The tents are still up at Turning Point Park, but Occupy Hartford has shown few signs of life in recent weeks. After a strong showing at their kickoff march in early October, active participation has waned. There has been high turnover of activists, both those living in the tents, and those dropping by or showing support from afar.
The declaration of its impending death comes from those who have worked closely with the group, saying that those still involved in the encampment “don’t even know they are on a sinking ship.” In recent weeks, there have been hints that Occupy Hartford was on the verge of imploding.
The inexcusable mishandling of the sexual assault on site may have been the final straw for many who had previously offered their support for the local incarnation of the Occupy movement.
The move away from Occupy Hartford appears to be taking two forms: Occupy Heaven and the Hartford Organizing Group. The latter seeks action and to disassociate itself from Occupy Hartford. The reasons given for the creation of the former vary, but it cannot be due to space, as some have speculated. Even at its peak, Turning Point Park was never close to being overcrowded.
As the discussions over who is responsible for cleaning up Turning Point Park commence, the time has come to look at what, if anything, Occupy Hartford has contributed to activism, the community, and its goals.
Reignition
The excitement about throngs of people taking over Zuccotti Park in New York City was palpable and contagious to many seasoned activists, a number of whom have been more politically passive since the election of President Obama. These are the folks who, in part, gave the OWS movement a reputation for being made of “aging hippies,” since some had been involved in civil disobedience and marches during the Vietnam War era. In the mix were those who rallied for civil rights. A younger contingent among them had protested the use of 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq and Afghanistan.
The idea of the 99% seemed to welcome those who had been accustomed to finding their politics on the fringes of society.
But the movement quickly became frustrating as some in the new-to-activism category refused to listen to practical advice given by this older contingent.
One effect: the previously hibernating activists have stepped up their actions outside of the OWS movement and have worked harder to create alliances among existing community organizations.
Introduction to Activism
There is no doubt that the larger OWS movement was responsible for bringing in new blood. The rhetoric of OWS worked its way into the national lexicon. Between the attention from the news media which fueled this continuous discussion, and the visibility of the actions, newcomers were enticed into activism
But locally,while gathered in a visible location, Occupy Hartford offered little in the way of community outreach or maintaining the attention of those new to the ranks.
Those whose attention was earned may have found the handling of incidents at the encampment to be a turn-off from future involvement in political activism.
The remaining newcomers will find ways to work with those interested in taking action; those just showing up for a prolonged camping excursion will lose interest when asked to be involved in less romantic forms of activism.
Visible Protest Site
When the tents are gone, what will remain is an understanding that the corner of Farmington and Broad is very visible. During rush hour, traffic comes to a stop. While standing up at the Capitol building is symbolic, it attracts little attention; now, another location has been identified for those seeking to get out the word about their causes.
Ultimately, though, Occupy Hartford did not fulfill its potential.
Squandered Opportunity
Just as Occupy Wall Street had garnered the attention of those around the word, Occupy Hartford had gained a large audience — perhaps not global, but respectable — through its location and early actions. But instead of using that momentum to push them ahead, they wasted important time squabbling over logistics, squabbling over principles, and just squabbling.
Much of this could have been avoided through better planning.
In the rush to jump on the OWS bandwagon, the group did not bother to create a solid foundation from which to build. Discussions about shared principles (if you search the Occupy Hartford website, no results are found for “principles”) and demands happened after the tent city was erected; when an organization is unable to articulate what it stands for amongst its members, how will it be able to put forth a clear message to those it is trying to reach? What’s more, a disorganized movement stands little chance of attracting more, reliable, and effective participants.
We saw this happen.
Those who were interested in the movement at the beginning walked away when it became clear that no meaningful actions were going to occur. Others felt pushed out by the tedious General Assemblies, those lengthy group meetings relying on the consensus process, which often turned into personal attacks due to poor facilitation. For the consensus process to work, a good facilitator is necessary. That’s just Lefty 101.
