Forum Post: A Means of Reaching Consensus
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 8, 2011, 2:26 p.m. EST by ImaDreamer
(82)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
We will never change government policy if we do not specify exactly what policies need to be changed and how to change them. At the same time, taking a particular stand can limit open dialogue and alienate those with opposing views.
A possible solution might be creating a web page where individuals can indicate their support for a particular policy. Items receiving the most support would move to the top of the list and become "policies receiving the most support" rather than "policies of the occupy movement." In this way all those following the movement, including the media, would become aware of the most practical solutions we can come up with. This would provide specific objectives we could work toward achieving in terms of policy change.
The "voting" pages could be part of the forum, located in a "proposed policies" area. Individuals could post a short statement defining a suggested policy in a clear and precise manner. Beneath the statement a check box could appear next to "I support this policy." Policies receiving the most support would move toward the top of the page. More details supplied by the person posting should be available via a "more info" link, with that page being a forum where people can discuss the pros and cons of the proposed policy.
A similar area could be created for "political actions" where strikes, boycotts and other actions could be proposed.
If all the Occupy sites could link to the most popular proposals it could help unify the movement worldwide.
Are you suggesting the unelected 'facilitators' in NYC run this or are you suggesting an elected NAtional General Assembly to coordinate?
I don't know anything about how the Occupy movement is organized, but whoever runs this site could add the suggested area. Ideally, the same pages would be mirrored on all other Occupy sites, or at least links could be provided on those sites so everyone could submit and/or vote for policy ideas they want to support.
This site is run by a handful of unelected people who privately removed the working group on the 99% Declarations pages after the working group was announced in public at the NYCGA on the evening of October 15th.
I think your idea is an excellent one for the National General Assembly.
https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/home
Also you might be interested in gawdoftruths wiki idea:
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Main_Page
Thanks for the links. I see the potential for endless difficulties in terms of the National General Assembly proposals on that page. For one thing, I do not believe forming a new political party will be the least bit effective at this stage, because the media won't cover anyone but Republicans and Democrats and that means no one else can get elected.
I think masses of people acting together to relentlessly demand a particular policy change is the most effective tool available. We just need to decide what those policy changes should be and how we can all act together to bring them about. That is why we need a method, such as the one I have proposed here, to bring the best ideas to the surface.
Forming an independent third party is a last resort. they'd have to give the government something like a year to address the grievances, so they're looking at Autumn 2013 to reconvene to launch the party.
There won't be any 99r candidates in the 2012 election but the NGA July 4th could be the most talked about event all summer. This is after all what RepubliCrats fear most. Do you remember the coverage Ross Perot got?
I think occupy was a most effective tool in waking everyone f'ing up to the possibilities but you can't make policy decisions that will effect the whole country without the authority or mandate. Your claim of "masses" has to be substantiated in a believable fashion or the American people will never take it seriously. Only the NGA will deliver that. Your method could be effective but only in the appropriate setting.
The whole idea of the NGA bothers me because it is simply another form of representative democracy, which is what got us into this mess to begin with. I think we need a more direct democracy, where decisions are made from the bottom up rather than the top down. Allowing people to "vote" on which policies they chose to support, as I have proposed here, avoids the problem of corruption and leaves the power with the people. If specific policies rise to the top here, efforts can be made to communicate those ideas to the media, and that can rally the masses behind those ideas.
Do you understand the meaning of 'grass roots' ? The people in their districts deliver a mandate to their delegates who deliver to the NGA who has the authority to act on the peoples wishes.
What most people here keep missing is that absolutely nothing will change until we the people control the levers of power. Make all the demands you want, they fall on deaf ears and you wind up in jail. FAIL Tell me that YOU are going to get millions of Americans to support direct democracy so loudly that the two-party system that's working very nicely for TPTB are going to decide one day to tear down the entire system and implement yours.
