Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We are the 99 percent

Activism in Crisis

Posted 9 years ago on June 15, 2015, 11:30 a.m. EST by OccupyWallSt
Tags: Micah White

I dream of a hybrid movement-party that wins elections in multiple countries.

The Crisis Within Activism is a Crisis Within Democracy

“We are living through a period with the largest protests in human history. But they are not working. And when you reach that point, instead of repeating the traditional protest behaviors, screaming and holding posters, you have to innovate,” says Micah White, cocreator of Occupy Wall Street and formerAdbusters editor, in an interview with Brazil's CartaCapital about his book, THE END OF PROTEST.

Micah spoke with CartaCapital during his recent visit to São Paulo for the launch of GUME ("Knife Edge"), a new engagement consultancy.

CartaCapital: Is there a crisis in today's representative democracies?

Micah White: Absolutely. In addition to a crisis in representative democracy, there is a crisis in the model of activism, how people protest. There is a crisis in the power of people to force governments to do what they want. We live in a time when there appears to be no way for ordinary people to influence their governments through protest… This means there is no democracy.

CC: Does this mean that the democratic system does not work anymore?

MW: I do not think in any way that the dream of democracy is dead. The dream of democracy has been going on since the beginning of civilization and humans have always been fighting for democracy. For five thousand years we’ve been overthrowing pharaohs, kings and tyrants in a struggle for democracy. Now we're in one of those moments in history when we have a low point of democracy, but there will be a high point of democracy soon. This requires, however, a kind of innovation within our concepts of activism.

CC: How is it possible to reduce the power of corporations in government?

MW: The only way to remove the power of corporations in our society would be to create a social movement capable of winning elections. As movements and as activists, we have avoided the only solution, which is: we have to build social movements that can also function as political parties. This is a need that we do not want to hear. We think we can just organize large protests and get really angry. Occupy Wall Street was a once in a lifetime event and it did not work because we were chasing a false theory of how social change happens. We believe, or wanted to believe, that a large number of people going to the streets can cause changes in their governments, but when we achieved a historical social movement, we realized this story of change is not true. Now it is clear that the only way to win power is to create a hybrid between a social movement and a political party. Something that does not have leaders, but has spokespeople and an organizational structure that lasts more than six months.

CC: How is it possible to achieve social change through protests?

MW: Today, social movements ask their participants do very basic and small actions: to take to the streets, holding posters and shouting. These are very basic behaviors and no longer have a political effect. Occupy Wall Street and the 15M in Spain, brought more complex behaviors, such as participating in general assemblies or utilizing hand gestures, but these are still very simple behaviors. I think we have to ask more of social movement participants. We must show that social movements require difficult behaviors like, winning elections, drafting legislation, governing our cities ... We need to demand a greater investment than just show up. The Internet allows us to ask for more. Thanks to social networks, it’s time to treat participants as capable of developing sophisticated behaviors and teaching each other how to to spread these actions globally.

CC: Do social networks have a new role in organizing and promoting protests?

MW: Absolutely. I think the role of the Internet is spreading contagious emotions. If we look at the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street, it seems that the trigger was a mood that spread all over the world and was basically a sensation of losing one’s fear. People said “I do not care about the risks, this is the time to act” and went to the streets. That's what social networks do: they allow us to transfer that contagious mood of rebellion to the whole world. The other power of the Internet is in allowing us to innovate our tactics in real time. From the moment when a new tactic emerges in one city, it can be deployed in another city. So it was with Occupy Wall Street.

CC: Can the internet become something more than a network in which feelings are spread?

MW: There is a hope that perhaps the Internet allows us an electronic democracy. That's the idea of the 5 Star Movement in Italy. Participants use the internet to decide on legislation and to select candidates for the elections. The idea of the Internet enabling collective decision-making is very interesting, but difficult to achieve.

CC: Some people prefer digital activism to the street. What do you think?

