Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Functional Demand for Broadened Appeal, Future Growth and Success of OWS... Food for Thought (UPDATED)

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 10, 2011, 1:42 a.m. EST by yasu4303 (9)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

We are fighting in the style of those fighting for a democracy, when we need to be fighting WITHIN a democracy. We are making demands for things that must be voted on by a congress, where we have no supporters, meanwhile our equally vocal opponents already have seats in both houses. We are fighting for the 99% but our objectives appeal to a narrow demographic. We have numbers with no leaders, and we have an image problem to say the least. Does this sound like a campaign that is aimed at achievement?<p>

<p> That needs to change before we lose the spotlight - that is to say, NOW! Saul Alinsky teaches that a victory, even a small one, is important to a burgeoning group’s future success. He also teaches to fight within the present framework, and to grow in number by broadening appeal. He teaches to keep the bigger picture and the greater good in mind, and put aside personal idealistic objections. These guidelines would each deserve chapters of discussion on how they apply to today, but there is one rule I would like to break. Alinsky does not suggest attempting to “educate”, but the present framework requires that we cautiously pursue what he might consider a dangerously didactic approach. We are in an information war, and the other side is already well entrenched, wealthy, and has “educated” our opponents. We are far behind, and must take steps to do the same. We are on the side of history, so we have nothing to hide and no need to spend millions of dollars fabricating deceptive statistics.<p>

<p>(This is the conclusion to a much longer document detailing each of these points, here shortened for forum posting, but it would be worth your time to consider the value of each of these objectives) In the interest of achieving something immediately, of broadening our appeal, of fixing our economy from the bottom up, of the longevity of this group, of clarifying goals, of fighting in an information war, of participating in a democracy, and in the interest of protecting life, peace and our great nation, I recommend one simple, unexciting first demand of many: One full day joint session of congress, along with Ben Bernanke and the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, hosting Richard Koo as a guest speaker. Who is Koo? Koo is the world’s foremost expert on balance sheet recessions. He has served as a consultant to Japan during their balance sheet recession, and he has talked down a fiscally conservative congress there. Not only is he the world’s highest expert on the subject and has done this before, but he is also in favor of an expansive fiscal policy - that is to say, he’s on our side.<p>

<p>He is not the master of some crackpot theory like a liberal version of Ron Paul. The business experts I see as guests on CNBC say we are in a balance sheet recession countless times. This is already a mainstream and readily accepted theory, but the people who determine our fiscal policy have no idea how a balance sheet recession works. Moreover, in a balance sheet recession, monetary policy is rendered ineffective, so Bernanke’s efforts are all for not, leaving our last and ONLY line of defense in the hands of congress. For the education of congress and probably most of us as well, Richard Koo needs to become a household name.<p>

<p>Koo being unknown will not be a downside. Remember the good ol' days when we didn't know who Sarah Palin was? Let Koo present the evidence, let congress be the judge in this very public trial, and after having seen the evidence, let us all be the judges in November.<p>

<p>THIS is the face of democracy, and the new face of our information war. Threats and demands from maybe 100,000 claiming to be the 99% rather than expanding their objectives and appeal to do something great and BECOME the 99% is not democracy. Please consider what I have written, do your own research, and consider that mass appeal and accomplishment are at least as important as courage and idealism. Agree with me or not, we need to re-evaluate our strategy, act fast, and worry about future objectives when we get there.

21 Comments

21 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by crd (1) 13 years ago

Koo Says "The bottom line is that this model is showing an economy likely to begin moderately contracting in 2012 (~0.88%) although I would argue that we’re splitting hairs talking about the difference between real growth and real contraction when the economy is as weak as it is. The truth is, we’re in a balance sheet recession and as the government slowly peels away the spending that has propped up the U.S. economy, the consumer will prove weak once again. So, the bad news is we’re still in for a muddle through period. The good news is the deficit will remain large enough to avoid substantial economic contraction. But the worst news is that our government and the world’s leading economists still have no idea what is causing the current malaise so the risks in this environment remain far higher than they should be."

