Occupy Ports Action-Just One More Action Against The 99%

Occupy at Oakland Port

If it didn’t go quite as well as the pre-event hype promised, Occupy The Ports still enjoyed some moderate success in Oakland, Portland and Seattle. Of course the word success is a relative term and it depends on how you define it.

For Occupy, anything that disrupts others and calls attention to the precious movement is considered a success even if it doesn't quite meet the original objective. Here's the original objective of the Shut Down The Ports action.

Occupy’s Statement of Objectives for its Shut Down The Ports action

"We are occupying the ports as part of a day of action, boycott and march for full legalization and good jobs for all to draw attention to and protest the criminal system of concentrated wealth that depends on local and global exploitation of working people, and the denial of workers' rights to organize for decent pay, working conditions and benefits, in disregard for the environment and the health and safety of surrounding communities," organizers said on their website.

Occupy primarily targeted terminals owned by SSA Marine, claiming it’s owned by the Goldman Sachs investment firm, which Occupy claims is anti-union and is also an iconic symbol of corporate greed.

In response to that claim, Bob Watters, SSA Senior Vice President, pointed out that Goldman Sachs owns less than 3% of an investment fund that has a minority stake in the company. Mr. Waters further pointed out that the company is the largest employer of union members on the West Coast, which pretty much undercut the validity and accuracy of Occupy’s argument..

Occupy published on their web site:

"The West Coast ports will be blockaded on December 12th in solidarity with longshoremen and port truckers struggles against EGT and Goldman Sachs.”

Last month, President Robert McEllrath the president of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union wrote that while the organization shares Occupy protesters concerns about what they consider corporate abuses, the union would not support or sanction any shutdown.

Despite requests from unions and workers in both the Unites States and Canada, unions which had been quite supportive of Occupy and which represent thousands in the 99%, Occupy proceeded with its planned action. So much for standing in solidarity.

In effect, Occupy turned its back on those they not only like to claim they represent but those same individuals and organizations that had supported their protest movement.The response from workers was not overly supportive to this message or Monday’s action.

Rather than rethink their action, Occupy put a message on its website announcing that it was acting independently of the union because the unions are "constrained under reactionary, anti-union federal legislation."

The response from unions, union workers and non union employees was predictable.

Communications Director for the ILWU Craig Merrilees telling told reporters that the union was "not supporting that at all"…[Occupy organisers] have been very disrespectful of the democratic decision-making process in the union and deliberately went around that process to call their own action without consulting workers…It's the second time they've done it. The first time they had very little support from workers in their so-called general strike” [the Occupy Oakland action on 2 November].

Mr Merrilees further stated that,"This is being promoted by a group of people who apparently think they can call general strikes and workplace shutdowns without talking to workers and without involving the unions.

The ILWU’s position echoes that of construction workers across America who also spoke out against the action to shut down the ports.

Additionally, despite Occupy's claims of having the support of workers and standing in solidarity with them, many spoke out against the action.

Occupy Seattle in action in support of truckers

"I'm just barely getting on my feet again after two years, and now I gotta go a day without pay while somebody else has something to say that I'm not really sure is relevant to the cause," trucker Chuck Baca told CNN affiliate KGO.

"This is a joke. What are they protesting?" said Christian Vega, who sat in his truck, part of a long line of trucks prevented from entering the port in Oakland, California. He said "the delay was costing him $600."

According to port officials, shutting down port facilities only costs workers and their community’s wages and tax revenue.

"Protesters wanted to send a message to the 1% but they are impacting the 99%," said Portland port spokesman Josh Thomas. Shutting down and disrupting ports only results in "lost shifts, lost wages and delays," he said.

Port of San Diego board chairman Scott Peters issued an open letter to the community on Sunday asking that protesters not disrupt work.

"The Port of San Diego is made up of working people with families who serve the public each day by helping to bring in goods that are important to the people of the San Diego region," he wrote."They are the 99%, the gardeners, the maintenance workers, the dock workers, the Harbor Police officers, the office workers, the environmental workers -- all working to improve the quality of life in San Diego Bay and on its surrounding lands. It is these people who would be hurt by a blockade of our Port."

None of this mattered to Occupy, of course, because it is never about supporting the 99%, that's merely the rhetoric they use to try and rationalize what they continue to do. They start with an idea for an action and then look for reasons to justify it. When they run into an inconvenient fact that undermines their justification, they simply change the reason but never the planned action.