The high rate of activist turnover in such a short amount of time made actualizing plans difficult-to-impossible.
Another way Occupy Hartford squandered opportunity was by failing to connect-the-dots. Throughout their stay in Hartford, they have received criticism from those on the Right, the Left, and everywhere in between and beyond. At different points, activists responded defensively, instead of engaging with those offering critiques. The defensiveness has been noted by those inside and outside of the encampment; local critics have observed that instead of asking for advice about how to do better, the first response offered by many in Occupy Hartford has been sheer insolence.
While many claimed they were interested in starting conversations about important issues, this was not the case for all; some were only interested in these conversations when they were steering them.
Instead of acknowledging that many camping at the site have been homeless, and then discussing why so many Americans find themselves living in poverty and without shelter, and instead of taking action on those issues, they often swept these matters under the rug. Only now, as the unraveling seems imminent, are public discussions even beginning to happen about homelessness. To those in the community who have been working with the homeless for years, who have constant exposure to this issue because we live in Hartford where poverty is not hidden away, but is instead pushing a shopping cart full of cans down the street several times daily, this last ditch effort is almost laughable.
When the group was criticized for failing to acknowledge that many Hartford residents are living in deep poverty, they appeared to begin to pay attention, at least momentarily. But what became of this?
Too Little, Too Late
After non-stop criticism for occupying space they did not understand, they finally began to get involved in the community.
In other circumstances, let’s say, with a group that is just forming and has yet to go public with its message and action, these pieces of ignorance would have been more forgivable. But when a group declares itself and seeks attention, one expects more of the background work to be in place. And when they have been asked by the community, repeatedly, to work with the community, they are practicing none other than willful ignorance.
Occupiers have recently begun to attend community meetings, the purpose of which is that the community talks and the Occupiers listen. This type of involvement before launching the local movement, or at the very least, within the very first days of it, would have taught the squatters which issues are most important to work on here in Hartford, it would have made them seem more genuine to residents (many of whom have had low expectations about what involvement Occupiers will have in socioeconomic justice once the adrenalin rush wears off and they go home), and it would have helped form alliances, which in turn, provide numbers. While there are some 4,245 people who “like” Occupy Hartford on Facebook, the largest number to show up for any Occupy action was only a few hundred. That was when the weather was mild and the excitement of the creation of Occupy Hartford was still fresh.
Maintaining the Status Quo
An early reason given for why some were protesting was that they did not want to pay their student loans. This kind of complaint being made in a city where so many students drop out, where so many people are functionally illiterate, well, it seems petty. Nobody wanted to talk about the privilege inherent in the ability to receive a quality education which would allow one to even be accepted into college. Vocalizing such entitlement overshadowed more legitimate complaints being waged about the exploitative nature of our current political and economic systems.
Regardless of whether or not those with student loans can pay them off, these individuals will, if they have not already, have opportunities afforded to them which many living in the city they have chosen to “occupy” will not. The economic woes of recent years give a taste of poverty to those who had never needed to think about it before; when the economy picks up, those grousing about student loans will again have job opportunities.
Before then, many will return to nice homes in safe neighborhoods and tell war stories about their encampment. For some of them, this will be treated as a rite of passage, nothing more. The better among them will have figured out spaces in the existing community where they can contribute their time and energy. They will build on what exists. Those truly drawn to effect a change have already begun to branch out and take meaningful action.
But the maintenance of the status quo goes beyond economic and racial privilege. We have seen that the way violence against women has been mishandled. When a woman was screamed at for making a comment that males on site had made, nothing was done with the aggressor other than to diffuse the situation. There was no teach-in about power dynamics. Last weekend, when a woman was molested, the perpetrator was merely told to leave the site. Two anonymous activists have reported that she was pressured by a few at the Occupy encampment to not report the crime to the police. It has also been said that the survivor was shamed for drinking alcohol.
The explanation given has been that activists are learning as they go, but intimidation and sexual molestation are not new problems; there is a lot of precedence for how to deal with these issues.
