8/18 Rally for Jobs, Peace and Planet. Joined Green Party and others, including Green presidential candidate Jill Stein.
9/1 – 9/3 At Verizon building, overnight sidewalk occupation to protest Verizon’s sending jobs overseas and overcharging customers.
9/2 Joined SEIU protest at Brown calling on Brown to pay its fair share of taxes.

Labor Day March. Photo by Lou L.

Labor Day March. Photo by Lou L.

9/3 Joined Labor Day march by Jobs with Justice for good jobs, immigrant rights, preserving unemployment services, and allowing foreclosed families to rent their homes.
9/16 – 9/17 Overnight sidewalk occupation at State House for an economy that works for the 99%. Called for the 1% to pay their fair share in taxes and for policies that make the economy work for the 99% instead of bailing out 38 Studios.
9/25 Robin Hood protest against EDC and 38 Studios bailout. At Joint Economic Committee hearing, Occupy Providence members opposed the bailout of 38 Studios and protested a plan by the big-business-backed RIPEC lobbying group to rebrand the RI Economic Development Corporation. Occupy Providence called for economic plans that benefit the 99% first.

Occupy Providence members celebrate
the one year anniversary of Occupy Providence in October at The People’s Park

10/20  First 99% Fair. Tables for social justice groups in Burnside Park to pass out information, start conversations, and discuss future plans together.
10/23 Free Speech is For People. Supported Occupy East Providence in calling on the East Providence city council to endorse the principle that free speech is for people, not corporations, and that corporate spending on elections can be regulated.
10/26 38 Studios banners. Hung banners on highway overpasses saying “Chafee to bail out Wall St Lenders to 38 Studios – Say No!”
11/5-6 Election Day banners. Hung banners on highway overpasses saying “Obama and Romney, Bailout Presidents” “Solidarity not Austerity,” and “Chafee to bail out Wall St Lenders to 38 Studios – Say No!”
11/17 Second 99% Fair. Tables for social justice groups and socially responsible businesses in Burnside Park to pass out information, start conversations, and discuss future plans together.

Photo by Chloe Chassaing

Photo by Chloe Chassaing

Photo by Chloe Chassaing

11/23 Walmart Protest. Demonstrated at Walmart stores from Fall River to Providence, demanding fair treatment for Walmart workers.
12/7 Supported George Wiley Center at State House in demanding the release of fuel assistance funds.
12/9 Hurricane Sandy relief. Joined Occupy Sandy in New York City and helped sort and distribute donated goods to Hurricane Sandy victims.
12/22 Demanded respect for Walmart workers with mic check inside Providence Walmart. Speeches from Walmart workers.

Photo by Susan Walker

1/2 Protested RI’s corporate welfare for Hasbro, which outsources many jobs to sweatshops in China.
1/12 Police brutality press conference. Joined press conference to protest a violent raid conducted by police.
1/13 Hurricane Sandy relief. Joined Occupy Sandy in New York City to help rebuild homes damaged by Hurricane Sandy.
1/29 Rally for low-income tenants facing eviction. Supported rally to save tenants from eviction by restoring funding to RI’s Rental Assistance Program.
2/13 Student protest. Joined Providence Student Union protest at RI Dept of Education calling for improved education, not just high-stakes graduation tests.

Occupy Providence members display the OP banner during a march at the Forward On Climate rally in Washington DC in February.

2/17 Climate change protest in DC. Joined other Rhode Islanders and people across the country in calling for action to prevent global warming, working to stop the tar sands pipeline.,
2/27 Pull the Pork from the Pentagon. Joined other social justice groups at the State House calling for reducing bloated Pentagon spending on projects like the failed F-35, closing tax loopholes for the rich, and funding community programs instead.
3/9 Third 99% Fair. Tables for social justice groups and socially responsible businesses at URI-Providence, to pass out information, start conversations, and discuss future plans together. Coordinated with the Hive Archive workshop.

The above actions were approved by votes in the Occupy Providence General Assembly, an open democratic meeting of the 99% where OP’s main decisions are made. Occupy Providence members also participated informally in many other actions.

John Joyce (1962-2013) became an advocate for others after being homeless for a while. One of his accomplishments was to make Rhode Island the first state to enact a Homeless Bill of Rights. This interview took place last fall, when he was busily working while ill with cancer.

