Duluth, Minnesota’s Low were prime progenitors of the slowcore movement, favoring creeping tempos and minimalist arrangements. Unlike too many other similarly inclined bands, Low’s music is never boring and often quite beautiful. “Murderer” comes from the band’s new “Drums and Guns” album and, in its own eerie, disquieting way, sounds like it belongs in an indie version of a film noir.
– David Marchese
(Credit: CLM via Shutterstock/Salon)
A man and a woman are lying in bed under the covers, both of them beaming. She’s holding a handwritten sign that reads in part, “F–k a dozen roses.”
It’s one of several photos on the web site Occupy Valentine’s Day, which applies the ethos of the anti-Wall Street movement to the consumerism of cupid’s holiday — and it’s just the latest attempt at creating an alternative celebration. “I think we need a new and different type of analysis around relationships,” says Samhita Mukhopadhyay, the site’s creator and author of “Outdated: Why Dating Is Ruining Your Love Life.” “This is not about being anti-love, but instead anti the unfair structures that forces us to love a certain way.”
A big part of that is that is the “romantic-industrial complex that nets billions of dollars from Valentine’s Day and weddings, and it needs you to ‘buy into’ outdated ideas of love and marriage,” she wrote in a recent op-ed for The Nation. “The more you express your love through candies, chocolates, diamonds, rentals and registries, the more the RIC makes!” (Indeed, it’s estimated that consumers will spend roughly $17.6 billion on cards, chocolates, flowers, jewelry and the like this February 14.) But instead of just trashing V-Day — or VD (i.e. venereal disease) Day, as its biggest haters like to call it — she wants to honor “the different ways we engage in loving relationships.”
A less political alternative is one introduced by everyone’s favorite fictional mid-level bureaucrat, Leslie Knope of NBC’s “Parks and Recreation.” She celebrates “Galentine’s Day” every February 13th by getting together with her ladyfriends for a brunch of her signature dish, whipped-cream with a side of waffle, to celebrate female friendship. Leslie doles out quirky gifts (sculptures of everyone’s spirit animal or mosaics of their faces made out of crushed diet soda cans, for example). She compares the celebration to Lilith Fair — “minus the angst and plus fritatas.”
Granted, Galentine’s Day started as a comedy punchline, but the concept was popular enough in the real world that this year NBC put together a guide on how to create your own Galentine’s Brunch. Bon Appetit even cooked up a special waffle recipe for the occasion. It’s also inspired DIY-ers to make Galentine’s Day e-cards and recreate some of Leslie’s more memorable gifts, like crochet flower pens.
Of course, “Parks and Recreation” didn’t invent the idea of single friends getting together on Valentine’s Day — that’s no doubt been around as long as the holiday itself — it just popularized a cute term for it. Let’s not forget the gender-inclusive Palentine’s Day, Singles Awareness Day, or the concept of having a friendly “anti-valentine.” Greeting card companies are increasingly cashing in on anti-Valentine’s Day card for friends, including — gasp! — Hallmark itself.
A similarly heartwarming option is Quirkyalone Day, founded by Sasha Cohen, author of “Quirkyalone: A Manifesto for Uncompromising Romantics,” a book about people who “prefer being single to dating for the sake of being in a relationship.” She tells me, “I’m not against Valentine’s Day, but I have never been particularly inspired by it. The aim of International Quirkyalone Day is to offer a fresh alternative where you get to create your own day free of all cliches.” It’s an excuse to “celebrate yourself and your whole life,” she says, and that can manifest in a number of different ways: “take a long walk alone (leave behind your cell phone), buy yourself daisies, start a neglected creative project, buy yourself hot lingerie, get a massage, host a dinner party.”
Of course, not all Valentine’s Day alternatives are so charmingly earnest. Anti-V-Day events across the country call on bitter singles to bring a photo of their ex to put through a paper-shredder or pin to a dart board, or exact some other form of questionable revenge. And make no mistake, while it’s nowhere near a $16 billion industry, there is a market for Cupid-hating goods — from cards reading “Love stinks” to T-shirts featuring upside-down hearts to candy hearts with sayings like, “U left seat up” and “Dog is cuter.” The social network game Farmville even has virtual anti-Valentine’s Day items for purchase, like a barbed heart and a black flower. The truth is this isn’t anything new: Long before there were pithy e-cards, there were Victorian-era vinegar valentines, insulting cards sent to one’s enemies.
