Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: If This Is Our Movement, What Is Our Message?

Posted 8 years ago on Nov. 22, 2011, 9:03 p.m. EST by Innervision (180)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Please send me your top 10 list of issues, that should be addressed, by this movement. We need to come up with our demands for the 1%. If we don't know where we are going, how can we possibly get there?

184 Comments

184 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by LSN45 (535) 8 years ago

For decades now the corporations and special interests have had our "representatives" bought and paid for (both on the right and the left). Don't get distracted by the symptoms - we need to address the root cause. Concentrating our efforts on getting the money out of our politics is the best way we can create an environment in which further reforms can be realized. Until we end the current system of legalized bribery (campaign donations) and paid lobbying our politicians will continue to be the LAP DOGS of the corporations and special interests. What we need first and foremost is real, loop-hole free CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM!!!! If the corruption is not dealt with first, the chance of any other meaningful reforms becoming a reality is almost zero - the special interests will just use their money to buy votes and put forward bills that create loop-holes or otherwise twist the law in their favor. If we want our children to live in a country where there vote matters, we need to get the money out of our politics, otherwise they will increasingly become the 21st century version of the "landless peasant." Spread the word - End the LEGALIZED BRIBERY!!! CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM needs to be THE main goal of the protests!!! Note: the current campaign finance laws are the reason that Grover Norquist has so much power. He, and others like them, only need to threaten the incumbent that they will field and fund a different candidate in the upcoming election to make the politicians fall into line.

[-] 3 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

BINGO!!! I came here to make almost exactly the same case, emphasizing the same points. I thought I would read down the page before posting my comments. I didn't expect to find them already here. Glad I did.

Several people on this page mention THE ROLE OF MONEY IN POLITICS as one issue among other issues. It's not: it's THE issue thru which all the others are leveraged. The Corporatocracy is able to get most of what it wants in Washington because it's able to buy permanent(?) access to the centers of power with its highly concentrated money, which overwhelms any influence of the scattered pocket-change of the 99%.

I call it the FULCRUM ISSUE: if we get movement here, it becomes much easier to get movement on corporate personhood, tax policy, health care, global warming/energy policy, etc. etc. etc., and the changes may have a chance of sticking, safe from an onslaught of corporate lobbying and election-buying.

If we don't get money out of politics, other changes will be MUCH more difficult to achieve, and successes MUCH less stable.

Not that success in removing corrupting money from politics will end the OWS movement, and everyone will go home to tune out again. This may be the One, Single Demand (or at least the central one), but there's no bargain to quit in exchange for that key victory, because winning that will only give us a fighting chance in the battles to follow.

[-] 3 points by LSN45 (535) 8 years ago

Well said - I love the "Fulcrum Issue" descriptor, because that is exactly what it is. I see many people saying we need to end the FED or get rid of the Commerce Clause, etc., etc., - those are all worthy causes and definitely areas that need reform, but making such reforms while leaving the current corrupt system in place is like replacing the roof on the chicken coop that is being guarded by the Fox. They will be back to their old antics in no time unless we get the money out. Spread the word with everyone you come into contact with.

[-] 2 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I totally agree!!!!! We also need to get rid of the voting machines. If they can be compromised, then we can't have a fair election. We desperately need money out of politics. Instead of putting all that money into politics, tell the corporations to put it in our public schools, for our children.

[-] 1 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

Maybe it's time to hire the attorneys and get a class action law suit going.

[-] 2 points by LSN45 (535) 8 years ago

What I'm hoping for is that OWS begins coalescing around the the root cause of the problem and makes its voice heard. The beauty of campaign finance reform is that the majority of American already agree that they want less corporate influence in their politics. A believe if the message really got out, a constitutional amendment is a real possibility.

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

I agree with you but these MFs lobbyist and their counterparts have broken some laws and they need to pay for screwing up our country. I'm not suggesting cutting off their heads but they need to get some prision cell time and pay a fine or two. I want some satisfaction since my kids are getting the shaft.

[-] 1 points by MrX (61) 8 years ago

Its a rich mans dream to live on his own island. Just so happens Alcatraz, its vacant!

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

The fact that these people have gotten away with selling out the majority of our citizens in one of the most powerfull nations on the planet is mind blowing. I realise we have history lessons teaching us that nations in the past have had similiar occurrences within their governments to bring them down. It's too bad their plan included wiping out our bank accounts in the process.

If they were pirates they would have to walk the plank. But since they are just leaches then maybe they should be baked it the sun. LOL

[-] 1 points by debndan (1145) 8 years ago

We had it here too AKA the gilded age then later the laissez-faire of unfettered capitalism of the 1920's.

We have a history of beating this.

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 8 years ago

IMO, the biggest single problem with our current economic system is that private banks control the issuance of money. They can literally create money from nothing and loan it to the government at interest. Since this causes there to always be more debt than there is money, we will never be able to pay off the debt. The only way to pay it off is to get more money than is already in the system. That means we have to borrow more from the only source there is, the people we owe.

For more insight into anything nefarious and high-level involving the US government over the past 65 years, ask one very simple question: Where was Heinz?

[-] 2 points by MrX (61) 8 years ago

Problem is, there is no way to know how far this movement will have to go. Some changes in Government will likely end up being be voluntary changes. Get the lobbyists and big business money out of politics, including the ellections! Media and special interest groups bankrolling smear campaigns and other disinformation should be heavily fined, fines could be based on % of total assets. ~with these fines~ Educate voters! If our representatives cant make a decision, then the American voters will!

With informed empowered American voters I think everything else would fall into place.

Don't beat me up to bad, Im just a dumb farmer :)

[-] 1 points by Will99 (4) 8 years ago

" informed empowered American voters"

That would be a great start. ....and take plenty of work. I also agree with MrX's hint at the fact that it is not rocket science to learn to get along. it's not rocket science to care, be compassionate, seek understanding, work together. I think the message is global and viral and when the right answers are spoken they will rise to the top for all to see and understand.

Just like this forum. WE are speaking. WE are communicating. the Global Dialoge between people, not "leaders" has begun and it is a snow ball. Never able to go back to it's small path, small ideas. The snowball is quite large already and the point is there is no stopping it's growth or it's projectile. This snowball of consciousness is headed for an exciting new world where "one for all and all for one" is not a quote, but our way of life on this little blue ball.

Peace out peeps. This movement ROCKS! This FORUM rocks. It's the real deal. Please send any and all people with doubt or questions about occupy to this site. HERE is our dialogue. ...and i love it.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 8 years ago

% of total assets? How about 100%?

As far as derrent goes, if we said '25%', that would be like saying we want 75% of potential crooks to decide to do it anyway...

No means no!

[-] 1 points by MrX (61) 8 years ago

No a% could be like telling share holders, you better fire this prick you have for a CEO his actions just lost your 3rd quarter profits due to fines. 100% would be like randomly destroying businesses just because of one bad apple. Im not against businesses, I am against corruption, and just throwing a few ideas up here.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

You don't sound dumb to me. It's a good answer. We have to know that the voting machines are not rigged as well.

[-] 0 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago
[-] 1 points by MrX (61) 8 years ago

Thank you! Actually did read it, like it, and have been passing it on.

Unfortunately did not know about it until yesterday when I saw that you had mentioned it in another thread. There are some awesome discusions going on in this forum between you and some of the others, its just really a job digging through all the crap to get to the goodies. ;)

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Thank you. Sometime it takes a bit of effort to retain focus.

[-] 1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Gothenburg, NE 8 years ago

Okay, my answer:

We are a signal in the body-politik, an inflammation that is supposed to tell you that something is wrong.

Here's what's wrong:

  1. Working in this existing economy has become a hazzard to anyone who really cares about the Earth.

  2. There's an underlying contradiction in a nation that claims to provide "liberty and justice for all" when the right to sleep gets oppressed by the notion of "right to property".

  3. Furthermore, it is noted in this contradiction of "liberty and justice for all" that the Native People's of this land have neither. That is shameful. We don't want to live in a shameful nation.

  4. The Founding Fathers built a framework in a time when expansion seemed endless. It/they did not have the foresight to factor in the end of that expansion, nor how the power of media technology would come to warp the notion of an "informed democracy".

  5. Given the end of growth and expansion, there should be a radical conversion of assets from the old paradigm into the new. Taxes on highest responsible-parties, then funneled to the highest potentials.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 8 years ago

What we are asking for today is simple - it is a return to the rule of law. And since the formal mechanisms of power refuse to restore the rule of law, then we, the 99 percent, will have to see that justice is done.

[-] 1 points by redcoat007 (1) 8 years ago
  1. The 2 party system is a scam. Founding Fathers did not advocate 2 party system. The elites introduced that to control the country regardless of election results.
  2. Lobbying must be illegal. Money=corruption. Only votes should affect policy, not money. That is a no-brainer.
[-] 1 points by metapolitik (1110) 8 years ago

Replace Capitalism

[-] 1 points by Philpux (643) from Mountain View, AR 8 years ago

Campaign Finance Reform. Boom.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Campaign Finance, Definitely, the first priority!!!!! And get rid of the voting machines that can be compromised.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 8 years ago

(in no particular order)

1 - Abolish government theft

2 - Vote out (most) incumbents

3 - Abolish civil servant pensions

4 - Institute 'direct impeachment'

5 - No federal handouts

6 - Ridiculous import taxes

7 - Enforce the 10th Amendment

8 - Prosecute & imprison: bankers, police, politicians and military

9 - Uphold property rights

10 - Live and let live.

[-] 1 points by rascal (42) 8 years ago

The message can become very strong and move forward quickly by getting involved here:

The 99% Declaration https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

[-] 1 points by VERUM (108) 8 years ago

We are ALL Human Beings...the only thing we have to be thankful for is our own perseverance!

Not a single one of us would be where we are today without the determination of those that proceeded us. The Pilgrims came to this country to escape the tyranny of Briton, and were eventually successful in Declaring Independence from the same. (See the Declaration of Independence)

OWS is not unlike many of our early pioneers... we are simply seeking a voice for the FREEDOM of the people from Corporate and State!

We seek freedom from economic oppression... freedom from corporate influence over our Government... and freedom from lobbyist!

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

honestly, you are being pointlessly obtuse and meaninglessly driving on a stupid argument. I keep trying to be nice about this it apepars i am making a mistake. Demands are stupid, infantile, and pointless, period. end of discussion. Clearly you don't understand what the real alternatives are because you can't manage to answer that or respond to it. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution, because you can't be bothered to fucking listen to the thousands of voices who have sanely admonished against "demands." you are sucking up time and energy from people trying to get REAL adult work done. Excuse me. You imbecile half troll. The ADULTS are trying to GET SOMETHING DONE, and you aren't one of them, so please go play games somewhere at your mental level and quit imagining you have anything meaningful to say to address the rest of us.

A "Demand" is typically a sentence or three paragraphs long. A Solution is going to be hundreds of pages. Clearly the obvious difference here is in quantity and style of content. For every so called moronic demand you might make, ADULTS have to pin down the DETAILS of what that would entail. You are asking us to leave those details back up to the oligarchs, instead of taking responsibility for creating those details ourselves. Stop being a thick fucking useless tool and pwn and part of the problem, and start listening to what other people are actually saying instead of bullishly promoting your fucking stupid agenda.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 8 years ago

WORLD PEACE IS THE ONLY ANSWER!!!!

