There are some good observations here - the purity tests surely kept this from becoming a bigger movement - but there are a ton of problems with this piece.
First and foremost, it's just wrong that that the movement was on the doorstep of winning. The protests captured the world's attention but didn't get us to the brink of a ceasefire as…
There are some good observations here - the purity tests surely kept this from becoming a bigger movement - but there are a ton of problems with this piece.
First and foremost, it's just wrong that that the movement was on the doorstep of winning. The protests captured the world's attention but didn't get us to the brink of a ceasefire as Wayne claims. The link he provides as evidence is from 5 months after the period he is talking about and doesn't say what he claims it does.
Second, Wayne just ignores that we live in a time of complete and total surveillance thanks to social media. His claims at the movement was violent are based on a couple of people saying stupid things. There have been, and always will be, people saying stupid things in movements. The difference is that now anything said by any person in a movement can get seized upon and amplified by a movements opponents in a way that was never possible before. The kind of message discipline that is required to keep everyone in a large movement from saying something stupid that it's opponents can seize upon is frankly impossible.
It is also weird to hold up extinction rebellion - of which I am a fan - as a model of success. I'm not exactly sure what they've achieved. And Wayne doesn't bother to make a case.
Finally, I'm not sure how anyone can look at the unrelenting genocidal intentions of Israel and the United States, or the relentless push towards fascism in the first 2 months of the new Trump administration, and claim that the reason students are being disappeared right now is because of violent rhetoric. It seems infinitely more likely to me that the crackdown is happening because of the students' success - to make an example of them to terrify anyone from dissenting against anything Trump does - rather than their failures.
Thanks for this feedback. Some great points for sure.
I may overstate the success of Free Palestine, but they mobilized nearly 1 million in London alone, and it was surely one of the largest global mobilizations in history -- with peak mobilization in key cities (NYC, London) on a scale that has not been seen in recent history. Was much accomplished with that power? I would argue not.
Re: random things said by random people, these were student leaders and orgs at the most important mobilization site of the movement: Columbia. For sure, even movement leaders are diverse, but was there any groundswell to support nonviolence in the face of the CUAD's statements that "violence was the ONLY path forward"? I saw none, and the primary reason was purity tests. I know people kicked out of organizing simply for suggesting an alternative to violent messaging.
XR was successful in some ways, not in others. But compared to Free Palestine, if you asked one year after XR's initial rebellion, had they achieved their goals? In no small part, yes. The UK government had declared a climate emergency, and those with political power who were promoting fossil fuels were on the rocks. XR's problem was sustaining success, not a complete lack of success.
Finally, I'm certainly not assigning blame to anyone, certainly not nonviolent protesters being swept up. But movements do need to think about what we can do strategically to respond most effectively to repression. There is a moment now for the Free Palestine movement to do that. Let's see if they do.
Again, thanks for the feedback. Super thoughtful, and you make very sound points that are worth considering.
Appreciate the thoughtful response and I don't mean that as a throwaway line. I *never* comment online and am only doing so because I have so much respect for you and have learned a lot from you.
On XR vs. Free Palestine. Both have had similar success - at the rhetorical level. XR was able to get the UK government to declare a climate emergency. Free Palestine has been able to get many to declare what is happening a genocide and war crimes. Both have not had success on larger goals - "a just transition" or a ceasefire (let alone a Free Palestine). So I don't think you're really comparing apples-to-apples in declaring one a success and the other a failure.
I think the other thing your piece and comment are missing is that Power (state and corporate interests) learn from the very same social movements that you have. We don't have a draft anymore, for instance, because the access to more (often reluctant or disgruntled) bodies for the war machine isn't worth people opposing US foreign policy.
But even more importantly, Power has learned how to leverage the always on outrage machine and surveillance that J Edgar couldn't have even dreamed of to crush movements. Consider the murder of George Floyd. You and I probably disagree on the revolutionary potential of the police station burning down. But I bet we do agree that what that moment evolved into - corporate DEI trainings, pronouns in email signatures, land acknowledgements - was ridiculously milquetoast. And yet that has still led to a massive backlash with enormous and horrendous consequences.
We live on screens now and that has changed the social movement equations. I'm not confident that Bull Conner would engender the same reaction today. Attacking civil rights activists might just be outrage porn for people on both sides for a few days before they moved onto the next outrage.
Finally, lots of grandparents out there (including my parents!) out there advocating for Palestine. Just not enough people of age between the students and the grandparents. But that is true of every US movement I've ever witnessed so don't think you can blame protest tactics or strategy for that.
