Occupy Wall Street Library
Librarian Mandy Henk, one of the volunteers at the Occupy Wall Street People's Library, called in this morning to tip us off to the news that six volunteers went to the Sanitation Department as directed to pick up the thousands of books and other materials that were seized when Zuccotti Park was raided. And... that tweet from NYC Mayor Bloomberg's office notwithstanding, here's what they found:
“There are only about 25 boxes of books; many of the books are destroyed. Laptops here but destroyed. Can’t find tent or shelves....Many books destroyed. Most equipment -and structures missing. . . most of library is missing (ALL of the reference section btw), damaged or destroyed. “
The thing about librarians is, they're organized. They went to the Department of Sanitation armed with a list of what was taken. Mandy says the Sanitation Department told the librarians to come back tomorrow to see if more books turn up from the garbage pile. But even if more do, Mandy cautions, those books are not likely to be usable.
Ummm, Mayor Bloomberg? Do you really want to run afoul of librarians?
Leave a Comment:
Also, does the mayor want to run afoul of the ghost of Benjamin Franklin, who started this whole free library system in America?
But if I come and set up a library in YOUR house and you've asked me over and over again to leave, can I blame you when you move my stuff for me?
I welcome books in my house.
That's not a very good analogy. Zuccotti Park is not Brookfield Properties' home; it's one of many properties they manage. And (as I understand it), the park is supposed to be available to the general public 24/7. Which, you know, my house isn't. :)
So, if you set up a library in a public property that I managed, and I wanted you to leave, I should probably give you time to box it up and take it with you. And if you refused, I should probably give you the boot, pay somebody else to box it up, and send you the bill.
And, to an extent, that's what NYC authorities decided to do. Except, it turns out, the people they paid to collect the stuff do not appear to have been very careful with it.
Zuccotti Park is not treated as a private property. The park was dedicated as a public park that is owned by a private entity. Zucotti Park is being maintained by the management company but that does not change the character of the park. Usually, a contractor building a subdivision gives title to the donated land for a public park as a condition for zoning and building. I suspect that the city negotiated the real estate zoning for a building in exchange for the park with the costs of maintenance to be borne by Brookfield because that saved the city money. But title to the land is still with Brookfield.
Except, it turns out, the people they paid to collect the stuff do not appear to have been very careful with it.
Please. These were cops. Cops around the property of other people, whether for the purpose of search or seizure or both, are notable for their extreme lack of concern for the property. This is the case anywhere. Ain't in the job description.
Bloomberg is a jag off. Simple as that. Whomever wrote the tweet that said the was OK is a PR flak who wouls say black is white if paid to do so.
Yes, Eleen, but do you welcome a crowd of unknown, unregulated strangers there as well.
To the others, I understand there is a very really difference in my analogy, the park is a privately own public space (POPS) in New York very different in many ways than your house. But, it was never intended to be living quarters as well.
I am NOT for mistreatment of people or their property but there has to be respect and considerations on both sides. The police did give protestors time to gather their stuff. I read where one protestor said that all they gave was 20 minutes. You should not be in a public area (privately owned or not) that would take you longer than 20 minutes to gather your things.
What if I decided to set up a library in the middle of the street? That's public property! You'd say, no, a street is used for traffic and you'd be correct. And this park is not used for living or for a library. That's my point.
I'm a fan of the OWS protesters.
I'm a fan of the Green Bay Packers but I wouldn't want them all over at my house immediately after Monday Night's game (sorry Viking fans).
Seriously? Do you see the Green Bay Packers as a, "...crowd of unknown, unregulated strangers," as well? Oh, and who qualifies as a known and regulated stranger?
BTW, the Packers are welcome at my house any time. I'll even let them borrow my books.
RobDon, you've already acknowledged that the "my house" thing is a poor analogy, but you're still using it. It makes me feel you're being disingenuous.