Global problems require global solutions!

We need to not be 'American', 'Australian', 'Egyptian', or whatever.... those are THEIR names for us. WE ARE THE PEOPLE. They keep us apart with names like these. Until we face our own humanity for what it is.... all these problems will escalate.

Here is my solution... and it already involves you

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/50500650/yourtopia-your%20official%20final%20beginning.pdf

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Our message is whatever we as individuals want it to be

[-] 1 points by suzencr (102) 8 years ago

Campaign finance reform doesn't go far enough. There must be a complete firewall between private business and public service. No revolving door, no juicy CEO positions for compliant congressman, and no appointments to plum governmental positions for greedy CEO's. There should be no financial perks because you happen to be a Senator that knows certain legislation will cause some stock to rise. No back room dealing. No hidden set of rules for the elite that would send the rest of us to jail. Private money and politics don't mix. Period!

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Very well said, you're absolutely right!

It is so refreshing to get a comment that is for "substantial change" on this sight. I'm thinking this movement has been heavily infiltrated by people who don't want it to work!

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 8 years ago

Please expand that to include the Supreme Court.

[-] 1 points by suzencr (102) 8 years ago

I did say "government" which in my mind means all three branches. As it stands, its of the corporation, for the corporation, by the corporation as far as how far down all of our supposed public servants are willing to grovel. Show me the money!

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 8 years ago

Corporations Do Not Have Tongues!!

Hey Ho

Hey Ho

The Repelican Party has Got To Go!!

Hey Ho

Hey Ho

[-] 1 points by Yonne11 (1) 8 years ago

You may need to consider rotating occupiers to find your way through the winter months this will give people time away from the weather and stem any ill affects it may have on the occupation.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

We are the movement. We are the demand. The movement is the demand. Occupy Everything, Demand Nothing. We are all leaders. Solidarity Forever!

[-] 1 points by julianzs (147) 8 years ago

OWS is a beacon that shows the path. The movement grows by the common conditions of its supporters. The political change will follow spontaneously.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I wish that were true. I think the people who are steering the conversation, the "insiders" of this movement, have been taken over by the right. That's why we don't have any real issues that have been released to the American people after 2 months. Really, it's not hard, there are so many things to be done. But no, you go to meetings and it's about pop-tents and you come on here and good ideas are insulted voraciously.

This movement has been infiltrated from the right, and they don't want anything to happen!

[-] 1 points by FirstLight (21) 8 years ago

All of the corruption and control by the 1% (actually, the .01%) is a result of indirect control by really big money legalized by virtue of Corporate Personhood. It cannot be reversed without reversing that - everything else is just symptoms and band-aids.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

This should be one of the top priorities.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

We are our message. We are our demands. We are all leaders. Solidarity forever!

[-] 1 points by racheldot (11) 8 years ago

I'd like to offer a way to articulate the overall demand, before any list of grievances or potential solutions: WE SEEK GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. Language that virtually all Americans will resonate with deeply. Language that belongs not to any one individual from the movement, but to all Americans. (it's from the Gettysburg Address & the Pledge of Allegiance, of course.) And - it's language that encompasses all demands we'd make, I believe. Frame the Occupy protesters as the true patriots; frame the movement itself as the next phase of the American Revolution, toward ideals we still aspire to, have not yet reached.

Then, in answer to the question, "what would this look like?" - my top issues would include: getting money out of politics (repealing corporate personhood, campaign finance reform); strengthening participatory democracy (automatic voter registration at birth, election day a holiday, only paper ballots, IRV); and complete overhaul of the federal budget to bring it in line with Americans' real priorities and values (through both fair taxation, on the revenue side, and sensible budget priorities on the expenditure side....ie end useless and tragic wars!...fund universal health care and quality education, jobs, green energy infrastructure etc.).

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Thank you. It is so refreshing to hear from a truly intelligent person.

[-] 1 points by TexasThunder (68) 8 years ago

I find our elected officials incompetent to govern. They need some incentive that will mean something to them instead of putting funds at risk that will cause harm to those persons and institutions who can least afford such loss. I suggest that these officials’ pay and/or benefits be cut if and/or when they fail to do their job. As it is, party “a” threatens to harm parties “”d” through “z” if parties “b” and “c” can’t come to an agreement. It makes no sense whatsoever to threaten Congress with cuts that will not have any impact on them directly. Our Constitution establishes the type of government we are to have. We do not need to establish any “sub” groups within these institutions. They are all responsible collectively to govern and if/when they fail to do so they are all liable collectively. The “carrot and stick” method only works when the carrot or stick is guaranteed to the same one. These officials have received their carrot upon being elected as they shall receive full pay and full benefits for the rest of their life even if they only serve one term. I say put all options “on the table” including their lifetime pay and benefits. I’m of the position that such a “stick” would cause these officials to get their head out of the clouds and their feet on the ground.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 8 years ago

"We want our government back."

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

We are the message. We are the demand. Look in a mirror. We are all leaders.

[-] 1 points by Danaan (96) 8 years ago

The 1%, actually about 400 of these guys in the whole of the US and that is not 1% so 1% is a wrong figure. These 400 should be stripped of their assets and thrown in jail and untill you do this en masse, you are nothing but crowling virmin to them and your actions will have no effect whatsoever.

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 8 years ago
  1. I want all people, corporations, governments and any other entities in this country to agree on and enforce a bill/ act/ trade agreement, centered around fair trade and sustainability.
  1. I want a regulatory watch committee to oversee the actions of the federal reserve and banking industry on behalf of the American people.
[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I like the way you think, ithink!

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

We are the message. We are the demand. We are the 99%. Who are you asking to supply a list of demands? If you are looking for leadership, look in a mirror.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Thank you, I believe I am a leader. However, I want to know what the priorities are, for other people. In this way we can get a list of top issues, that most of us can agree on, and start working on them.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

What issues are important to you? You don't have to wait around or ask permission. Start working on them. Read the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City, the only political document approved by the NYC GA so far.

I know everybody has a busy life, but nearly everyone has two days a week off. Nearly everyone is within a few hours of an occupation, most substantially closer. There is no substitute for going to an occupation and spending serious time there. I'd say 24 hours. It is a life changing experiences. Then, if that occupation is to far from you for you to be there regularly, go home, use face book, twitter and other social networks along with your address book and call a meeting. Set up a GA in your community. Start a website. If you build it they will come. The most important thing you can do at your first meeting is schedule the next meeting.

I don't think the most important thing is to have this or that perfect agenda item. Everybody has their own idea of what the perfect agenda item is and they should follow their bliss. The most important thing is to build the movement until there is a GA and an occupation in every nook and cranny, not only of this nation, but of the globe.

[-] 1 points by beamerbikeclub (414) 8 years ago

I love it... it seems like CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM is a clear priority.

I love it because I think we all believe in our American democracy. We can solve all our problems or at least live with our imperfect solutions. But we can't-- and shouldn't!-- accept the current status qua that only Pretends to solve problems while they serve their corporate donors.

We don't need to do anything but elect REAL PEOPLE. Why are there no scientists, plumbers, teachers, police and farmers! in our government? A bunch of business execs and hack lawyers and really just a bunch of puppets and cheerleaders. or ideologues.

Americans Elect.com (org?) is attempting to give us real choices.

I am not voting for any of these people any more. Not even Obama.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I agree with everything except the part about not voting for President Obama. He is our best choice. He has been the only president of recent times that could do anything about health care.

Look at the alternative if we don't get him back in? In my opinion, most of the people running against him are very crooked. For instance, the Freddie Mac "Advisor" and the blatant lies that are popping up in campaign adds.

Maybe after he is elected again, we should think about a new party because I know there is corruption on both sides of the aisle.

[-] 1 points by beamerbikeclub (414) 8 years ago

thanks...

I know but... you know...?!? we just Can't go on like this. I had such high hopes (Hope!) for Obama. I danced in the streets when he won. And yeah, what a nightmare on the other side. But I don't really even think it is about this anymore. The system is busted.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Look at what he inherited. Poor guy! Yes, I wanted a public option on health care but the republicans are trying to kill, everything. Why not go with him for another 4 years, and if things stay in a stalemate,and the corruption continues, we start a third party.

[-] 1 points by beamerbikeclub (414) 8 years ago

well I don't really want a 3rd party anymore. I like the OWS idea (and the Americans Elect) idea that political parties are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

And I guess I'm just too fed up. I already voted for Nader 3 times and I voted Obama because he really did give me "hope". I think that's partly what this OWS movement is about. "We" realize that even WITH a smart and presumably fair-minded "public servant" in the White House, nothing changes anyway. He's powerless. I don't mind that he failed on health-care reform, I mind that he didn't even try! Public option off the table from the beginning...? Why...?!? Because it was a non-starter for those who were holding the bags of money for his re-election campaign!

He could have gone out at that point and used the bully pulpit and rallied all of us. Instead he made the deals with the devils. Nope... Fool me once!

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Sorry to hear that...Go check out the 99 Declaration. Now, This is a movement I can get behind!

[-] 1 points by beamerbikeclub (414) 8 years ago

I am 99% behind OWS!

Carry on and see you in the streets. : )

[-] 1 points by lobotaru (12) 8 years ago

Definitely some amount of electoral reform is needed. We have a system where those with the largest pool of money to splurge on advertising wins. I'm pretty sure that our founders didn't foresee the effects mass media and wealthy corporations would have on our electorate.

[-] 1 points by KnaveDave (357) 8 years ago

1) A constitutional convention to impose the strictest of campaign reforms: no corporate, charitable or personal money may be spent on election campaigns. Instead, all election campaign coverage will be paid for on a limited bases by a campaign fund funded by tax monies. What we lose as tax payers in making this limitation will be far less than what we gain. We, of course, need to discuss what equitable and objective criteria will be used for doling out those monies. We should also place some kind of cap on the total that can be spent.

2) More aggressive prosecution of the perps of this mess.

3) Tax reform that, in the very least, eliminates all the tax breaks that allow the top 20% currently to pay a smaller percentage in income tax than those under them. I'm personally in favor of switching from our regressive income tax that lets the rich off easier than the middle class to a progressive national sales tax (made progressive by not taxing the most basic essentials, food, clothing under $100 per item, medicine, and rent under $1,000 per month (adjusted by region) or the first $100,000 of a home purchase if it is one's primary dwelling (again adjusted by region). That allows a very basic level of living (such as living in a mobile home) that is tax free. Above that level, we all choose how much we will be taxed by how we choose to spend our money.

4) REregulation of banking.

Those four things, by themselves, would make a massive difference in the fairness of our country. (Whether you go for my particular alternative or not -- REAL and STRICT campaign finance reform with no political wiggle room, serious pursuit of the wrongdoers that created this mess, tax realignment that makes certain the wealthy ALWAYS pay a percentage of their wealth equal to what any individual under them is paying, and bank regulations that are reasonable so as not to stifle banking, but to protect from the nonsense we have all seen.