Q: During the past session, the General Assembly passed a Homeless Bill of Rights into law. Could you explain what a “Homeless Bill of Rights” is, exactly?
It’s not special rights, it’s just equal rights. It was our feeling when we were going up there that legislators would think the bill was going to be special rights for a certain class.  But that wasn’t  the case. What we were hearing from people without homes in Rhode Island was some of the discriminatory tactics that people were using against them. The rights were always in place. The Homeless Bill of Rights would just put it on equal boundaries. These aren’t special rights that people already had, but it’s more specific to people without homes.

Q: It’s reinforcing rights that were already there? They didn’t really pass anything new then?
No, it just put housing status in there, the same as sexual orientation, race, religion. So we wanted to have that housing status in there. That’s law now.

Q: Was it hard to get it through the legislature?
Yes.  Very much so. You would think that, being a progressive state, something like this would go through, but  people had in their minds that stigma or stereotype that people without homes were what they see in Hollywood [movies]— the drunk, the hobo, the guy in the corner— and that’s not true.  With foreclosures, people losing their jobs, these were people who never expected to be without a home and when they were thrown into the system and carried their life on their back, they were discriminated against. There was a basic hatred towards them and that was something that I personally experienced when I was without a home.

Q: How did you come up with the bill in the first place? Were homeless people involved in this?
That was the first thing. When we were hearing about everything that was going on out in the streets, we did a little research. We found out Illinois had tried to pass a bill similar to what we were hearing on the streets so we took their model and we made it into Rhode Islandese because this is not Illinois. We came up with a basic concept based on what Illinois did but we made it what people were telling us.  We wanted to make sure we were doing the right thing, so we asked the community. We were asking people on the streets, in the shelters, in the soup kitchens, would this be a good idea? And the majority said yes, because that is happening. So we wouldn’t proceed with something like this without community input. Their voice is more important than anybody’s in the whole process, so we made sure that was included in the bill.

Q: Who was involved in spearheading this?
RI Homeless Advocacy Project (RIHAP). It’s a grassroots organization for people that are homeless and formerly homeless, so they get it. We do a lot of outreach out on the streets. It has open meetings— anybody can go. We would discuss the Bill of Rights and how we wanted to frame it and what people felt. And that was pretty cool. It was really cool seeing the community get together and actually participate in something that was very meaningful to them.

Q: Who are the homeless in Rhode Island?
There’s always been the stereotype that people without homes are from the inner city. That’s not true. People without homes are from throughout the whole state. Especially with the way 2008 hit the state. Unemployment at almost 13%. Foreclosures were off the charts. Fair market rent in the state, you have to work 2 ½ minimum-wage jobs.  Everything crashed at once, and we’re still not out of it.
John Q. Public thinks it’s a middle-aged man that just doesn’t want to do anything. That’s not the case. There’s families out there. It’s a diversity.  Single mothers. Youth aging out of foster homes.  Senior citizens— that’s an issue, also. People over 62 just can’t find subsidized housing, affordable housing.

Q: So would you say that one of the biggest problems is that there’s just not enough affordable housing?
Of course! Homelessness is a solvable problem. It’s called affordable housing. If you’ve got to pay over $1000 a month and you’re on Social Security and your Social Security is only $700 and change, how do you expect to have housing? And feed yourself?

Q: What do you see as the next step, after having gotten the Homeless Bill of Rights passed in the last legislative session?
The next step is advocating for more housing. A lot of people say I’m a homeless advocate. I’m more of a housing advocate. I don’t want to see people living in shelters. I don’t want people losing their homes. I wish there was enough housing so everyone can have that stability. It’s one of life’s basic necessities: food and shelter.

Q: What’s coming up in this legislative session?
We have solutions on how to create money like the voucher system to get people right from the streets into housing. It’s called the Housing First model. It’s a program where we take chronically homeless individuals right off the streets and put them into housing. What a “radical” thing that is! There’s research studies on it from Professor [Eric] Hirsch, on the Housing First model. We can save the state money. We can put people into housing and save the state $8000 and we’re 90% successful that people maintain their housing. The old way, we take someone and they’ve got to follow all these rules but if they don’t they’ll be kicked out to the curb again. That was 40% successful. And it cost more money.

