Forum Post: Demands? HOW
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 20, 2011, 9:20 p.m. EST by Kelly26
(2)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I have read all over this site and have been watching the news but what I cannot figure is HOW occupywallstreets ideas can it be achieved in a REALISTIC manor? There are many desires posted but no legal plan.
This is what I've been saying.
Kelly,
I've written a declaration with concise demands but they haven't gotten any coverage lately or support from the OWS community. I'm beginning to think that this movement was an intent to troll or just a anarchic movement which can lead to violence.Take a look at the Declaration: http://www.scribd.com/doc/73304557/Declaration-of-Independence-for-a-New-Era
What are you doing to begin to engage with others in your local area to implement the steps needed for actualization? I do not perceive OWS as an anarchic movement. It is not a pyramid scheme. Each individual has the opportunity to take the initiative to begin the work that they see needs to be done under the umbrella of OWS. You've taken the first step on your journey of self empowerment. Maybe the next step is to build a community of participants and communally develop the steps for actualization
Dude, you're blind.
Oxymoron. A anarchy is a movement without a pyramid scheme; without hierarchy.
Thanks for the illumination: according to you Anarchy cannot be a movement.
CORRECT!
It can be a structure used as the framework for a movement. Why not? That is what Occupy is doing. They are a movement using anarchy.
Are you aware of the consequences? You do realize how the Soviet Union got into power, right?
red herring
You're off target. We are discussion whether or not the structure of anarchy can be used to create a movement. We are not discussing whether this is good or bad in practice, only if it possible.
If you want to change the subject of the debate make it clear. Don't use rhetorical questions as if you were attempting to counter what we are discussing.
I see openness, inclusiveness and action with personal responsibility being incorporated into the framework of OWS. The fact that this is a leaderless movement does not preclude that there is a lack of governance within the movement. The assemblies are about governance by consensus. I do not equate that with anarchy.
I see. Your definition of anarchy is flawed. Anarchy simply means there is no hierarchy. It doesn't meant there are no decisions being made.
Definition, Anarchy:
a state of society without government or law.
political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.
A state of society and theory does not a movement make!
My apologies, I was just trying to define "anarchy" as someone was clearly misinformed.
I wrote what I wrote because your definition made it clear that anarchy cannot be a movement. Thanks.
LOL, thank you Sirius, this is why I prefer GA's and voice chats with people of this movement ;)
Might be. I do think that it is possible. I am sure there are plants in the OWS and they are sabotaging the movement as best they can.
Though I think its very board and does not do much for detail. Though it can be done later.
A leaderless movement is bound to attract anarchists, bro especially with the anti-Capitalist messages flowing around. RT AMERICA is playing with the messages by attracting Communists into the movement. We need a total revamp in this protest.
Im new around here, but of coarse do have an opinion: IMHO I don't think it would be good at this time to broaden the demands much farther than taking political influence away from Wall Street and empowering the voters. I see the rare oppurtunity here to unite a majority of the American voters! I think it would be counter productive for OWS to delve into civil matters (gay marriage/ legalize drugs,etc...), and the other finites of professional politics at this time.
Just my opinions!
Yes. First unite them, and THEN tell them what you want them to do.
Nono, don't tell them too soon. Might scare them off.
--Brilliant!
Hey Screwy, Thats how politics works now! Im not talking about laying a big old sweaty tea bag on Americas forehead,Im talking about OWS making changes that a majority of Americans want. Once the system is cleaned up, then voters can squable over what drugs should be legal, who can marry, ya know the things that do not leave people unemployed,homeless, and starving.
--Screwy!
Open your eyes Mr.X, there are TWO different OWS's here.
Only two? LMAO. Hey if you ever have any thoughts on the matter please feel free to post them!
In my understanding OWS is not about right and wrong membership but engagement and responsibility. It is not about everyone being on the same page. I find this refreshing because it takes the bogey man out of opposing or contradictory ideas. Remember, any ideology can be used for exploitation and oppression. Corporate America demands the spread of Democracy around the World. Corporations have honed their takeover skills in our country and know that an electoral form of government is the easiest to purchase and run. We are living it here. An open and inquisitive approach between opposing persuasions or ideologies can open vistas for new possibilities and probabilities that can lead to the development of an equitable and just economic and socio-political system. .
I agree with you, but to change the system there needs to be people in political positions to do so. Problem is we have no viable candidates.