Why has the holiday generated such cynicism and, sometimes, downright hatred? Cohen says, “Valentine’s Day has this way of making people feel bad, whether they are single or in a relationship. If you are single, you feel left out. If you are dating or in a relationship, you feel pressure and expectation to have a romantic evening.” She’s all for “a pure celebration of love in all its forms,” but “the problem is when we narrow that definition of love to a romantic connection.” Cohen explains, “Almost 50 percent of American adults are single, so people are bound to feel left out. It’s sort of like a Thanksgiving that only 50 percent of the population feels invited to.”
Tracy Clark-Flory is a staff writer at Salon. Follow @tracyclarkflory on Twitter. More Tracy Clark-Flory
Authors Jack Murnighan and Maura Kelly.
Dear Jack and Maura,
I’m a 23-year-old straight male, and I’ve never been in a relationship. In fact, I’ve never even been on a second date before (and only a couple of first dates, for that matter). I’ve only ever kissed two girls, and that’s the extent of my sexual experience. I feel like I’ve missed out on so much over the years, and it’s made me wonder if there might be something horribly wrong with me. I’m seriously on the brink of giving up on dating (and everything that goes with it) altogether.
Moreover, I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone who is as much of a romantic “blank slate” as I am. Because I’ve never been in a relationship, I don’t have a reference point; I have no idea what kind of partner I’d be for a woman (whether I’d be clingy, whether I’d be open to the possibility of commitment, etc.). So not only do I think I’ve missed out on a wealth of experiences, but I’ve also missed out on the self-discovery (or whatever Disney cliché you want to use) that goes along with those experiences.
If you have any literature to recommend me, I’d greatly appreciate it.
Maura writes:
Dear Never Been in Love:
You haven’t missed out all! Very few people who are 23 truly know what they’d be like in a relationship. These are the years — your 20′s and 30′s — for figuring this stuff out. I know it’s hard to remember in our hyper-sexualized age, but you still have plenty of time for all sorts of experiences and self-discoveries — even if you may need to push yourself out of your comfort zone a bit to have them.
Read a book like “Jane Eyre,” and you’ll meet a main character a bit like yourself, even though she’s female. She lives a very lonely and solitary life — and surely has no idea what she‘d be like in a relationship — until she meets a true kindred spirit in her employer, a man named Edward Rochester. You might, however, feel more affinity with Margaret Schlegel, the heroine of “Howards End.” A thirty-something spinster, she’s pretty sure she won’t ever fall in love — until the day when an older male friend unexpectedly makes it clear that he’s deeply enamored of her by asking her to become his wife. His love for her is so strong that her own love grows out of it — and they go on to build a remarkable marriage.
But there are also male characters who think they’ll never find love, only to discover it unexpectedly — like Karim, a computer programmer who gets into a sweet relationship with his office mate, in the novel “Kapitoil,” by my friend Teddy Wayne. Or Raskolnikov, the murderer from “Crime and Punishment,” who is redeemed by the love of a good woman (who happens to be a prostitute). Although, come to think of it, maybe it’s not Raskolnikov who thought he’d never find love, but I who thought no one could ever love an over-educated, self-important jerk like him.
So please, Mr. Never Been, have faith! Remember how much opportunity and possibility there is out there — and how young you are. Life is yours for the living, friend.
– – — – — – — – — – — – — – –
Dear Jack and Maura,
Two years ago I met a very sweet guy from out of town at a friend’s party. We kept in touch primarily via letters and saw each other once or twice a year. Since I met him I have been irrationally in love with him, but he always seemed a little cold to me (even though he supposedly cared for me). We didn’t declare our mutual love for one another (and he didn’t explain why he had been so paralyzed by his feelings for me) until after I had already moved a continent away. We’ve since decided to try being friends (leaving a romantic relationship to the unforeseeable), and I have a great new French boyfriend, but I don’t know how to let go of this guy back in the States. Help!
Jack writes:
My guess is that what you call “irrationally in love” is really just honest-to-goodness infatuation; you guys have only seen each other a few times, and each visit got to be a reunion. That doesn’t add up to the reality that long-term relationships have to go through.
As a result, it’s pretty likely that your man back home is really more of an idealization than the one that got away. I’d advise you to put your energies into the fantastic French boyfriend, knowing that one way or another, you have the American as a backup. But don’t compare the two: the American is still a dreamy soap bubble that could easily burst the first time you spend real time together. Fantasy is fun, but don’t let it make you discontent with reality.
A good literary example of this is Hans Castorp in Thomas Mann’s “The Magic Mountain.” He convinces himself he’s in love with Claudia Chauchat, another patient at the sanitarium he is staying in, but he’s barely exchanged introductions with her. Seeing how far he can go down the road of “love” without having real information is a warning to us all.