Q: Where are you getting the money for this program?
There’s different ideas to try to create that money. We want to try to get a dedicated funding stream for these vouchers. There’s a lot of talk on how to get that. We can get it right out of the budget. It think this year we might be asking for $4 or $5 million to try to get people off the streets. Get them stable. Get people to where they gotta be. Get them into independent life. With the Housing First model, it’s intensive case management, make sure they maintain their housing, vocational training, if they have a disability we can get them on SSI, SSDI. It’s a system that works. It’s a harm-reduction model, also. If you have a problem with drugs or alcohol and you pick up, you’re not going to get kicked out to the curb. Your case manager is already following through with what the next plan is. It’s more people-orientated than it is organizationally orientated.

Q: You are a homeless advocate.  What do you do, and where?
I’m everywhere. I work for Providence Center with their home-based program. I do outreach for them. It’s the hardest-to-serve population. I’ve done a lot of research on how we get people into housing and connect them with services. The old way was that person had to walk through your door. But I’m seeing people who’ve been out on the streets 5, 10, 15 years. They don’t “walk through the door.” So what I do, I bring the office to them, where they’re at, where they’re comfortable. That’s how we get people. I used to work for Riverwood Housing First doing the same thing. It’s called the “Where You’re At” model. Sometimes people will engage with me and get to where they want to be. Sometimes it takes a month, sometimes six months, sometimes a year. My job is to engage, engage, engage. I’m out there every day.

Q: Where is “out there”?
Basically, in the downtown area. Most of the people without homes who are in shelters or sleeping outside end up downtown in the morning because that’s where the transportation is. So I just make sure I’m on the streets. I’m known on the streets so people will refer me to people that need help and sometimes my case load can go up to 200, 300 people. But I connect them with all the services. If it’s not through the Providence Center it’s different agencies. I work for the Providence Center and that’s a community mental health organization, but they’re even going into the realm of trying to get into people without homes. There was always a disconnect between homeless service providers and mental health organizations but that is changing.

Q: What got you into becoming a homeless advocate?
Being homeless myself. Some of the service providers that I went to, I felt like I was second-class. I felt like no one cared. I’ve seen atrocities in shelters, people being belittled, degraded and it basically pissed me off. What can I do to change that attitude? So I started going to meetings. I heard about state meetings and then the Coalition for the Homeless, I’d go there and I’d bring my backpack with my life on my back and I’d go to these meetings and it gave me a chance to vent. But what I was saying was what I was experiencing and then at the end of the meeting they would say, “O.K. Now, shoo, shoo, be a nice boy and go back to whatever dumpster you came from,” and that’s the attitude I got from people. But I didn’t let that deter me, either. Because I’d show up at the next meeting and I’m still going to the meetings. A lot of people out there, they think they don’t have a voice. I’m just a messenger sometimes. I’ll ask people, “What you just told me— are you willing to come to a meeting and say that?” and they’ll say, “Oh, no!  I can’t do that because I’m afraid that I’ll get retaliated against.” So I just carry that message.

Q: What did you do before you were homeless?
I was a union construction worker. I was making good money. I never thought I’d be out on the streets. I got laid off. My health went to shit. And then the crash of 2008 happened. My unemployment ran out. I was in a bad relationship. I just packed a bag and said, “I gotta get out of here before something happens.” I was one of them prideful individuals. I set up a tent out in Cranston. I was still trying to hustle work. Sometimes I’d get some work and I was living in a tent. No one knew it. I learned something out of it: never put a tent near a river that floods. I lost everything. With all the money I saved, I went to a hotel room: where do I go now? I ended up out on the streets. I’d go to the mall. I’d go around the circle of the food court and take all the chicken samples and that’s how I ate. I was too prideful to go to a soup kitchen.

Q: Why did you become involved in the Occupy movement?
Somebody called me up after the first Occupy organizational meeting in Roger Williams National Park— and I work with a lot of different organizations on, some would say, the radical side— and they said “you have to go to this next meeting. It’s going to be in Burnside Park. This is this Occupy thing.” So I said, “O.K.” And what I want in my own advocacy they were speaking the same things I was seeing. The economic downturn. Where’s all the money going? People being put in situations they never thought of. Here was a chance where good community organizers were coming together for the same things we’d all been complaining about and that was very, very much in my interest.