Finally, no more bailouts for anyone.

--Knave Dave http://TheGreatRecession.info/blog

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Great job, Dave! Those 4 things would make a huge difference.

[-] 1 points by Fiction (14) 8 years ago

An Idea that i have set in Motion, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gryco23SQlU Can You Commit to it? Spread it if you can, My family agreed.

[-] 1 points by mikeyj68 (2) 8 years ago

Michael Moore has presented a list of 10 issues/demands that could be the basis for an Occupy political program--at least it's a very good start of a positive political discussion. I believe his plan is to propose it at a future OWS general assembly.

I support the notion that all OCCUPIES should begin discussion of a political program or for a NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (the 99% declares their independence from the 1%!). Discussion could ensue over the next 6 months or so culminating in a NEW DECLARATION CONVENTION to be held over July 4th in Philadelphia, or in late August in Tampa, Florida, the site and time of the Republican National Convention. That could be intersting!

What do you all say?

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

WE NEED MICHAEL MOORE TO START ANOTHER MOVEMENT!

HE CAN BE TRUSTED, By The Left , and he won't get snowballed, by the right!

It is Fd up on the inside...... of this OWS movement......I tried to help and got Fd around .

Who the F are these people?

I kept waiting for an agenda and it Fn never came.

I kept lookin' for my "postins" and could hardly find a thing,

"This ain't no organization that "I" wanna be in!

And don't get me started on their Fn G A. games!

We need your help, and we know we can trust you..........Who "is" behind the OWS?

AND WHERE ARE YOU MICHAEL MOORE?

I wrote the top of this post, last night, after drinking some wine I guess I shouldn't drink and write, cause this is a God awfull rhyme!

[-] 1 points by stuartchase (861) 8 years ago

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/

[-] 1 points by Mikeferdy (4) 8 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaeRum-GJMY - Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8wDcpZSdFo&feature=related - Part 2

The answer is here... The top 1% is holding the rest in eternal debt.

You can chose to continue to protest and hope the government will listen to you... or you can chose to defy your corrupt government and adopt an existing financial system that won't let them steal your money.

[-] 1 points by daverose1270 (9) 8 years ago

beast idea , know what it is you want. and let the media know . me I want term limits on congress, I want the executive privilege that lets the president wage war with out consent of Congress replied . I want all political contributions caped at 100.000 from any entity, person or corporation privet are public to any party not individual. No political contributions from any person or entity out side the united states.

[-] 1 points by CentristFiasco (60) 8 years ago

Our message is in the declaration: http://t.co/PrYKS2y0

[-] 1 points by kurisC (9) 8 years ago

I dont think that the United States government really cares about our consitutonal rights, as long as they line thier pockets and maintain power they dont care. If they feel their power threatened they will limit our rights, good examples of this are: The bonus Marchers during the great depression, the WWI veterans were promised a pention for their services in the war in the 1940's, well the depression hit and 15,000 veterans went to the capital where they camped around the capital building, and petitioned to abtain their pentions early so they could survive and feed their families. The police were sent in to clear them out, but the police paniced and fired into the crowed and killed 2 vets, Then the Goventment sent in the military to force the protesters from Washington D.C; Another example is the espionage act created during WWI which stated that anyone who says anything negitive about the Govenment will be placed in prision.I dont think that the movment should stop, i mearly suggest that it make itself more clear about what they want, and make it clear that They are not going to move til The changes they want are put into place.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

We have to stick together and not allow our rights to be denied. We stay non-violent and have solidarity when we boycott large chain stores and corporations. Hit them where it hurts, have the corporations help us, if they want to stay in business. After all, 70% pf the US economy is driven by consumer spending.

[-] 1 points by mawall (1) 8 years ago

Drastic times require drastic measures. We no longer should worry about affending the controlling 1%, but should stand up to them. They ignore our grievances but our demands should get their attention. The failure of the supercommittee to supply any deficit reduction proposals should prove to the remaining 99% of Americans that our system is officially broken. The rest of the world was looking toward America to provide leadership out of its economic woes and our elected leaders failed. Failure has its consequences:

  1. Congressional reform: One 6 year term for both the house and senate (1/3 elected every 2 yrs)
  2. Election reform: Only individuals can contribute to election campaigns (up to $50 each) with remaining funds provided by public campaign contributions from tax returns.
  3. Lobbyist reform: No lobbyists allowed on capital hill and it is illegal to offer anything of value to our elected officials. No elected offical can accept a job as a lobbyist once he/she has served a term in congress.
  4. Budget reform: Pass a balanced budget amendment to our constitution. The 2012 Federal budget has to be reworked ($2.627 in revenues and $3.729 in outlays is unacceptable) 5.Tax reform: Simplify the IRS tax code by eliminating all individual tax credits and deductions (pay tax on gross income). This frees up IRS auditors to concentrate on business tax returns which would stay the same for the short-run (eventually eliminated and all income passed thru to individuals like Sub S corps). Individuals would pay tax on gross income (no tax on first $50k, 25% on the next $110k, 50% on the next $240K and 75% over $400K. for married tax payers) As a result, the wealthiest 1% (based on 138 million tax returns filed in 2009) would have their effective tax rates increased on average from 24% to 60%, more in line with traditional top tax rates prior to the Reagan and Bush reforms (the average gross income of the top 1% was $960K in 2009). The remainder of the top 5% would see their effective tax rate increase on average from 16% to 25% and the bottom 95% of tax payers on average would see tax decreases (with couples making less $50k paying no Federal income tax).
  5. Job reform: The Federal government in conjunction with private industry should make sure there is a job available for every American citizen physically able to work. Child care services should be provided as well as transportation to be paid out of proceeds of work depending on ability to pay. SBA expanded to make low interest rate loans available as well as business plan preparation and monitoring. Minimun wage increased to $12/hr (for couples making minimum wage there would be no federal tax based on tax schedule described above). Because all citizens will be provided a job, most types of welfare can be eliminated. Incentives should be given to corporations who hire American rather than foreign workers.
  6. Universal Health Care: The government acts as the insurer for all workers. People would be required to have annual physicals and follow their doctor's recommendations or be subject to paying a portion of medical expenses. Rich could buy additional coverage if desired. Improved health would offset some of the costs. Participation in this program would be voluntary, individuals could maintain their current programs if desired.
  7. Education reform: Free education as far as your abilities allow. Trade school can be chosen once test scores would indicate the student should go this route. Sports should be taken out of schools and become local clubs. Teaching should become an elite profession where requirements for entry into teaching schools is similar to law or medicine (pay is adjusted accordingly). 9.Upgrade America's eroding infrastructure: This will employ large numbers of the unemployed, with employer given tax incentives to hire the unemployed. 10.Enforce and enhance anti trust laws: If a company is "too big to fail" then it is simply Too Big. Reinstate provisions of Glass-Steagall whereby commercial banks are not allowed to engage in investment activities of brokerage firms (consequently lessen their ability to gamble with government insured funds).Employee layoffs should be a last resort, not a short-term fix to keep the value of stock high.
[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Great ideas,well thought out, very bright and articulate!

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 8 years ago

"The Shit is Fucked Up" Thats what Ive been saying!

[-] 1 points by debndan (1145) 8 years ago

Here's my 2 cents

http://occupywallst.org/forum/heres-a-thought-why-not-try-to-attract-more-people/#comment-418015

Hope I've identified a common problem and goal, HAPPY THANKSGIVING everyone.

[-] 1 points by Peretyatkov (241) from город Пенза, Пензенская область 8 years ago

These are my demands: http://occupywallst.org/forum/nardialog/

This explanation of why my demands are not met: http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-nardialog/

What to do? We need to create an international party. Moreover, need such a party, which, world history does not know yet. What's next? At all - God's will! http://occupywallst.org/forum/what-is-nardialog/

[-] 1 points by thegrinchwhostoleyourmoney (15) 8 years ago

the people who started the OWS movement are self-proclaimed anarchist communists. they don't want a leader nor a message. they just want anarchy and let their own few stimulate it.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

How do you know this?

[-] 1 points by groovyjoker (39) 8 years ago

Hasn't this already been addressed by the99PercentDeclaration? This petition is well developed, addresses most of the issued listed here, and has a petition to the White House waiting to be heard. Now, it needs another 23,000 signatures before it will be read by the White House. It only has a little over 1,000. Seems to me that if you are interested in the issues in this forum, or in the Declaration (below), you may consider supporting the Petition. https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

Petition link https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!/petition/endorse-wwwthe99declarationorg-which-petition-redress-grievances/Q6qYt2H9

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

If this has already been addressed, then why have only 1000 people signed it so far? I never heard about it at local meetings. Why doesn't the press know, so more people can get behind this movement?

[-] 1 points by groovyjoker (39) 8 years ago

Hope you don't mind, I quoted you (without mentioning your name) on the FB page. Good point, well said.

[-] 1 points by groovyjoker (39) 8 years ago

Yup. These exact points were recently discussed on the facebook page for the99PercentDeclaration. http://www.facebook.com/www.the99declaration.org?ref=pb

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Good, I didn't see it, as I am not on Facebook.

[-] 1 points by groovyjoker (39) 8 years ago

Here is the reply I received. Hope to see you there. If you do not do FB, I posted the website in an earlier post - Note they have apparently been invited to the Keith Olbermann show.

"We have raised $5,921.86 USD since 11-7. We need $8,000 to reserve the venue for the National General Assembly. Hopefully after we run the TV commercial nationally the week of 12-5, contributions will pick up. We got lucky when an anonymous donor gave us $10,000 to make the commercial and air it but we are on our own now.

You may make a contribution here: www.the99declaration.org. The commercial was cleared by the legal department at the network and the tapes were overnighted to California yesterday. Be sure to watch Keith Olbermann on Current TV the week of 12-5 at 8 and 11pm."

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 8 years ago

I have no demands of the 1%. They are irrelevant in this movement. I have demands from my government, they are relevant.

Remove money from the private sector, except the money from individuals from the politics or we will remove you from politics.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

You should have demands for the1% ,because, their lobbyists are controlling our government.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 8 years ago

Why would you have me waste my time with demanding anything from those unwilling to give into the demand? It is the Government that has lost its way. The greedy will always be greedy.

http://www.nycga.net/groups/political-and-electoral-reform/docs/amendment-28-to-the-constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Corporations have forgotten who feeds them. 70% of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. We boycott them until they help us. They have the lobbyists in Washington. We come up with our demands, and tell them to use their lobbyists for us. They break the stalemate in Washington, we get the reforms we need, and the corporations stay in business. It's win, win, win for everybody.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

Consider the difference between "request" and "demand". Nobody's suggesting requests.

[-] 1 points by unimportant (716) 8 years ago

The demands from our government are already outlined;

Resolved by the CITIZENS of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and presented to the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within twelve [12] months after the date of its submission for ratification:

"ARTICLE—

"SECTION 1. We the people who ordain and establish the rights protected by the Constitution of the United States to be the rights of natural persons.

"SECTION 2. The words people, person, or citizen as used in this Constitution do not include corporations, limited liability companies and other private entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state.

