Eight people were arrested Monday during a protest at Obama’s 2012 campaign headquarters. The rally, organized by social justice and anti-war group Catholic Workers, was the first organized demonstration — and the first instance of arrests — relating to the NATO counter-protests. It was small (just over two dozen participants assailed security and stormed the campaign headquarters and read a statement inside) but set a tone for actions later this week in asserting that the president and Democratic Party are protest targets alongside NATO generals and corporations like Boeing, who receive large government defense contracts.

For months the question has hovered over Occupy supporters, many of whom are attending NATO protests, partly organized by Occupy Chicago, from across the country: How many of them will manifest as Democratic voters come November? Will the energy that has brought hundreds of thousands into streets and parks across the country over the past half year be co-opted by the party machine? Of course, the small Catholic Workers demonstration is no indication either way. It will be interesting to watch, however, as the week of permitted and unpermitted protest actions continue in the city Obama calls home, the ways in which Mayor Rahm Emanuel and the president are willing to crack down on the dissenting crowds whose support they will ask for in November.

The Chicago Police Department is pitching the LRAD largely as a means to communicate with large crowds:

“This is simply a risk management tool, as the public will receive clear information regarding public safety messages and any orders provided by police,” Chicago Police spokeswoman Melissa Stratton told the Guardian.

However, during its first outing at a U.S. protest, during the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh in 2009, police blasted non-lethal sound waves from the device as a crowd deterrent. Unlike firing tear gas or swinging batons, deploying the LRAD does not create a dramatic media spectacle; indeed, videos from the Pittsburgh protests capture the LRAD emitting little more than a high-pitched siren. Those within the sound cannon’s range, however, have described immense pain and severe headaches and — in some cases — irreversible hearing damage. LRAD Corp., which produces the weapon for the military and domestic policing, said that anyone within 100m of the device’s directed sound path will experience “extreme pain,” according to Gizmodo.

“In Pittsburgh, they directed the LRAD at a crowd coming up the center of a wide street, then sent tear gas canisters down the sides of the street. Tear gas is painful, but everyone ran into the tear gas to get out of the LRAD path,” one protester who attended the Pittsburgh G-20 told me, asking to remain anonymous. Chicago’s Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy has recently expressed that he believes tear gas to be an ineffective crowd control device — and based on lessons from Pittsburgh, the LRAD can produce a painful enough effect to force crowd dispersal without the dramatic media impact tear gas creates; it’s certainly a more insidious weapon. (Indeed, the Chicago police riot during the 1968 Democratic National Convention went down in infamy partly because of the excessive use of tear gas.)

Norm Stamper, the former Seattle police chief who oversaw the policing of the Battle in Seattle in 1999, has learned some hard personal lessons about protest policing. Stamper resigned after his department was condemned for excessive use of force and tear gas against the ’99 World Trade Organization protesters; he has since become an outspoken critic of harsh crowd control techniques. Of the LRAD Stamper told Salon, “I’m not a fan. And it’s not just because I suffer from tinnitus. Everyone, without ear protection, is at risk for permanent hearing damage. Not worth it, as far as I’m concerned.”

Mayor Rahm Emanuel has assured Chicagoans that no taxpayer money will go toward covering any summit activity (federal and private money was secured for this purpose). However, Chicago organizers and participants in the counter-summit have nonetheless balked that money can be made available for such purposes, while public services, such as mental health clinics are being shuttered (six out of 12 of the city’s mental health clinics are set for closure, which sparked the week-long occupation of one clinic by staff and clients with the support of Occupy Chicago).

Occupy Chicago’s press committee late last week held a conference to give the media a preview of the week of protests. Although it was made explicit that actions would take place that have not yet been disclosed or even planned, scheduled protests include a march Tuesday organized by National Nurses United (who are paying for 12 busloads of protesters to get to Chicago from across the country). The NNU march will end with a musical performance by Rage Against the Machine guitarist and “guitarmy” instigator Tom Morello, and aims to speak out against austerity measures implemented by the G-8. Having changed original plans to hold the G-8 summit in Chicago the same week as NATO, G-8 leaders are instead meeting this week in the rural seclusion of Camp David. Organizers plan to make their opposition to the G-8 visible in Chicago nonetheless.

Other actions specifically targeting NATO include a procession to the summit headquarters on May 20, during which veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars plan to hand back their service medals to NATO generals in protest against ongoing wars. Occupy Chicago also has plans for an unpermitted march to shut down Boeing’s main office on May 21, in opposition to the government defense contracts the company receives.

Occupy Chicago, CANG8 and other organizing groups have pitched all counter-summit activity as “peaceful,” prompting further outcry that the city is preparing a militaristic crowd control response, especially with the threat of the LRAD.

Clarification: An earlier version of this story suggested the LRAD was a new purchase for Chicago. The riot gear is newly purchased and CPD are preparing to use the LRAD, which they already owned.