Q: What did you think of the relationship between the Occupiers in the park and the people who were homeless who had been congregating down there for a long time and felt it was their space?  Was it a successful relationship?
It was more than successful. It was phenomenal. The Occupy movement didn’t think that they were going to become part of the system but I depended upon Occupy for the outreach in my work. When people without homes were asking to go down there and set up a tent, one of the first questions they would ask them was “Why do you want to come down here?” “Well, I have no other place to go.”  And they would call me up. So, without Occupy even knowing it, they were a big part of trying to connect people with services in the mainstream. They became part of the outreach part of our system. And that wasn’t unique just in Providence because [it happened at] other Occupies throughout the country. Providence, I think, was more unique because they became part of the outreach of my work, which was very cool. They helped more people than they realized.
What was really cool, the Occupiers didn’t want to just hand it over to me. They wanted to learn the system so they could actually independently know that knowledge— where the soup kitchens were— [They said,]“I want to know where to send people.” They saw the people who were really getting slammed by the 1%, the bottom of the ladder. They weren’t just protesting, they were actually reaching out and helping. That was great.

Q: What did you think of the agreement between Occupy and the City regarding the winter day shelter for the homeless?
You could see the end coming. Numbers were dwindling. The weather was warm, but it was still miserable. Other Occupations, they didn’t get anything out but bad publicity. There would be an argument: we could have gotten more or we could have asked for more but the Occupation itself in Burnside Park was just part of the picture, in my view. If people were depending on the park for the Occupy movement, my feeling as an organizer is, the message is more important than the park.  There was a lot of debate going on. I love debate but it was getting really crass.

Q: Did the agreement to open a winter day shelter carry over into this winter?
It was a one-shot deal. There’s no money for the mayor of Providence to be giving money when it’s a state problem. It’s not a city problem, it just happens to be in the city. It’s a state issue but the state just doesn’t want that.

Q: Where do you think the Occupy Movement is going from here?
I think people needed a break. Doing this type of work for social justice— it can get very, very tiring. It always seems you are climbing mountains every day, then all you get is that one victory and then the next day you’re always climbing again. So I think a lot of people got burned out. I wish some of the core organizers that are still doing their own work would unify again. Throughout the state. I think if we can get all the mainstream organizations and some of the grassroots radical organizations, just organizations who care, back to the table we can just say, “What’s the next step for the 99%?” It was a perfect storm last October. It just happened quick. The timing— everything fell into place.  Within two weeks we occupied a park and had almost 1500 people march to the State House. Some people say, “How’d you do that?” but if you were part of that core group— I think I was at the second or the third meeting—  more and more community organizers who have done actions and things like that got together. It surprised us, the seasoned organizers, what was happening that day. Because people were still coming. I remember when we started the march, I jumped up on the statue with a bullhorn in front of the federal courthouse ready to say something and I had to sit there for like 10 minutes because more and more people were gathering and then we gave our speech at the courthouse and we were heading towards the financial district and we started marching down Westminster and I could not see where this march ended. It was beyond all expectations –it was a perfect storm.

John Joyce passed away on February 14, 2013.

Rhode Island’s best-known memorial to the tragedy of September 11 is now in disrepair, obscured by graffiti.
Over 10,000 Rhode Islanders contributed hand-painted tiles that were placed on the Wall of Hope in downtown Providence, dedicated in September 2002. A nonprofit group, Rhode Island for Community and Justice, came up with the idea for this mosaic, encouraging Rhode Islanders to pay tribute to the lost loved ones of September 11 and to portray their personal visions and hopes for the future. People from many religions, races and cultures, ranging from young children to seniors, each contributed their own piece. I’ve always found it moving to see the pictures and thoughts on the tiles, which express the hopes, patriotism, peace, and love of thousands of people.

