Update from 4 days ago:

Bodies as mass and buildings as mass assert political power by their physical presence as masses.  Their symbolic presence makes them more vulnerable to symbolic removal, and these resultant anxieties manifest themselves in defensive architectural tactics.

Worldwide protests in the last year demonstrate an accumulation of mass (made up of/by bodies), creating a new urban order and revealing the ability to interiorize/defend space outside of buildings.

Bodies and buildings deploy similar strategies in asserting their presence as mass in extreme conditions of mass demonstrations. But when considering architecture and the fact that we most often occupy and live INSIDE of buildings, the question is this: can protesting bodies assert their own agenda/power over buildings when they (the bodies) are the secondary mass contained in a primary mass, a building?  Difficult when buildings are often used to regulate and control bodies.

Or, are there situations where buildings are not enough to control bodies?  When do temporary netting barricades (i.e. used to corral Occupy Wall Street protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge in October 2011) and riot control squads become necessary as a new kind of mobile architecture?