Forum Post: Can somebody confirm to me that this movement is not about Anarchy or Communism?
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 23, 2011, 9:28 a.m. EST by illinoisbill
(2)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I've seen a lot of credible info that suggest that the movement is staying vague in order to accumulate momentum but that the organizers have an extremist plan in place to usurp the government instead of working to make our system better.
I don't want to remove our system and have a civil war on our hands for years to come yet I very upset by the nutjobs that promote these extreme "systems".
So, are we looking for a democratic solution or what?
............
I don't buy into the incentive argument
it's based on the idea that a human wants more money
um... well... some people do want more money.. no ? personally I can give a shit about being rich... but there are things that I wish to do... like feed people... help the homeless... etc... and that takes money...
now I agree that a perfect system should feed people & help the homeless... but there will always be new ideas that people will want to implement that is easiest done with access to capital...
further, incentives are not necessarily monetary... how about Jonas Salk, inventing the polio vaccine?... and when he was done he gave to the people for free...
incentives, provide opportunity, creativity and invention... ;)
no needs time for creativity
We do know that politicians have a big incentive to get re-elected.
Let's vote every time for the one who got the least WS money. It would train them to change their behavior really fast. They'd be Pavlov's Politicians.
The US was not designed to be a democracy. It is a republic. please learn about this. Watch the video at http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment.
The core of change must begin with the dissolution of the Fed Reserve system and a return to a constitutional form of money. Debt is the virus that must be eliminated, then corrupt power in leadership
It is actually a democratic republic and the republic part is what has been corrupted over time. The division of power between the branches made sense and was a huge evolutionary step in self-determination, but new power structures have emerged. The concentration of wealth in the private sector among individuals and Corps. have eroded the protections of the division of power. The strength of public employee unions have also perverted the balance as the government machine now functions for its own benefit. Add to that the healthcare and pay for life for serving just a single term in federal elected office and you have a perfect storm for things being as they are today. I'd suggest that campaign finance reform and term limits, along with a national referendum process would do more to break the power that the 1% has on the process. Once fresh perspective is restored and institutionalized at the top (due to tern limits), Government at all levels could be brought back to its core purpose of serving the people not itself. Finally, ending the special care congress gets may help them focus on healthcare and retirement issues. I say they get paid while in office and must use the same healthcare system they prescribe for the rest of us. All support ends upon leaving office. (no retirement , no health care plan)
I can confirm this movement is not about anarchism or communism.
Everybody's been talking about this post:
Here's Lisa Fithian defining herself as an Anarchist: http://thevillager.com/villager_73/anarchistssaysmearwere.html
"Fithian, 43, of Austin, Tex., is a member of RANT, or Root Activist Network of Trainers, a coalition member of U.F.P.J. Fithian trains people in civil disobedience and direct action. “Much of my practice is based on anarchist ideas and principles,” she said."
And her wiki was updated a few weeks before Occupy to remove one word: Anarchist (which was on her Wiki since January 2009): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Fithian
WTF?
Dude, nobody has been talking about that post.
And nobody gives a fuck if some random hippie anarchist chick is hanging around OWS.
Who the hell is Lisa Fithian? I consider myself a non-practicing anarchist and I support the OWS movement. Does that mean OWS is an anarchist movement? No, of course it doesn't.
OWS is not about the organizers. It is about taking the power back from the Corporate/government owners of our country. We aim to do this by a peaceful, democratic movement that makes manifest the voice of the people. The main goal is to take the money out of politics. There are anarchists and probably communists involved, as all people and ideas are welcomed. But we prefer working toward the American ideals of equality, justice ,and the rule of laws....NOT the rule of corporate masters.
There will be no "civil war" because there are no sides yet taken. So far, based upon what I have seen, there is a group of by and large younger folk refusing to budge over a non-set of non-demands in a public space--hardly a convincing challenge to corporate, imperial capitalism. but if you are interested in learning about the differences between some of these words like "communism" or "socialism" or "anarchism" then here is a list I published at Dissident Voice the other day: http://dissidentvoice.org/2011/10/how-to-occupy-your-time/
Anarchism is democratic.
Perhaps you would consider our group's proposal of an alternative online direct democracy of government and business at http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo , hit the facebook “like” button if agreed, and then join our group's 20 members committed to that plan at http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. From the Declaration of Independence
There are anarchist and communists in the movement. But the movement is open to all and if you think about it clearly and calmly it should be obvious what are it's main draws and objectives, and that they appeal to a significant majority of americans. Therefore the question becomes : do you think the american people supports anarchism and communism in anything approaching a majority?
Neither should we be afraid of words. It's to the movement's credit that it is bold enough and honest enough to hold discussions on more radical and marginal ideologies, and to the media's shame that it tries to scare off the public with boogyman words.
In short, I tell you what I tell everyone with similar fears : if you care about the movement's direction take joint owenership of it, participate. For all the difficulties it brings, the absence of central authority means no agenda can be forced down on the movement, one can only emerge bottom up, from concensus.
the past is being repeated again and again:
With strident language Roosevelt took credit for dethroning the bankers he alleged had caused the debacle. On March 4, 1933, in his first inaugural address, he proclaimed: Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men. ... The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization
The movement is to create peaceful change before it gets so bad that the only way out is all out revolution.