MW: In the early stages, the Internet is very important for social movements. However, over time, the Internet becomes harmful because things start to look better online than in real life. This happened with Occupy. The protest looked better on Facebook than it did in the streets. This is negative because people start to prefer the online experience to the real world. So the Internet is a double-edged sword. The internet is a weapon that is not fully under our control, and it is very difficult to wield effectively.

CC: Do you believe that the advance of neoliberalism has helped reduce the importance of social movements around the world?

MW: Protests are a form of war and war is politics by other means. Protests are ways of influencing the political system by unconventional methods. And the revolution is a change in the legal regime. It is transforming what is legal into something illegal or making what is illegal legal. If social movements are a form of warfare then it is clear that the forces that are in power will use all possible means to destroy social movements. The problem is activists do not see their protests in the context of war. We see them as a big party or something, while the other side realizes the importance of the event. Above all, however, it is crucial not blame others. We must blame ourselves. Social movements do not fail because the police are very strong. Throughout history, people have overthrown governments with a much stronger police, either because they found a way to defeat them in the streets or because they managed to get the police to change sides. So when our protests fail it is because our theory of change was wrong and not because the other side was stronger.

CC: Occupy Wall Street was born in 2011 and influenced many movements around the world. To date, we have several social movements emerging in Europe also influenced by 15M or Occupy. What is the role of the internet?

MW: What happened is that a new tactic emerged and it worked, so it spread worldwide. Occupy Wall Street combined tactics in Egypt with those of Spain and applied them to the United States. The police could not anticipate this new protest strategy and that's why the movement worked. Once the police discovered how to respond to our encampments, they destroyed all the movements worldwide in the same way. Protest is a constant war of new attack strategies and counter-attack. Interestingly, at the moment we are increasing the frequency of protests. This is very good, but on the other hand, we must be skeptical because we are living through a period with the largest protests in human history, but they are not working.

CC: Do you believe that we can be in a historic moment of rupture?

MW: What I imagine is the birth of a social movement that wins elections in a country and then begins to win elections in multiple countries. Then you will see Syriza or the 5 Star Movement in three, seven or ten different countries. Yeah ... I really think it's about this storyline of a global social movement.

CC: You do not think that is too optimistic?

MW: I think we live in a time when activists are so focused on what seems possible that we do not achieve anything. We need to disturb power and not act only in safe ways. That's what Occupy Wall Street and the Arab Spring did. The best activism is the one that asks participants to do the things they fear.

Micah White's first book—THE END OF PROTEST—will be published by Random House of Canada in 2016.

"A democracia está em crise porque o dinheiro controla governos"

Criador do movimento Occupy Wall Street, o ativista Micah White culpa a influência de corporações nos governos pela crise política e afirma que os protestos são ineficazes e precisam se reinventar

Uma onda de revoltas contra o sistema político tomou o mundo desde 2010, com protestos se estendendo de Túnis a Brasília, passando por Madrid, Atenas e Nova York. Apesar de separados por milhares de quilômetros, os atos possuem elementos comuns. Para Micah White, ativista e criador do Occupy Wall Street, as revoltas e protestos expõem o descontentamento da população em relação à representação política e à influência do dinheiro das corporações nos governos.

Segundo o ativista, as diversas manifestações, que aconteceram em diferentes continentes e em um espaço curto de tempo, são um sintoma de um "sentimento contagiante de descontentamento" e só "foram possíveis graças à internet". Contudo, tanto a Primavera Árabe, em 2010, quanto o 15M na Espanha, em 2011, ou as manifestações de junho de 2013, no Brasil, foram incapazes de produzir os resultados esperados. "Estamos vivendo o período com mais protestos da história humana, porém eles não estão funcionando. E quando se alcança esse momento, em vez de repetir os comportamentos tradicionais, de gritar e segurar cartazes, é preciso inovar", afirma Micah White em entrevista a CartaCapital, na qual fala também sobre seu livro, O fim do protesto.

CartaCapital: Existe uma crise nas democracias representativas de hoje em dia?