In our current system no elected official can change it from within. The majority of our Legislators are indentured servants of the 1%. Their reelection campaigns are totally dependent on their mega donors. It is up to the voters to nullify the current campaign finance laws and limit all campaign funding to public funding for every level of government. To do this we will need to daft a Constitutional Amendment that separates speech from money and removes the designation of a corporation as a person. This will require a national referendum. It has to originate on the grass roots level.
There are currently two grass roots movements tackling this issue: www.movetoamend.org and www.getmoneyout.com. Until we end the sale of political influence our elected officials are handcuffed to the highest bidders. We, the voters are the only ones who have the power to make these changes.
A sentence full of irony. A leaderless movement is already anarchic by definition!
Can a non-hierarchical structure have a non-leader? A person that is not officially recognized as a leader, but attracts followers. If a person attracts followers of his ideas and principles, and the followers act according to those ideas and principles, is that person a type of leader? Since he has followers, it follows that, he is a leader.
In theory, any system that is not hierarchic is by definition an anarchy, and an anarchy doesn't have a leader or leaders. In theory, an anarchy is absolutely horizontal or flat and the power is distributed equally to every person.
In practice, this is impossible. Leaders will always emerge. Some people are more intelligent than others, or they are better at convincing others, or both. These people present ideas to the consensus and are effectively the ones guiding the movement. The main difference is that they are not officially elected, and can leave the movement at anytime. It's obvious some very intelligent people are meeting their friends in coffee houses and discussing strategies for Occupy, and that they are able to influence others to follow their ideas and principles.
Direct democracy itself can be corrupted quite easily. It depends who shows up for general assemblies, and that can be determined to an extend by when they are scheduled. You don't like Mr. White because he will vote down your idea, then call the general assembly when you know he is working.
I just read a post (too lazy to search for it again) where an occupier was explaining how the decision to pay $30,000 dollars to send occupiers to Egypt was corrupted. Most of the people at the assembly were against the idea, so the people who were organizing the assembly made it last till the wee hours of the morning when everyone but the true anarchists had left. There were originally around 100 people at the assembly, but by the time the vote was passed at around 3:00 am there were only around 30 left.
This is why people should stop advocating a direct democracy, especially in the United States because they're making this movement look like an anarchic movement in which wants a direct democracy that throughout history has failed. If the majority of the protesters indeed advocate this then this movement is a failure, they are heavily misinformed about history.
I don't support anarchy and don't think it would work in modern American, but those who want to counter your historical argument can do it quite easily. They could simply point to the fact that there were many different types of anarchies that were put into practice, and that the outcome was different in each circumstance because the socio-political and historical context of a nation plays a part as well. It is thus not a given that using anarchy in modern day America would necessarily fail because some anarchies faired badly in the passed. The 1930 anarchies in Spain worked pretty well until they were toppled by the military.
I agree with your premise, but your argument is flawed. You should adopt another line of argumentation to support it.
I think I understand. So for all practical purposes, there is a leader/leaders of this movement.
The non-hierarchical structure is meant to serve as protection for the movement, so it is not undermined by some other authority, with different purposes than those of the practical leader guiding the movement now.
It is protecting the leader that already exists. Am I right??
Iv'e stated my opinion on the matter in this post:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-anarchic-dilemma-do-anarchies-self-destruct/
I know! It's taken me a while to fully understand it! As I go back and re-read it, I understand it even better now.
Anarchy per above definition is incapable of becoming a movement. those who believe in anarchy are not the bogey men who will destroy this movement. Control freaks destroy movements.
Why is anarchy incapable of becoming a movement. Show this with arguments. Give me something to think about.
Historically, the idea of anarchy was born in opposition to hierarchy, rather than an independent ideology or vision. Thus anarchy requires that there be something or someone to oppose. For a movement to be born and sustained what is needed is the synergy of diverse and independent elements, that each on its own could not create - a totally new function born in the synergistic union of independent parts: i.e. plastic cylinder, batteries, light bulb, conducting metal, lens and switch. Individually each is a part in potential. Once the parts are unified in a synergistic relationship you have a flash light! Anarchy leaves the synergy to chance and thus unsustainable.
Your logic does not follow and is riddled with fallacies of thought.
