Le mouvement Occupy Wall Street<\/em> s’impose chaque jour davantage comme un \u00e9v\u00e9nement extr\u00eamement singulier et sp\u00e9cifique, voire \u00e9trange et \u00e0 premi\u00e8re vue inexplicable. Il y a bien s\u00fbr l’explication des complots<\/a>, mais elle explique si peu qu’elle sert finalement \u00e0 confirmer la singularit\u00e9 extraordinaire de ce qui est effectivement une \u00e9nigme<\/a>. Un texte de William Echols, de Russia Today<\/em> le 10 octobre 2011<\/a>, apporte d’int\u00e9ressants \u00e9l\u00e9ments de r\u00e9flexion, non pas de r\u00e9solution de l’\u00e9nigme, mais pour renforcer encore plus le sentiment que OWS est bien une \u00e9nigme et m\u00e9rite d’\u00eatre trait\u00e9e comme telle, selon des appr\u00e9ciations compl\u00e8tement nouvelles et non pas selon les r\u00e9f\u00e9rences archa\u00efques (complots, revendications, r\u00e9volution, etc.). <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tApr\u00e8s avoir d\u00e9crit la fa\u00e7on absolument inhabituelle dont se forment les diff\u00e9rents mouvements, ou branches g\u00e9ographiques de OWS, dans d’autres villes des USA, apr\u00e8s avoir act\u00e9 le succ\u00e8s non seulement de communication du mouvement, mais le succ\u00e8s tactique<\/strong> de cette m\u00e9thode, Echols d\u00e9veloppe ses observations<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThis reality points to one of the greatest paradoxes of the burgeoning Occupy Wall Street movement. Despite criticisms that the group has a vaguely defined message and no clear leadership, the protests, both in terms of demographic composition, conduct, and the messages being conveyed via placards and chants (often to the beat of a drum), are almost uniform. Whether crying out we are the 99 per cent or decrying the injustice that they got bailed out, we got sold out, the scenery changes from city to city, but one message remains the same: this is what democracy looks like.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbPerhaps the reason for it is that today’s movement is very much a product of its age and also an inversion of the past order. While the US was once viewed as a city on the hill that provided a mythical beacon of democracy to other nations, in an almost strange twist of fate, the Occupy Wall Street movement has found its inspiration in the Arab World, as even former vice-president Al Gore proclaimed that America needed a non-violent Tahrir Square. A seemingly metaphorical parallel took on life this past Saturday as Egyptian activist Mohammed Ezzeldin told an exuberant crowd in New York’s Washington Square Park about the link he saw between the anti-Mubarak protests and America’s growing civil action. In a somewhat awkward choral call and response, Ezzeldin proclaimed: I am coming from there -from the Arab Spring. From the Arab Spring to the fall of Wall Street. From Liberation Square to Washington Square, to the fall of Wall Street and market domination, and capitalist domination.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIt is the sort of message that both enlivens the nascent movement as well as points to the flaws inherit within it. For while youthful radicals might find exhilaration in Marxist calls to bring down the capitalist order, union members (among others) who came out in force are merely seeking to preserve their role in it.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIt is in that sense that a horizontally organized protest movement has the power to turn modern day tweets and status updates into old school bodies and placards filling the streets from sea to shining sea, while at the same time lacking any authority to impose a set of demands on its participants. If we are the 99 per cent means we are not among the world’s elite, the message almost certainly rings true. But qualify that message beyond one’s personal assets, and the unifying principle of the protestors becomes far less definable. Ultimately, the lack of a clearly defined message could just as well serve to rain on their own parade as it could to set the streets ablaze.<\/em> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbPerhaps recognizing this, the famous writer and activist Naomi Klein attempted to address this very real problem while addressing demonstrators in New York on Thursday. Being horizontal and deeply democratic is wonderful. But these principles are compatible with the hard work of building structures and institutions that are sturdy enough to weather the storms ahead. I have great faith that this will happen, Klein said, as cited by the Nation.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbFor now, there is enough public anger to give the movement lifeblood to both sustain itself and continue to grow. And in picking a fight with the most dominant economic and political forces on the planet, Klein implored the protestors to treat this beautiful movement as if it is most important thing in the world. Because it is. It really is.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbWhile Klein’s message is one of inspiration and hope, one question remains: Who is listening?<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tOn le voit, Echols cite notamment Noami Klein dans son adresse<\/a> aux Occupants de OWS, \u00e0 Wall Street. Alors qu’en la citant, nous insistions essentiellement sur l’aspect lyrique et esth\u00e9tique du discours, pour mettre en \u00e9vidence les tr\u00e8s grandes diff\u00e9rence de r\u00e9actions (celle de Klein compar\u00e9e \u00e0 celle de Robert Reich), Echols mentionne un passage plus technique, qui est tr\u00e8s int\u00e9ressant : \u00abBeing horizontal and deeply democratic is wonderful. But these principles are compatible with the hard work of building structures and institutions that are sturdy enough to weather the storms ahead. I have great faith that this will happen<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tCette id\u00e9e peut \u00eatre compl\u00e9t\u00e9e par une autre, que pr\u00e9sente un des Occupants d’OWS, \u00e9galement consult\u00e9 par Russia Toiday<\/em>, le 7 octobre 2011<\/a>. Il s’agit de l’activiste Yotam Marom, qui fut arr\u00eat\u00e9 \u00e0 Manhattan lors de l’affaire du pont de Brooklyn. Marom, qui est toujours actif au sein d’OWS, \u00e0 Wall Street, explique pourquoi il approuve le fait que Occupy Wall Street<\/em> ne pr\u00e9sente aucune revendication pr\u00e9cise.