But, okay, let's assume the Packers came to your house and outstayed their welcome. It still would not be okay for you to destroy their possessions.
icekat, I didn't say "poor analogy" I said there's a "difference" between a privately owned home and privately owned property for public use. It is not a 'perfect' analogy.
That's why I asked about setting up a library or protest camp in the middle of a street or public park baseball field. No one so far has said that would be acceptable.
I'm not trying to be "disingenuous," my later house reference was poking back and forth with Eileen, who it seems would be pretty fun to visit.
As to your last statement:
That is not what has happened at OWS either. Protestors by their own account say they were allowed to gather their stuff and leave. From the photo above it does not seem their library was destroyed. I don't know about the computers, but I'll take the protestor's word. If they were broken, that was uncalled for. But when one abandons property in a public space, it can be expected.
Hey, I don't want the protestors mistreated or their property damaged. Nor do I think they have the "right" to live in a public space especially when officials say it is becoming unsafe and a health risk. As I stated earlier:
I heard that if we post in this thread, there's a chance the Green Bay Packers will come to our homes to hang out with us for an afternoon. Does anyone know if they'll be wearing their super bowl rings when they visit?
Not sure about the rings. They may have to be safely stored.
You may have a point, but I still want my Aaron Rodgers rookie card signed before they leave.
Okay, my wife affectionately refers to this community as my "pretend friends." (Like, "Oh, are you communicating with your pretend friends, again?) But, Matt, she laughed at your post!
Eileen, Matt, and others...thanks for tolerating me even in our disagreements.
Anytime! May we never disagree so heartily that we forget our humanity.
The only people Mike Bloomberg worries about running afoul of is the 1%, of which he is a prominent member. He clearly demonstrated two nights ago that he doesn't care one whit about running afoul of the US Constitution or restraining orders issued by judges.
Librarians are card-
carryingcatalogging superheroes. I'd never intentionally piss one off.You got THAT right, darlin'!
Damn right. My mom was a librarian and so is my sister and my uncle (who is a 2-tours in Vietnam Marine). NEVER mess with a librarian. They can get you so lost in the stacks you'd be calling for mommy and she wouldn't be able to find you *smirks*
As a Library Assistant I would concur. Never piss a Library Assistant either or you'll never get your favorite periodicals first when they come in. The Readers are very nice to me. ;-)
Defend the books!
As a lifelong bibliophile, this is very painful. Who said, "First they burn the books, then...."?
The burning of books is the suppression of speech. The internet blacklist bill and non-net-neutrality is the next stage of the suppression of speech.
The Boston Tea Party became a protest in part due to the Stamp Act that required the colonies to only use paper created in London, raising the cost of supplies to create newspapers; the mode of disseminating information and circulating speech.
Those that control speech, control information. That is why the First Amendment gives the People Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press.
Heinrich Heine.
Unfortunately, that's starting to be an applicable bit of trivia.
Occupy the First Amendment; Occupy SCOTUS!
Are we a country that burns and destroys books?
All Harry-Potter, private, religious, burning parties aside, when did we allow our government to seize and burn books? Are we as a people allowing and enabling this horrendous act?
OWS's message is that the entire system of government is corrupt and this goes to prove that point.
I agree, Drew. They may have been "following orders" in removing everything, but I don't think that also gave them the right to destroy property. The protesters should sue for the cost of repairs or a reasonable replacement.
It shouldn't have gotten to that point in the first place.
If, in the military, "following orders" isn't a justifiable excuse for a soldier to not face prosecution, then it shouldn't be a justifiable excuse for the police, either.
As for suing for the cost of repairs, that's probably the typical recourse, but what do the People do when the courts are just another part of the corrupt system that absolves responsibility for the Ruling Elite?
When did we become a county that allowed people to "occupy" other people's property? If I set up a library in YOUR house, would that be okay?
You posted that earlier, RobDon and received a suitable answer.
If by "my house" you mean public property that has always been open to anyone who wanted access to it, then yes.
Though this does bring up an interesting example of selling off of public utilities to be managed by private companies to be used as private - no longer public - works.