 
Now, though, parts of the mosaic are covered with graffiti or advertising, and many tiles are broken. If you go to Waterplace Park, where most of the tiles are installed in the pedestrian tunnel underneath Memorial Boulevard by the river, you can see heavy stains and graffiti on many of the tiles. One tile that originally said “LOVE” has been altered to “Brittany LOVE’s Jose.” On another tile, which was designed to show a family holding hands, graffiti writers have decided to add their own names and the names of their friends next to the family members’ original names. Some of the graffiti has been there for years and still hasn’t been cleaned. On the Providence Journal building, which also hosts thousands of tiles, an advertisement for a snowboarding store has been pasted across the mosaic, and no one has removed it. Evidently things have also been pasted on the tiles in Waterplace Park and then removed, but they weren’t cleaned off carefully, since you can still see the heavy residue left on the tiles. The few tiles that are located indoors, in the Convention Center, are in better shape but still have some marks on them.
It’s painful to see this. The Wall of Hope is a great example of the wisdom, diversity and resilience of Rhode Islanders. Currently most of it is hard to see, in a tunnel below street level where heavy rains sometimes lead to water flooding onto the tiles. But it deserves to be better kept up.
I wrote down some of the variety of messages that people put on their tiles:

At first, the tiles were supposed to be in the tunnel for only a couple of years. They were intended to have a permanent home in the Heritage Harbor Museum, and money was borrowed in taxpayers’ names to pay for building this museum. But authorities have since announced that the museum will not be built, even though the stone marker outside the tunnel still says that the tiles will be moved to the Heritage Harbor Museum in 2005. State leaders designed the museum funding without enough protection for taxpayers, so we will still be on the hook for this never-built museum, a total of $1.1 million including interest (yes, Wall Street got a cut of the deal). This is only one of many recent rip-offs like 38 Studios.
It’s good to be reminded that we, the 99% of Rhode Island, are better than this.  Our spirit is the spirit that’s shown on this monument. It’s not just about hope, it’s about what we’re ready to do. The wise words on this monument came from us, and we have it in us to make a better future. We don’t need to live under these disasters and swindles, if we refuse to allow the 1% to stand in our way.

As Occupy groups across the world celebrate their anniversaries and the movement enters its second year, it has only just begun in East Providence.
This past summer, a small group of socially conscious people met and discussed the Occupy movement and how it pertained to East Providence. On October 2nd, they had prepared a speech and introduced a non-binding resolution to the East Providence City Council, asking their elected officials to support amending the Constitution to state explicitly that corporations are not people and that money is not free speech and to advocate overturning the Supreme Court case Citizens United v Federal Elections Commission. The idea for an Occupy East Providence came out of my own belief that organizing at the local level and working in the realm of local politics was as much needed as are the big city occupations, such as Occupy Providence or Occupy Wall Street, campaigning on state, national, or international issues. Smaller Occupations can connect national politics to the local level and illustrate that what happens on Capitol Hill is affecting the people of East Providence.
Since presenting the non-binding resolution addressing the concept of corporate personhood to the city council, Occupy East Providence has taken on a campaign to make the connection between the national political atmosphere, the one that believes corporations are people and money is free speech, and the undemocratic budget commission that controls the City of East Providence’s finances. It is easy to attend a city council meeting and lose faith in our elected officials (as we Townies know all too well). The process drags on for hours and nothing real seems to be accomplished. But is it due to the alleged failings of our councilpersons that the city is on the verge of bankruptcy and that the state has mandated an unelected budget commission to take charge of the city’s funds? At the Weaver Library on Saturday, October 6th, Occupy East Providence invited residents to share their feelings in an attempt to answer that very question. To spark the discussion, our own Patricia Fontes delivered a speech on how the national attitude toward taxes and federal tax policy has brought this country, and East Providence, to where it is today.     
Pat presented a chart which showed the top marginal tax rates between 1937 and 2011, stating that “My birth date, December of 1936, coincided with the introduction of highly progressive income taxation, 79% of taxable income above $215,400. All through my childhood and the period of my public education (through 1953), on into the years when I taught in public schools (1957-59), that top rate rose into the 90%s, typically on taxable incomes over either $200,000 or $400,000. Between 1972 and 1986, the federal government had enough tax revenue to share with state and local governments (revenue sharing). Neither as a school pupil nor as a teacher did the schools I was in have to have candy sales or bake sales to raise money; no one had to pay to participate in school sports. East Providence supported four public libraries, and the tuitions at Rhode Island College and the University of Rhode Island were next-to-nothing”.
She lamented the fact that “so many Tea Party types of my age and even much younger (anyone born up through 1942 shared my experience, and even people born up to 1963 shared at least some of the progressive taxation years, 90%s until 1963, 70%s until 1981, and 60% until 1986) are so eager to make sure that the next generations will not share their good fortune.”
“The wealthy who had to pay taxes at those high rates during my childhood and youth did pay them and did keep on doing whatever it was they did to earn the incomes in those high brackets. They didn’t stop working and earning because the part of their income greater than $400,000 (after all the usual deductions and the lower tax rate brackets) was taxed at 90%. Or, if they did, as I think back now, so much the better. That left economic space for others to work and to invest. All of those highest tax rate payers from 1942 through 1963 have probably died by now.  Were they some kind of genetic mutants? If greed is human nature and virtuous, as the free market proponents would have us believe, was that group inhuman?  No. The socio-cultural and the political milieu supported their tax-paying as desirable and virtuous, and so they paid, more or less willingly.”
Her speech exemplified how drastically the national conversation regarding taxes has changed during her lifetime, especially pertaining to the wealthy. It also made clear the effects that drastically lowered taxes are having on everyone else. These budget constraints did not come out of the blue, they were not created overnight. Cities like my own hometown of East Providence as well as Central Falls are seeing some of the more horrific results of a tax policy that allows the wealthiest to get away with paying next to nothing.