"SECTION 3. Such entities not identified as a "natural persons" in SECTION 2. of this Amendment, shall be prohibited from making contributions or expenditures to, for or against, any candidate for public office or to, for or against, publicly elected official or to, for or against, any legislation before the Congress, the Senate or the people.

"SECTION 4. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people’s rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, freedom of association and all such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.".

The rest can be read here. If you agree. tell people.

http://www.nycga.net/groups/political-and-electoral-reform/docs/amendment-28-to-the-constitution-of-the-united-states-of-america

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Don't you read what the people who set up this web sit, OWS, have written on it. On the cover page of this forum it says"we don't need Wall Street and we don't need politicians to build a better society" and "the only solution is world revolution." In terms of how that is to be accomplished and what the institutions of a new society would look like it says further on up this same page that we want "a general assembly on every street corner."

That is OWS has absolutely nothing to do with making demands on politicians, suggesting pieces of legislation or Constitutional amendments , or running people for political office. It is about all of us, working together to build entirely new and democratic institutions that genuinely meet our needs and enable us to govern ourselves in a loving, peaceful and just way, unlike the hierarchal institutions that currently govern us.

Elsewhere on this website and elsewhere on the web the Declaration of the Occupation of New York can be found, the only official political document ever yet produced by OWS. Among other things it contains more than 20 enumerated grievances. I don't know how many more specific issues you would want addressed.

My point here is not whether or not you agree with this or whether or not you think this is a good thing. My point is that these are statements which are hard wired onto this website by the people who created this website and if you really take issue with them then you are really no better than a troll unless you can suspend your disbelief long enough to engage honestly in the discussion on the premises on which it is based.

[-] 2 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

If this movement is representing the 99% and I am one of them, then I have every right to state my opinion. I am not into tearing the basic fabric of our constitution apart, or our institutions. That would just create mayhem We should be working to know where our true power lies, and work on that basis to add pressure to the corporations, we buy from.

If you tear everything apart leaders will emerge, and I'm sure we would get a lot worse minds in there then the founders of our constitution. A general assembly on every street corner by people who are ill informed , is insane.Nothing will get done and the structure of our lives will fall apart. We need to get the attention of the rich and powerful .There are good and decent wealthy people. We need to have companies to invest in. But it can't be just about making a profit for the stockholder. It has to also be about fairness to the employees and contributing to the communities that support these corporations.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

If you look carefully at what the NYC GA says (the governing body of OWS) it is not so much pro-Constitutional or anti-Constitutional as the Constitution is irrelevant to its project. As it says "we don't need Wall St and we don't need politicians to build a better society."

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

We do need deal with reality. An important reality we must deal with is that the social/economic/political System exists -- or, perhaps, that it happens, has force, must be reckoned with. We may easily imagine a better world without those things (such as they are -- we don't need them). And we don't need to ask permission from the Corporatocracy (the gov't-corporate nexus) to build a better society. And we can certainly make society better just by being better people.

But a societal-scale Movement seeking to change things must deal with societal institutions -- even if the plan is to fly rockets to the moon to escape them.

We must start where we are, and deal with what's at hand. How we do so is up to us and our collective creativity. But I think pressing demands is an important (if not indispensable) element of an effective strategy. And the most pressing is the divorce of concentrated wealth and political power. (Not that they may have nothing to do with each other, just as a divorced couple may still talk, even enjoy beer or more together, from time to time.)

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

"We" don't need to do a fucking thing, including paying taxes, excepting perhaps, to die. Nor does a movement have to do anything that it doesn't want to do as a movement, excepting, perhaps, grow, die, or remain stagnant. Movements are not organizations. Organizations can decide whether or not they want to do anything. But there is nothing ordained in heaven that says they "must" do anything at all. You might suggest that that an organization or even a movement "must" do this or that or else it will die, but so far at least, OWS as a movement and the various GAs associated with it as organizations, seem to be doing just fine without your advice.

The dominant position of the NYC GA seems to be hostile to raising demands, though there is a "Demands" Working Group within NYC GA which is the natural habitat of those "realos" consumed with the notion of demands, though it is important to note that after weeks of meeting these "realists" can't even seem to agree among themselves on a common set of demands, much less present it to a skeptical GA.

As for other GAs around the nation, in many places, especially in smaller communities and in smaller GAs the notion of raising specific demands does seem to have a bit more traction, though no GA that I am aware has yet to raise a specific set of demands, or if they have they tend to be locally oriented, not national or international in scope. Most of the larger GAs seem to be consonant with the NYC GA in their opposition, or at least indifference to specific demands.

Perhaps the strongest of these was the slogan that came out of the Oakland occupation: Occupy Everything, Demand Nothing!. Though my favorite slogan in this regard that I saw in New York was: Making Demands Put Somebody Else In Charge Of Your Happiness!

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"Though my favorite slogan in this regard that I saw in New York was: Making Demands Put Somebody Else In Charge Of Your Happiness!"

That's a nice slogan, but not actually true. One can perfectly well make demands without sacrificing happiness.

In any case, it may be worth meditating for a minute on the name: Occupy Wall Street.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

The slogan Making Demands Puts Somebody Else In Charge Of Your Happiness doesn't say that you sacrifice happiness in making a demand. It says, if that demand is met (and depending on the demand it might well be) it means that by the very nature of a demand, what a demand is, you have stopped being responsible for your own happiness. You have said to some entity in which you have placed authority: do this for me and I will be happy. Now if they have the power to do what you ask and you were being honest, then it might well make you happy, but certainly at the expense of your own self respect, your own integrity and your own autonomy. When we say that we don't need Wall Street or politicians to build a better society we are saying that we will take responsibility for ourselves collectively and not depend on institutions which have clearly failed us.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"it means that by the very nature of a demand, what a demand is, you have stopped being responsible for your own happiness."

I'm sorry, I just don't see that as necessarily true. Can we say, then, that by the act of eating we stop being responsible for our happiness, transferring that responsibility to the food (demanding that it ease our hunger, and be reasonably pleasant)? Gandhi demanded that the British leave India. In doing so, did he give the Crown responsibility for his happiness? Did he debase and embarrass himself simply by making the demand and pressing it implacably, until the British left?

As I said elsewhere on this page, the very existence of this Movement constitutes a demand (to powers that have long taken us for granted and ignored us, treating us with contempt): NOTICE US, LISTEN TO US! Does this mean we have collectively surrendered our self-respect, our integrity, our autonomy? It's the opposite, no?

But we're not just demanding attention: we're also building something among ourselves, developing inwardly and spreading outwardly.

Again, I repeat: this Movement shouldn't just be about any demands, or any engagement with the current System. But not being about them doesn't exclude them, much less mean they can't be critically important to the survival and growth of the Movement in the long term.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

I personally don't consider the demand to leave a demand, but if it is insisted upon that the demand to leave is a demand then that is the demand that I think OWS should have of Wall Street and the state. But since OWS is a tiny, tiny movement, it is in no position to have such a demand taken seriously, which is why I'm against raising any demand. Our main job now is to organized to the point where we have to be taken seriously when we raise the demand that the corporations and the state dissolve. Of course, by that point we will be powerful enough that we will not have to raise any demands. We will simply ignore Wall Street and the state as we go about the business of reorganizing society democratically from below. And of course we are a very, very long way from that, which is why we have to get busy and keep organizing.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"But since OWS is a tiny, tiny movement, it is in no position to have such a demand taken seriously, which is why I'm against raising any demand."

WE. ARE. THE NINETY-NINE PERCENT!

I think it may be helpful to think of the Movement as resisting the 99% of political power on behalf of the 99% of people (the numbers don't have to be exact, the principle's correct). With that in mind, we should have faith that we can win major popular support for demanding very popular measures that would shift major heaps of power from the Corporatocracy to The People. If we're making demands that don't have massive public support, they're the wrong demands.

Demand that the State dissolve itself and fuck off? A noble hope, but not a winner. Demand that the government purge itself of its vast corporate money-fuel, and change institutionally so that it doesn't need it any more? The People will have our backs, big-time! They want that. We want that. It's a huge goal -- the corporate resistance would be like nothing we've ever seen. But it's imaginable, feasible.

And we start by announcing that we insist upon it, and we're going to make it happen.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Whatever demand is made on the corporate state, it will still be a corporate state. It will still be their state. Which is to say that any demand that is made on the corporate state that the corporate state accedes to will actually strengthen the corporate state.

Which is why the demand that it go away is fundamentally differerent than any other demand. Basically it is a demand that the state cannot grant or at least it thinks its impossible to grant.

As I previously stated, of course the demand that the state dissolve itself would not resonate with the vast majority of the American public, but any other demand, any demand that the state could or would grant would only serve to strengthen the state, the corporate state, the state of the 1%, which is why they shouldn't be raised either.

The only way out of that connundrum is to organize, organize organize until society is saturated with GAs to the point that they don't have to make any demands but the project before them will be to reorganize society.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

I'm afraid I haven't been clear enough, or maybe you haven't been paying close attention. In any case, you're not getting what I've been trying to communicate.

"Whatever demand is made on the corporate state, it will still be a corporate state. It will still be their state. Which is to say that any demand that is made on the corporate state that the corporate state accedes to will actually strengthen the corporate state."

It is a corporate state, yes - but what, exactly, makes it a corporate state? What, in its structure, in its organization? And is the condition of being a corporate state an all-or-nothing matter, such that nothing can change it? You seem to be implying that it is, without addressing my several suggestions and descriptions of how it isn't.

It certainly can change -- it has changed greatly in the last 30 years, toward becoming ever more a corporate state. The corporate sector practically owns it now (not entirely, but close).

What are the theoretical limits for how responsive it can become to The People? I don't know, but I think the extent is very considerable -- far more than it has yet ever been. Simply repeating "it's a corporate state" obscures that and limits one's possibilities.

". . . any demand that is made on the corporate state that the corporate state accedes to will actually strengthen the corporate state"

That's starting to sound like a mantra, not a thought. Again: by "demand", I don't mean something the State has a choice to accede or not accede in. Not a request. And, again: what strengthens the corporate state? Put differently, for clarity: what strengthens the corporate character of the state? Corporate control of the state. I think that's clear, isn't it? So if that factor is reduced, then the state is less a corporate state, and more a People's state. Black & white thinking cannot conceive a rainbow.

A majority of Americans support what they think to be OWS goals. Most Americans are strongly opposed to the dissolution of the State -- they just want it to be more their state, and not the Corporatocracy's. Perhaps someday they'll evolve on the matter of dissolution. But in the meantime, I think the Movement is in danger of alienating many who now support it, if it abandons the 99% project identity and becomes an ideologically purist revolutionary movement.

That would be a tragedy, partly because it's totally not necessary to choose between them: working from the bottom-up and from the top down are not logically or practically in conflict -- or they don't need to be, if you choose not to put them in conflict.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Well one thing that makes it a corporate state is the commerce clause. Another is the separation of powers. I could parse this out but there are libraries full of books that delineate this in detail. It is worthwhile to note, however that virtually all of the most radical leaders of the Revolution very consciously boycotted the Constitutional Convention. That included Patrick Henry, Sam (not John) Adams, Tom Paine and Thomas Jefferson, though Jefferson himself did eventually make his peace with the document.