Lemme guess, RobDon, work for FedEx, do ya?
So, Drew, could I set up a library in the street or in the middle of a public park ball field?
I love how setting up a library is being spoken about like it was a military installation or a trade blockade.
"They set up a library."
I'm so scared.
Wait, we're talking about a normal library, right? and not something out of "Read or Die." Cause I'm against any library serving as a front for undercover agents.
It's not the setting up of the library, it's the "oh, the bad police are mistreating us and damaged our stuff" part that is odd to me. When you move into a privately owned public space and try to set up house and community, some challenge to that is to be expected.
At the time and for the technology, the library was the internet of Ben Franklin's day. As a repository of information, it is still the internet sans computers. All of the pioneering that Ben F did was possible because of the library. The Library of Alexandria was one of the Great Wonders of the World until it was destroyed by the early church.
Military installation or trade blockade? Maybe even more vital. A thorough destruction of the OWS library should be regarded with full gravity as an act of cultural terrorism by the police. What would Ben Franklin have done?
It's not the eviction from the privately owned public space that upsets me.
It's the fact that the eviction was done so forcefully by the privately owned public police.
How else do you evict someone who refuses to leave other than forcefully? Forcefully does not mean violent or recklessly.
RobDon needs to stop cheerleading for the wrong side. Somebody's bound to stop thing he's merely wrong-headed and start thinking he's willfully thick.
I'd call him a jackass, but I would not so slander the mascot of my political affiliation. Cretin? Nah. Insult to cretins everywhere. Let's just call him a wonderfully programed right wing device and leave it at that.
"The Library of Alexandria was one of the Great Wonders of the World until it was destroyed by the early church"
OK it's the nit picky amateur historian squad which solely consists of me. The Library of Alexander was not on of the official 7 Wonders of the Ancient World. That honor goes to the Lighthouse of Pharos in Alexandria's harbor.
The Library was at it's height when it was first burned down accidentally by Julius Cesar when he set fire to the Egyptian fleet in Alexandria's harbor in 48 B.C.E. . It was the largest and most significant library in the ancient world. There is some disagreement whether the Library was rebuilt or another library was used as the Library of Alexandria. This is the library you maybe referringDon. It was burned down and rebuilt a few times. Unfortunately books are combustible things. To say the least there is a very good fire repression system where I work.
The mistreatment of any book no matter what era is sickening to me. I work at a place that preserves books not mishandles them. There is also a state-of-the-art preservation lab where I work to care for the collection (410,000 rare books, 270,000 reference books, 7 million manuscripts).
Rob books are not easily movable at a moments notice. They're heavy for one thing. If you have had to pack up a large personal library like I have you'd understand. It took me days last time and I have about 1,000 books.
We're having too many different debates, all pushed together. There's the technical debate, involving the method of police action. There's also a debate regarding the specific legal rights to protest, place, time, physical damage. On top of these, there's the larger, more interesting debates regarding the right to protest and speak freely, and another regarding the actual message of the OWS, the damage done to our democracy by corporate corruption and the resulting oligarchy it creates.
If we're going to debate the first, then the whole matter sounds like a gross mismanagement of tactics. Someone forgot to think that the morning after the attack, the public would be looking at pictures of damaged books and hearing stories about the destruction of books. Somehow I doubt this is really a case of Mayor Bloomberg ordering police to destroy books. It just sounds like he was foolish and reckless in the way he ordered the attack, just as foolish and reckless as some of the police were during the attack. This just sounds like it's more of an issue about whether he's a competent mayor, than a real political statement. After all, it would take a fool to think that the image of books being destroyed wouldn't provoke a visceral reaction from onlookers.
As far as the specific legal rights to protest and the legal rights to protest where they chose to set up, I honestly don't care. In comparison to the fundamental right to free speech, I could care less where they set up the library or who's property it was on. We are making a mistake by letting these issues cloud the more important messages of the OWS movement. We can debate the fundamental right to free speech, or the degradation of our democracy occurring everyday when companies and individuals purchase our elected officials, buy our political platforms and turn us, and the OWS protesters, into economic fatted calves for ultimate advantage of corporate machine.