– – — – — – — – — – — – — – –
Dear Maura and Jack,
My plight is simple: my beloved husband died in 2008 after a several-year struggle with cancer. While he was not my first husband or love, he was the best. Also the one I had a daughter with (she’s now away in college). I guess the woe is this: I’m 58, look OK, have a good job (though always precarious) and live in a metro-New York family town chock-full of younger Park Slope émigrés. I’m interested in finding someone, but know how hard it is, and I’m weary at the prospect. No one on Match.com who’s also interested in me seems interesting. I listen to live music, read and write a lot; I’m a little cynical; I’m a lot of fun. I do seek out books and movies that I can relate to, but somehow my life isn’t turning into “Shirley Valentine.” I’m not Olive Kittredge, or some 70-plus widow either. Find my literature that balms my soul! Or gives me hope that even one such as I will serendipitously find love again.
Maura writes:
Dear Aging Cynically:
When I was 33, I had a tearful heart-to-heart with a friend of mine that ended with me saying, “I just feel too old to find love — like if my love juice hasn’t been activated yet by now, it’s probably expired.” He said, “Maura, sweetheart, you realize you’ve been saying that kind of thing since you were about 25, don’t you?” This is a long way of saying age might be a matter of perception more than anything else.
What’s more, I know of plenty of people who have found love unexpectedly much later in life — like my friends Donna and Ari, who found each other online when she was in her 50s and he was in his 60s. They’re like two newlyweds whenever I see them: always affectionate, holding hands, and kissing. If Match.com isn’t working out for you, why not try another site, like OkCupid? Or Alikewise, which caters especially to bibliophiles?
Or you could take a cue from “Love in the Time of Cholera.” The two main characters in that get together, finally, for the first time, when they are quite old … though the man, Florentino, has held a candle for the woman, Fermina, since they were kids. Do you happen to have any high school reunions coming up? Maybe you should go!
Another great — if far more bawdy — novel about love in older age is Philip Roth’s “Sabbath’s Theater.” The main character lives in a little Massachusetts town that might be a little like your New York town — and he and the town’s innkeeper fall into a passionate love affair when she’s in her late 50s, he in his 70s. It’s far from a conventional relationship, but it brings them both new zest for life, inspiring in them deeper feelings (and lust) than they’d imagined they could feel. So perhaps it’s worth attending a few Chamber of Commerce meetings … or getting involved in local politics … or maybe just treating yourself to a drink at the little hotel in town, where that charming older bartender works.
Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani waves upon his arrival at the Supreme Court for a hearing in Islamabad, Pakistan, Monday, Feb. 13, 2012 (Credit: AP Photo/B.K. Bangash)
ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s story has long been dominated by a power struggle between its two main characters: the country’s mighty military and its weak civilian government. Now, as if the story weren’t sordid enough, the rise of Pakistan’s judiciary has introduced a third character, one that analysts worry could be highly unpredictable.
Its power was on display this week when the country’s Supreme Court formally charged Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani with contempt of court, a move that could eventually lead to the leader’s dismissal.
And then, not to appear unfair, the court took on the military as well. For the first time in the country’s history, Pakistan’s Supreme Court forced the Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI), the country’s formidable spy organization, to bring before the court seven prisoners it is accused of detaining illegally.
Proponents and critics raise points from both ends regarding the surge of the judiciary’s power.
A stronger judiciary, one that is willing to hold the government and the military accountable, could be good for Pakistan, observers said. But many of them remain wary, unsure whether the court’s intentions are honorable or dubious.
Gilani, flanked by ministers, governors, coalition partners and other supporters, appeared surprisingly calm during his visit to the court on Monday.
Outside the imposing courthouse, helicopters hovered and riot police guarded the entrance.
Gilani is charged with contempt for not writing a letter to the Swiss authorities asking them to reopen corruption cases against President Asif Ali Zardari, who as head of the ruling political party, is also his boss. Gilani pleaded not guilty, arguing that Zardari enjos immunity as president.
Constitutional experts say that if convicted, Gilani could appeal. And as a last resort, the president could pardon him. Gilani said in a recent interview with Al Jazeera however that, if convicted, he would automatically lose his parliamentary seat and thereby his post as prime minister.
It would be a major shake-up for the civilian government, which has so far survived multiple confrontations with the military and the judiciary and as a result, and against all odds, has become the longest-serving civilian administration since the 1970s.
The Supreme Court also heard the case of eleven prisoners in custody of ISI – four of whom died in mysterious circumstances. The court had asked the shadowy spy agency to produce the seven remaining prisoners before the court twice last week, but they never showed.