Neither response to those incidents was revolutionary.
In fact, these responses are ones that we expect from those in power now. If caught doing wrong, those in power try to minimize the situation inasmuch as possible. They may accept the most minimal amount of responsibility for their actions as they can get away with, and then they thrown in a red herring (or three) to take control of what type of conversation they would like to be having about the matter. We saw this same spirit in action several times with Occupy Hartford. When they have said that another world is possible, they might have clarified that they were not the ones willing to create it.
What the most vulnerable in society, what those who have been marginalized by society do not need is more of the same treatment that we have been receiving.
Best Possible Outcome
For those who are seeking to move forward, it can only be hoped that they have removed their blinders. At all stages of Occupy Hartford, activists made mistakes. If their motives are sincere, they should be willing to look carefully, critically, and honestly at what has ensued in the past two months, and learn from that:
- Learn about the issues and community first. Respect the place you are attempting to work in.
- Make allies and build support within community
- Create Principles of Unity
- Create specific, measurable, and achievable goals
- Then, take action
- Welcome constructive criticism from those who would like to see the movement succeed
- Be a little less paranoid about police, being co-opted (especially if there is nothing to co-opt), and each other. Caution and paranoia are not the same thing.
- Listen more than you speak
- Think hard about your rhetoric. It might not mean what you think it does and it might be far less inclusive than you imagine it to be.
- Get off the Internet. Okay, not entirely, but recognize how the Internet is something that not everyone has 24/7 access to. People can use it at the library, etc., but this does not keep them connected to what is going on when the library is closed. Think about other ways that you need to communicate better with the population you are working within. This may mean translating to other languages. This might mean cutting out the fanciful jargon so that those with only a basic education can still have access.
- Learn how to work the media to your advantage. Beginning from a place of hostility does not entice most journalists to speak with you more than they are assigned to. Expecting coverage when there is nothing to cover is unreasonable. Learn how to write simple press releases (no need to take a college course, as this info can be found online and in library books) that make sense and give reporters a reason to show up.
- Learn more appropriate ways of conflict resolution and use them.
Those in the Hartford Organizing Group, an offshoot of (but unaffiliated with) Occupy Hartford, have begun to move in this direction. How their plans will materialize remains to be seen.
Joanna
I had high hopes for the Hartford Organizing Group. But, at the meeting I attended, I was really let down, yet again. First, although it is supposed to be separate from Occupy Hartford, there seemed to be a reluctance to actually declare that to be so. It was really confusing, especially since a paper that was passed around came from an email address that made it seem like hog was definitely part of Occupy Hartford.
I was also dissapointed, because despite being told that racial justice would be one of the major issues addressed by HOG, no one wanted to join a racial justice working group. Instead, there seemed to be this desire to put it together with the “education” working group. The basic impression I got was that the Education working group was going to just be about bringing in speaker to discuss various types of “privilege”. While I have no problem with anyone else having an “intersectional” approach to activism, I think it causes race to get shorted. Because usually the “feminist” causes addresses primarily the issues of white women, the gay rights platform focuses mainly on the rights of white gay people, etc etc. I have seen this repeatedly, to the point where Black women who fought for womens rights began to call themselves “womanists” and to declare that feminism is for white women.
Kerri Provost
Thanks for sharing your experience and perspective. My only guess about this is based on what I was able to overhear — people needed to pick one place to be, and there were several compelling options, including working on an action for this week. Not making excuses, but I’m sure this made it much more complicated.
I do not know all of the dynamics and procedures, but am wondering if this is something you can continue to push for. I did not get to answer your question at the forum yesterday, and I don’t have any definitive answer about what to do when people seem unwilling to address all of the issues you were mentioning (in the fashion of let’s ignore the problem because it’s not *our* problem), but I do think that being that nagging, persistent voice is important.