Any demand that you can mention that the state has acceded to has ultimately strengthened that state and made the struggle against it all the more difficult. I would include stuff that I actually support like Social Security (which I live on) and the National Labor Relations Act. As wonderful as these are as paliatives, ultimately what they do is strengthen a state which is not fundamentally organized to serve the interest of the vast majority.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"Any demand that you can mention that the state has acceded to has ultimately strengthened that state and made the struggle against it all the more difficult. I would include stuff that I actually support like Social Security (which I live on) and the National Labor Relations Act. As wonderful as these are as paliatives, ultimately what they do is strengthen a state which is not fundamentally organized to serve the interest of the vast majority."

I'd like to come back later for more in-depth, but I'll just comment briefly on that narrow point for now, as I'm short of time. Recall my earlier remarks:

. . . . "I think therein lies an error in the assumption that incremental improvements are bad because they must strengthen a bad System. If "improvements" are defined in terms of material comforts then, yes, a comfortable People may become complacent and easily exploited.

But to the extent that "making the System better" is defined in terms of making it more responsive to The People, then it's better, period. And if it becomes good enough, then The People can use it as an instrument of popular (GA) consensus . . . [the possibilities can't be fully fleshed out; historically, people who fill in the gaps too fully always end up looking foolish in retrospect]."

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Therein lies the distinction between reform and revolution. The fact is that OWS is a movement whose initiators were revolutionaries. If you don't believe that read the quite sympathetic new New Yorker article on the subject. But it is also the case that they were by no means sectarian, nor did they or do they hide their sentiments. By that I mean that they have consistently chosen strategies and tactics that resonate with a broad mass of people who do not necessarily share their world view.

On the other hand the broad mass of people who support and are active in OWS would probably characterize themselves as liberals if they bothered to think about it. But ironically even though I think they constitute a majority in the movement they cannot seem to get themselves together and as a political tendency or current they are not nearly as well organized or as coherent as are the radicals. This is perhaps best exemplified by the Demands Working Group of the NYC GA, which is the natural habitat of the reformers. They can't even collectively decide on a common set of demands, much less present it coherently to a skeptical GA.

Nevertheless I continue to believe in the old SDS formulation that any viable American movement needs both liberals and radicals: liberals for their relevance and radicals for their vision. That said, should either tendency gain dominance it would probably mean the death of the movement. The liberals would undoubtedly lead us into the death trap of the Democratic Party, which has been the grave yard of every mass movement since the days of the Populists whereas the hegemony of the radicals might turn OWS into little more than an inconsequential sect.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

. . . "so far at least, OWS as a movement and the various GAs associated with it as organizations, seem to be doing just fine without your advice."

Yes, and yours too. I'm not sure what your point is. We could just as well say: I am the 99%, and so are you; the Movement has done nothing at all without us -- without our advice, without our intellectual input, without our passion.

I'm not deciding, because I want to, that the movement "must" deal with the dominant societal institutions -- it already has dealt with them, and must continue to do so (will do so) because it's unavoidable. The question is: in what ways, toward what ends? That's what we must decide. [If someone says a dropped stone must fall, don't attack them for using the word "must" -- it would fall even if they said nothing.]

The Movement didn't first come into being, then scratch its collective head, look around in a daze, and ask, "Why am I here?" (tho many in the media pretend that's exactly what happened). It came into being around a set of serious, related problems that are widely recognized, and felt, and suffered. What it lacked, upon birth, was a specific vision of the effects it wished to achieve, and how.

That's what we are working out now. There are differences of opinion. As far as objectives are concerned, there is no Bible that is correct for all. But there are facts of reality that are true for all -- even for those who deny them. My point is: in developing visions and strategies, we must (yes, must) acknowledge reality, and deal with it (at least if we intend to be effective). This is not to put a limit on imagination, but to keep our collective imagination from being easy to ignore, suppress and, likely, exploit.

The stone must fall.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

I agree that OWS is doing just fine without my advice. Basically, I'm along for the ride, which I think is great. I basically agree with Chris Hedges and Naomi Klein that OWS needs to keep on doing what it's doing and not worry about a "next step" or a "next stage" which is pretty much what it is actually doing. This is not to say that I don't have suggestions from time to time at GAs and in Working Groups, but I don't take myself too seriously and I don't get terribly disappointed when my advice isn't followed.

As far as reality goes, different people have different conceptions of what it's all about. It's a very subjective experience after all. Solidarity forever!

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

I recognize that we disagree on demands, so far as you think they're unnecessary or should be avoided, and I . . . don't. I'll clarify: I don't think the movement should define itself in terms of its political demands -- let it grow as broadly as it can, please :-)

But let's pretend that the GA's (in NY and elsewhere) decided on pressing political demands, and the question was down to which the demand/s were to be.

Can I ask you to read a pair of posts above (one of them mine) and say whether you would support this demand as the Central Demand? And if not, why not? Here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-this-is-our-movement-what-is-our-message/#comment-413404

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

The reason I'm opposed to demands is that I don't recognize the legitimacy of any authority to which we might make demands. Did the American revolutionaries really have any demands of King George? No. Did they say, do this for us or do that for us and we'll be happy? Not really. They had a lot of grievances, but what was their demand? Essentially, get out! Which is not really a demand.

I mean, that would be my demand of both Wall Street corporations and the state: leave! This is essentially the demand that the Egyptian demonstrators are making to the junta right now and the response of the junta is, we can't, there is nothing to replace us. And they have a point, but the demonstrators respond: we don't care, we will figure out how to govern ourselves, just leave!

Now I fully realize that OWS is in no position to take such a stance just now, which is why I say that our primary job right now ought to be building our movement. Once there is a General Assembly in every Congressional District, in every Legislative District, in Every County, in every municipality, in every ward, in every precinct, in every neighborhood, on every block, in every school and every university, in every nursing home, in every mental instiution, in every homeless shelter, in every drug rehabilitation center, in every military barrracks, in every jail, in every prison, in every work place, everywhere, then we will not need to make demands of anyone, nor will there be anyone to make demands of, we will then be in a position to reconstruct society democratically from below however we want.

In fact though, we will proabably be in a position to begin such a social reconstruction long before GAs become so comprehensive, but that should be the goal and it is in fact the unarticulated (but not hidden) goal of the initiators of OWS.

[-] 2 points by looselyhuman (3117) 8 years ago

Robespierre, Muslim Brotherhood, no problem.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"The reason I'm opposed to demands is that I don't recognize the legitimacy of any authority to which we might make demands."

I don't see any connection between making demands and recognizing the legitimacy of any authority -- quite the opposite, if authority is legitimate, then there's no reason to make demands of it: one can reason with it. One makes suggestions to, and requests of, legitimate authority, and demands of illegitimate authority. And so, in my view, the American revolutionaries' "Get out!" to the English was, indeed, a demand.

"I mean, that would be my demand of both Wall Street corporations and the state: leave!"

Ideally, I would join you in that -- and someday I may. But, thinking practically, I distinguish between immediate goals and ultimate goals. If the ultimate goal is societal anarchism, it'll probably never happen -- but I think the movement stands a far greater chance of achieving meaningful successes toward that goal if it doesn't try to start at the finish line.

And I think a very good start would be to get money [mostly corporate money] out of politics. Why? Because I think that is, by far, the single greatest factor preventing the American political system from being responsive to the interests of ordinary people - the 99%.

Now, the System works actively against our interests. But it's not a fixed, unchanging thing -- if it were, the only solution would be to destroy it, ASAP. But we can influence it to be much, much more responsive to our concerns -- not so much any ideological concerns, perhaps, but practical concerns that may lead to greater power for The People vis-a-vis the Corporatocracy, and greater prosperity (however one understands that).

Such power isn't abstract or symbolic: it's the power to shift energy policy away from dirty/unsustainable sources; to work seriously against global warming; to improve options in education and transportation and economic/social organization; to re-write laws governing labor and the responsibilities borne by the owners of the means of production, or to facilitate productivity on entirely different models; etc., etc.

I think all those things are possible (tho far from guaranteed), and can set the stage for further developments (a bridge to be crossed when we get there).

But, in my opinion, I think the Movement almost certainly condemns itself (on the societal scale, not the personal level) to being, perhaps, a large and very interesting flash of "weirdness" in society, before it returns to the corporate-dominated "normalcy" we so want to undo.

Perhaps one difference between my understanding and yours: while we both accept that the current System is profoundly illegitimate, it seems to me (correct me if I'm wrong) that you see it as take-it-or-leave-it, all-or-nothing, whereas I see it as being structurally capable of much flexibility, of supporting a wide range of possibilities, depending on how we engage with it (or disengage from it). It cannot be ideal (or very close, I think we agree), but it can be much closer to ideal than it is now. And I think our most likely possibilities lie in the direction of making that System more responsive to us -- not limiting ourselves to reforming the System, but not ignoring it, either (a huge mistake, I think). (Even as we pursue that path, we continue movement-building, spreading GA involvement everywhere - it's not an either/or choice.)

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 8 years ago

Fair enough. If you think the desire of the Americans was for the British to get out constitutes a demand then ok, as Lenny Bruce used to say, it's a demand. Then that is my demand of both Wall Street and the state: get out, but since we are a tiny tiny movement that could hardly be taken seriously in making such a demand, that is why I am against raising it at this point. It would be premature.

I don't see things as a take it or leave it situation. But I don't see revolutions being made on an incremental basis either. I would also agree that the vast majority of Americans are not revolutionary, which is precisely why am against raising either incremental or ultimate demands at this time. I'm against raising incremental demands because ultimately, not only do I think that increments don't lead to fundamental change, but more often than not, incremental "reforms" actually end up strengthing the very institutions they were meant to regulate. And I'm against raising ultimate demands because they clearly would not resonate with the vast majority of the American population.

What I am for doing is building our movement until it is in a realistic position to raise ultimate demands. That means having a GA in every CD, in every legislative district, in every county, in every municipality, in every ward, in every precinct, in every neighborhood, on every block, in every school and university, in every nursing home, in every drug rehabilitation clinic, on every hospital ward, in every mental institution, in every military barracks, in every jail, in every prison, in every work place, everywhere. Then we won't even have to make any ultimate demands. Then we can begin to reconstruct society democratically from below. In practical terms I suspect we will be able to begin that social reconstruction long before GAs literally cover the land. But that is still our goal and IMHO that path towards a fundamental social reconstruction. Organize, organize, organize! Solidarity forever!

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

A wee, technical quibble:

"If you think the desire of the Americans was for the British to get out constitutes a demand then ok, as Lenny Bruce used to say, it's a demand."

It wasn't the desire that constituted a demand, it was the demand (enforced by musket).

;-)

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

We're not so far apart now, it seems. But on this point:

"I would also agree that the vast majority of Americans are not revolutionary, which is precisely why am against raising either incremental or ultimate demands at this time."

