force the protesters were first asked to leave then informed of the consequences. The Occupiers could have chosen to “peacefully assemble” by obtaining the proper permits, providing proper sanitation and security, And adhering to a reasonable time limit to occupy a public space.
November 24, 2011 at 9:55 pm
MVCasey
So, the consequences of violating rules for usage and creating a mess are pepper spray, tear gas and getting beaten with batons? I kind of think that getting proper permits and adhering to rules defeats the purpose of civil disobedience.
Even if you disagree, you may want to read this very interesting post about why police brutality is not the best way to deal with peaceful protest – http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/10/26/how-not-to-respond-to-a-peaceful-protest/
Mary V. Casey
November 24, 2011 at 10:30 pm
momizms
It’s precisely the violation of the law that makes these protests unpeacful. The term civil disobedience implies a willful disregard for the law. And it is the job of the police to enforce the law. As I stated, the protesters were given multiple opportunities to disband before force was used. What if this type of “peaceful” assembly was occurring on the public street in front of your house and interfering with your ability to conduct your daily activities? Would you still want the police to just leave them alone?
November 24, 2011 at 10:41 pm
MVCasey
I read your recent posts on your blog. Best wishes.
Mary V. Casey
November 25, 2011 at 5:17 pm
Rick
There is no time limit on when you can be on streets or in that particular park and, even if there were, the notion that something is “unpeaceful” because it violates a dubious interpretation of the law is a plain crappy argument. If the authorities were interested in sanitation, they would have provided alternative arrangements while cleaning the park – I’m sure the bone of spending a few hours protesting on already car-free Wall Street while Zucotti Park gets cleaned would have been rather irresistible to most of them, and it would have bothered no one except the sanctimonious types who don’t like the First Amendment anyway. Given that we are talking about a flock of doves here, they probably would have (ironically) been quite compliant regardless.
That said, the conduct of civil authorities in general and the police in particular has been utter contempt for their own rules, so I think we can drop the facade of concern about sanitation, safety, and rule of law. The real problem is that the uppity kids are bothersome and expressing heretical thoughts, and that just plain pisses the self-appointed guardians of Amerikana off.
As to the “cost” to the public of First Amendment rights, it’s probably a safe bet that there is little need for incremental policing. I can only roll my eyes at the quantitative illiteracy of the people who think it’s smart to sic baton-wielders on a pack of doves and then go on to complain about the price of the baton-wielders’ overtime.
November 26, 2011 at 1:39 pm
MVCasey
Thanks Rick. In addition to your excellent points, it was the police who made getting around the area difficult because of all the barricades and road blocks that they set up. It was ridiculous.
Also ridiculous and a waste of taxpayer money was the gross amount of police presence for a group of protesters. Couldn’t thousands of cops have been better used fighting crime throughout the city?
Mary V. Casey
December 22, 2011 at 11:50 am
randy
Ordinances and laws exist in these circumstances to ensure that protests are conducted peacefully and fairly and within reason.
If these protests were continued then how much do you give until people feel entitled? We saw evidence of this when some OWS protesters stormed Trinity park a few days ago and in Occupy Baltimore where a cancer non-profit had a permit cancelled because they did not feel like they should have to share the space because they filed a permit months prior. And there are more examples…
The police in almost all cases gave several warnings to these camping groups that they had to leave. They stayed. What do you expect police to think and bring when a direct order to vacated has been violated.
Expressing your first amendment rights is very easy. Learing how to do so in conjunction with the rest of society is the hard part.
December 22, 2011 at 12:14 pm
MVCasey
Happy holidays, and please pass along the holiday wishes to the Koch Brothers.
December 22, 2011 at 3:16 pm
middleagedhousewife
Since civil disobedience is not a “peaceful assembly” it is not protected under the first amendment. Along with having certain rights comes responsibilities in exercising hem. Abusing those rights is the first step to losing them. It seems to me that this post was not meant to support the Occupy agenda. It was instead meant to promote an anti-law enforcement agenda. The objections to the actions of the police seem to be based more on emotion than an actual understanding of police work, or the circumstances surrounding their actions .
December 22, 2011 at 3:19 pm
MVCasey
I’m honored that somehow my humble post is making the rounds of the right-wing blogosphere.
Happy Holidays and best wishes in 2012.
January 30, 2012 at 3:51 pm
MVCasey
Journalists are still getting arrested and the truth is still being suppressed. http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/journalists-arrested-occupy-oakland.