{"id":15805,"date":"2011-11-21T12:00:59","date_gmt":"2011-11-21T12:00:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=15805"},"modified":"2011-11-18T01:53:09","modified_gmt":"2011-11-18T01:53:09","slug":"occupy-wall-street%e2%80%99s-commitment-to-nonviolence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2011\/11\/occupy-wall-street%e2%80%99s-commitment-to-nonviolence\/","title":{"rendered":"Occupy Wall Street\u2019s Commitment to Nonviolence"},"content":{"rendered":"

I\u2019ve noted before that Occupy Wall Street has had trouble coming to consensus on a statement of nonviolence (as opposed to, say, the October 2011 movement in DC, which publicized one at the outset<\/a>). This was an issue both in the planning process and in the early days of the occupation. In my essay on the notion of \u201cdiversity of tactics\u201d<\/a> for Occupy Wall Street, I wrote:<\/p>\n

Since the early stages of the movement, it is true, those taking part have been in a deadlock on the question of making a commitment to nonviolence. At a planning meeting in Tompkins Square Park prior to September 17, I recall one young man in dark sunglasses saying, knowingly, \u201cThere is a danger of fetishizing nonviolence to the point that it becomes a dogma.\u201d In response, a woman added a \u201cpoint of information,\u201d despite being in contradiction to what Gandhi or King might say: \u201cNonviolence just means not\u00a0initiating<\/em>\u00a0violence.\u201d The question of nonviolence was ultimately tabled that night and thereafter. \u201cThis discussion is a complete waste of time,\u201d someone concluded.<\/p>\n

However, this is long overdue for an update. Every major statement so far issued by the General Assembly at Occupy Wall Street\u2019s Liberty Plaza has included a definitive nod toward a commitment to nonviolence.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s a quick rundown of each document now available in the Resources section<\/a> of the New York City General Assembly\u2019s website:<\/p>\n