top
East Bay
East Bay
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Muwekma Direct Action

by Konsider
The University has stepped up it's repression of the People's park, Muwekma tree sit.
Imagine being homeless, and unable to locate a place to sleep the previous, cold and rainy night, going to Peoples Park, in the morning when they open, to finally get some rest. Now imagine Peoples Park official Devon, with assistance from UCPD forces, throwing away (into locked dumpsters) your sleeping bag, or backpack, on grounds that "you had too much stuff in the park." This is just one horrendous example of the current circumstances faced within--under University of Berkeley, California ownership and jurisdiction--so called "People's" park.

A few days ago a homeless man, outraged at having found his backpack gone and tossed away, screamed at Devon with the question: "How would you like it if I came into your house and threw away all your belongings?" Devon was, as usual, indifferent. A friend of mine told me a story, recently, about a homeless man who had his backpack thrown away with his birth
certificate in it. These are some of the people in "People's" park.

Across the street, on the Harrison st. side of the park, student dorms are currently under construction, the incessant noise of the bulldozers, a sad, frustrating reminder of what's to come. And if you have any doubts about that pending future closing in on People's park, then I recommend you look at the number of trees the University has cut down recently, coupled with the huge propaganda campaign portraying the park as riddled with monstrous, drug addicted thieves waiting to rob or kill anyone near its vicinity. The Berkeley Daily Californian, a UCB paper, is there at the helm, defining the framework for coverage, by all the local mainstream news sources, of what appears as a dark, treacherous area, infecting our otherwise proud and gleaming city of Berkeley, needing to be expunged.

In response there has been several outcries by people, unfortunately marginal, calling for taking up initiative to stand up to the University, as well as ongoing attempts at raising the awareness of students, and other outsiders, as to what is actually happening in People's park. More recently a tree sit, near the far left corner of the park, has been taken up by those of us incensed at the University, and city of Berkeley's deception and hegemony. Those involved in the tree sit agreed to adopt the name Muwekma (Ohlone for people) as an alternative name for the park. Thus far, UCPD reaction has been clear: do not disobey, or even attempt to question UC authority. Initially one of the tree sitters had climbed down from one of the trees, temporarily left for about an hour or so, and returned to find that his hammock and everything situated in the tree was gone. Since then, police harassment had, during the first few or so weeks, consisted mostly of intimidation tactics: like constantly shining a light on the tree sitter, parking police cars near the tree, or physically coming up to the area with questions such as: "is everything all right here?" or "how's everything going?" More recently, however, the University has stepped up it's aggression.

A man by the name of Jacob has, since he arrived in Berkeley a few weeks ago, been a particularly steadfast supporter of the tree sit, taking constant watch of potential police attempts to attack or dislodge the action. Keeping an eye out late into the night, Jacob has more than once broken People's park curfew (beginning at 10pm at night) by standing, and even sometimes sleeping under the tree, much to the annoyance of UCB police authorities. Despite his constant presence, Jacob just suddenly disappeared a couple days ago. We strongly suspect he must have been arrested, but unfortunately no one knows his last name in order to check. Of course, even though they probably performed the arrest, the UC police, who regularly patrol the particular area, are not the ones to get an honest answer from. Further, the police recently took a banner from the tree sit, and police presence in area has steadily been increasing. Recently, a person I know from the tree sit noticed that, while he was in another area, had a patrol car continuously drive around him over and over again.

Right now, we need much more involvement in the tree sit, and the movement to protect People's park. The University doesn't want that; the Berkeley city council doesn't want (or else doesn't care) about it; Berkeley landowners, and developers don't want such a scenario; The Berkeley Business Association doesn't want this to happen; and the UCB, and Berkeley city police, who maintain these elites, certainly doesn't want any resistance from anyone. But what do "people" really want? What do you want?
Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by sasquatch
The name of the banner, taken down by police, read:

POVERTY IS NOT A CRIME!

Is it possible that police could have done something like 51--50ed Jacob? If they did just simply arrest him, how long can they hold him for? Maybe they just buried him somewhere. It's scary when rich people and the police have so much power.

Also, we need to stand up for animal rights in the park as well.
by ted friedman
please update me on tree cutting; latest example of. do you have specific info on arrests of tree sitters in park? how is ucb trying to dislodge midnight matt? be specific.
by Konsider
I am not certain how many trees have been cut in the park. I know a redwood use to stand right next to the one Matt is currently occupying. There are others, but I have to ask, so hopefully I'll get back to you on that one. Jacob is the only person who has been arrested at this point -- so far as we can tell: like I said in the post, he could have been killed and buried for all we know -- and as for Matt, he's currently still in the trees: the cops have not physically attempted to take him out of the trees. Yet.