The court persisted, and officials at ISI finally relented on Monday. The prisoners looked frail, with dark circles around their eyes. A number of them needed someone’s support to walk, and one held a catheter.
The chief justice ordered hospital treatment for all seven. The next hearing is scheduled for March 1 and will seek to clarify, among other things, how the four died and whether or not any of the prisoners received a fair trial.
The seven men had an emotional reunion with family members who they had seen only a few times since they were picked up by the spy agency almost five years ago.
“Prove our crime! Prove our crime!” screamed Mohammad Shafiq, one of the detained prisoners, as his brother held him. Asked whether he thought justice would be served, he shook his head and tears ran down his face. “Why not?”
The two cases seem to indicate that the country’s judiciary is asserting its independence and, perhaps, a new found bravura that began to develop during the rule of former President Pervez Musharraf.
Pakistani judges had in the past largely been lackeys of the government and the military. But when Musharraf suspended Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry for “abuse of office” in 2007, a march toward greater independence began.
Musharraf’s move was widely seen as an attempt to preempt a court decision that would have invalidated his reelection. Thousands of emotional protesters, led by prominent lawyers, took to the streets. Never before had Pakistan’s judiciary enjoyed such popular support.
In 2008, after the election of the current government and a year of prodding, Chaudhry was finally reinstated.
Since then, Pakistan’s judiciary has become more aggressive, drawing its power in part from widespread dissatisfaction with the performance of the civilian government and from a press that is asking more questions than it did a decade ago.
Although the government has been tripped up by its clashes with the military and the courts, the public hasn’t forgiven it for presiding over a period of economy disaster. Double-digit inflation has plagued Pakistan for the greater part of the government’s tenure, and foreign direct investment has dropped significantly in the face of security concerns. A severe energy crisis has also hampered economic growth, which is already not half of what it needs to be to sustain the yearly influx of new workers.
The media has also played an important role in the the military-judiciary-government power equation, said Ali Dayan Hassan, director of Human Rights Watch in Pakistan. In the last 10 years, it has presented more alternative views than Pakistan has ever seen before, but it still faces taboos.
“You have a situation where there are three actors engaging in a political turf-war and the media is only really free to hold one of them in account. It is not that some media do not try and do it, but if the prime minister can be summoned for contempt of court, so can any journalist,” he said. Many journalists in Pakistan censor themselves to protect against possible retaliation from the military, the courts or the government.
The courts, it seems, much like the military, appear to be interested in more than the fair application of the rule of law. Opponents say it has ventured too far into the political realm, which could ultimately hurt the country’s efforts at democratic reform.
“The Supreme Court has literally taken over executive functions. Even if we take the chief justice’s intentions positively, it is still dangerous. It has to keep status quo. It is not meant to be a revolutionary institution,” said Fawad Hussain Chaudhry, a lawyer from Lahore.
The Supreme Court has intervened on political decisions repeatedly since its chief was reinstated. It nullified the carbon tax a week after the government introduced it, for instance. It also suspended the privatization of state companies and even, at one point, set sugar prices, a move many saw as an obvious over-stepping of its responsibilities.
Average Pakistanis have also accused the court of targeting the government unfairly, leading to conspiracy theories that the court is being supported by the military, which has at times acted openly hostile toward the current civilian leadership.
A wave of public criticism may have persuaded the Supreme Court to pursue the case of the eleven prisoners, as well as another, 15-year old case that accuses the ISI of using taxpayer’s money to support political opposition parties in the 1990s.
For others, the Supreme Court is a modern judicial Robin Hood. Analysts say it has recovered tens of billions of rupees (comparable to hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars) by pursuing corruption cases.
“Imagine, had there been no judicial activism, Pakistan would have been in further abyss,” said Umar Cheema, an investigative reporter for The News, a daily newspaper based in Islamabad.
The rise of the judiciary comes at a time when the original battle, the one between the government and the military, is beginning to change. Lacking popular support, the military is no longer able launch an overt take-over, as it had before — three times in the last 64 years.
Rashid Rehman, editor of the Daily Times, another Pakistani newspaper, said that opposition political parties are no longer willing to back a coup, which has forced the military to devise other ways to vie for power.
A battle between the two erupted earlier this year with the surfacing of an unsigned memo, allegedly written by Pakistan’s government, that asked for Washington’s help in preventing a military take-over.
The courts, of all institutions, will likely be forced to resolve the fight, which has been dubbed Memogate by the media. A judicial commission is set to hear the main witness, the Pakistani-American Mansoor Ijaz, who first revealed the existence of the memo last year, on Feb. 22, via a video link from the Pakistani embassy in London.