It has been like that since the beginning.

Occupy's respect for the cities of the 99%

Occupy claims it opposes the 1% and corporate greed but who has it hurt? To date, Occupy has not caused anyone in the 1% any serious issues. The banks continue to operate like normal, Black Friday was a huge success for retailers, corporations are running just fine thank you very much and Wall Street is not only open for business every day, it’s even hired one of the OWS protesters. 


It isn't just unions and their members that are starting to distance themselves from Occupy. Support for the movement is plummeting across the 99% as Occupy continues to demonstrate its complete lack of respect for anyone or anything but itself. 


Occupy Oakland, which drew almost 10,000 to its General Strike a month ago barely drew 1000 for this action and Occupy Vancouver didn't draw enough support for a pick-up baseball game. Even the celebrities and politicians have stopped dropping round for photo ops.

Another Occupier striking a blow for the 99%

Instead it was the people that Occupy claims to represent that have been harmed by this ongoing stupidity. It is working people who have had their lives disrupted, their cities trashed and their jobs interfered with. It is the 99%, not the 1% who have been stuck with a bill for costs that is inching towards $50 million across North America. 


It is low wage bank employees, not bank owners who have been intimidated and small businesses, not corporations and large box stores that have been vandalized and disrupted. Even a cathedral in London became a target for protester vandalism despite having giving sanctuary on their grounds for the protesters to set up their tents.

This is a pale imitation of a revolution by a bunch of people who haven’t got a clue but don’t take my word for it; as one freelance journalist and Occupy supporter messaged during the action on Monday at the Los Angeles Port:

“People are wondering around in the rain looking very sorry for themselves, everybody's talking about where to go next. Talk of a march somewhere, there's talk of shutting down LAX, everybody's got a different plan.”

Or as one spokesperson for Occupy Vanouver put it, “Regarding turnout today, I think it's clear we need more time to educate the public and educate each other on what these issues are and to really find actions and issues that do galvanize the public.” (Looking for an issue to galvanize the public is simply another way of saying that what Occupy Vancouver stands for is completely out of touch with the concerns of the 99%)

There are unquestionably some within the Occupy movement who are sincere and who are as committed to the search for solutions to the issues as the rest of us. Unfortunately, they are few and far between. Even more unfortunately, they have allowed their movement to be co-opted by others who are less interested in advancing the issues towards resolution than they are in flexing a little muscle in a pathetic attempt to try and prove to themselves that they have a little bit of power.

It’s an irresponsible attitude that got Occupy evicted from its camps and that has caused a significant drop in moral and financial support for the movement. It's a self-righteous and self-absorbed attitude that has also undermined any claim to legitimacy Occupy might have once enjoyed. It has simply cost too many in the 99% lost wages, damage to their property and disruption in their lives. 

To date, by contrast, Occupy has cost the 1% next to nothing. 


NOTE: In the comments section below this post is a link from an Occupy supporter which leads to a letter from a trucker who supported the ports action. It comes as no surprise that Occupy would be frantically searching for some third party justification for their action but they miss they point of this post completely.This post was about loyalty or as Occupy likes to call it, solidarity. 
      Despite the support they have received in the past from both unions and others in the 99%, Occupy did not stand in solidarity with either with its ports action. It had its information wrong about the ownership of SSA Marine, rejected the specific request of ILWU to stand down and not proceed with the action and inflicted more cost and disruption on the 99%. That is neither solidarity nor loyalty and that was the point of the post. 
      There will always be some within a group who disagree and as usual, rather than examining itself and its motives, Occupy has focused on trying some of them within the union movement to try and justify its action after the fact in the face of criticism, rather than examine itself and its motives. 
      In Canada, no doubt embarrassed by its poor showing on Monday, Occupy Vancouver also showe an incredible lack of loyalty or "solidarity" when it returned Tuesday to Occupy the port despite a request from the Canadian Federation of Labour that it not do so.
     The point of my post was that when push comes to shove, Occupy is only interested in itself and its actions. It has no loyalty to those who have supported it, and does not stand in solidarity with anyone outside of its group. Once again, it is its own actions that prove the point and in the end which will be Occupy's undoing but I have left the link below to let others decide for themselves.

 © 2011 Maggie's Bear

all rights reserved

The content of this article is the sole property of Maggie's Bear but a link to it may be shared by those who think it may be of interest to others