Micah White: Com certeza. Além de uma crise na democracia representativa, existe uma crise no modelo de ativismo, de como as pessoas protestam. Existe uma crise no poder dado às pessoas para forçar os governos a fazer o que elas querem. Como não há uma forma para que pessoas comuns protestem e aprimorem ou mudem os governos, de certa forma, não existe democracia. Essa realidade gerou o Occupy Wall Street e diversos outros protestos que estão acontecendo ao redor do mundo.

CC: O problema é que a democracia já não funciona mais ou que não temos instrumentos de democracia direta?

MW: No caso dos Estados Unidos, eu realmente não acho que haja democracia no sentido de pessoas conduzindo o governo. O que realmente acontece é que o dinheiro conduz o governo e é impossível se eleger sem ter muito dinheiro. A outra ponta dessa realidade é que quem gasta mais dinheiro vence as eleições. Essa é a crise de representatividade. Com isso, também temos o problema de corporações e associações poderem financiar partidos políticos de forma ilimitada. Na verdade, nós não temos uma democracia. Temos alguma outra coisa, algo mais distante.

CC: Isso significa que o sistema democrático não funciona mais?

MW: Eu não acho de forma alguma que o sonho da democracia esteja morto. O sonho da democracia vem acontecendo desde o princípio da civilização e os humanos sempre estiveram lutando por democracia. Por cinco mil anos derrubamos faraós, reis e tiranos à procura de democracia. Agora, estamos em um daqueles momentos da história em que temos um ponto baixo de democracia, mas haverá um ponto alto de democracia logo. Isso requer, contudo, um tipo de inovação dentro de nossos conceitos de ativismo.

CC: Como é possível reduzir o poder de corporações no governo, seja por meio de financiamento de campanha, seja por meio dos lobbies dentro do Congresso?

MW: A única forma de remover o poder das corporações em nossa sociedade seria criar um movimento social capaz de vencer eleições. Como movimentos e como ativistas, nós temos evitado a única solução, que é: nós temos que construir movimentos sociais que também possam funcionar como partidos. Essa é uma necessidade que não queremos ouvir. Pensamos que podemos apenas organizar protestos baratos e ficar realmente bravos. O Occupy Wall Street foi um evento que acontece uma vez na vida e não funcionou porque estávamos perseguindo uma falsa teoria de como mudanças sociais acontecem. Nós acreditamos, ou quisemos acreditar, que um grande número de pessoas indo para as ruas causarão possíveis mudanças em seus governos, mas quando se alcança isso percebe-se que isso não é verdade. A única forma de vencer é criar algo híbrido entre um movimento social e um partido político. Algo que não tenha líderes, mas que tenha porta-vozes e uma organização que dure mais do que seis meses.

CC: Como é possível alcançar mudanças sociais por meio dos protestos?

MW: Hoje, os movimentos sociais pedem para que seus participantes façam coisas muito básicas e pequenas, como ir às ruas, segurar cartazes ou gritar. Esses são comportamentos muito básicos e que não possuem mais efeito. O Occupy Wall Street e o 15M, na Espanha, trouxeram comportamentos mais complexos, como participar de assembleias gerais ou com gestos de mãos, mas ainda são coisas muito simples. Eu acho que temos de pedir mais dos participantes. Temos de mostrar que movimentos sociais requerem coisas difíceis, como vencer eleições, escrever legislações, governar nossas cidades... Precisamos de comportamentos que envolvam um investimento maior do que apenas aparecer, e a internet nos permite isso. Graças às redes sociais, é hora de tratar os participantes como capazes de desenvolver comportamentos sofisticados e ensiná-los a fazer isso.

CC: As redes sociais podem ter um novo papel para organizar e promover as comunicações dos protestos?