The turf-war between the three groups has two possible outcomes, said Hassan, one very good and one very bad.
“Either this process will lead to all stakeholders to understand the limits of their domains, or it will lead to confrontation and a break down of constitutional order,” he said.
House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio listens at left as House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Va., talks about jobs and the latest government report on unemployment, Friday, Feb. 3, 2012, during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) (Credit: AP)
Since the 112th Congress was seated more than a year ago, the Republican House Conference has served as a generally reliable reflection of the Tea Party movement’s passions and priorities. A significant chunk of its members — mainly freshmen, but also some veterans — are explicitly aligned with the movement, while those who aren’t know better than to break too loudly or too publicly with it, lest they fall victim to a primary challenge.
This is why Speaker John Boehner, a Capitol Hill lifer whose political biography invites automatic Tea Party suspicion, has been repeatedly forced to subordinate his best judgment to the zeal of purity-obsessed rank-and-filers. And it’s why Boehner’s surprise decision yesterday to support a payroll tax cut extension even if it’s not paid for represents a real gamble — one that seems grounded in a reasonable calculation but that still has the potential to create another serious political mess for him and his party.
The political logic of his move is obvious: If an extension isn’t implemented by the end of the month, tens of millions of middle class Americans will face an election year tax increase — one for which congressional Republicans, who’ve seen their poll numbers drop lower and lower with each showdown they’ve forced with President Obama, will likely take the blame. Given the relatively low cost of an extension, it hardly seems worth risking further damage to the GOP brand, especially since the party’s hold on the House is somewhat tenuous.
But as the past 13 months have demonstrated, this sort of political logic doesn’t tend to hold sway with the Tea Party crowd, which has convinced itself that rigid, compromise-averse devotion to ideological purity is the key to a sustained GOP revival. It helps that many of the true believers in the House come from safely Republican districts where there’s little or no threat of a general election backlash. So the risk for Boehner is that Tea Party Republicans in the House — and influential Tea Party leaders outside the House — will deem his payroll tax move a sellout, since it would add to the deficit.
And by last night, there were some ominous signs for the Speaker. As Politico reported:
The announcement shocked rank-and-file members, who were back in their House districts. Senate Republicans were likewise caught off guard — even one GOP leader who was trying to negotiate a compromise had no idea it was coming.
And conservative ire rose throughout the day, threatening to derail Speaker John Boehner’s plan to take the thorny issue off the table.
[SNIP]
More than a half-dozen House Republicans, reached directly by POLITICO, declined to comment on the record about the decision, saying they wanted to hear the case from their leadership when they return Tuesday. GOP leadership said the decision to move forward with this plan depends on reaction from the rank and file.
In other words, when push comes to shove, they’d much rather increase the federal budget deficit than to raise even a dime of taxes on wealthy Americans.
Look for Obama to point that out once or twice this year when Republicans attack him on the deficit.
Steve Kornacki writes about politics for Salon. Reach him by email at SKornacki@salon.com and follow him on Twitter @SteveKornacki More Steve Kornacki
Occupy Boise is under legal and meteorological siege. (Credit: AP/John Miller)
The Occupy movement is an exercise in the workings of power whether it is social, financial, policing or political. The occupations that began in September spread with an infectious passion. By October hundreds of encampments had popped up nationwide with the tacit cooperation and sometimes explicit approval of local officials. For a few heady weeks Occupy Wall Street had the glow of popular legitimacy – social power – trumping whatever fusty laws prohibited camping or a continuous presence in a public space.
The inevitable counteroffensive was launched in November. Using the mass media, politicians hyped the movements as imminent threats to public health and safety, justifying aggressive evictions of prominent occupations in Oakland, Calif., Portland, Ore., and New York City. The police violence and mass arrests, the tried-and-true methods of state power employed to suppress radical movements, backfired and the movement grew more. Within weeks other major encampments in Los Angeles, Seattle, Boston and New Orleans were scattered with hundreds of arrests. A third wave of closures has been underway since late January with occupations shut down from Hawaii to Miami and Austin, Texas, to Buffalo, N.Y.
Nonetheless, some encampments survive. In Houston a small contingent is legally maintaining a presence in downtown Tranquility Park, though a ban on tents and tarps has kept all but the hardy or desperate away. In Tampa Bay, after months of police harassment, occupiers found a safe haven in a privately owned public space donated by a wealthy supporter.