Protest organizers are currently in discussions with city officials about alternative routes. However, it’s worth noting that protesters may still march without official permits. Indeed, on the first day of the G-20 summit in Pittsburgh in 2009 an unpermitted march led by anarchists — during which police used tear gas — set a radical tone for the mobilizations, both permitted and unpermitted, that followed. Furthermore, the context of the upcoming NATO summit suggests unpermitted protests will hit Chicago. Occupy actions have encouraged individuals to reclaim space, take to the streets and speak out without asking permission. Many thousands of people — beyond seasoned summit-hopping anarchists well versed in spontaneous direct action during political conferences — are now open to the idea of dissent that is not circumscribed by city ordinances.

Mayor Emanuel and Chicago bureaucrats will no doubt build further barriers to hamper mass protest and prevent riotous scenes at all cost. But long-term anarchists and those radicalized by Occupy actions (and the harsh police responses to them) have again and again proved themselves willing to challenge authority and risk arrest and injury — attempts to enact a “Chicago Spring” evidently will not be killed by 1,000 (bureaucratic) paper cuts. As Occupy Chicago’s Twitter feed responded Tuesday to the news of the the parade permit rejection, “Think it will stop us? ”.

Festival organizers made an embarrassing early move (aside from using cringe-inducing phrases like “music – the heartbeat of our cultures”). They advertised VIP passes, with access to a private lounge, special viewing areas and more. An Occupy event with VIP tickets: The idea is truly laughable. Evidently, public responses made this more than clear. Just over a day after the VIP passes were announced in a press release, they were scrapped.

“There is no VIP or premium access … That was an oversight that was pretty big,” Grahan Czach, an organizer with Solid Clarity LLC, told RedEye Chicago.

However, that the idea was floated in the first place suggests that those behind Occupy Festival might not be familiar with the horizontalism underpinning Occupy organizing, despite Czach’s claim that they are “part of the movement.” It’s worth noting that standard-price tickets are already $35 for one day, $55 for two, which will exclude many Occupy supporters anyway.

At best, the festival is a fundraiser, which will push some much-needed funds to Occupy Chicago (hopefully without strings attached). At worst, it is the sort of event that co-opts energy and anger and pacifies, rather than stokes, challenges and threats to the status quo. No one needs another WOMAD festival, and I fail to see how Occupy Festival’s permits, strict rules, elevated stages and pricey tickets have much to do with Occupy at all. I also fail to see how a music festival can “peacefully embody the struggle of social and economic inequality,” as Occupy Festival promises to do – a complex challenge indeed.

As Occupy brushes off its winter dust and springs back into regular, highly public action, the many-legged co-optation machine will follow suit. Another cultural event at the end of March, for example, will see the language popularized by Occupy funneled into a distinctly liberal cause. “All in for the 99%” is an arts event hosted by hip-hop producer Russell Simmons and former White House environmental advisor Van Jones, and sponsored by MoveOn Civic Action, SEIU, Rebuild the Dream – a nonprofit focused on economic inequality. Ed Norton, Marisa Tomei, Moby and other big names are on the host committee for the Los Angeles event, which will feature curated DJ sets alongside community activist training sessions.

“Artists, musicians, writers and activists will gather and use creative collaboration to amplify the voices of the 99%, demanding an end to Citizens United and calling loudly for real campaign finance reform,” announced the event release (noting too that the day is pretty much free and open to the public, save for a private party at the end for more important members of the public). It’s more of the same sort of non-threatening consciousness raising — celebrity endorsement included — reminiscent of the weakest antiwar and environmental activism in recent decades.

The amorphous, confusing assemblage that loosely constitutes the Occupy movement did not resonate just because it raised awareness. All across the country — in unpermitted marches, occupations and short-lived squat attempts — people re-appropriated spaces, determined their use and found each other. It’s a false proposition that “the voices of the 99%” could be amplified by celebrity artists and musicians. These voices were heard most loudly when they autonomously took space, got arrested and beaten for it, and came back again and again.

Correction: An earlier version of this story stated that a portion of proceeds from Occupy Festival would go to The 8th Day Center for Justice. In fact, this group is just the fiscal sponsor for Occupy Chicago.

This would, of course, include the areas restricted in Chicago for the NATO summit and Camp David for the G-8. However, concerns focusing solely on the passing of HR 347 seem to be a red herring of sorts, as most of its content has long been enshrined into law.

The new bill specifically addresses certain trespassing violations in D.C., which currently do not fall under the remit of federal law (i.e., HR 347 now makes it a federal issue if you trespass onto White House grounds). The only other significant change in the bill is a shift in language, which will make it easier to prosecute those who are found to unlawfully have entered these restricted areas. The law used to say that the person must have entered the area “knowingly” and “willfully.” HR 347, however, scrapped the “willfully,” which essentially now renders it a crime to remain in a restricted area, even if you do not know that it’s illegal for you to be there.

“By striking out ‘willfully’ they make it easier to prosecute under ‘knowingly,’” explained Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, executive director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund. She noted with some exasperation that the campaigns focusing energies against HR 347 miss the bigger, ongoing fight for basic free speech and threats to it, as this specific law is only an amendment to laws that were primarily established in 2006. For Verheyden-Hilliard, HR 347 is best understood as the government “looking at the tools in their arsenal and polishing them up” in time for major, protest-drawing summits and political conventions this year.

This is not to say that free speech issues raised by HR 347′s passage should be ignored, but rather contextualized against a backdrop where protest and dissent are already consistently treated as illegal.