Most Americans are not "revolutionary" - right! BUT, most Americans are aware -- in varying degrees of acuteness -- that the economic-political System doesn't respond to their concerns, doesn't care about them. And that the ones who own and operate it do so to their own stupendously obscene advantage. Most Americans already want Campaign Finance Reform and Lobbying Reform -- it doesn't have to be sold to them.

We may call it an incremental reform, and debate well-worn theoretical points (mostly developed in contexts very different from ours) about whether incremental change can lead to "fundamental" change, but if we understand "fundamental" as having to do with relational principles and not organizational structures, then fundamental change is achieved wherever non-hierarchical relations replace hierarchical ones. That is, fundamental change is ongoing, institutional change incremental.

I think therein lies an error in the assumption that incremental improvements are bad because they must strengthen a bad System. If "improvements" are defined in terms of material comforts then, yes, a comfortable People may become complacent and easily exploited.

But to the extent that "making the System better" is defined in terms of making it more responsive to The People, then it's better, period. And if it becomes good enough, then The People can use it as an instrument of popular (GA) consensus . . . [the possibilities can't be fully fleshed out; historically, people who fill in the gaps too fully always end up looking foolish in retrospect].

I think the time is very ripe for demanding of the System what most people (not 99%, but well more than half) already want, and have longed for for years, and what is perfectly consistent with the underlying principles (tho not necessarily the ideologies) of the Movement.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 8 years ago

Your constitution is sound. It has stood you all i good stead for many years. The problem is that Your government has decided it can disregard it, & use executive orders to do what it wants. The constitution applies to all of you, or none of you, & that's where you are at right now. gov is not applying to to it's actions. If you can make it apply to them, you would have cause to prosecute for tyranny, enticement to slavery, human rights abuses, usurption of the rightful authority of the people. Either make them declare the Constitution invalid, or use it against them as it was intended in this situation. If they invalidate it, they should immediately be arrested by the People-paid-for LAW enforcement. it is the pinnacle of the law of government over the people, & the constitution itself denies anybody the right to do that, so would in effect be breaching it, both in denying your right to it's protection, & ignoring it's law of unalienable rights. Otherwise, all law is their contract law,requiring your signature to give inalienable rights away, or know about your Unalienable rights, that no authority on earth can take from you... You can't even give them away... Like growing your own food... They CANNOT change it. It is given by the same God that we are led to believe is the same one that they say 'In God we trust', about. The 'amendments' are their changes to confound the law, & make it not straight forward. the constitution was specifically worded to say, very well, I thought, what was intended. If you could make them answer to just that part of it, it cannot be misconstrued or twisted by them putting their own connotation on it. Don't let them them add more to it than is written on it.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I love our Constitution! Great answer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[-] 1 points by scottpot (27) 8 years ago

!) Public Money for a Public Media 2) Legalize Marijuana 3) Mandatory Voting 4) Medicare for All 5) Cut Military Spending 6) Close Guantanamo Bay 7) Government Banks for People 8) Cut Work Week to 37 Hours 9) Raise Minimum Wage 10)Tax The Rich 11) Ban Political Advertising on Television 12) Campaign Funding

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 8 years ago

Rich pigs. This global crisis and subsequent protest is all happening because of you. Because of your incredible greed. It's getting worse by the day. The prosperity and social stability of an entire world is now in jeopardy. You have a choice to make. Stop concentrating so much wealth or go down in history with one hell of a footnote.

Greed kills. It will be our downfall.

[-] 1 points by zvrk9 (5) 8 years ago

I support Occupy Wall Street because many people in the movement appear to believe in these 5 issues:

  1. Personal Income Tax Change. Change it to a simple code that increases taxes for family income above $350K, and more heavily for family income above $500K. There are many tax loopholes that only benefit rapid growing number of US millionaires. We can eliminate the greed (personal and corporate) by adopting income taxing systems of Scandinavian countries. People of these European countries enjoy all US freedoms, free higher education, and have the highest rating for personal happiness in the World.
  2. National Healthcare is a must. Our healthcare should not be directly tied to employment and cost cutting rationale of corporate executives. We are not “the most advanced nation” if we deny the most basic need to our citizens – healthcare. Current healthcare is a monopoly resistant to cost and process improvements.
  3. Create corporate tax incentives for jobs and employee retention. There are very few US companies like Zappos and Wegmans, where an employer truly cares for their employees. Most of the corporate leaders are driven only by greed. Their HR minions and manipulators are there just to see how to get more for less from employees. There is no responsibility for people and their jobs. Shifting manufacturing and engineering jobs elsewhere is rewarded with year-end bonuses. That has to change.
  4. Create an objective rating system for candidates and elected officials based on voting records, contributions received and the ability to compromise. Provide this clear and concise objective information to all voters.
  5. Exclude lobbyist. They are ugly instrument of the corporate greed. Lobbyists are key source of corruption in our democratic process and decision making.
[-] 2 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I like your ideas. I ask for ten, because I wanted to get as many issues on the table as possible. It's my opinion that if we can come up with a list, then we can make our demands.

My list would include:

  1. Election Reform: We need big money out of politics and we need a way of voting that can not be compromised. These electronic machines can be.

  2. A constitutional convention to overturn the Supreme Court decision giving corporations equal status to individuals.

  3. A public health care option: We can no longer let people die because they can not afford health insurance.

  4. Banking and Wall Street regulation, so that what happened in 2008, can never happen again.

  5. Legalize Marijuana: The pharmecutical companies want to keep it illegal so they can get America addicted to their prescription drugs. We could also tax it and use the revenues to build up our public schools.

6, Tear apart the Prison Industrial Complex: Instead of pouring money into building more prisons, put that money into youth programs and rehabilitation programs.

  1. An elected official, or anyone on his or her staff ,can never work as a lobbyist.

  2. Give tax breaks to companies who employ American workers.

  3. Make sure large corporations, and the rich pay their fair share of taxes.

  4. Get banks to write down more debt to keep homeowners in their homes.

  5. Pass more legislation to protect our environment.

  6. Have a fair flat tax, to take the complexity out of our tax system.

[-] 2 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"An elected official, or anyone on his or her staff ,can never work as a lobbyist."

Better:

Strong version: nobody can work as a lobbyist. Period.

Weak version: lobbyists cannot exchange gifts or favors of any kind with legislators or other officials, including implied assurances of future rewards (e.g. lucrative "private sector" gigs). Such exchanges will be regarded as bribery and prosecuted under stringent new anti-bribery laws.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Good, very clear, I like that.

[-] 2 points by KVNLGN (154) 8 years ago

I thought that the demands listed here were credible. Clearly some points could be added or deducted but at least it provides a framwork:

https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

[-] 1 points by groovyjoker (39) 8 years ago

Finally - another supporter of this framework! Let's touch bases somewhere. I'm on their facebook site and follow them on twitter. Have I stepped up and signed the petition - HellYeah!

[-] 1 points by Cocreator (306) 8 years ago

13.Cancel the Debt, Fake Money= Fake Debt

  1. Eliminate The Forest Service, Wildlife Management, B.L.M. shills for corporate interests.mismanaging and profit taking on Protected Public Land..
  2. End the Federal Reserve Counterfeiters Club..
  3. Get the 16 trillion embezzeled funds back and give every man,woman and child $100,000..
  4. Demand resignations from The Supreme Court, and the many people in Congress,guilty of insider trading, and bailing out and giving bonuses to the very people who bankrupted the world economy.. 18.Create a People's Forest Service And Wildlife management..Earth Restoration Projects focus on sustainability and self sufficience in our communities. 19.Everyone who takes part is elected, why go through a process so expensive,devisive,and corrupt..let the people decide, and share the day to day management,getting paid, but much less than 174,000 a year..
[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I'm replying to myself because I came up with twelve ideas and numbered them and when I posted it , it was changed to 1-6 and another 1-6. the twelve ideas above are coming from innervision.

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 8 years ago

End the Fed

Stop the Wars

Expose the American Drug Lords (Banksters)

[b]INVESTIGATE 9/11![/B]

Free your mind and your ass will follow!

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

5 down 5 to go--you have a great ideas!

solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity solidarity

OSW is a transformative movement of solidarity that protest for social justice. Our rights to free speech and our rights to a peaceful assembly will never be taken away.

[-] 1 points by zvrk9 (5) 8 years ago

Do we really need to have 10? Accomplishing just 2 or 3 of these 5 would be a monumental task and game changing experience.

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

zvrk9 it was nice of you to assist inervision with his/her post and onced a few of the guys that are against our rights to a peaceful assembly gets themselves knocked down the rest of the clan will fall shortly behind. Our police are all following a hand guide that has been written for them by the corrupt leaders of our country. There's not a mother or father that would treat his children the way our protesters have been treated in this country for the past 100 years let it alone that we are living in the 21st century.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

All of the issues have merit. There is only one way to gain the authority to address the issues.

Article 5 convention NOW!

Otherwise you are just begging the infiltrating criminals for help.

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

Article V conference, Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-other attendee video comments http://vimeo.com/31464745

[-] 0 points by winwinforall (-13) 8 years ago

Please educate yourselves well and use the POWER OF THE PEN to kick them out.

That's why they are being sued: The lawsuit that could end the gangster rule of Western civilization - November 24th, 201

http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/benjaminfulford/2011/11/the-lawsuit-that-could-end-the-gangster-rule-of-western-civilization.html

[-] 0 points by winwinforall (-13) 8 years ago

You all see that they are flying our flag with the gold fringe on it. See the folollowing informational facts for yourselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBTrwQP0LkQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=2AQwolz6c50

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0BUGSrkvTM&feature=related

http://apfn.org/apfn/flag.htm

Here's the real deal. They use a fraudulent corporate constitution to run our USA. See the document that proves it and the comparison to our republic US Constitution:

Here’s the document that shows the comparison of the two constitutions:

http://phoenixmaterials.org/pdf/100616.pdf

[-] 0 points by energy17 (4) 8 years ago

I think OWS is being co-opted pretty successfully.

[-] 0 points by energy17 (4) 8 years ago

If your movement is drifting toward communism then you are playing into the hands of the globalists.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

If it is drifting into communism then I want nothing to do with it. I love capitalism but capitalism needs to have a conscience. I actually think the movement has been taken over by the right wing of this country. That's why there is no clear message after over two months. There is also no leadership and this website is so disorganized you can't find anything on it.

They want it to fail!

[-] 0 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

we know where we are going, and i know how to get there. "Demands" are not how its done, and you compiling lists of "demands" makes you a volunteer facilitator thats not listened to the movement as it woke up to realize "demands" is a dumb idea. Stop . Actually pay attention. And get to the real work. "Demands" isn't part of that.

"ultimately, you are not in a position and nobody is to brainstorm up mere demands. demands are stupid and infantile. complaints and then problem defintions and then detailed problem solutions are great. that requires time and homework to generate, not bong hits and then a brainstormed imagine yourself as emperor of the world Scrawl. this kind of thing does not help the movement, it just gives the powers that be ammo against us and prevents meaningful conversations which have depth or open source research and problem solving because you and everyone else imagines we can just skip all the steps and churn out "demands." Listen to the other people in the movement who are wisely saying NO to demands lists. I have demands, they are to the movement itself- thats where the real game is.