MW: Absolutamente. Eu acho que o papel da internet é espalhar emoções contagiantes. Se olharmos para a Primavera Árabe e o Occupy Wall Street parece que o gatilho do movimento foi uma sensação que se espalhou pelo mundo inteiro e era uma sensação de basicamente perder o medo. Pessoas diziam “eu não me importo, este é o momento” e iam às ruas. Isso é o que as redes sociais fazem: elas nos permitem transferir essa sensação para o mundo todo. O outro poder é nos permitir inovar nossas táticas em tempo real. A partir do momento em que pessoas vêm algo nosso surgir em um lugar, elas podem reproduzi-lo em outro. Foi assim com o Occupy Wall Street.

CC: A internet pode se tornar algo maior do que uma rede na qual sentimentos são espalhados?

MW: Existe uma esperança que talvez a internet nos permita uma democracia eletrônica. Essa é a ideia do Movimento 5 Estrelas, na Itália. Os participantes vão aos debates eleitorais, mas também usam a internet para decidir sobre a legislação e até eleger os candidatos das eleições. A ideia de a internet ser um grupo decisão é muito interessante, mas difícil de atingir.

CC: Algumas pessoas preferem um ativismo digital a sair às ruas. O que você acha disso?

MW: Nos estágios iniciais, a internet foi muito importante para os movimentos sociais. Contudo, com o tempo, a internet passou a ser prejudicial porque as coisas começaram a parecer melhor na internet do que na vida real. Com o Occupy foi assim. O protesto parecia melhor no Facebook do que ele era nas ruas. Isso é negativo porque as pessoas começam a preferir a experiência online à do mundo real. Por isso, é uma faca de dois gumes. A internet é uma arma, que não está totalmente sobre o nosso controle, e que é muito difícil de usar.

CC: Você acredita que o avanço do neoliberalismo ajudou a reduzir a importância dos movimentos sociais pelo mundo?

MW: Protestos são uma forma de guerra e guerra é a política por outros meios. Protestos são formas de influenciar o sistema político por métodos não convencionais. E a revolução é uma mudança no regime legal. É transformar o legal em ilegal ou o ilegal em legal. Ou seja, é uma forma de estado de guerra. Por isso, é claro que as forças que estão no poder irão usar todos os meios possíveis para destruir os movimentos sociais. O problema é que não vemos os protestos no contexto de guerra. Nós os vemos como uma grande festa ou coisa do tipo, enquanto o outro lado percebe a importância disso. O mais importante, contudo, não é culpar os outros, mas culpar a si mesmo. Movimentos sociais não falharam porque a polícia era muito forte. Durante a história, pessoas derrubaram governos com uma polícia muito mais forte, seja porque eles descobriram uma forma ou porque conseguiram fazer com que a polícia mudasse de lado. Por isso, quando falhamos é porque nossa teoria estava errada e não porque o outro lado era mais forte.

CC: Occupy Wall Street nasceu em 2011 e influenciou diversos movimentos pelo mundo. Até hoje, temos diversos movimentos sociais surgindo na Europa ainda influenciados pelo 15M ou pelo Occupy. Você atribui isso à internet?

MW: O que aconteceu é que uma nova tática surgiu e funcionou, por isso, se espalhou. Occupy Wall Street combinou táticas usadas no Egito com as da Espanha e aplicou nos Estados Unidos. A polícia não soube responder a essa nova estratégia e é por isso que o movimento funcionou. Uma vez que a polícia descobre como responder, ela destrói todos os movimentos da mesma forma. É guerra constante de novas estratégias de ataque e contra-ataque. O interessante do momento em que estamos é o aumento da frequência dos protestos, assim como da repressão. Isso é muito bom, mas por outro lado, é preciso ser cético porque estamos vivendo o período com mais protestos da história humana, porém eles não estão funcionando.

CC: Você acredita que podemos estar em momento histórico de ruptura?

MW: O que eu imagino é o nascimento de um movimento social que ganhe eleições em um país e depois começa a ganhar eleições em múltiplos países. Aí você terá Podemos, Syriza ou o Movimento 5 Estrelas em cinco, seis ou dez diferentes países. É... eu realmente acho que é sobre esse enredo de um movimento social global.

