How San Francisco's Anti-Tech Movement Can Make Itself Heard

Predictability is the death of influence. And so it seemed to be with San Francisco's anti-tech movement when one of its tentacles, the Counterforce, on Monday published a diatribe against Kevin Rose, Digg founder and current Google Ventures partner. In it, the group railed against Rose's venture capitalism as one aspect of a tech elite parasitism strangling the eccentric San Francisco. Their piece de resistance? A request for $3 billion. The protesters also staged a home demonstration outside Rose's Portrero Hill house for added emphasis.

Strategically, the campaign was lifted straight from past activist playbooks. Recall the drum circle staged by Occupy protesters near Mayor Michael Bloomberg's home in 2011? As valid as the anti-tech contingent's criticisms might be, the predictable action relegated the Rose demonstration to a minor media event. Who among us would have argued the home demonstration wasn't bound to happen?

But, as San Francisco's Diggers taught the '60s counterculture—particularly the Yippies' Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin—creativity and protest walk hand-in-hand. Many of the Diggers' methods, which the Yippies copied, are still being used to this day: mass media manipulation, pranks, stunts, papers, street action, and so on. There is a reason for this: the methods still work, but with varying degrees of success.

The Diggers walked through the streets in various costumes, performing elaborate spectacles. In one famous bit of street theater, the Diggers staged a "Death of Money" parade. Famously, the Yippies tried to levitate the Pentagon, and actually threw fake and real US dollars onto the New York Stock Exchange floor. This anarchic spirit still animates protest movements. Even Tea Party activist James O'Keefe lies on this continuum—albeit on the dark edge of it. And maybe the demand for $3 billion lies on this continuum as well, though the Counterforce seems deadly serious about creating an alternative model with that cash.

Protesters always do what they can, using whatever resources and bodies are available. They have a vision of the way the world is and the way they believe it should be, and attempt to express this through words, images, and street theater. The Counterforce surely knows this, and were attempting to work this magic with the Kevin Rose protest action. But, the effect appears to have been muted.

Neither the Counterforce's essay nor its home demonstration seemed to produce the proper resonance. It didn't cut through the noise the way Diggers or Yippies actions did. True, it's harder to make a big statement now with mass media—especially with the ADHD flavor of digital media consumption. But, the anti-tech protesters made a big statement early on, catching the media's attention; now, they need to sustain it.

Not everyone shares this critical view of the Counterforce's actions. Noted community organizer scott crow, whose post-Katrina efforts as co-organizer of the Common Ground Collective helped influence Occupy and other protest movements, believes home demonstrations have real power.

"I am supportive of home demonstrations since it actually targets the decision makers personally," said crow. "They don't get to hide behind a façade of bureaucracy or a business entity. Businesses and government are run by people—they have names and addresses and should be accountable for their actions."

Crow added that making money "from exploitation" is not just an external cost, but an act that has real impact. "I think [the protesters] are quite clear in why they are doing it and offering a utopian vision that challenges capitalism and the dominant narratives," crow added. "By not just condemning, but saying $3 billion would significantly alleviate some of these issues, they are offering a signpost." Crow added that their demand for money isn't real, it just "exposes the pillaging that often blindly happens for profit under our economic system."

"Businesses are run by people that cannot continue to ignore that their never-before-seen accumulation of wealth has deep and real impacts on people, communities, and the environment," he said. "People like Kevin can lament on Twitter all they want, but until they give up their wealth for a common good, it's just meaningless lip service. To those taking it to the homes: do it more!"

Maybe if these actions were amplified with more protesters across numerous home demonstrations, on a single day of action, it would have more impact. This possible scenario suggests that an issue as important as tech elitism and profiteering deserves a powerful and effective countercultural campaign. It needn't be as anarchically goofy as the Diggers and Yippies' efforts, but it requires that level of abstraction in approach.

Bring the unexpected. Surprise the masses and the media. It's hard to do these days, but not impossible. The $3 billion demand had some zing on a conceptual level, even the vague details about what would be done with it. But, the Counterforce can and should do more to highlight the root problem that technologies are constantly being created to solve the myriad of problems created by other technologies.