O, de next morning such condition our village
 So late do seems of confusion, riot and pillage.
-Hard Scrabble, from an 1824 pamphlet

This 1824 broadside phrase illustrates the aftermath of a race riot that destroyed a predominately African-American community in Providence called Hard Scrabble. Few today know of the events that took place in this neighborhood nearly two centuries ago, but the riot that occurred there was a major controversy back in its day. This conflict illuminated the stark racial, social, and political divisions that split the town at that time.
The riot was sparked when a group of black men walking in Providence refused to give up the “inside walk” to a number of white individuals coming from the opposite direction on an autumn evening. The next night, on October 18, 1824, violence broke out. A mob of white residents from all parts of Providence attacked a section of North Main Street. About twenty African-Americans’ homes and that of one white resident were destroyed during the riot. Only four rioters were tried after the Hard Scrabble incident, and all but one was eventually acquitted.
Race, of course, played a huge part in the incident. Although Rhode Island contained one of the highest percentages of free blacks throughout the U.S., there was still a sharp racial divide, and at the time of the riot, suffrage was only allowed to white male land owners. A couple of days before the riot, Chief Justice William Spear contributed an editorial to the Providence Beacon in which he commented that blacks in Providence were “naturally vicious and wicked.” Before the riot, Hard Scrabble was known as that part of the city where people of “ill repute” resided; it was deemed a place plagued with “criminal elements.” It was no wonder, then, that Joseph Tillinghast, the defense attorney in the “Hard Scrabble Riot” trial, stated that the reason the accused caused such destructive mayhem to that section of Providence was that they were protecting “the morals of the community.”

Attacks by white rioters on African Americans occurred in many parts of the country. This is a contemporary depiction of the 1863 New York Draft Riot that occurred four decades after Providence’s Hard Scrabble riot. Photo from authentichistory.com

Racial violence unfortunately continued in Providence in later years. An integrated working-class community, Snow Town, was malevolently assaulted by white rioters in 1831 when a black resident shot and killed a white sailor for throwing stones at his home. The “Snow Town Riots” resulted in four whites being killed by the local militia. As a result of the tragic events of Snow Town, the General Assembly granted the town of Providence a city charter in November of 1831, giving the presiding mayor the power to imprison anyone who carried out any sort of disorderly conduct in the municipality.
After the Civil War, the memory of Hard Scrabble and Snow Town and the violence the residents there had endured began to fade away. Ironically, the shadow of the State House still falls upon the sites of this chapter in the city’s dark and almost forgotten past. Although both neighborhoods were cursed by rumors of crime and seedy activities, they also housed a vibrant working-class community composed of all races that lived together in harmony. While we shouldn’t forget the racial hatred and violence that marred this chapter in Providence’s history, we should also remember the diversity and solidarity that characterized our own 99% in these neighborhoods, too.