"Would you rather have war in this land? Do not confront me work with me...Civil unrest could very well lead to civil war... This list will prevent civil war.... Infantile, we are all infants in conciseness, which explains your poor choice of words.... You should be telling me how to make the list better not how it will never work."

? gawdoftruth (Santa Barbara, CA) 1 points 0 seconds ago

no, you need to drop making lists of demands. period. until you do open source research and science centered problem solving with other people, you have nothing to say worth repeating. your brain storming in ignorance. it sounds really really awesome to you- but for many people your tone def. Making demands is itself a sign of infantilism. period. Take responsibility and start working the problems in a deep and real way. I should not have to run through this further with you. This is a ludicrous sense of direction, it is not helping the movement and its not useful or meaningful for long term strategy in fact all it is is a giant set of red rings to give the pundits a clear target.

I don't want war. how i stop the war is to work the problems in a deep way and address the war. Not make demands. I'm an adult, not a seven year old, not a hostage taker, not a terrorist. I don't make demands, i communicate evolutionary truths. If ten thousand people follow my example we can have an evolution. If you run around like a bunch of punk alpha dominant azzholes, i promise you, all of your demands will lead to nothing but scorn and alienation.

but i can expect that we will find good solid means to that end instead of self sabotaging means to that end. Change your communication strategy. These are main political issues which you find to be critical. Now ask people to join you in reasearching them and working on these problems open source. You think you have the end product. instead you have a starting point. remove the "demands" from "demands" and replace with "these are the issues i want to discuss which seem critical to me." There you go. Thats the real process. "Demands " is itself what big Bruddah wants precisely because that makes us the ones holding wall street hostage. Domestic terrorism even when called non violent is still in essence domestic terrorism. Terrorists issue demands. Evolutionary patriots form think tanks."

http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/OccupyThisWiki:About

[-] 2 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"we know where we are going, and i know how to get there." . . . but . . . "until you do open source research and science centered problem solving with other people, you have nothing to say worth repeating."

See a problem between those two statements? What about in this one:

"no, you need to drop making lists of demands. period" Sounds like a demand to me. Maybe avoiding demands isn't as easy as saying it.

gawdoftruth, I appreciate that you're on fire about this Movement. It's a good thing. But maybe also good to cool off and stand back, often, for perspective. To think things through.

This very Movement stands as a kind of demand: the System has ignored us for too long; PAY ATTENTION to us, or ignore us at your peril! Making demands doesn't necessarily imply hostility or anti-love. The parent demands that the child not run out into traffic. More to the point for OWS, if we find someone raping our loved one, we don't even bother making demands, we enforce them without bothering to utter them first.

The rape of the 99% by the 1% is only metaphorical (and happens gradually over decades) but is no less harmful, and no less appropriate for demands. Yes, we should love the people of the 1%, but I think we're right to make demands of the System by which they exploit us.

[-] -2 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

again, i think its ludicrous to make demands, for a large variety of reasons, not the least of which is that they don't care, making demands abdicates our responsibility back to them, and "demands" are terrorist tools. Again, what we need is long term deep problem solving, not demands, we need real solutions, not demands. Making demands is simply intellectual lazyness, running away from the actual problem solving process, and the actual work, so again, i state, making demands is idiotic, useless, pointless, counter productive, and self defeating.

[-] 2 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

I've been having a fairly extensive dialogue on this question with RedJazz43 on this thread: http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-this-is-our-movement-what-is-our-message/#comment-415854, where I've fleshed out much of what I would say in response to you.

On your particular points, you make a number of accusations (but don't offer much to back them up or explain. I'll address a few, briefly.

"its ludicrous to make demands, for a large variety of reasons, not the least of which is that they don't care"

I've addressed this point elsewhere on this page, in response to someone else. It doesn't matter if they don't care, demands are not requests, and well-chosen demands should be enforceable, with sufficient movement-building behind them. I've proposed a key Demand (see the 2 posts starting here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-this-is-our-movement-what-is-our-message/#comment-413404 ) of getting money out of electoral and legislative politics, which is already supported by most Americans. Because it is, it can be framed as the Corporatocracy (or whatever) against The People, and be made very hard to resist, tho resistance (from Wall Street) would be fierce.

"making demands abdicates our responsibility back to them"

I addressed that point at length in this post (and one or two others): http://occupywallst.org/forum/if-this-is-our-movement-what-is-our-message/#comment-423402

"demands" are terrorist tools"

If someone makes demands as part of committing terrorism, then his demands are terrorist tools. If someone makes demands while pushing against oppression on behalf of dignity and autonomy, then those demands are terrorist tools. The thing about tools is, they can be used for lots of different things by different people. A hammer used by a terrorist isn't a terrorist hammer, it's just a hammer.

"what we need is long term deep problem solving, not demands, we need real solutions, not demands."

Problem solving toward real solutions doesn't necessarily conflict with making demands -- making and enforcing demands can very well be indispensable parts of a solution.

"Making demands is simply intellectual lazyness, running away from the actual problem. . ."

Honestly, I don't understand your thinking well enough to comment usefully. But elsewhere on this page I have discussed the case for the importance making a certain Demand, and following it thru effectively, for the future of the Movement. Before you reply, I suggest you read them. K?

[-] -1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

honestly, you are being pointlessly obtuse and meaninglessly driving on a stupid argument. I keep trying to be nice about this it apepars i am making a mistake. Demands are stupid, infantile, and pointless, period. end of discussion. Clearly you don't understand what the real alternatives are because you can't manage to answer that or respond to it. You are part of the problem, not part of the solution, because you can't be bothered to fucking listen to the thousands of voices who have sanely admonished against "demands." you are sucking up time and energy from people trying to get REAL adult work done. Excuse me. You imbecile half troll. The ADULTS are trying to GET SOMETHING DONE, and you aren't one of them, so please go play games somewhere at your mental level and quit imagining you have anything meaningful to say to address the rest of us.

A "Demand" is typically a sentence or three paragraphs long. A Solution is going to be hundreds of pages. Clearly the obvious difference here is in quantity and style of content. For every so called moronic demand you might make, ADULTS have to pin down the DETAILS of what that would entail. You are asking us to leave those details back up to the oligarchs, instead of taking responsibility for creating those details ourselves. Stop being a thick fucking useless tool and pwn and part of the problem, and start listening to what other people are actually saying instead of bullishly promoting your fucking stupid agenda.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

Your very "serious" and "adult" rant of insults and errors might seem embarrassing if you read it in a calm moment. If you decide to delete it, I'll delete this message. But if you're comfortable with it, I'm fine with that too.

A couple of small points:

"You are asking us to leave those details back up to the oligarchs, instead of taking responsibility for creating those details ourselves."

No. And I didn't say anything whatsoever to suggest such a thing. "Listening", you say?

"A "Demand" is typically a sentence or three paragraphs long. A Solution is going to be hundreds of pages. Clearly the obvious difference here is in quantity and style of content."

Try this:

PROBLEM: The Corporatocracy owns and operates the government for its own benefit -- and a magnificently rich benefit it is!

SOLUTION: Remove from the government the channels by which the Corporatocracy pumps money into the System, effectively breaking the unity of corporate sector and government.

DEMAND: The elimination of donation-driven elections (Campaign Finance Reform) and lobbying.

If you think about it, the Solution (one sentence, not hundreds of pages) and the Demand can be put in practically the same language.

Now, you may think of that [corporate control of government] as not your concern (you have bigger fish to fry, perhaps?). But it is very much a concern of the majority of Americans, most of whom support what they take OWS' goals to be.

[-] -1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

its hard to believe your still going. "demand" is still 1. asking evil overlords for favors. 2. Not a specific list of details. 3. Not going to make any headway with 98 percent of the population until its got those details. 4. is open to distortion for being too simple, 5. Abdicates responsibility for those details to the evil overlords, instead of taking that responsibility ourselves. 6. Puts us in the position of being terrorists, not problem solvers.

Corporate control of government is a concern of mine, which is why i take actually solving the problems instead of shooting ourselves in the ass with demands to be an idiotic, imbecilic fucktard move, esp once its been explained, multiple times.

Stop running around in BS circles.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

Why does the OWC have the symbol of the fist as it's logo,if it isn't making demands? Why did it occupy a park and protest, if it isn't making demands?

We the citizens of the United States have every right to make demands when the government , as is, is laced with corruption. Isn't this supposed to be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

again, its not about your rights, its about the INFANTILE way of approaching the problem with a TEMPER TANTRUM versus the ADULT way of approaching the problem as problems and solutions and as teaching opportunities.

http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Assorted_Calls_for_%22Demands%22

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

So tell me, gawdoftruth,"where are your evolutionary truths" ? You said nothing in your text but try to quiet me. I have freedom of speech, which would be denied in your forum, Go ahead what are your ideas? I don't want war either, but I see where the powers that be are vulnerable, and I plan on spreading that word. It is still a free country isn't it? I want the corporations to sit up and take notice and help the American people. I do not want to put them out of business. However, too many children are going to bed hungry in this country, and I'm going to try and do everything I can so that it doesn't continue. The only reason you have spent so much time attacking me is that you realize the validity of my ideas, and it scares you.

[-] 0 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

freedom of speech would not be denied on the wiki and there is more room for diversity of thought there than there is here. However all freedoms come attached to responsibilities, several of which many people like to imagine don't exist.

There is nothing valid about "demands", nothing valid about the assorted dumble down nonsense which people like you are spewing.

http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Main_Page

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

So you "are" saying that freedom of speech is denied in this forum? I should go to wiki. You have no message, all you can do is insult. Which, reminds me very much of the heartless right wing faction in this country, which I know is deeply entrenched in this movement. When you see me, gawdoftruth, you better have enough guts to come up to me, and show me who you are! Although, I seriously doubt that you do have enough guts to do that.

[-] 0 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

duh. Freedom of speech is denied in this forum. You haven't been paying attention. In fact i am the one actually arguing with content, and in fact all you have here is a contentless long winded ad hom.

Gutless, pathetic BS. I love it when morons like you project their own shit and thus accidentally confess.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

This web site is in the USA. I have freedom of speech.

You come see me tomorrow, and call me a moron to my face OK. I know you don't have the guts. You are one of the insiders in my city.

This is one of the "insiders," one of the ones who know me and they wouldn't know who I was if they were not an "insider". The people running this movement are not into freedom of speech and what the US Constitution grants us.

So I ask, who the hell is behind OWS and why has the left given their time to a movement that would deny free speech?

Hey, all of my brothers and sisters, on the left, who believe in saving our country, we need to start a new movement, now!

[-] 0 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 8 years ago

i have better things to do than come "see" you. since i don't know or care where you are, that is doubly ludicrous. But it wouldn't bother me one bit to call you a moron to your face, Since I'm a martial artist expert.

http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Assorted_Calls_for_%22Demands%22

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 8 years ago

Remember what Marshall McLuhan said................The Medium is the Message".

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I hate to admit it but sometimes I'm kind of lame. What do you mean by that?

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 8 years ago

no problem. do a search on mcluhan.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

What are your top 10?

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I listed them in another comment. I believe it's somewhere above this. I actually wrote 12 but when I posted it , it came out in two lists of 6 each numbered 1-6.