My explanation to you is not based on logic but on historic fact. There have been numerous attempts in European history to use anarchy as a movement. Each failed! Here is an excerpt of what I wrote in another form: The chasm that stands between what is and what is to be is in many ways abysmal (i.e. like an abyss). The function of social orders in human history has been and continues to be to contain chaos thru limiting the exercise of power and authority. The systems so far have been one form or another of hierarchic systems. Representative democratic systems were supposed to be the counter to systems of hierarchy. Communist ideology attempted to take this one step further from the plutocracies that were taking shape in the the representative democracies. Communism 's answer was to decentralize and spread power and authority. It worked on paper but not in application. Communism failed because it too turned into a system of domination and wealth extortion including the implementation of an oppressive police state to enforce unquestioning compliance.
History demonstrates that any ideology is open to the implementation of exploitation and extortion by a small powerful elite. Both counter systems originated within an intellectual, moneyed and political elite and then were applied to the society at large. History is demonstrating the end result of the top down enforcement of a system upon the majority constituency of a society. It results in domination and exploitation! This is the current state in the Russia and China.
For a new sociopolitical system to work for all, its creation and implementation must be born of the majority. Thus the majority of members within our current system must be able to come up with answers, proposals and system of implementation to create a system born of the synergy of the many rather than ideas from the few. This is a messy process and without historic precedent. Yet with todays communications technologies and social networking sites we may have an optimal opportunity for this to succeed.
That's the point... I write things in irony sometimes to make a point. This is what most need to know, a leadership movement is anarchy and they expect a peaceful protests?
I don't believe they are planning peaceful protests much longer. I have already posted a simple analysis of Occupy's propaganda tactics used to demonize the police, and I will be posting a deeper study today or tomorrow.
I HAVE A PLAN!!!! A 100 page document, that would bring us to a leaderless, highly organised society.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/yourtopia-your-official-final-beginning-perhaps-no/
And I would LOVE feedback...
One person's reality is another person's fantasy. As far as legality goes, OWS started with an illegal act, an act of civil disobedience, the attempt to occupy Wall Street and the actual occupation of Zuccotti Park. Subsequent to that virtually all of its activities have been rooted in civil disobedience, which is to say illegal acts. Whether something is legal or not has certainly not been of particular concern to OWS, nor has that lack of concern been a particular problem as occupations continue to grow and spread around the nation and around the world despite the movement's indifference to legality.
Your sentiments are shared by many, myself included. The way I look at it, we each have to do what we can. All real change starts with the individual. In some way or another, we got ourselves into this mess.. and we have a lot of work to do to get ourselves out. I am occupying this forum. I refuse to leave until we get a plan together that everyone can back. In the meantime, I deliberate. I read, I learn, I change my mind, I read more, I learn more and I change my mind again...
Only in this way!
Thank you very much for this post! Thank God! My prayers were answered!
The way I see it, it's not OWS's job to come up with precise demands. OWS has clearly expressed what lots of people are upset about, what they want government to address, the will of the public that it has just completely ignored as it toadies up to corporate interests. OWS has even advanced a few suggestions or demands but that's not really OWS's job ... that's what the politicians are supposed to be doing, so that the people don't have to take to the streets.
Check this Out! I want you to speak truth to power!. Say it once, say it twice. Say it loud. Say it proud. I'm down with the KTC. The Revolution starts here!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGaRtqrlGy8&feature=related
http://occupywallst.org/forum/make-a-stand-join-the-clan/
There is a perfectly legal plan. Read an download the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City. It is the only political document yet to be approved by OWS. It is a great organizing vehicle. It is short, simple and easy to read and it is perfectly legal. If you can't find it on this web site it is available at several other places on the web. I can't think of a better, more realistic, more legal or more practical way to get OWS ideas out than to use this document for outreach.
"Approved by OWS" -- who made the final call on that?
It was approved by consensus by the NYC GA and anybody who has been to a GA knows how difficult it is to get anything passed by it.
It is not for the 99% to make demands. It is but for the 99% to expect results.
Thats a lame comment. Thats like siliently sitting at the door step of a restaurant, and expecting them to serve you the dinner of your choice.
If 99% of the public isnt going to get up and make their own tomorrow, then all the freezing in the dark is useless.
Not sure how getting arrested and tortured equates with sitting quietly on a doorstep. I don't know about you, but I expect respect. Demanding it only cheapens it. Take the silent UC students for example. What should they say? We demand not to be tortured? Better to just let the status quo dig its own grave.