CC: Você não se acha muito otimista?

MW: Eu acho que vivemos em um momento em que as pessoas estão tão focadas naquilo que parece possível que nós não alcançamos nada. É preciso incomodar o poder e não agir apenas com aquilo que é seguro. Foi isso que Occupy Wall Street e a Primavera Árabe fizeram. O melhor ativismo é aquele que mexe com as coisas que temos medo.



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by lugano (1221) 9 years ago

In view of the contents of this News-Post, please consider ''Flipping the Script: Rethinking Working-Class Resistance'' - http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/31238-flipping-the-script-rethinking-working-class-resistance An introspective, subtle and very insightful article, that is well worth reading slowly.

[-] 1 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

Were Goldman Sachs and The Rockefeller Foundation two of the sponsors of for these videos, as they were with your IDEAS CITY? Was it only a coincidence that ran just about at the same time as the Left Forum?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

In compliment to this post = it's gonna take millions of people getting involved - getting active - staying involved and active.

Video:Bernie Sanders Wows Overflow Minneapolis Crowd

[-] 1 points by lugano (1221) 9 years ago

There did not seem to be a ''Crisis Within Activism'' at the Left Forum in NYC recently. The cunning 0.01% (S)Election Process - will not yield results for The 99% - especially without Mass Movements and it has been done before, eg. http://wagingnonviolence.org/feature/how-swedes-and-norwegians-broke-the-power-of-the-1-percent/ These lessons still apply to us now.

The fundamentals of the Corporate Usurpation of US Politics has many roots but an important one is: http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/ Democracy is a Great Idea - and we could do with some here on this forum actually, with the 'Sign Up' Page and a way of Positive Voting being restored.

Further, I am not at all sure that holding rival events to The Left Forum ... at the same time, that are sponsored by Banks, Corporations and 0.01%er ''Foundations'' - are really a way to go for The 99%.

Finally, re Campaign Finance - http://occupywallst.org/article/presidentsday-2015/#comment-1060630 and it could be argued that any ''Crisis Within Activism'' is that there aren't enough 'Activists' - though co-option and infighting and bickering can't be minimised either.

OWS still lives in a myriad different iterations btw - and the Occupiers have NOT gone away. Inspired Leadership is desired by some - clarity of analysis and effective arguments and facts - by others. Both can come into play BUT without a Mass Movement from below, we'll have difficulties. R:Evolution Now! and perhaps also consider http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article42029.htm + its implications.

Consider: "Today the tyrant rules not by club or fist, but, disguised as a market researcher, he shepherds his flocks in the ways of utility and comfort." ... (Marshall McLuhan, 1911-1980)

[-] 1 points by windyacres (1197) 9 years ago

I am not certain leadership is as important as I have always thought. You made the best point, "Democracy is a Great Idea", and it is powerful enough if voters that aren't activists will Vote Together, we can win.

I continue to believe we should be promoting, "The Third Party", with only important issues most agree with. Then, interview for candidates later. How can we get the masses to consider voting against dems and repubs and it not be a waste of their vote? We need a movement!

[-] 1 points by lugano (1221) 9 years ago

''US corporations are sitting on an unprecedented $2 trillion in cash - money many of these corporations literally do not know what to do with. California's regions are home to many of these fantastically prosperous corporations. Google is sitting on $17 billion in cash; Apple, $14 billion; Disney, $4 billion.

''Yet to date, these prosperous sectors are not driving our region's economy forward. They too often turn a blind eye toward the pay and working conditions of their suppliers and contractors.''

Briefly excerpted from http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/31119-strengthen-the-middle-class-and-the-country-with-higher-wages - so YES ''a movement'' is needed and workers - unionized or not are one of The Key constituents. The struggle is generational and we had our chance - now it's all about the kids and possibly any information, education and guidance we can offer them, in the hope that they'll learn.

Solidarity to you and yours windy and finally fyi: http://www.truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/29817-pushing-left-a-16-priority-agenda-for-the-2016-us-presidential-election Viva The 99%; Viva OWS Viva!!