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abDespite getting bigger and gaining more support every day, Occupy Wall Street has been largely criticized for not having any definite demands. Marom, who is a proponent of demands, explained that generally they are necessary as they clarify the struggle. However, he believes it is not compulsory for Occupy Wall Street\u00a0\u00bb to come up with demands. I don’t think this occupation has to come up with its own demands. It can be a foundation on top of which community and grassroots organizations and movements can fight. We have an enormous potential to really build a movement capable of both creating an alternative structure and fighting to create space for that structure, he concluded.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tOn sait combien nous pensons que ce comportement spontan\u00e9, ou cette tactique, notamment l’absence de buts affirm\u00e9s, sont novateurs et essentiels pour cette sorte de mouvement. (Voir notamment le 28 juin 2011<\/a> et le 3 octobre 2011<\/a>.) Qu’il s’agisse d’un comportement spontan\u00e9 ou d’une tactique importe assez peu, notre conviction \u00e9tant d’ailleurs qu’il s’agit d’un comportement et<\/strong> d’une tactique, ou d’un comportement devenant<\/strong> une tactique, etc. L’explication d’un comportement spontan\u00e9 qui existe n\u00e9anmoins, dans tous les cas \u00e0 l’origine, peut \u00eatre ais\u00e9ment trouv\u00e9e dans le fait que ces mouvements se d\u00e9veloppent dans le cadre d’une crise dont tout le monde sent bien qu’elle ne peut \u00eatre r\u00e9solue d’une fa\u00e7on parcellaire, par une r\u00e9forme ou l’autre, et que, par cons\u00e9quent, la mise en avant de revendications parcellaires ne peut aboutir qu’\u00e0 des mesures elles-m\u00eames parcellaires, qui ne changeront rien au fondement de la crise mais permettront la r\u00e9cup\u00e9ration du mouvement par le Syst\u00e8me. Ce qui est par contre remarquable, notamment dans le cas US, c’est que cette absence de buts affirm\u00e9s, souvent d\u00e9sign\u00e9 comme une faiblesse du mouvement et la garantie de son \u00e9chec, suscite un tel tintamarre, une telle accumulation d’interrogations ou de d\u00e9nonciations, que cela donne un statut de plus en plus important au mouvement par le fait du syst\u00e8me de la communication, et assure donc le succ\u00e8s du mouvement (Puisque, aujourd’hui, le succ\u00e8s r\u00e9el se mesure en termes de communication.) Le paradoxe est complet puisque la faiblesse du mouvement comme garantie de son \u00e9chec assure son succ\u00e8s. Aujourd’hui, aux USA, tout le monde ne parle que d’Occupy Wall Street<\/em>, alors que le mouvement n’a rien exig\u00e9, n’a rien obtenu et a d\u00e9plac\u00e9 des masses extr\u00eamement faibles de protestataires.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tUn autre point est int\u00e9ressant dans les extraits cit\u00e9s ci-dessus. Il s’agit du caract\u00e8re d’horizontalit\u00e9 du mouvement. Pour les id\u00e9ologues, cela se traduit aussit\u00f4t en termes de d\u00e9mocratie directe. ([T]his is what democracy looks like<\/em>, disent les manifestants ; \u00abBeing horizontal and deeply democratic is wonderful<\/em>\u00bb, dit Noami Klein.) Nous chercherions plut\u00f4t une interpr\u00e9tation en terme de hi\u00e9rarchie, d’inversion et d’action hors-Syst\u00e8me. L’horizontalit\u00e9 entrave compl\u00e8tement le caract\u00e8re vertical de la hi\u00e9rarchie, que ce soit la hi\u00e9rarchie du Syst\u00e8me ou la contre-hi\u00e9rarchie des groupes qui luttent contre le Syst\u00e8me en acceptant les termes et les r\u00e9f\u00e9rences du Syst\u00e8me. L’horizontalit\u00e9 rompt le concept de hi\u00e9rarchie, qui est dans ce cas une hi\u00e9rarchie compl\u00e8tement subvertie et invertie, comme tout ce qui renvoie au Syst\u00e8me. M\u00eame si elle peut \u00eatre consid\u00e9r\u00e9e comme th\u00e9oriquement subversive par rapport \u00e0 l’ordre th\u00e9orique, cette horizontalit\u00e9 est en r\u00e9alit\u00e9 subversive d’un ordre (d’une hi\u00e9rarchie) lui-m\u00eame subversif ; par cons\u00e9quent elle est vertueuse. Elle agit en dehors du Syst\u00e8me parce qu’elle refuse les r\u00e9f\u00e9rences du Syst\u00e8me et se r\u00e9v\u00e8le compl\u00e8tement antiSyst\u00e8me.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 11 octobre 2011 \u00e0 09H58<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Le mouvement Occupy Wall Street s’impose chaque jour davantage comme un \u00e9v\u00e9nement extr\u00eamement singulier et sp\u00e9cifique, voire \u00e9trange et \u00e0 premi\u00e8re vue inexplicable. Il y a bien s\u00fbr l’explication des complots, mais elle explique si peu qu’elle sert finalement \u00e0 confirmer la singularit\u00e9 extraordinaire de ce qui est effectivement une \u00e9nigme. Un texte de William… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[4646,6648,10743,11567,11360,9054,5145,11493,3372,8049,3132],"class_list":["post-74132","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-antisysteme","tag-enigme","tag-hierarchie","tag-horizontalite","tag-indignes","tag-inversion","tag-klein","tag-occupy","tag-street","tag-subversion","tag-wall"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74132","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=74132"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74132\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74132"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74132"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74132"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}