On the other hand, if you got behind the NGA you could work with other like minded individuals in a group setting to update the way we use technology in the system to move it in the direction you seek and offer it up to the people so that they can make a decision to go forward and WE have the POWER to make it so.
I'd much prefer living in a Venus Project world too but you have to deal with this reality. here's a few folks you might want to contact:
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://metapolitik.org/
http://www.osixs.org/home.aspx
good luck
Authority is either given by or forced upon those who are subject to it. I don't see how the NGA has any authority to control the levers of power, as you put it, though I understand that you hope they will gain that power in the future, through creating a political party with electable candidates supported by those in the occupy movement.
But here is the problem I see with that approach. It's more "democracy through representation." The purpose of the "voting" idea I outlined here is to create a direct democracy with policies chosen directly by the people. "Representatives" would only be managers implementing the will of the people without any real power of their own. IF the people are organized well enough they can force even our current representatives to act on their behalf. I admit that is a big "if" and perhaps the NGA could coordinate that organization of the people. But just looking at their web site it appears to me that they are already thinking in terms of being elected officials with power. Power breeds corruption, and I simply have fears that we'll end up right back where we started if we take that approach, though it may be useful as a short term means of transitioning to a truly grass roots form of government.
I believe the world needs a single government with a constitution and policies created directly by the people, though some sort of "voting" procedure similar to what I outlined here. We would elect managers, not representatives, and it would be the people pulling the levers of power themselves.
I'll take a closer look at the NGA, but I'm rather fond of the idea of a leaderless movement :)
This sounds like a damned brilliant idea, yes.
It's already unified.
I don't believe it is, at least not from the perspective were seeking. We are unified internally as a movement of ideas, however that does not appeal to the great many people looking to us for specific action. We need to gain more support to represent the "99%", and many people I speak to do not believe in this movement because it seems impractically abstract and gets misrepresented by others.
Edit: From a practical standpoint, there are common goals that could unite us across the spectrum, such as removing money from politics and increasing transparency, people are just waiting for an issue they can actually get behind and feel like they're making a difference in.
What kind of perspective is it that you are seeking? It sounds like you want to market it.
From an outside perspective. Think, how hard is it to get a good idea of everything we are fighting for just by looking at these forums? How hard is it when there is someone in the middle leaving details out? We come off as dreamers, when we very much intend to be allies, we just need to make it clear how people getting involved here will be helping everyone.
No, not really. You see, the vast majority of people have been discussing this for years. Most have played by the rules and gone through proper procedures---you know, the SOP to productive citizenship guide. They have been living it and working it. It doesn't need to be packaged.
Please understand I am being sincere, you can look towards my other posts as well, that might convey my idea better than I am doing here. I am not talking about "packaging" this, I am talking about earnestly asserting the goals we agree on so that others can see something for them to join in on. It's an issue that has come up multiple times while talking to people here. I mention, for instance, removing money from politics by implementing campaign finance reform and lobby reform, and more than half the time a seemingly stern dissenter finds common ground with us, or at least me.
Edit: Thank you ImaDreamer, I believe you articulate it much better than I.
I think it is safe to say that most people supporting the occupy movement would like to get money out of politics, but without a specific policy to support, what can any of us do to change things? On the other hand, what if everyone demanded that a law be passed prohibiting paid political advertising altogether. That law would go a long way toward reducing the power of corporations and lobbyists. Lots of people here would be willing to take some sort of action if they believed such a law could be implemented. We are unified in spirit here, but without specific policies we can choose to support (or not) we are also powerless.
Representative Ted Deutch has proposed "The Occupied Amendment" to get corporate money out of political campaigns. It may not go far enough, but it is a start and it is obviously an outcome of this movement.
http://www.theoccupiedamendment.org/
Thanks for the link. It's good to know someone in congress is actually trying to fix things. I doubt it will happen because congress has stopped every effort at campaign reform for years. That's why making it part of a grassroots movement will probably be necessary.