[-] 1 points by windyacres (1197) 9 years ago

My understanding is not only do many major corporations have record cash reserves, they also buy back their own stock. Who can borrow money at .025 and use it to buy stock that pays a 4% dividend? Best of all, the price of the stock goes up. We know who benefits most. No one can go to the local bank and deposit cash and get a 5% return on Passbook savings as I could my entire life until recently, so all savings must now go to the markets. Millions added every day through 401k's, etc.

[-] 1 points by lugano (1221) 9 years ago

''As (a) system, awash in plutocratic contributions to politics and taxpayer contributions to the military-industrial-homeland-security complex, morphs into something else, so will you, whether you realize it or not. Though never thought of as such, your debt is part of the same system.

''A society that programmatically trains its young into debt and calls that “higher education” is as corrupt as a wealthy country that won’t rebuild its own infrastructure. Talk about the hollowing out of America: you are it. No matter how substantial you may be in private, you are being impersonally emptied in what passes for the real world.'' From:


Also briefly excerpted here .. http://occupywallst.org/forum/dimon-says-chase-shareholders-are-lazy-as-bankers-/#comment-1060784

And please try to see this short, punchy, uncompromising article .. ''Who Is On The Left?'' by Margaret Kimberley: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article42039.htm - which is not a comfortable read but is probably very in keeping with the subject matter of this News-Post.Thanks for your reply and my suggested solution to much of what ails us as societies is Publicly Owned Banks + Sovereign Money!

[-] 1 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

Supporting a third party, and activism is our only chance in the electoral process. That is, if we want real change. Both parties fear the emergence of a third party that will take away votes from them.

[-] 1 points by windyacres (1197) 9 years ago

What if the activism involved convincing masses to Vote Together! The primary goal is to alter our present government for major issues that most people already agree with, and nothing else. Anybody has the right to change their mind and no one has to know how a person voted. Convince everyone to vote against the dems and repubs, and Vote Together!

[-] 1 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

I think that it is impossible to know how this will all play out. I do think that Sander's candidacy and run against Hillary was contrived, and might well backfire on the Democrats as it will bring to light the inequities in our society, and that will piss off BIG money. The original intent I believe was to herd the cattle, or the far left back into the corrupt Democratic Party... via Hillary's run with Sander's support. She will have her hands full trying to convince people that now, she is a people person, especially while accumulating her war chest from the corporate world and Wall St. She has a record of supporting the neoliberal agenda, which she cannot run from. My opinion, we should start building a third party that answers to the people, and we should do it soon. Activism is paramont though in whatever path people choose to take. Systemic change always happens from the bottom up.

Everyone who votes will have to make a difficult choice come election time, and I do realize the bad consequences of splitting the Democratic Party. In any event, I will never vote for the lesser of two evils on the scale that the Democrats and Republcans represent. I have done that enough...

[-] 1 points by windyacres (1197) 9 years ago

The key may be to convince people to vote against both parties. Let's have a protest vote, and let's make it fun.

[-] 1 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

Treating people well should be a part of our everyday lives. If we are going to replace this profit over people World with something better, we should start at home. And caring and enjoying the company of people in our struggle is paramount in sustaining it. The skies won't always be bright, so when they do turn darker, we have to be there for each other, especially then. That may sound corny, or idealistic, but forty plus years of neoliberalism, in more ways than we probably realize has taken it's toll on our psyches.

In the earlier days of Occupy, when people took part in protests, some activists in different groups would set up a buddy system where you would check with that other person to make sure that he/she made it home safe. Yet other groups set up slightly different systems. The purpose was the same though, to account for everyone's welfare. Most people knew the number of the Lawyer's Guild too, either by heart, on a piece of paper or written on their hand. And many people volunteered for Jail Support. That's because people who were getting out of jail for civil disobedience... needed support, so other Occupiers would wait for them, and greet them, encourage them, offer them use of their cell phone, offer them food, give them money or just about any kind of assistance people needed so that they knew that they were appreciated, and so they could get home safely.