We are looking for a solution...but every voice should be heard...it is freedom of expression...never be afraid to hear the voice of those you disagree with. That is how we achieve compromise.
I think the majority of people here are neither of those. But there are some.
Read your constitution and you will see exactly what's taking place.
And yet I find it odd that people who wish to replace our system applaud it for allowing them the freedom to express themselves.
And what is the point of that? Something can have both good an bad aspects. It's the bad things they are clearly trying to change. People can be right about one thing and wrong about another, just like there are good parts to a broken system.
Well naturally we have our naturally born given rights to be free with or without it. But I understand what you are saying.
This person is making a very important point. Anarchists on the far left and sociopaths on the far right, the extreme ends of the spectrum, will attempt to bring this movement to bloodshed. That cannot happen! It is absolutely NOT necessary!
PRINCIPLE, ORGANIZATION, PERSISTENCE! POP, POP, POP!
Why would you think "anarchists" will bring bloodshed? is it the commitment to non-hierarchical community organisation??
Do we have the same definition of "anarchy"? Look it up.
Why should I do your work?
"Most often, the term "anarchy" describes the simple absence of publicly recognized government or enforced political authority."
"The word "anarchy" is often used by non-anarchists as a pejorative term, intended to connote a lack of control and a negatively chaotic environment. However, anarchists still argue that anarchy does not imply nihilism, anomie, or the total absence of rules, but rather an anti-statist society that is based on the spontaneous order of free individuals in autonomous communities."
from; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy
So a system of consensus based General Assemblies,. is an Anarcho-Collectivist idea. In my opinion the most advance of all human organisations.
"spontaneuos order of free individuals in autonomous communities"...
So, if I decide spontaneously that a red light is an impingement on my free will...?
I looked it up and it lists that the inevitable conclusion is war. Is this how the have-nots are expecting to obtain their yachts?
Did you ever play games as a kid? Even something as simple as Hide and Go Seek has rules. Lawlessness is not the answer.
You need to re-read what Anarchy is. I'll wait.
Hillary, perhaps my thought that Anarchy is based on confusion and lawlessness is incorrect, especially in relation to your point of view.
My position simply is this. It's the last time I will explain and I will be on my way (I've been spending sleepless hours on this forum and have other practical matters to tend to.):
Systems, any system, inevitably get old and weak. And they get sick. They become corrupted. Yet there is no other place on this earth I'd rather be. I believe in the the Constitution, the founding priciples of this country. This country has survived great upheavals in the past. And it will survive this one, as well. Our governement doesnt need to be abondoned, abolished and foresaken. It needs to be repaired. it needs to be salvaged. It needs to be nursed back to health. But only if we believe, collectively, that that can be done.
I believe it can be done.
Yesterday I was out for a walk in my neighborhood, an average working-class neighborhood, and came across three young girls having a yard sale. They were selling thier unused toys. Thier faces were painted in bright colors. They were standing near thier sign with colored streamers hanging and blowing about. Mom was sitting in a chair in the background watching over things. This made me feel good. I asked them how the sale was going. And offered some encouraging words. (No, I didnt buy anything. All my kids are grown.) I felt that what I was seeing was the best we could hope for. Young children, the seeds of industry, healthy, happy, learning, learning how to provide for themselves, together, under the helpful direction of a caring adult.
No, there's nothing really all that wrong with America. It just needs some repairs. And OWS has to come to terms on how best to do that.
100% agree. I'm just particularly upset at seeing these special-interest groups jumping onto a bandwagon and the fact that the "organizers" have remained clueless (apparently) to the aim of this movement concerns me because once people get "attached" to the movement, the leaders can then derail it into some extremist position.
People are upset, we get it. But where was everybody when the de-regulation of the banks was passed? I guess everybody drank the cool-aid and here we are.
What's done is done. There has to be a consensus on how to move forward. And it must be based on principle, a single, overriding, understandable, undistputable princple.
So long, for now.
Yes, I read it. Sorry, just cant get my head to accept Anrchism is viable. There's this thing called Self-Interest. And no human being is lacking in it.
A true communist believes in eliminating money. Good ppl don't require laws. Laws should be in Ur heart. Jesus (if he existed) had only two laws, love ur neighbor & god, he also sent his disciples out without money and said, "U can't serve God & money."
Not only are we looking for a democratic solution, we are looking for a deep and direct democratic solution.
And if you think that concepts like 'anarchy' or 'communism' are expressly non-democratic, then I'm afraid you've been brainwashed by the US media, the US educational system... Or both.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_center_%28politics%29
http://www.radicalcenter.org/
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24friedman.html?_r=1
http://radicalcentrism.org/
http://metapolitik.org/content/introduction
Because we all know that the USSR, North Korea and China are shining examples of democracy....
None of the states that you listed are authentically communist.
They are more accurately described by words like: "fascist", "statist" and "totalitarian".
In a true communist society the state is minimal or non existent. Those on the right should appreciate that. Anyway, were not here to talk about them, or to ruminate over what is past.