There are some good observations here - the purity tests surely kept this from becoming a bigger movement - but there are a ton of problems with this piece.
First and foremost, it's just wrong that that the movement was on the doorstep of winning. The protests captured the world's attention but didn't get us to the brink of a ceasefire as Wayne claims. The link he provides as evidence is from 5 months after the period he is talking about and doesn't say what he claims it does.
Second, Wayne just ignores that we live in a time of complete and total surveillance thanks to social media. His claims at the movement was violent are based on a couple of people saying stupid things. There have been, and always will be, people saying stupid things in movements. The difference is that now anything said by any person in a movement can get seized upon and amplified by a movements opponents in a way that was never possible before. The kind of message discipline that is required to keep everyone in a large movement from saying something stupid that it's opponents can seize upon is frankly impossible.
It is also weird to hold up extinction rebellion - of which I am a fan - as a model of success. I'm not exactly sure what they've achieved. And Wayne doesn't bother to make a case.
Finally, I'm not sure how anyone can look at the unrelenting genocidal intentions of Israel and the United States, or the relentless push towards fascism in the first 2 months of the new Trump administration, and claim that the reason students are being disappeared right now is because of violent rhetoric. It seems infinitely more likely to me that the crackdown is happening because of the students' success - to make an example of them to terrify anyone from dissenting against anything Trump does - rather than their failures.
Hi Josh!
Thanks for this feedback. Some great points for sure.
I may overstate the success of Free Palestine, but they mobilized nearly 1 million in London alone, and it was surely one of the largest global mobilizations in history -- with peak mobilization in key cities (NYC, London) on a scale that has not been seen in recent history. Was much accomplished with that power? I would argue not.
Re: random things said by random people, these were student leaders and orgs at the most important mobilization site of the movement: Columbia. For sure, even movement leaders are diverse, but was there any groundswell to support nonviolence in the face of the CUAD's statements that "violence was the ONLY path forward"? I saw none, and the primary reason was purity tests. I know people kicked out of organizing simply for suggesting an alternative to violent messaging.
XR was successful in some ways, not in others. But compared to Free Palestine, if you asked one year after XR's initial rebellion, had they achieved their goals? In no small part, yes. The UK government had declared a climate emergency, and those with political power who were promoting fossil fuels were on the rocks. XR's problem was sustaining success, not a complete lack of success.
Finally, I'm certainly not assigning blame to anyone, certainly not nonviolent protesters being swept up. But movements do need to think about what we can do strategically to respond most effectively to repression. There is a moment now for the Free Palestine movement to do that. Let's see if they do.
Again, thanks for the feedback. Super thoughtful, and you make very sound points that are worth considering.
Appreciate the thoughtful response and I don't mean that as a throwaway line. I *never* comment online and am only doing so because I have so much respect for you and have learned a lot from you.
On XR vs. Free Palestine. Both have had similar success - at the rhetorical level. XR was able to get the UK government to declare a climate emergency. Free Palestine has been able to get many to declare what is happening a genocide and war crimes. Both have not had success on larger goals - "a just transition" or a ceasefire (let alone a Free Palestine). So I don't think you're really comparing apples-to-apples in declaring one a success and the other a failure.
I think the other thing your piece and comment are missing is that Power (state and corporate interests) learn from the very same social movements that you have. We don't have a draft anymore, for instance, because the access to more (often reluctant or disgruntled) bodies for the war machine isn't worth people opposing US foreign policy.
But even more importantly, Power has learned how to leverage the always on outrage machine and surveillance that J Edgar couldn't have even dreamed of to crush movements. Consider the murder of George Floyd. You and I probably disagree on the revolutionary potential of the police station burning down. But I bet we do agree that what that moment evolved into - corporate DEI trainings, pronouns in email signatures, land acknowledgements - was ridiculously milquetoast. And yet that has still led to a massive backlash with enormous and horrendous consequences.
We live on screens now and that has changed the social movement equations. I'm not confident that Bull Conner would engender the same reaction today. Attacking civil rights activists might just be outrage porn for people on both sides for a few days before they moved onto the next outrage.
Finally, lots of grandparents out there (including my parents!) out there advocating for Palestine. Just not enough people of age between the students and the grandparents. But that is true of every US movement I've ever witnessed so don't think you can blame protest tactics or strategy for that.
I 100% agree. This post seems nearly entirely delusional to reality.
How so?
how much did they pay you to make this garbage article?
$0, sadly! haha