These beautiful, unselfish human acts exemplify the word 'Solidarity.'

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

Concerning activism in crisis - please consider the following - which I have started sending out to various groups:

We need to go on the OFFENSIVE.

There are tools to use to educate the public as to who is working for them and who is working against them.

It is not a matter of opinion.

It "IS" a matter of RECORD - Voting Record.

Show the people who exactly is working against them and needs to be removed from office.

Whether or not anyone in office has EVER done anything in support of the public - IF THEY SUPPORT THE PASSAGE OF THE TPP and of Fast Tracking it. - THEN - they have made moot anything positive that they have ever done or forwarded to be done for the public - AS - the passage of TPP will destroy all workers rights the passage of TPP will destroy all environmental protections - the passage of TPP will destroy all financial regulations - the passage of TPP will destroy democracy.

Please review the following and see if you could put the idea to work (network it):


[-] 0 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

Yes, the passage of the TPP will be devastating to the 99%. Why does YOUR DEMOCRATIC President want to have it passed?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

20th track "(We really really really are not about Direct Democracy)"

As people could tell if only people paid attention to our activities

Lucky for us the people do not and so we can continue with our politi-speak = talking endlessly while saying "really" nothing at all - nothing of any value - see also: endlessly arguing circular "public self defeating" logic, tossing shit, spouting specious aspersions, trying to hide in the light, etc etc etc

Lucky thing that more people don't ask us why:

"Why don't you take over government for the people from within?"

"Seeing as you don't have a national party in place to successfully run your candidates in all 50 states - WHY don't you run your candidates as dems and reps?"

Well we would just have to say (and we do) that the people can't be successful that way. Better we say - if we all stay away - and just protest for government to get better.

We really do not want people to consider a possible winner by doing things like Bernie Sanders and run as a dem for a real chance to win - and have "more" people running on the issues where they can legitimately destroy their opponents in office or also running for office - by pointing out past voting records showing non support for the people - even showing active attacks on the people - or even calling on them to declare a public stance.

Gosh that would ruin our whole "public self defeating" circular do nothing opt out and just protest logic.

  • by (mdonelly, turbocharger, lugano, windyacres - harmonizing & the Cronies singing back-up)
[-] 0 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

So you don't know why YOUR corrupt DEMOCRATIC President is trying so hard to pass the TPP either? Both parties are rotten. Don't you think?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

9th track: (Take no action) "as Nothing can be done - believe us!"

We support the status quo of handing the USA over to the 1% - but that just don't float - so instead we urge taking no action and clothe it in an appearence to be rebelling against the system - and we are so happy that few catch on to these facts

Because you know we're all about that base, 'Public base, to take no action

We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base

Yeah it's pretty clear, we ain't for you

But we can shake it, shake it like we're supposed to do

'Cause We got that boom boom that all the 1%'s chase

All the right crap spread in all the right places

We see the citizens groups working that action to take

We know that shit ain't real (believe us)

Come on now, make it stop ( as we like things the way they are)

If you got apathy apathy - just raise it up

'Cause every inch of you is perfect

From the bottom to the top

Yeah, our Koch he told us don't worry about your stance

He says, people they like a little more BS to hold to at night

You know we won't support no publc-figure, speaking truth to all,

So, if that's what's you're into

Then go ahead and move along

Because you know we're all about that base, 'Public base, to take no action

We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base

We're bringing doody back

Go ahead and tell them citizens groups hey

No, We're not playing - you stink - you're naive,

We're here to tell you,

Every inch of you is played from from the cradle to the grave

Yeah, our Koch told us don't worry about your stance

He says, people they like a little more BS to hold at night

You know we won't support no publc-figure, speaking truth to all,

So, if that's what's you're into

Then go ahead and move along

Because you know we're all about that base, 'Public base, to take no action

We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base

Because you know we're all about that base, 'Public base, to take no action

We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base

Because you know we're all about that base, 'Public base, to take no action

We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base, take no action We're all 'bout that base, 'Public base