We are here to talk about our future.
If this system of which you speak is so utopian, why hasn't anyone attempted to create a working example to show off to the world? Why should the first incarnation be a country of 300+ million?
Why?
Because whenever someone brings up the topic in public discourse, a bunch of greedy capitalist trolls gather around and belittle them.
Because if we don't do it RIGHT NOW our planet's entire ecosystem is going to die and take us with it.
300 Million?
More like 7 Billion!
Do you really think you can sell ANYBODY with an unproven idea? Do you believe that we should implicitly trust your motives just because you're a "nice guy"? Start small - ant farm, hamsters, dogs, cats...then work up to humans. You seem in a rush to move everybody into your unproven system - are we doing this to expedite your needs, or the needs of the many?
When it comes to politics and economics, EVERY idea is 'unproven' until someone bothers trying to implement it.
Besides, it's not 'unproven' at all. The ancient Greeks invented Democracy over two thousand years ago.
And at no point in my argument did I make it about 'me'.
But you still resist showing everybody a small case success story. Why?
I dunno, for some reason I expect you people to know how to use Google.
How foolish of me.
Fine... Here's some examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_democracy#Examples
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7Jpn5D73cQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
This is not about anarchy or communism. It is about everyone getting together to address the problems we all face. Are there anarchists and communists here? Probably. But there are far more democrats, republicans, independents, Methodists, Catholics, Protestants, Quakers, atheists, gay, straight, tea party, young, old, nazi, klan, college educated, non college educated, Greeks, English, Aussie, Taiwanese, etc., people here. Everybody is here because everybody is being played by the 1%. Everybody is hurting. Worldwide. The movement is staying vague because it is only 32 days old. It takes time to build consensus, but, if this movement is truly successful, it will represent a major change in the economic and political systems of the US.
One major factor keeping the population under control are the artificial political, class and race barriers that have been erected by the ruling class. (Howard Zinn's A Peoples History of the US has the best explanation of this.) By the way, I include union leadership in the 1% ruling class.
OWS tries to be a classless, raceless movement. This frightens the ruling class to no end. One of their major social control mechanisms is on the verge of failing.
To counter this in the short term, they have encouraged hatemongers to post on this forum, and to express sympathy with OWS. The racist right has been insistent on denying OWS any cooperation. These forces of hate have felt threatened since Obama's election, anyway, and they sense the power of this movement. Without an artificial political, racial and economic divide, many of these hate groups would have no reason to exist.
Many poor whites make up the bulk of these hate groups, but others, specifically recent immigrants (East Indians, Russians, etc.), belong, too. The poor whites have been more negatively impacted by the financial crisis than most, so the risk to the ruling class is two fold:
Hatemongers might just wake up and realize they have been played by the 1%, and actually join the movement. This would be a nightmare for the ruling class.
Many of the exploited poor white folks who are hate group members or sympathizers are also members of unions and the police/armed forces. Without a reason to protect the 1%, the 1% would suddenly become quite vulnerable physically.
If the ruling class can paint this movement as anarchists, communists, racist and antisemitic, they can lower the attractiveness of OWS to the bulk of Americans, who believe in fair play above all else.
Do not believe the hype. I suggest occupiers remain peaceful and positive.
Essentially it is a movement designed to better society by disrupting it... to further progress by hindering it... sit ins don't work very well...
This movement it about you and me. Just the unfairness, unjustice we see around us. The organisers are all the people that believe something is wrong and that there should be a discussion to evaluate our situation and try to make this a better, more sustainable world.
I would say no, this is not about anarchy or communism. When you invite everyone to the party, there will be a few who dance on the table with a lampshade on their head. No offense, I'm just sayin'.
This is about government corruption.
1% buys their representation, 99% are left with the scraps.
But yes, we need to change the system. We need to change the politcal system, to get the money out.
Have you ever shaken hands with a Communist? Ever talked with an Anarchist? Seen a terrorist? They don't exist.
Well, I had a few college professors who might fit those descriptions but they were cool anyway.
They sound like good people :)
A very good point. ONe I've been trying to clarify for a week or so. I was told that the poster occupywallstreet is the official contact to OWS. Accordingly I've asked them to support the US constitution by helping to educate people into the fact that Article 5 is the way by which Americans can control their republic by amending the constitution.--
If others ask them to begin a dialogue on this, then we know they are not working to "usurp the government". Otherwise, they maybe.
Efforts to create skype conferencing on Article 5. http://www.articlevmeeting.info/
Article V conference, Mark Meckler Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-video comments http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7ikbvu0Y8
Lessig power point on article V http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk
Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html
this is a communist movement
There is no plan. it's a straight up clusterfuck and nothing more. I have yet to see as much as a suggestion to get people registered to vote. Occupying this & that doesn't matter a bit. The rich people are laughing at you. It's the ballot box, dummies. About 99% of the support will melt away at the first real suggestion of any communism or whatever extreme dumbshit.
There are 2 things to exploit: The vote and the power of boycott. The rest is BS
it doesn't matter what the OWS is about because the freakshow bible thumpers hold hate the bible would have them burn for. that hate is aimed at ows right now.