________________________________________________

Sources about Hard Scrabble:
Crouch, John, “Providence Newspapers and the Race Riots of 1824 and 1831.”   http://patriot.net/~crouch/artj/riot.html

Hard-Scrabble Calendar: Report of the Trials of Oliver Cummins Who Were Indicted with Six Others for a Riot, and for Aiding in Pulling Down a Dwelling-House, on the 18th of October, at Hard-Scrabble (1824).

Sweet, John Wood.  Bodies Politic: Negotiating Race in the American North 1730-1830.
University of Pennsylania Press, 2006.

Photo by Chloe Chassaing

Netroots Nation participants were greeted by a 24/7 sidewalk occupation by Occupy Providence that started when the annual conference began on Thursday afternoon, June 7, at the Providence Convention Center, and continued until the conference’s ending on Sunday, June 10.
Netroots Nation is a collection of liberal Internet bloggers, news reporters and other individuals who play a major role in national political social networking. This conference was an opportunity for those who had been writing about political issues to interact with one another and with prominent politicians on the Left.
Members of Occupy Providence set up sleeping bags, protest signs, and an info desk outside the Convention Center to attract those attending the conference and focused on three themes: no bailout for 38 Studios, the bankrupt gaming company founded by Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling that owes the state of Rhode Island millions of dollars; Tax the Wealthy; and an economic development and recovery plan that involves Solidarity not Austerity.
Protesters, passers-by and Netroots folks engaged in daily working group meetings, general assemblies, and community discussions. Every night ended with a People’s Open Mic, where all Occupiers were welcome to tell their stories, explaining why they were members of the movement and how the movement had affected them.
There were Teach-ins on Thursday and Friday afternoon centering on issues of economic inequality, student debt and environmental destruction. Many of the problems addressed in these public forums could be resolved, speakers and participants agreed, if the richest individuals in the nation were taxed at a higher rate. Rather than taxing those who can afford to pay higher taxes, our elected representatives engage in austerity measures and cut social programs for those who need them. This exact type of economic injustice is what Occupy Providence highlighted during the weekend’s twenty-four hour protest.
The Netroots conference could not have taken place at a more politically charged time in Providence, as it was held only weeks after 38 Studios failed. Many of the liberal Internet bloggers inside the Convention Center have long expressed outrage at the economic injustice prevalent in American society. The situation surrounding the recently shattered 38 Studios is a perfect example of this injustice and Occupy Providence shed light on the scandal during the Netroots conference. Schilling was given $75 million dollars by the State of Rhode Island with the expectation that his venture would create job opportunities for Rhode Island workers— but his venture failed. Occupy Providence shared the outrage felt by the community at seeing Schilling, a man with no experience in running a large business, given so much job relief money simply because he was famous and wealthy.
Occupy Providence organized protests throughout the weekend. On Friday protesters marched to 38 Studios to make chalk outlines representing the “Dead on Arrival” jobs that Curt Schilling’s company had “brought” to Rhode Island. Occupy Providence then marched to the State House where they delivered a petition to the Governor’s office to stop the bailout of 38 Studios.
Occupy Providence members were ejected from the State House by police officers, despite being told they could stay if they were quiet. Representative Teresa A. Tanzi left the House floor to defend the protesters against the police but they ignored her as well.
On Saturday Occupy Providence held their biggest march of the weekend with around 75 people taking to the streets. Their first stop was again 38 Studios, to denounce the state’s ill-considered financial support for this failed venture. The activists then continued their march to the State House, drawing chalk outlines of bodies representing 38 Studio’s D.O.A. jobs.
Protesters then marched through the Providence Place Mall, where they had a tense confrontation with the police. Mall security officers unsuccessfully attempted to push protesters out of the Mall. Outraged at Occupy Providence’s exercise of its freedom of speech, the head of security called the police to have the marchers arrested. Ten peaceful protesters were detained while other members of Occupy Providence stood across the street awaiting their detained friends’ release and mic checked the police. After a few tense moments the protesters were released. One had suffered a sprained arm as a result of the police’s aggressive arrest. A community healing discussion followed that symbolized the unity that Occupy Providence has maintained even during its most intense political protests.
I, the author of this article, was one of the individuals who helped plan and also participated in this four-day, three-night, twenty-four hour protest. This protest was, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful political actions our organization has seen to date. The weekend-long protest has increased the number of faces that I will think of when I need strength and inspiration. I formed many new friendships and strengthened old ones. I want to give a special thank you to those who stayed with us from Occupies in Connecticut, Texas and Tennessee.
By the time we packed up our sleeping bags on Sunday our movement had grown in maturity, productivity and unity. It seems to me that our movement is beginning to take a first of many steps toward being capable of dealing with issues, both internal and external, that have held us back. I am confident of our ability to continue to grow stronger now that the Sidewalk Occupation has ended.