  • by (mdonelly, turbocharger, lugano, windyacres - harmonizing & the Cronies singing back-up)
[-] 0 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

Many of the "actions" are being taken by people who don't come here anymore, if ever. I have heard-tell that you banned many people who were not CORRUPT DEMOCRATS... too.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

10th track: (Tossing Shit)

As We have nothing to back-up our stated positions (opt-out fiction = public self defeating) - We will do our best to throw it back on ( put a lie on) any who would ask for details of our non-existent action plans (Ya know......those who put the lie to our bullshit - "who shine the light on our bullshit").

The putdown we use on others is simple - and with it in play - we then retreat - to our constant tactic of providing nothing while saying much (politi-speak = talking endlessly while saying "really" nothing at all - nothing of any value - see also: endlessly arguing circular "public self defeating" logic).

Tossing shit - we love it.

  • by (mdonelly, turbocharger, lugano, windyacres - harmonizing & the Cronies singing back-up)
[-] 0 points by mdonelly (324) from Mineola, NY 9 years ago

Your view of me, "Tossing shit" at lest does not include shilling for more CORRUPT Democrats.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

19th track "(We are not about Democracy)"

As some can plainly see

We feign to support it

While doing our best to get the public not to participate to own it or control it

We spout propaganda while trying to expound that the public is unable to make a difference and so should just protest instead of voting out those working against them - as that would be futile

Thus we get a lot of mileage to argue our meaningless "public self defeating" circular logic arguments - that to make a difference one must opt out

  • by (mdonelly, turbocharger, lugano, windyacres - harmonizing & the Cronies singing back-up)
[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

In reply to your e-mail ( http://rainbow.activistboutique.com/magus/l/1JYxcGqH892OMDWke3HuFzQA/AMghRAVlrVFLSnZ9vRdQPA/BfYSbVvG5TnDubFXkofZ8g ) I sent the following and thought that it might also be shared here.

BTW - Thanks for the e-mail invitation.

My Reply (partial) :

YES - We absolutely need to take advantage of the political system. WE HAVE NO TIME TO WASTE.

Developing a third party would be nice - but we don't have the time to wait for it to be in place BEFORE we start making our moves to put people into office to forward our interests/legislation.

We need to network with every social group that exists right now - including Avaaz and AARP and the Sierra Club and Union of Concerned Scientists and Physicians for Social Responsibility and all occupy groups and more..............

We need to work together to find individuals like Kshama Sawant and Jill Stein and Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders - IN ALL 50 states - and put them into office - into local state and federal offices - USING whatever is in place in the 50 states where these people can run successfully - WHILE at the same time introducing building the 3rd party (if it is really necessary) - WE NEED TO CO-OPT what is in place and defeat money with actual people and their votes.

Our chosen representatives should have no problem with stating their support for the people and sign on to programs such as Move To Amend and expansion of social security and taxation of the very wealthy (individuals as well as corporations) to call out those in office who are not supporting the people - in a public manner that gets seen by the populations of each state. BERNIE SANDERS does an excellent job of presenting to the people what needs to be done and how it could get done (real ACTIONS and not just a lot of dreaming without substance) - is He perfect (?) - is anyone (?) = NO. That is why the people need to get involved get educated and stay involved - and as we move forward we introduce legislation that gives the people concrete power in their voice in government - such as a public veto (?).

Well Anyway - thanks for the invite, Dan

[-] 1 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 9 years ago

Damn Dan :) first post from you I've seen in quite a while that's 100% positive !! I like it...

anyway... I love Bernie ... but personally I do not think he has a chance at winning as is ...simply because he calls himself a "Socialist" in a margonally Anti-Socialist country... (whether right or wrong) .... All Bernie has to do is change that stand to ... believe in Social Wealth creation ... as an economic value... and Bernie will win !!! imo ... especially if Warren is on the ticket ....