It seems to me that this otherwise excellent article is mis-titled. The central theme of the essay is on what the Occupy movement must focus on: creating a living model of the future within a movement opposed to the present oppressive structure. She expresses this so well:
We have to resist, first, the cultural values so ingrained on our psyches—things like competition, and distrust of strangers. We have to confront our own privilege, and the ways in which we are oppressed, so that we can be ready to be open to the ways that those privileges and oppressions intersect with the people we will be working with. We have to really listen to one another, be ready for the long hard work of real dialogue, ready to value disagreements as opportunities for new solutions. We must be ready to accept that some of us are angry, or sad, or tired; and are going to be that way for a long time. We must be there to listen, to offer care and to offer alternatives for support outside the dominant system. We have to fight the anger and sadness and weariness by making joy, with play; with art; with creativity; with action. With values that have nothing to do with buying and selling and labor-for- pay.Of course, this is much easier said than done, but it is important as a direction for the Occupy movement. It serves to give it a sense of mission and an affirmation of radically different values from the dominant system so that it can sustain the movement over the difficult days ahead. However, what I don't see are any arguments against using tactics of disruption of capitalist business as usual or damage to capitalist property, and using methods of self-defense against police brutality when deemed appropriate by the Occupiers.