As you know, I don’t do much self-censoring. I hear that people (as long as they are not the ones being critiqued for something) find this brave or something. I’m mentioning that because most people are timid about expressing what might be an unpopular or risky idea. But others are thinking about it, and they need someone else to sort of open the door for them so that they have “permission” to get into that conversation. So, my response is to keep at it because by voicing your concerns, you are making it easier for others with the same concerns to come forward and join in.
Joanna
Well, since I had been to the OH campsite a few times, and been to their community meeting (and am planning to attend another, not to join with their movement, but simply to bring up dialogue I see has been ignored by and large), AND posted on their facebook page, I GUESS I could try giving HOG a few more hours of my time before I close the door on the idea of getting involved with them.
My focus is on racial justice. If HOG shows that they are willing to work towards that end, I can get down with them to some degree. If not, I will just have to concentrate on the project my friend is working on (The Hartford Racial Justice Alliance) and on the Hart Monitor.
I am not really sure how to get in on the HOG email list, or listserv, or whatever it is called though… LOL
Kerri Provost
I am unsure about the email list as well. There was a sign-up sheet that was passed around the meeting, but I have received no notices yet. They have an email address posted here: http://hartfordog.org/
dave r
Great post Kerri! Hopefully folks will take your criticisms seriously and not just have a kneejerk reaction to it. Criticism is a positive thing and can help people learn from their mistakes. This is a time for self-reflection and folks should be asking what worked and what didn’t?
As to the question of whether HOG is affiliated with OH or not…it is not. That was established early on in the formation of the group. If there was a bit of confusion on that point at the meeting, it was again clarified later on for the new folks attending. At the same time, we also don’t wish to have an adversarial relationship with them either.
Also, Joanna’s concerns are obviously valid ones…a racial justice working group should not be lumped in with any eduacation group (though I’m sure there would be some crossover due to the desire to educate people on issues of privilege)…if you have any specific plans or ideas to address racial justice in mind, please bring them to the group and I’m sure you will be heard.
As for the list-serv, I’ll be sure to grab your email address Joanna when I see you next and add you to it.
But sorry Kerri, no press allowed 😉
Kerri Provost
I have no press pass.
Joanna
I send an email to the address of the HOG page, saying that I would like to be included in the email list. I walked out of the last meeting out of frustration, but I am nothing if not persistent, so I am willing to give it another shot! LOL
I think the confusion about Occupy and HOG being connected came for me from two things… one, the legislative working group passed out a paper and the email address has an address for hg that seemed to be on the occupy hartford domain, and two, the facilitator of the meeting was using some of the slogans associated with the occupy movement.
I do not expect there to be an adversarial relationship between the two groups, but I also do not want to get involved in a group that is too intimately tied to the Occupy movement, for reasons I have expressed on numerous ocassions.
Josh
Well thought out and put analysis. My thoughts on OH run to the lost opportunity. While the tea parties may be “leaderless” they most certainly are willing to make demands. There is an agenda. I walked past the Occupy Hartford site daily. There was no message. No outreach. No one bothered to talk to me. As someone who worked in community organizing for a while, I am shocked by an organization who does not outreach. Where were the flyers? I live about three blocks away. No one knocked on my door. My listed-in-the-book telephone never rang. The whole point seemed to be that people were sleeping in tents in this little green patch next to the highway. Most media stories were about negotiations with the city to allow the group to remain there. I think it’s too bad that participants new to activism may now have the impression that activism is flawed or pointless. Bottom line is that if you want people to join your cause, you need to respect their time and resources. Have a clear message. Formulate some demands. Get some wins under your belt. Try to mediate and manage internal disputes so they are resolved and do not become distractions. For several weeks I walked by a sign posted at Occupy Hartford stating that “love is the answer.” For some reason this made me furious. Love is the answer to what? Sleeping in a tent on public property for no reason is the answer to what?