I think the point I was trying to get across in my posting was that -- with police harassment steadily increasing, and the recent disappearance of Jacob, indicating harsher steps to come, along with, and in particular, the current plight of the park, of the homeless, of Berkeley, and of the earth -- there is a need for increased resistance.
by Ted Friedman
thanks for your quick response; is that you, Running Wolf? I'm doing a piece on the tree-sit for the Planet and would like to do the best by you that I can. I believe that Philip was busted early in the sit for an outstanding warrant; I believe they hauled him down. Keep me posted on Jacob. But mainly, the dates on tree/shrub damage still remain vague. I think you are saying that they've done it before--I've learned that very little of the original plantings remain and I know that over the years there has been clearing at the eastside of the park probably to give the police better views into the park from their cars. Aren't you really getting at the POSSIBILITY that various interventions could happen and that should be opposed sooner than later?
by Konsider
No, I am not Running Wolf. Jacob is still missing, and if he's in jail, even if he gets released, we wont see him till Monday, because of the weekend. The University cutting trees and shrubbery, and killing plants, has been very random, and without any process of any kind. A common excuse heard by UC arborists, after the fact, is that the tree was dying, which has been, on more than one occasion, very dubious. Sorry, I don't known of any specific examples, but to put some clarity on the question of whether the UCB can be taken at it's word, take as an example the previous tree sit staged by Running Wolf: when he agreed to come down, only if the University promised to not kill three Acacia trees, they proceeded to do so anyhow.

As to your inquiry about whether there's the possibility of intervention in the tree sit, the answer is there already has been -- one of the points I've been trying to emphasize is we're expecting a major attack any day, and that resistance is needed now.

by Sacred Plants of Europe
If trees are as few and far between in this urban area as in Hamburg or Stuttgart, protective action may be mandated, even more so if the threat against those trees is not just from misguided development but from greenwashing corruption, authoritarian statism, or in this instance historical revisionism masquerading as misguided development. The park experience requires activists even more to know why they are doing what they are doing than the same type of action in an undeveloped surrounding. There is an increased risk for political mistakes of inidividual activists to threaten the entire action with a legitimacy deficit, but there also is an increased chance to get a strength of support from the ground which can turn technical mistakes of police counterparts into political gains.
by Konsider
First, I want to say that I don't know how many trees were, or have been cut, in Hamburg or Stuttgart.

Second, I don't think resistance is ever "mandated", but is a choice, you or I make, based on understanding actual circumstances.

Third, the decisions made by UCB forces were, and are definitely based on authoritarian priorities: for instance, tall plants and other greenry were cut back, in the front of Peoples park, hardly "an undeveloped surrounding," so police could keep a better eye on activity in the area.

Forth, I don't understand what you mean by the phrase "legitimacy deficit." Are you saying actions can be better justified for public reception? I don't know.

Fifth, I was, overall, confused as to what your message was trying to convey.
by Sacred Plants of Europe
This comment was written with all the earlier reporting and commentary on this action in mind. [https://indybay.org/newsitems/2010/11/04/18663168.php] No trees were harmed in Hamburg, not even when we took our firehose-wrapped polyprops out, while in Stuttgart they were unrooting them as wholes, to the horror of these who had seen them grow. The set of possibilities what could be behind misguided development is neither mutually exclusive nor complete, but the experience is in every treesit project one of them turns out to be more central than the others. In your case it seems they want to get rid of the park not because they wanted the space for something else, but because they want to get rid of the history of the place. What makes a legitimacy deficit will depend on the political goals of your action, but certainly in every political action there is the possibility of behaviour which amounts to serving sausages in a protest against a slaughterhouse.

The legal precedent for "too much stuff in the park" should be "too many cars in the parking." I don´t know how this is being handled in Amiland, but there are countries where the official response to such a situation would be to attach stickers, wait, then collect only those which have not been used in the meantime, charge owners requesting their property back for storage. It would be designed to leave the possibility to change the situation, which is quite a different procedure compared to wrecking random items without warning. I do not expect capitalist regimes to live up to our principles, but when they even can´t to their own it clearly is a symptom of moral bankruptcy. Apparently in your country private property is only for those who are more equal than the rest of us, just like in China.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$260.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network