Okay so he knows his stuff and he has no fast fixes. Are we ready for this? It defines this movement. We'll be asking for our government to quit playing and face the truth, help us not to starve and go homeless while we figure out how to endure the effects of their mistakes with the least amount of chaos perpetrated upon each other. We all have to be willing to do more with less. This means that the intention behind the movement becomes supremely important and we will be addressing our citizen's basic needs like, food, water, shelter and medical care while we wait out the cure and stay united without corruption. It's a long term commitment to mutual sustainability.

[-] 1 points by Elysium22 (95) 13 years ago

support independents that signify with the movement.People the movement chooses

[-] 1 points by peacejam (114) 13 years ago

It's a good suggestion, and i too am afraid our moment might pass or the decentralized nature of this movement might minimize our influence. who is koo is catchy, but i think any strategy that depends on getting as many people to rally behind the power of any single individual will fail within this movement, since a founding tenet of it involves resisting official leaders.

if we are to all get on board the same goal, i think it has to be a single policy, not faith in a single individual. did you know 94% of politicians who won the 2008 elections had the most campaign funds? i think it's pretty easy to convince people that lobbyist/campaign donations that make our politicians represent money interests instead of the will of their constituency are at the core of why only 12% of Americans have confidence in Congress right now. this is a viewpoint dylan ratigan is promoting, and he has written a draft of an amendment to the Constitution that would separate money from politics. i personally like this amendment as a singular goal of ows. before our government will make policy with the true intentions of representing the average American voter, our politicians need to stop having incentive to represent money interests.

please check out www.getmoneyout.com if you haven't already, and sign the petition and pass it on if you're interested.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

post your suggestions here http://blog.richardkentgates.com/

[-] 1 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 13 years ago

The thing here is we do not have to work within the politicians and businesses system. We are the system. We have the power to remove those in power from power. We reserve this right as our forefathers gave it to us.

Congress will eventually have to listen to the masses even if we were all poor poverty nobodies ( which i am one of). That is the power of the people. When the people unite nothing can stop that force. Nothing. Not money, not an army, nothing. The problem is most people do not realize this so they live under the "current system". Change the system to fit the people, not the people to fit the system. Any nation can change their country, but they have to do it as a group united in a single goal, change. Any politician will tell you people are easier to control when they are divided. This why police use kettling on protesters and why the media spins so many stories. They want us divided.

One of my biggest fears with this movement is that we are going to try to use the system we have, which doesnt work, instead of making the system adapt to us. I fear we may cave and start endorsing (current) politicians and start playing into the system. This is just another form of manipulation by the ones that have spent all of their lives manipulating us.

We must do this within the laws of the constitution because this is something we all hold dear, but we do not have to bend to the politicians and businesses way of doing things. We have many voices, they have one and its sounding a little scared to me.

[-] 1 points by Jackrabbit (8) 13 years ago

Friend, how are we going to change that system? It needs to change. No doubt. The Occupation has to be understood as just one part of the change that needs to happen. Addressing the political system directly is going to have to happen for us to see any lasting change.

[-] 1 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 13 years ago

Through the power of people. We need to keep the same basic political system we have now. But we need to put the power back in the hands of the people. First, we need real people, statesman. Patriots. People that feel so strongly about "we the people" that they are almost impossible to corrupt.

Second, we need to limit many things that do not have limits or have to high of limits. This would include term limits for congress, outlawing lobbying, not allowing corporations or groups to contribute to campaign funding. Limiting individual campaign contributing to $2500 per ( voting age) adult.

Third, we need an independent civilian agency. A simple and small one. It doesnt need 2000 people. This agency would have a board perhaps 9 members elected every 2 years in 3's by popular vote. This agency would have complete oversight( including top level security clearance) of the govt for the purpose of monitoring politicians on ethical grounds and how well they represent the people. Findings are reported directly to the people via website. This agency answers to no one but the people. It is not controlled by the govt in any way and cannot be defunded by the govt. The only way it can be dissolved is by the people through popular vote.