When OWS, Occupy Boston, Occupy Oakland, and the dozens of other encampments were cleared out by the police, it disrupted and disorganized our movement. We have to recognize and admit those facts. Repression is a tried and true method that the 1% employs against social movements— IT WORKS— that’s why they do it.
Further, the continued occupation of OWS in Zuccotti Park represented the only national focal point for our movement and once it was gone, Occupy entered a new space— the space of retreat, regroupment and figuring out the next phase.
As long as the movement was in occupied spaces, we offered an organizing/protest in the streets/social movement alternative to the electoral sham of the 1%. Mass social protest movements in the streets seriously disrupt the electoral process and I cite the 1968 street protests at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago as a good example of that. In order to refocus the country on the duopoly of the Democrats and Republicans, the 1% had to repress our movement.
All social movements have inherent contradictions and follow their own special ‘laws’ of development. They go through amazing phases of mass protest, unity, unleashed energy and creativity, and, especially after a nationally coordinated repression, periods of downturn.
A huge part of movement building (and movement leadership) is having the ability to recognize those periods of downturn and being sufficiently organized to minimize the impacts from the blows from the 1%.
The Occupy movement was brilliant at illuminating the primary contradiction of American capitalism. By focusing on the obscene wealth inequality caused by Wall St, the big banks, and the profit motive, the Occupy movement tapped into mass anger and deep-seated outrage at the corporations, which was bubbling just underneath the surface in American society. Its formulation of the 1% versus the 99% struck a deep chord in the consciousness of the American people, particularly the youth.
The occupation tactic offered an amazing model of sustained organizing, reclaiming public space for protest, assembly and free speech. These combined to give the Occupy movement a mass appeal which hasn’t been seen from a social protest movement in 35 years. A new radicalization is beginning to unfold in dramatic and unique ways.
Occupy represents nothing less than the rebirth of working-class, anti-capitalist struggle. After 35 years of neo-liberal economic policies and structural adjustments that have devastated the unions and women’s rights and increased racial inequality (despite Obama’s election as President), the one-sided class war is over. Our side is finally fighting back!
Two-sided class struggle is on the agenda­­— an amazing achievement for a movement that’s just six months old. But as I stated earlier, all social protest movements have contradictions and follow their own ‘laws’ of development. The Occupy movement’s biggest contradiction is this: it’s a working-class, anti-capitalist movement fighting the 1% that is physically based outside the workplace (factories, offices, hospitals, schools, construction sites, other workplaces), and largely outside the organized spaces of the working class (unions). That is where the real potential power of the 99% resides, in our workplaces, where through strikes and workplace occupations, we can collectively organize to shut down, then take over and run the system ourselves. The tactic of occupying public space was brilliant as a first phase for our new movement but there are solid reasons to believe that phase is and should be over. The most compelling reason why I think it won’t be useful for us to try to reproduce the occupations of last fall in the spring is the relative ease with which the armed agents (police/security apparatus) of the 1% were able to repress and clear out the encampments. Occupy alone doesn’t possess the social weight (which exists with workers in factories and workplaces) to defend occupations, especially in open public parks.  Occupy can’t mobilize sufficient masses of the American working class to consistently come out in defense of public spaces every time the police move to evict us. The relationship of class forces (1% versus 99%) doesn’t yet favor the Occupy movement.
The Occupy movement has changed the discourse in this country, with a powerful narrative that has resonated with the 99%, but we have largely been unable to change the material reality and agenda of the 1%. That agenda has been decades in the making and encompasses dramatically lowering the standard of living of the 99%. US capitalism is in a life and death struggle to maintain its hegemony as an international empire with wars/occupations abroad and class war at home. It will take the power of the working class, organized in collective workplace struggle, to transform society in the fundamental ways Occupy is demanding.