Christ I love you lot! Thank you Maria. I knew about the Lighthouse of Alexandria, but I though the Library might have constituted a second for Alexandria in World Wonders.
I just want to second Maria, since there's so much legendary misinformation about the Alexandria library. As she hints at, the library experienced several fires over time. And the idea that the library was destroyed by early Christians is pretty absurd considering how many books early Christianity produced, and the fact that early Christians were either responsible for, or were the earliest adopters of, the codex form of the book.
I'd also like to point out, since we're sort of geeking out about libraries, that Alexandria had a bitter rival in the library at Pergamum. And, of course, there were other, smaller libraries in Late Antiquity. It's not as if all the books in the world were at Alexandria.
In the ancient world, it was very expensive and time-consuming to make a copy of a book. A copy was only made if someone wanted a copy. So if a book was lost forever in a fire, that would mean that that was the only copy in existence, making it a book nobody cared enough about to duplicate.
The thing that is really responsible for the loss of ancient texts is simply changing fashions and the passage of time. That's boring, so people prefer to believe in big sexy fires.
Maria, from post #1.6, my response:
Matt,
Assessment correct. I would add "responsible treatment of books" as a topic as well. I'm all for that! The others we may have so disagreement. Here's hoping it all works out to a constructive end.
Now THAT I will cheerfully co-sign!
Rob
OK After reading #1.6 in can see your point. I think next time OWS should invest their donations in a book-mobile. That way the books would be available and far more portable and most importantly safe from harm.
Are you hearing me librarians of OWS?!
Maria, they took your suggestion!
See Tricia McKinney's new blog post: The People's Bookmobile
YAY! Thank you RobDon!
Thanks Rob
I just posted to the thread.
I would not read too much into the destruction of the books. It is just part of Bloomberg's intent to destroy Occupy's ability to protest. And that is why Occupy will outmaneuver Bloomberg. I am sure they will come up with something creative. The Occupy movement is not going away and that is what worries politicians and their rich benefactors. Public opinion supporting the Occupy movement has the potential to change the elections.
I don't think it's an attempt to destroy the ability to protest. As he said, you can protest anywhere at anytime as long as you respect property and don't disrupt the lives of others.Bloomberg acted not only to the potential and real health and safty issues, but also to pleas by the residential community, which supports the protest. to restore the quality of life in their neighborhood. We forget there is a large residential area, complete with schools, within walking distance.
What seems to have been lost in all the media reports and blogging is the message - inequality. This is a real issue in today's economy and deserves much discussion and debate. However, by choosing the tactic they did, their actions have superceded the message. Camping in make shift locations, and breaking the law, only focuses people away from the message.
Say what you want about the Tea Party, they organized, protested, then went back and voted.
And openly carried weapons to presidential town halls and celebrated the 15th anniversary of the Murrah federal building bombing in OKC.
The claims about health and safety are the magic words that judges want to hear when it involves restricting constitutional rights. If the National Guild of Lawyers force the issue, the city will have to put on a case for legitimate health and safety issues. They can't prove that and any such claims are speculative. A government entity may not use an artifice to regulate constitutional rights. If OWS pushes this issue and Bloomberg loses, Wall Street will not be happy if OWS returns and the city can do nothing.
Pres Obama is not on our side. http://current.com/shows/countdown/videos/occupy-wall-street-michael-moore-connects-the-federal-government-to-encampment-raids
You're not pronouncing it correctly. It's "you can protest anywhere at any time as long as it's out of the line of sight and earshot of any rich person, politician or person associated with the media." Hope that helps.
Protesting in a convenient location out of ear-shot really defeats the purpose.
Which is the whole idea, defeating the occupation.