Fourth, accountability. All politicians are held accountable for there actions. Taking money other than salary while in office is considered treason. Obviously, this would have to have details in it. So actual honest politicians do not get tried for treason. Pension and other related benefits are taken at the same time as social security. They have a max duration of 10 years. I shouldnt have to support politicians there entire life. You have to serve a full term to get benefits or die in office with more than 50% of your term completed. All perks for all politicians will be reviewed. These will be adjusted as necessary. Future perks will no longer be voted on by congress they will be voted on by the people. Politicians salary is tied to inflation and cost of living increases. If both are below 0 such as in a recession year then they get no increase but they do not lose salary either.

These are just some ideas. At the very least we need to make sure that the current corruption is removed and prevented. I think also that corporations and lobbyist who attempt to influence our government should also be able to be tried for treason. Maybe being able to try both sides for treason would help keep them from corrupting each other.

[-] 1 points by Jackrabbit (8) 13 years ago

Right. And those are great ideas, but you're not answering the question I posed, which is how do we directly address the political system in a practical way. No offense, but your first point is what you suggest as the gateway to the rest of your suggestions and it is not a sufficient recommendation. You could easily say that people voted for Obama because they thought he was that guy. Thanks for your response, but there needs to be more consideration of the practical application of the Occupy movement and less adherence to utopian visions of the future.

[-] 1 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 13 years ago

You mean how do we convey our message now? Get it from the protesters to Congress in a more "official" form?

[-] 1 points by Jackrabbit (8) 13 years ago

I disagree strongly with people who believe we have to start from scratch. We can have long term goals that need to be adhered to but our short and medium term goals need to be practical. That means working with what we have now as flawed as it may be.

[-] 1 points by yasu4303 (9) 13 years ago

I think we are saying the same thing. You are right, we do have the power to remove those in power from power, but we must do it democratically. By rallying like this we are already not doing things the usual way, which is good and necessary, but we are also not changing the way a democracy works, so we MUST get numbers through broadened appeal and accomplishment. That will never change so long as we live in a democratic society.

Take a cue from the TEA Party on this matter. They now enjoy numbers, seats in congress, and have the GOP by the throat, all through a broadly popular mantra, "no more taxes". We need an equally appealing mantra, and I am hoping that can be, "economic recovery focusing on the 99%". Can you support that? I think most people can. With a solid goal, all we need is to establish legitimacy through success, and I think running the "Who is Koo?" campaign and bringing about the education of congress and the US, and the ultimate bottom up recovery will give us the greatest success imaginable. Yes?

Don't worry about business as usual. We are already outside of that. But these rules are as undeniable as gravity. Remember to be desciplined and we will succeed where the TEA Party failed. They were bought, used, and will ultimately fail where our true grassroots movement will succeed.

[-] 1 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 13 years ago

Some former members of the tea party say they were infiltrated and corrupted and used as a political tool for the right. I believe them for the most part since their story matches info i have found.

It is important that we remember our core goal is to represent the people and bring change. They are going to try to divide us and put us against each other and get some of us at least to endorse them. Then they can further tear us apart by one side claiming we endorse their side and the other side agreeing and saying they endorse Obama or Cain or whoever and thus try to pull members from us.

This is something they will definitely try and no doubt are trying now. They want us to divide because we are better sheep in separate pens. This is why i make it a point to work with people on the opposite end of the spectrum than i normally am at. Because that unity is needed.And as an Atheist if i can unite with a Christian, as a liberal if i can unite with a conservative then we will be strong. It takes a strong bond to overcome differences. And that is what we need. We need to show these leeches that we are different but we can put aside our difference to unite against them. That we are not going to fight each other. That we will conquer them by not letting ourselves get divided.

[-] 1 points by yasu4303 (9) 13 years ago

Well said! I absolutely agree. I am afraid of sharing the same fate as the bought off TEA Party, but even more afraid of fading into oblivion. I promise you, the "Who is Koo?" campaign is absolutely not a bought idea. It falls right in with our ideal of bringing change for the people. Look him up and see for yourself. His suggested policies are a jobs up recovery.

Banding together is only step one. Growing appeal base, gaining legitimacy, and effecting change while maintaining core values are the rest of the steps. Please help move us to the next level. Thank you for your consideration, and I honestly hear and appreciate what you're saying and how you're saying it. Thank you.