Forum Post: CALL TO ACTION - Let's make a DECISION RE THE 2 CAMPS IN OWS: Some want to grow the movement by clarifying what it's about. Some want to grow the movement before engaging in massive direct nonviolent action. WE CAN DO BOTH.

Setting aside the very small minority that just wants to blow the whole thing up and throw bottles and fight police, there really seem to be two main camps in OWS:

A. There are people who say we need to get bigger before we make demands. They say that, once we, the 99%, recognize that we have more in common than we have separating us, we will be in a position to make DECISIONS from a position of unified strength instead of DEMANDS from a position of divided weakness.

B. Other people say that in order for the movement to succeed and grow its numbers, We must get clear on what the goals are. The line of thinking here is that people reach a certain point where their level of sacrifice and commitment plateaus if the goals are unclear. Folks in this camp will tell you they're being realistic in thinking "Hey, who's going to join and commit funds, time and vocal support if they don't know what the real goals of the movement are and can't articulate them themselves."

I don't think it's either/or. I think it's both. And I think we need to take action on both now before the tiny minority of people who advocate and practice violence win out.

I think there is absolutely nothing wrong with discussing demands since the discussion itself helps people get relatively clear view of the issues and goals. I believe that this can help the movement grow exponentially because it will begin to become clear that there are real actionable steps we can take to effect the change we desire. That tends to motivate people to focus and increase their support.

At the same time, I think it is unrealistic from a tactical perspective to think we can launch serious massive direct non-violent action without having sufficient numbers. (NOTE: The serious massive direct action I'm referring to would be something like the one described here http://occupywallst.org/forum/fresh-thread-forum-post-below-received-over-2000-c/ -- if link doesn't work, pls just google occupywallst.org fresh thread).

To get support, we should vocally and publicly debate our list of goals (whether it's 1 or 3 or 8). To get support, we should most certainly publicly denounce violence and publicly commit to non-violent direct action. To get support, (speaking from a purely tactical perspective here) we should do everything we can to look like middle America at any events, marches, blockades, sit ins or other protests so that when we're arrested, middle America sees its sons and daughters being arrested.

Most of all, to gain support needed to engage in major direct action like the one at link below, we need to engage in more and more smaller direct nonviolent actions all over the country to raise awareness. Once we get this ball seriously rolling, we can then do something massive like the action described at the link below:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/fresh-thread-forum-post-below-received-over-2000-c/ If the link doesn't work, please just google occupywallst.org fresh thread .

QUOTE from Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from the Birmingham Jail" is below -- This fellow was a radical my friends and he understood how to get things done. If you want OWS to evolve from a fledgling movement to a productive revolution that gets the money out of politics,, the tactics described by King below describe how you do it. Martin Luther King, Jr., inspired by Gandhi, engaged in direct non-violent action and effected massive change in the U.S. He left us his play book. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr. in his own words writing from JAIL after being arrested for protesting. King is an occupier from back in the day:

"Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks to so dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, we must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood."

"The purpose of our direct-action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation."

Remember who he was writing to in the letter from the BIRMINGHAM JAIL: The silent good people. King spoke of the "appalling silence of the good people" doing as much to harm the country as the the loud voices of the misguided. King was writing to white ministers basically saying (not direct quote) -- Where the hell are you? We are standing up for the freedom of all Americans, basic human freedom, democracy and goodness. Which of these great things would Jesus have been against? Why aren't you out here in the streets with us?

Direct action with large numbers of people can make a real difference. Consider this SECOND quote from Martin Luther King, Jr., and see again why he really was an occupier from back in the day:

"A delegation of poor people can walk into a high official’s office with a carefully, collectively prepared list of demands. (If you’re poor, if you’re unemployed anyway, you can choose to stay in Washington as long as the struggle needs you.) And if that official says, ‘But Congress would have to approve this,’ or, ‘But the President would have to be consulted on that,’ you can say, ‘All right, we’ll wait.’ And you can settle down in his office for as long a stay as necessary."

Yes. This is how it's done. If you want change that matters for real citizens right here on the ground, this is how you get it done. They know what to do with violence but they have no idea what to do with tactical non-violent direct action. It befuddles the 1%. They look bad if they allow their offices to be occupied by protesters. They look bad if they arrest or rough up peaceful protestors who look like middle America. Then it is the 1% who are stuck and only we have the power to release them. A pretty good position from which to negotiate. Sure beats throwing bottles at tanks.