It will be interesting to see how much public support the heavy handed police depts. get when their negotiating their new contracts with the cities.They should remember the OWS are citizens of their districts.Sure they can say,just doin what I'm told,but where have we heard that before.Spraying people with mace doing nothing more than standing there,using tear gas like they were controlling a bunch of rioters.I can realize some control is a necessity but what their doing is inexcusable.Or they can say the actions of a few officers should not reflect badly on the whole police force.But cant the same be said for OWS.The police depts. better watch their few bad apples,they are on shaky ground with citizens anyway because of their generous pension and health benefits,then again maybe Bloomberg and other mayors realize this and think it will help them in negotiations. Naah their not that smart!
More you pull crap like this, the more power goes to We The People!!!!
so keep it up and you will find out that the office you are sitting does not belong to you but it belongs to We The People and we only let you sit there!!!!
Keep up the fight to take America back for Americans!!!
Amen!
What intrigues me about the OWS library is not its representation of the permanence of the movement (though it certainly does that), but of the ethos of the movement. Clearly this is a group that values reading, education, and thinking.
Whether intentional or otherwise, dismantling the movement and treating the library with such disdain demonstrates an extraordinary move on the part of the establishment/1% to repress or limit not only free speech, but critical thought.
It is a well-established historical fact that education is consistently seen as a threat to injustice -- and the 1% seem to be aware of that fact.
and across the country, what are states doing with the crisis on their hands? cutting education funds drastically. here in texas, where i am from, perry and his super majority in the texas house cut Billions from schools, and then we see him parade around on the national stage wanting to do away with the department of education all together.
ideas are so strong. that's what they are really afraid of.
In the same way the flag is the symbol of America, the book is the symbol for our humanity. When they're destroyed, it matters.
Wow. The narrative of the 1% is at war with the narratives of the 99%.
If this was about order, the dismantling would be orderly and respectful. The argument that the people consent to allow the state a monopoly on police power is premised on the idea that the power be used to maintain order. Without orderly execution of power, the legitimacy of the ruling elites is put in question.
Resorting to large scale and coordinated acts violence and intimidation in several cities is an indication of desperation in the ranks of the technocratic elites.
The republicans have had many administrations to install like minded technocrats in the bureaucracies in the departments of Justice and Homeland Security. Michael Moore was on Olbermann last night making the case that Justice and/or Homeland Security had a coordinating role in organizing the police actions against the occupy movement in multiple cities.
Obama argued that there needs to be transparency in the actions of government. If he doesn't know already whether there was a federal role in the crackdown, the administration can easily find out by having a cabinet member call up the mayors of Portland and Oakland and press them for the names of all federal officials involved. The heads of those departments can then bring their internal investigative groups to bear on those involved. If we are to believe that the administration was not complicit in the crackdown, Jay Carney needs to have a full report about the findings no later than tomorrow.
Interesting, so you are saying if there is a federal role in ousting and harassing the OWS protestors it should not be difficult to find out due to the admitted goal of governmental transparency, so lacking in previous administrations, by the current administration.
Michael Moore notwithstanding, years ago Ray Bradbury wrote a brilliant book, Fahrenheit 451 (the temperature at which paper burns). If you've read it (or have seen the movie) then you understand. If not, it's about the suppression of ideas in a society controlled by a government that polices its citizens 24/7, controls their thoughts and bans the ownership-nay, the very existence of all books. Municipal firemen do not extinguish fires, but collect books and burn them. But there are people committed to keeping alive books and freedom of ideas. They have been forced into exile.
A government can take away the tents...the generators...and even the books and laptops in an effort to further its thuggery and deny basic rights (e.g., freedom of assembly and other constitutional and human rights), but it cannot bar communication and the ideas driving a movement like Occupy! The governments of all these cities that are banning the "occupations", are boosting the movement to its next level.
I am a librarian and you can even take away my catalogs, lists and inventories, but I know EXACTLY what is in my collection, who has used/read nearly every book and if I am asked for assistance, I will help you find your answer or the resources to help you reach that answer. I am committed to communication.
--and any government or body that has tried to obstruct or control ideas..or thinks it can--doesn't get it.
