Tom is on your side. That was petty and uncalled for.
Isn't this the public record for Kasama? Is there actually no editor?

Eric, I think TNL is referring to the Wisconsin protests: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OA3FpfsN3sM

Tom Morello released an album today that has a song with a verse that talks about the how the even the police are joining the union. I think that's what is being referenced.

So what is the line on the police in WI? Seemed like a good thing...no? There were no divisions there to exploit? I think the video intro includes an unnecessary sweep. Tom has displayed a "creeping populism" okay. But what's the better line? A broader discussion might include questions of during the revolutionary process where do all the police go? In the best case scenario do they as an institution wither away? Do they switch sides?

I am curious how folks should have handled the situation in WI. Was their silence wrong? Isn't it better to have the police divided against sections of the ruling class?

There will always be instances when individual cops temporarily act outside of the interests of the state. For example at CUNY there were situations in late 80s and even the 91 or 92 building occupations where to cops were simultaneously breaking down barricades and arresting people and also giving people a pass out the back door in the minutes before the order went down. In the republic of Ireland the Garda Síochána na hÉireann ("Guardians of the Peace of Ireland") have often had ties to the republican movement in the north. Providing a host of active support in the military campaigns in the 70, 80 and into the 90s. But still these are exceptions not the rule. What our analysis is and what our line is.

It's common for the left to suggest that the police are the "armed defenders of property and privilege." I don't necessary want to disagree but I want to draw somethings out here. The former statement is often made in distinction to say US rank and file soldiers who are seen as less ideologically wedded to the state and the orders of there commanders. Like in documentaries such as Sir, No Sir, etc.

The police, and here I am thinking the 39K strong NYPD, in my experience come from the most stable sections of the working class as more lumpen elements hit closest by crime, drugs and poverty. The state invests a tremendous amount of indoctrination and ideological training in rank and file police. It's as if all cops go to a condensed version of west point before hitting the streets. Of course even getting into the academy can mean a better paying job than one at Starbucks or McDonalds while cops make around 50K per year. I agree they will likely be among the last to switch sides. But as the case in WI points even in non-revolutionary situations there are possibly small breaks.

I do not doubt the police's propensity for violence. It is well documented. They do have a lot of guns though the military has more and considering who is in the military right now who would be more open to revolutionary ideas? Looking at the vietnam experience there was clearly a fantastic breakdown. Will that happen again? today I see a US military operating with a largely motivated rank and file. I know this may be against established assumptions but that's just what they are assumptions. I think more investigation is needed and this is a good discussion.

I think that the right posture was to have a basically friendly interaction with the police inside the capitol, as Tom describes. The operation of the police <i>within the demonstrations</i> was to try and stamp out the militancy and channel them into "official" actions. They did this through the police hierarchy presenting themselves as very nice, on the side of the demonstrations, and so on. They enlisted either paid agents or dupes to speak on their behalf. And rank and file police officers were basically absent after the first week, it was all sheriffs and state troopers.

So there was a situation where it was literally true that the police were not repressing the demonstrations but clearly trying to manipulate them. I think this was because the police hierarchy was bothered by the possibility of giving an arrest order, for example, and it being disobeyed - which would indicate a breakdown of discipline. Higher-ups in the police would say "I support the protests, but leave the capitol, that will make the protest more effective" while rank and file officers who took me out of the capitol at various points would say "sorry, I have to do this, I support you, come back soon". I think the former is a conscious effort to manipulate and the latter indicates some conflict within the ranks.

The most effective thing was to explain and expose what the police where doing and why, while not vilifying individuals or officers as a group, because that would contribute to a shutdown of the conflict within the police, and also was usually not effective for educating white workers whose ideas about the police were slowly changing.

Had their been any kind of illegal strike action, that would have begun a new dynamic.

There was an interesting split that opened up, but I don't think there was any organized force that could intervene to widen it even if the analysis was correct.

Saw what I found to be a mesmerizing interview with Tom Morello on Bill Moyers Journal, last night.

Think instead of going tit for tat re the line on the police in WI, Morello was able to give a more sweeping overview of his politics, and his role as an artist in the overall picture, who he identifies with and who his politics represent--maybe most significant that he is clearly an internationalist.

He referred to those who impacted on his own politics artistically, like The Clash and Public Enemy, as well as his own, but not exclusively his own, "evolution" artistically/politically--and the positive role and responsibility of artists in the struggles of today. Also, this very recent interview had footage of May Day 2012 in NYC, along with Rage against the Machine, Occupy, etc.

IMO, Tom Morello articulated the overall politics (passionately but without being rhetorical) that many of us ascribe to, and he used the forum of Bill M.'s program to reach an even broader audience extremely well.

Here's the link for anyone interested:

http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-tom-morello-troubadour-for-justice/