Now, a new strategy is being deployed to yank the rug from under occupations in four cities: legal power. Politicians have recently passed laws in Honolulu and Charlotte, N.C., that with a stroke of the pen made the occupations illegal, enabling police to sweep them away. Two more occupations, in Boise, Idaho, and Nashville, may be nearing the end as their respective state legislatures are on the verge of outlawing the democratic villages that for months have been thriving next to edifices of power. Critics charge that the anti-Occupy laws reveal how the law is not an objective code that treats everyone equally, but an arbitrary weapon wielded by the powerful.
In a separate case, the Hamilton County Commission in Tennessee gets the award for the most innovative and dicey use of the law. After passing a law on Jan. 4 that bans various activities that Occupy Chattanooga is engaged in, the commission filed suit in federal court against nine alleged occupiers, asking for a determination that the law is constitutional as well as payment for legal fees. Lawyers for the group have filed a motion to dismiss, and the suit does appear to be on shaky legal ground because “the county is trying to impose a monetary penalty on a group of innocent people for their political activity.”
Heidi Boghosian, executive director of the National Lawyers Guild, a progressive bar association founded in 1937, says, “Clearly the law is used politically. Occupy has shed a spotlight on that fact. Laws are enacted arbitrarily and interpreted as to how the status quo wants to interpret them.” She points to how camping in public space – the main rationale for shutting down occupations – is routinely allowed and even assisted by police when thousands of consumers camp overnight for Black Friday sales, the latest iPhone model or concert tickets.
On Dec. 9, the city of Honolulu approved a sweeping anti-homeless ordinance that the local ACLU testified against as being “a particularly egregious attack on the homeless.” The new law was used to arrest Occupy Honolulu members in late December and to clear out their encampment in early February, though organizers report that they are still camping in a park overnight and putting away their tents every morning.
In Charlotte, as a welcoming gift for this year’s Democratic National Convention, the City Council passed an ordinance on Jan. 24 banning camping on city property, prohibiting items such as glass bottles, sparklers, police scanners, scarves, backpacks, duffel bags and coolers within the boundaries of an “extraordinary event,” and criminalizing the use as a “projectile” of “animal parts or fluids, manure, urine, feces or other organic waste by-products.” Less than a week after the anti-camping ordinance passed, police busted up the Occupy Charlotte encampment on the Old City Hall grounds. (No word if the police have nabbed any feces flingers yet.)
As for Boise and Nashville, both the Idaho and Tennessee legislatures are set to enact their anti-Occupy bills by wide margins, but occupiers are hoping they can convince a court to block or overturn the laws because they are arbitrary. In Idaho’s case the punishment for camping only amounts to an infraction, a non-arrestable offense, while in Tennessee those in violation could be jailed for up to 364 days and fined $2,500.
Boghosian says these laws will likely be challenged in court as unconstitutional. “It’s one thing to say people can’t sleep in the parks after midnight, but it’s another to create that law after they have already camped for an extended period of time. That is a political act … In several jurisdictions we have seen laws created targeting specific people who have a political message. As well, existing laws are frequently being enforced arbitrarily based on the political content of the message and that violates the First Amendment.”
There is another troubling legal trend impacting the Occupy movement, according to Boghosian. She says that since protesters nonviolently shut down the 1999 World Trade Organization ministerial in Seattle, the National Lawyers Guild has observed how police work with municipalities to create ordinances in advance of “national special security events” such as the Charlotte law. Boghosian says the “event-specific ordinances are often found to be unconstitutional. They ask for prohibitive insurance. They ask for restrictive permits. They tie protesters up in court and this distracts them from the message. It becomes another way the government chills free speech.”
In Chicago, where occupiers deride mayor and former Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel as “Mayor 1%,” the city has enacted its own questionable event-specific ordinance for the planned NATO and G-8 summits this May. Chicago activists call it the “sit down and shut up” law because of the onerous restrictions it places on freedom of speech and public assembly. Boghosian says this is another arbitrary use of the law as it is designed to go after political messages of specific groups.
The battle of Boise
Occupy Boise strategically choose to plunk down on the grounds of the old Ada County Courthouse next to the Idaho Capitol, says Bryan Walker, a 47-year-old practicing attorney active with the group. “We selected the site because there was no statute on the books prohibiting Occupy Boise from camping there.” Walker says the occupiers informed Idaho’s Department of Administration they were going to use the courthouse grounds, and presented “operational plans” but did not ask permission. “The state acknowledged they did not have legal authority to prevent us from occupying the spot,” he added.
The camp was set up on Nov. 5, and when I visited weeks later the organization was impressive and the lack of police surprising. It included tents serving as a kitchen, dining area, a free clothing store, arts and crafts, childcare, medical care, psychological and spiritual counseling and even a workers center.