It doesn't. But that also also doesn't seem to be connected to your first post in relation to the topic. The point of civil disobedience is a demonstration of resolve to challenge the state of things. Forbarence and restraint commands respect. Virtue of the grievences commands respect.
There is nothing to demand in this regard.
In the 60's it was get out of Vietnam and equal rights, In Tahir Square it was to get rid of Mubaric. The S Koreans got rid of a military dictatorship etc.
The real question facing the nation is dire need of the public to take back the direction of this country, to have government enforce consequences for aberrant and abhorrent behavior, to structure finance to serve the needs of the economy, not usurp it, to take the steps necessary to build our own damn future.
A global revolution for equality, this is. The nation state is passe.
Tortured?
Zipcuffs are torture devices. They keep us tied up for hours, cutting off circulation to our hands and crushing our nerves. Both my hands are still numb a week after the raid.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/dear-mr-mayor-kindly-stop-torturing-us-12/ http://occupywallst.org/forum/dear-mr-mayor-kindly-stop-torturing-us-22/
Poor thing. Don't get arrested and you don't have to worry about it.
At the time I was arrested I had no idea it would turn into this. It was just a day like any other day. The only thing that made it significant was that the masses of the people joined in.
The plan?
Accountability. Corporate accountability, government accountability.
Great. How do we get there from here?
Well, I'm not sure. I think the plan is to starve them out. Corporations can't run if they don't make a profit, Governments can't exist without taxes.
The old ways have not worked so time to put our heads together and co-create a whole new system instead of focusing on repairing this broken system. Brain storming discussions.
You are so right. I just hope we are not too late. The influence of corporate money is at the core of our government.
One can be too late for fixing something, One is never too late for creating something, There is as much time for that as we want.
Without a leader, the movement lacks the ability to harness it's power into action. See the post and comments referenced here : http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-becoming-increasingly-unpopular-heres-how-t/
It is the responsibility of each member of a equitable society to lead in accordance with their capacity. OWS is not a pyramid scheme. It is a grass roots revolutionary movement.
Thank you! OWS might look a lot different with some organization.
It might start to look like a political party. Corporate contributors and corruption at the top. Isn't that what we are trying to change?
Now that I understand the many demands how can they be achieved?
I take it that you're referring to my demands that I've created but unfortunately this hasn't been established by the majority of the participants.
We can blow on the embers of discontent, and send the repelican party tottering into oblivion.
How you say? I'm glad you asked.
With Peace
Truth,
and the Weight of Public Opinion
we will feed them upon the fruit of their own lips and I will laugh as they choke.
Any more questions?
[Removed]
If you read OWS's declaration: "Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.
This #ows movement empowers real people to create real change from the bottom up. We want to see a general assembly in every backyard, on every street corner because we don't need Wall Street and we don't need politicians to build a better society.
the only solution is WorldRevolution"
You would recognize that this is a movement focused on process where each participant takes on with responsibility to work with others on the local level to implement the changes that they believe to be essential in their community. This is not a top down movement.
The current declaration is very misleading and people are beginning to think we're a bunch of lazy pot heads because of it.
I would not place my focus on what people think but rather on what needs to be done that will turn our country in a new and Just direction. There will be many critics. In my experience most people are addicted to the boxes that they live their lives in and perceive their world thru. I respect their freedom to decide what is right for them. This is why I appreciate the open and leaderless position of the OWS movement. It allows for divergent and contradictory social factions to join together in the search for a new and more equitable system. This takes a tremendous amount of courage and commitment to the common good.
2.
We Want Economic Justice for All Human Beings
To translate this from wordspeak to plain language: communism.
No ideology can deliver an economic justice for all. Every ideology can be manipulated for the benefit of the few. This happend in the Soviet Union and China and right here in the US where our electoral form of government was used by the 1% to hiijack our government, our wealth and our tax dollars to serve them. Economic justice for all has to be embedded in the very structure of a society. Take our Constitution: it was written by the wealthy and the merchants, for the wealthy and the merchants, not for the common settlers. Consequently to this day working individuals have no protection from the exploitation of their labor or the denial of a living wage. It took unions to secure what rights and protections working individuals have today. No business enterprise granted them freely.
Are you implying that I'm a Commie? Boy, you better get out of here before I start ranting.
Buy silver... Crash JP Morgan. That's 100% legal.
Move your money into a credit union. That's 100% legal.