Bloomberg insisted on occupying New York's mayoralty for a third term. New Yorkers should demand that he and his "party" should leave, as well.
Fahrenheit 451 has been in my thoughts a lot lately. Although I haven't read it in years, lately I've been reminded of Montag's flight from the authorities as he was pursued by helicopters and tiny insect-like drones. Technology was used to wield power over the people rather than for their benefit.
Our country seems to be devolving into a dystopian nightmare envisioned by several 20th Century writers. I see bits of Fahrenheit 451, Nineteen Eighty-Four, and even Brave New World. I see less and less of the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.
I don't care who you are, where you are, you don't mess with the books!
Also, I have to keep reminding myself that the brilliant Fahrenheit 451 was written in 1953!
1953 - The height of McCarthyism.
i'm not in any way advocating violence at all, but sometimes i can't help but think back to sharon angle saying if people didn't get their way at the polls, they would turn to second amendment remedies.
my question is, if people cannot protest peacefully, then what will they have to do to be heard?
the people breaking up these protests really ought to consider that.
They won't. For whatever reason, when you get into a position of authority, they remove the part of your brain that allows you to understand that repression never works. But as that great political philosopher, Princess Leia, said, "The more you tighten your grip, the more systems will slip through your fingers."
One quick question to the history buffs amongst us. Has it ever happened, historically, where police were aggressively used against peaceful civilian protesters with a positive resolution? I know we have clips throughout the 20th century, depicting cruelty and violence against protesters, but I can't seem to think of one single time when it lead to something good.
Nevertheless, in a world where these protests are being viewed, worldwide, live, and social media outlets are keeping every event in people's minds, people must be insane if they think that armed police action is a good solution.
Protester: No! OWS is peaceful! We have no weapons, you can't possibly...
Mayor Bloomberg: You would prefer another target, a militaristic target? Then name the city! I grow tired of asking this so it will be the last time: *Where* is the OWS base?
Matt, you and Emily are awesome. As to your question...worked out for the authorities and the establishment? Generally not. But here in my hometown of Tulsa Ok we had the 1921 Greenwood Race Riots which were successfully covered up until I was in high school in the 80s.
More broadly speaking, violent oppression has never worked here if it inspires disgust in the general populace. In a backhanded way, it almost always leads to a good result in the areas of social justice and reform. I've said it before and reiterate: The blood of martyrs is the cement of institutional change. The 8 hour day was paid for by protestors being shot to death by police. The practice of sweat shop labor ended with over 140 women leaping or falling to their deaths during the Triangle Shirt Factory fire. The killing of students in Kent State and in Birmingham(?) underscored the unpopularity of the Viet Nam war. The Chicago Democratic Convention radicalized an entire generation, the Civil Rights Protests in the South had its police dogs, firehoses, and batons. All of which lead to great results. Just not for the people wielding the guns hoses and batons.
don, i love reading your posts. i don't always agree with them, but you are much more eloquent in your points than i ever seem to get. sending a mental high five your way!
Thank you, I appreciate it. I do not claim infallibilty, though I've always ruined the bell curve for test scores in about class I'd taken. If you think I am wrong in my facts, I prefer to be corrected. I would rather have good facts than win an argument.
Thank you! I still find it amazing that real history and fictional history (books and movies) are both filled with warning signs, begging governments to find a better solution than direct police action, but still people continue to make the same mistakes with every new generation.
Every generation reinvents the wheel and every generation's leaders rediscovers why using violence against the people you are sworn to represent is really bad PR.
And everyone who knows history or saw the same dance years ago gets to say "Dumbass! What did you expect!?"
I'm not sure what you mean by 'positive resolution'. If you mean whether the brutal repression of protestors has ever had a good outcome, maybe. If you take a really long view. But only in the sense that repression usually makes the protest movement stronger and ultimately prevail.
Thanks for your comments :)
psychiatric abuse
Thanks for sharing this nice information )
psychiatric abuse