Kerri Provost
I would build on your question — love of *what* is the answer? Love of money and love of power got us into this mess.
lobonick
an excellent analysis as usual. one thing that comes to mind now that occupy hartford has been “evicted” is that calling the experience a failure is technically invalid. it was merely a group of people coming together to move towards change. it was not smooth. homeless individuals became a large majority of the occupiers. people came and went. the meetings were long and less than fluid. in the end, this part of the occupation ended when the occupying site became a bit to chaotic for the public forces to except (note: if it had been under a bridge, the public wouldn’t have known about it or cared).
still, a failure ? like somebody did something wrong ? like the mission was not completed ? like people wasted their time ? like a friend once said to me at a time when truth finally was told: probably not. the mission of bringing visibility to the concept of economic inequality was successful. occupy hartford was like a cup of coffee (or even an espresso) to the public. occupy hartford was interesting experiment that simply mirrored the reality of the united states. sure, homeless types showed up and “occupied.” still the leaderless structure was attempting to deal with the issues they were bringing to the table. all in the name of promoting economic equality and the belief that all people are worth something.
it was not easy work. it was not an easy fight. the community that supported the movement did what it could. some members were more committed than others. the reality of life called. could it have been better ? sure. but a failure ? a mere camping expedition ? perhaps. but as society will be forced to continue to deal with the issues of economic inequality as the years go on, there will be more of the same. sure things can always be better. the grass is always greener on the other side. but occupy hartford doesn’t need to hold its head down. it was beautiful in its own way.
Kerri Provost
Did you read my post, Nick?
It was posted before they were served eviction notice, because I considered it completely ineffectual and fractured. The shame is that Occupiers had not recognized the encampment was a problem and needed to go before the City did. Early on, there was talk of going out with a bang and then breaking down camp. It’s too bad Occupiers squandered the opportunity to end their stay in that way.
Luis
Excellent points nick. Occupy Hartford came and went as EVERYONE knew it would come, and eventually, go. Maybe not under the best of circumstances, but it happened. And I, for one, am happy that it happened. People saw what was happening around the country and chose our little corner of the world, a Capitol city that has the distinction of being the poorest city in the richest state, to join in.
Was it perfect? Not by a longshot. Was it horrible? Not by my estimation. What we learned is what we already knew: The 99% has a long way to go before they can come together without issues of privilege, sexism, racism, classism etc… popping its ugly head.
Because of Occupy Hartford I was able to meet like minded folk that I hope to do good work with…no matter how much they want to believe Occupy Hartford has nothing to do with anything. Their beliefs are not a prerequisite for us to work together.
My hope is that years from now when people look at Turning Point Park they will remember it not for the fact that humans got together and acted as, well, humans, but that in that small little corner of nothing, a group of people participated in what was a national cry that said ¡Basta! to the status quo.
Steve
Excellent piece, Kerri and great comments. As a suburban married father of two who spent the early Occupy days defending the movement and explaining to coworkers how I felt about it and what I thought the message was and – most importantly – how all people of whatever political stripe or economic background SHOULD get on board with the message. I “joined” the Occupy movement that way – discussing with coworker teabaggers that perhaps yes, even HE should agree with 90% of the Occupy message.
Then weeks went by and then a couple months and our local chapter became a caricature of itself. It really DID just become some people and some tents and the only time it made the news was when a local union usurped the message and tried to shut down a highway onramp for some inexplicable, terribly planned reason.
In the end, the physical encampment did nothing. Said nothing, promoted nothing. Was it a start to something bigger? Perhaps – I hope so. Did the Occupiers identify speakers and leaders to lead the next chapter? I hope so. But sadly, if we were to take a poll of Hartford County residents about the message they took from the encampment, I’m sad to say it is probably 100% opposite of what was intended back in september.
PS. Jesus Christ cops, full militia riot gear to remove a handful of peaceful tired and wet people? WTF.
Kerri Provost
P.S. The police presence (20 cars) seemed like total overkill given that only a handful of people were still camping and that those left could not rally any real support. Five cops would have been able to handle the matter. I cringe thinking about the way my taxdollars are used.