One factor in Occupy Boise’s careful planning, explains Walker, is the presence of older members such as himself and his wife, Cyndi Tiferet. “We tend to have more patience,” he says. “There are a myriad of tools at our disposal, and we’ve been waiting for a movement like this for a long time, so we are ready to do it for the long haul.” Occupy Boise has been careful to stay within the legal boundaries and has had only a handful of problems with substance abuse or violence that have marred other occupations. When I spoke to Tiferet on the courthouse grounds, she said their legal status kept relations cordial with the police who were maintaining a low-key presence.
As evidence for Occupy Boise’s neighborly presence, Walker pointed me to a letter from Boise Chief of Police Michael Masterson, dated Jan. 31, commending the occupiers for conducting “themselves in a civically responsible (law abiding) and peaceful manner. We have found our ongoing dialogue to be helpful, constructive and respectful.”
He wasn’t just delivering warm tidings, however. Masterson wrote that because “the State of Idaho may very soon enact legislation that prohibits camping on state property … we anticipate that it may ultimately impact our future relationship.” What he wanted was for the occupiers to clean up the site and skedaddle “prior to any enforcement action.”
Masterson was referring to a bill introduced at the beginning of the 2012 Idaho legislative session with the sole purpose of banning camping on state property. The bill’s legislative intent is “to regulate the use of the grounds of the Capitol Mall and other state-owned and leased grounds and facilities in order to prevent the unauthorized use of these grounds and facilities as a temporary or permanent place for camping, lodging or living accommodations.”
The superfluous nature of the bill is not lost on observers. It’s a case, as the Idaho Statesman puts it, of “trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. … As a response to Occupy Boise, this bill makes its sponsors look like they are out to quash public protest.”
Because the bill singles out one group, it may backfire. Walker asserts, “The legislation is weak on due process grounds. The intention is to put an end to our vigil, which is protected freedom of speech. It is an abridgement of our first amendment rights.” The bill is designated as an emergency, meaning it will go into effect once it is signed into law instead of the state’s normal process of enacting new laws on July 1.
Ironically, the bill has been a boon to Occupy Boise. Walker says, “If this legislation had not cropped up we may have ended the camp already. But it gave us precisely what we wanted, the political expression.” Rather than diverting their energy, says Walker, “It’s been a huge favor because the media attention has been incredible. It has given us the bully pulpit … The letters to the editor and comments on articles about the proposed legislation have shifted markedly in our favor. It’s gone from people griping about damage to the grass to saying you need to listen to these people.”
Occupy Boise has mobilized up to 60 people to attend various legislative committee hearings on the bill, which Walker says has been an empowering experience. “I had never testified before the legislature and here I am doing it. People from the camp are showing up and testifying in House and Senate Committee hearings. People who are homeless or who have come out of prison with no training or resources are coming into the Capitol, standing before their senator or sepresentative and having their say.”
Even though the anti-camping bill passed the Idaho House by a 53 to 16 margin (and is now before the state Senate), the occupiers’ regular and, by all accounts, respectful presence in the legislature won them the support of the entire Democratic caucus plus three Republicans. Not all legislators see it that way. The House speaker has ordered the building to be locked down, which is designed to be open to the public. The body has been prohibiting signs and placards in the chambers, and on one occasion asked a dozen occupiers to remove American flags pinned to their clothing.
Walker says, “In more than 120 years in the state of Idaho the Legislature has never felt a need to do that before. Plus the high level of security they are pouring into the statehouse has provoked comments to the legislators like, ‘What are you afraid of? They are doing exactly what you want them to do.’”
As for next steps, if the bill passes as an emergency measure then Occupy Boise will almost certainly fight it in court. Walker says, “If we don’t have to decamp until July, then it’s up to the general assembly to decide if we should stay or not. My opinion is we need to go with what’s effective and focus on our goals.”
Safety in Nashville
Occupiers in Nashville have traveled a similar, if bumpier, road. On Oct. 7 they descended on the Legislative Plaza within sight of the state Capitol, Supreme Court and Legislature. Michael Custer, a 46-year-old line cook, musician and father of four, calls it “the place to address the state of Tennessee,” adding that “it’s always been used for that.”
Gov. Bill Haslam’s administration wasn’t too happy about that. So it secretly drafted a nighttime curfew on the plaza, and hours after unveiling it on Oct. 27 began hauling away members of Occupy Nashville and their gear. The problem was, in trying to criminalize Occupy Nashville Haslam was acting illegally. The state arrested more occupiers the following night, but night court Judge Tom Nelson refused both times to keep the protesters jailed because “I can find no authority anywhere for anyone to authorize a curfew anywhere on Legislative Plaza.”
Days later Federal District Court Judge Aleta Trauger issued a temporary restraining order on the new policy and observed, “I can’t think of any more quintessential public forum than the Legislative Plaza.” Trauger added that the state was at fault for exercising “clear prior restraint of free speech,” and two weeks later issued a preliminary injunction on the policy.
Notching a victory against governmental abuse of power was a shot in the arm for the Nashville group. But the preliminary injunction noted the state could still enact new laws regarding the use of the public area, while Occupy Nashville and others could likewise challenge those rules.
According to Michael Custer, the occupation has stabilized at a few dozen regulars while the state has pursued an underhanded strategy to chip away at its support while preparing to legislate it away. As in Boise, police have been largely absent from the Legislative Plaza, but in Nashville’s case that’s a problem.
Custer explains that “unsavory vagrants” are the issue. “We have a pretty small group and, well, we’re easily intimidated. So we had to call the city police many times to get violent people removed from the camp.” Calling the police was a difficult decision for occupiers, says Custer. “We do band together and try to chase off the violent people. We will call the police when violence is happening on the plaza, and it hurts to do it, but we’re not going to let the violence happen.”
Now, says Custer, the police are “using the injunction that we have against them to justify why they’re not there.” When they call to file a complaint the police retort, “Yeah, well, we can’t tell you apart. Y’all look the same to us!” He adds that they have informed the state “many times” of their code of conduct against drinking on the plaza, possession of drugs, sexual assault or harassment or violence.
The Nashville media have reported on the protesters’ “pleas for improved security,” to which one official responded that the state cannot “go out and, in effect, baby-sit protesters 24/7.” The concern about manpower did not stop the state from reportedly deploying more than 70 state troopers and other law enforcement personnel to enforce the now defunct curfew two nights in a row. And both the city and state had enough resources to infiltrate undercover police into the Occupy Nashville movement from the beginning.
At this point the damage is done. Custer says some media stake out the site looking for footage of public urination or drug use that then shows up on the nightly news as the face of the movement. Over the last few months, Custer says, polling has shown public approval of Occupy Nashville drop from 70 percent to 30 percent.
This loss of social power has opened the door to wild claims about Occupy Nashville that are used to legitimize the legal attack. Rep. Eric Watson, who introduced the anti-camping bill, seems obsessed with the genitals of occupiers. In October Watson said he saw some members engage in a sex act outside his office, which allegedly triggered the police infiltration. (An unnamed legislative aide also claimed witnessing an “orgy going on out on the plaza.”)
During recent hearings before the House Judiciary Committee, which Watson chairs, he bellowed indignantly that an occupier “peed on” a secretary taking a cigarette break. His solution: “If you approve of that and you think that’s peaceable assembly, you need to be peed on.”
Custer responds, “We know that Homeland Security is out there and we have been told by state police that they are photographing and recording us. If someone was breaking the law so blatantly then they should have been arrested.”
It was during those judiciary committee hearings that the one-year jail time was added for anyone maintaining “living quarters on publicly owned property” where residency is not allowed. To get rid of the Occupy movement, the state is taking a sledgehammer approach by also effectively criminalizing homelessness.
Occupy Nashville is almost certain to challenge the law in court once it passes. Like their compatriots in Boise, they hope to block implementation of the law or even have it overturned. In a perverse manner, the laws are a sign of success of the Occupy movement. Novelist Arundhati Roy told me that she doesn’t think “the state will allow people to occupy a particular space unless it feels that allowing that will end up in a kind of complacency, and the effectiveness and urgency of the protest will be lost.”
That urgency will be on display repeatedly this year. On May Day. In Chicago during the G-8 and NATO summits. In Tampa Bay, Fla., for the Republican National Convention and Charlotte for the Democrats. And in ways no one can predict. In each instance the confrontation will come down to a question of power. The government will deploy all the ideological, policing and legal power at its disposal. On the other side, the Occupy movement has the power of a unifying idea and social legitimacy. It’s a lopsided battle, but no one could have ever imagined that the Occupy Wall Street movement could have come this far already.
Page 1 of 15129 in All Salon
Occupy Valentine’s Day
Literature for your love woes
Pakistan’s crippling turf war
Occupy fights the law: Will the law win?
The right’s lost causes
Unhappy Valentine’s Day in Israel
What a GOP cave looks like
U.S. media takes the lead on Iran
Interview With My Bully: When I confronted my bully about racism
Iran’s Greens aim to rise again