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 8 years ago

How about this - no fealty to Grover Norquist. We will work to unseat every politician who signs onto his pledge to protect the monied few from taxes.

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 8 years ago

I got your back cmt

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

To get them out of the USA - - they are being identified as domestic enemies of the United States. See more info at:

http://reclaimearth.blogspot.com

They just want to bankrupt the United States. These bastards work for the british (i.e. most of them are lawyers and they took an israeli oath (secret one) called "kol nidre" and join the BAR = British Accredited Registry) because the USA has been a british colony on paper since 1917. See http://reclaimearth.blogspot.com for more. Some of the info from the link are shown below:

http://tinyurl.com/2ds553d – - info links about the oath and the BAR

http://tinyurl.com/3e26dfx ("USA is a british colony" - - more info can be found by googling / youtubing )

A must see video w/ facts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0BUGSrkvTM&feature=related

They use corporations to run the USA, there are no real "Constitutional Republic" governments. Here they are w/ their filings in the state of Delaware:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. Non-profit Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 4/19/89 File No. 2193946 (USA Corporation...disguised as Federal Gov't - - using a fraudulent constitution.)

INTERNAL REVENUE TAX AND AUDIT SERVICE (IRS) For Profit General Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 7/12/33 File No. 0325720

FEDERAL RESERVE ASSOCIATION (Federal Reserve) Non-profit Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 9/13/14 File No. 0042817

CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AUTHORITY INC. (CIA) For Profit General Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date 3/9/83 File No. 2004409

SOCIAL SECURITY CORP, DEPT. OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE For-Profit General Delaware Corporation Incorporation Date: 11/13/89 File No. 2213135

etc… The following video will show you facts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0BUGSrkvTM&feature=related

That's why they are being sued: The lawsuit that could end the gangster rule of Western civilization - November 24th, 201

http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/benjaminfulford/2011/11/the-lawsuit-that-could-end-the-gangster-rule-of-western-civilization.html

[-] -1 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

You don't have a fucking message, don't you get it? Stop looking for it, it's not there. There's no message in collective anger. It's a pointless effort. It's like reaching into bucket that has 1000 complaint cards, and trying to pull one out that everyone is going to agree on. Can't happen.

[-] 2 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

A message isn't the same as a cause or purpose. The cause is clear enough, isn't it? I case you've failed to notice, here:

Especially since the start of the Reagan era standard measures of the economic well-being of most people have remained stagnant, while those for the elite levels (the 1%, and much more the 1/10%) have skyrocketed, multiplied. Together with that trend has Washington has become increasingly responsive to the Corporatocracy and the wealthy elite -- a trend which, unsurprisingly, corresponds to the growth of the role of money in politics.

Legislation passed under Congress' extreme bias toward the interests of the very top of the socioeconomic pyramid has resulted in more power and wealth for the powerful and wealthy, and more misery and insecurity for almost everyone. But it has also resulted in the erosion of environmental protections, worker safety, public works & services, safety-net provisions and many other public goods. It has resulted in opportunistic "wars of choice" sold to the public (for large profits!) by agents of the corporate sector. And . . .

The deregulation of the financial services/banking industry, leading to the crash (totally predictable and widely predicted, and avoidable) -- and to bailouts for the crooked and unethical powers that caused it, along with severe punishment for innocent tens and hundreds of millions (say nothing of crashes that rippled around the world from the Washington epicenter).

That's a too-brief summary of the Cause. Most people understand it without needing to have it explained to them. Can it be reduced to a simple sound-bite "message"? Or even a "fucking message", as you like? I don't know.

But it's not a fault of the Movement if it can't.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

These are issues that are corrupting our democracy. I believe an educated person can see the validity of these issues.

I actually think that you are the one without the message.

[-] -1 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

Really? There's corruption? Wow, I never would have thought. Newsflash, you can't eliminate corruption (Google "cigarette handouts votes"). At the same time, you need to stop trying to destroy the entire system for that corruption. For starters, stop using the 99% analogy. You do not represent 99%. Second, stop persecuting your so called 1%. It's wrong, and generalizing. As soon as you generalize, your purpose is not valid. Period.

[-] 2 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

Compare:

A. "It's like reaching into bucket that has 1000 complaint cards, and trying to pull one out that everyone is going to agree on." [The charge: too much specificity.]

and

B. "As soon as you generalize, your purpose is not valid."

That's called "trying to have it both ways". Or a "kitchen-sink argument". Typically, that kind of argumentation involves throwing anything you can against one's target, mindless of falsehood or contradiction. The point is not to reason, not to work toward refining or improving ideas (one's own or anyone else's), but to attack.

It seems to me, hunter, that your comments are essentially expressions of distaste for the Movement, dressed up with intellectual content in order to fit in. I say that because your sentiments are perfectly clear, but your thinking is not. Your ideas (contradictory and factually wrong) can't possibly be, as a whole, your reasons for expressing them.

Also, you said: ". . . . you need to stop trying to destroy the entire system for that corruption"

I don't know how you arrived that as an adequate (or accurate) synopsis of the Movement's purpose, but I am sure that you didn't arrive at it thru a sincere effort to find out.

Fyi, both specific/concrete thought and general/abstract thought are indispensable. Too much of one or the other can be dysfunctional, yes, but that's not a point of your criticisms. Think about it.

Sorry to harsh on you, but you did ask for it.

[-] -1 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

"....expressions of distaste for the Movement". Yes, did you finally get that?

"I don't know how you arrived that as an adequate (or accurate) synopsis of the Movement's purpose, but I am sure that you didn't arrive at it thru a sincere effort to find out. "

I have tried to search for your movement's purpose, and it has taken me into too many different directions. If your mission statement, your business plan, your "manifest" (whatever you want to call it) can't be summarized and made clear on page 1, then it's a lost cause. Any time spent listening to someone who knows business can tell you that. That's why the "fat cats" on Wall Street are laughing at you. You can't be taken serious.

[-] 2 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

""....expressions of distaste for the Movement". Yes, did you finally get that?"

The word you omitted just before that quotation was "essentially". You should have included it (and the rest of the sentence). My point was that your arguments were transparently insincere. Get that?

"If your mission statement, your business plan, your "manifest" (whatever you want to call it) can't be summarized and made clear on page 1, then it's a lost cause. Any time spent listening to someone who knows business can tell you that."

OWS isn't anything like a business, and I consider that a good thing. Unlike the Tea Party (which has been run much more like a business), OWS is a genuinely spontaneous grassroots uprising, organizing itself as it goes. You might ask why it's exploded so rapidly and widely, without corporate money and propaganda to organize and drive it. Can you think of a good (i.e. true) answer? It shouldn't require speculation; people have been waiting for it for years. (My immediate response wasn't "what do they want?", but "what took so long?")

"That's why the "fat cats" on Wall Street are laughing at you. You can't be taken serious."

They laugh because they want you to think the Movement is laughable. And they want to convince themselves. But consider how they're scrambling to do opposition research on people within the Movement, spinning millions of dollars to develop a media strategy and propaganda tools to discredit the movement.

They're laughing because they're scared.

[-] -1 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

Fact, no they are not. Those that think they are are fucking stupid. Nobody is scared of this movement, except the demoncratic candidates who can't keep track of the issues they will be running on in the future. In the past, it was easy to bribe the public into voting for them. Now, they aren't going to know where to turn for their bribe.

Republicans, on the other hand, will be doing what they always do. Run on principle, not bribes.

Hold onto your handouts, 25%, you are about to understand what it's like to EARN.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

If you can't/won't contribute something constructive or useful, at least don't try to make trouble. Enough time wasted. Goodbye

[-] -1 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

Not contrinuting anything constructive? I'm telling you facts. Wouldn't you want to know what your opposition actually thinks? Believing that they are scared is ignorant and stupid. If you actually took the time to sit down and listen to people, you MIGHT know what they are actually thinking. Assuming that they are scared tells me that you are just arrogant, which is the single biggest flaw in debate. Arrogance will get you no where. Your so called "Wall Street" is the complete opposite. They aren't arrogant, otherwise they wouldn't be in the position that they are in. Sorry to see you go. I didn't know you were so weak. Maybe the reality was too much for you.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

This OWC movement doesn't represent the 99%, either. In my experience with this movement it's more like the insiders are representing the right.

Also, if the 1% are the ones holding the power, then I am trying to get them to help in whatever way I can. If they don't want to do it voluntarily then I guess we have to do it other ways. I'm hear to tell you that we hold the power because 70% of the US economy is driven by consumer spending. We built their businesses by shoppiing and we can take them out of business by not shopping.

You say you, can't eliminate corruption? You just roll over and take it, like we did when Bush stole the election or should I say when Bush was given it by the Supreme court? I think most of the American people would agree that we need free and fair elections. We need to get big money out of politics and put it into our schools instead. We need to get rid of the voting machines that can be compromised. I believe most of the people in this country would agree to that.

[-] 0 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

Believing that most people agree with you is your first mistake.

You are absoluting right, going back to hand written voting proceedures and finger counting is a much safer means to slant the system in your general direction, fucking idiot. We also need to get rid of aliens, men in black, and we've GOT to find the 2nd and 3rd shooters in the Kennedy assasination.

We are all dumber for listening to what you just said. If I were you, I'd put your tin foil hat back on, and keep all radio waves out of your house. Fucking idiot.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

I have no question in my mind about "who" is running this site.

I have never heard a person coming from the left, ever, be so disgusting! Most people that I have met , who are liberal are kind. Why don't you go back to the tea party or the Republicans, cause you're definitely not one of us!

bluedoghunter, You are a fowl mouthed, heartless and classless member of the human race.

You have no good ideas, all you can do is be insulting.

[-] 0 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

Being fowl mouthed is much more admirable then relaying false statistics and falsee informatno to prove a point. It makes you and your party sound STUPID. When you're ready to stop distorting the truth about America, we are all ears.

[-] 1 points by Innervision (180) 8 years ago

You said: " it makes you and your "party" look stupid". Well, I guess I was right, you're not one of us so why don't you go back to the other insulting people in your party.

No one needs to wonder why there is so much bullying in our schools. What kind of example are you, and many conservatives setting, by your constant insults?

[-] 0 points by bluedoghunter (3) 8 years ago

Typicaly liberal response, jumping from one issue to another, using no facts, and sterotyping.

[-] -1 points by bre0001 (50) from Brooklyn, NY 8 years ago

They can't get there and they won't. After two months of crapping and pissing on the sidewalks, you still don't know what you want. Great fucking movement morons.

Don't you get it by now that you're just a bunch of lemmings being played with by Democraps?

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

We don't know it because it's spectacularly untrue.

Moderator . . .?

[-] 0 points by bre0001 (50) from Brooklyn, NY 8 years ago

Moderator? Mommy? What's the matter, if somone doesn't have your beliefs, you want them censored? Ahole.

[-] 1 points by MalCalder (70) from San Francisco, CA 8 years ago

"What's the matter, if somone doesn't have your beliefs, you want them censored?"

Answer: not at all. And since I didn't say anything to suggest that I wish censorship for ideas contrary to my own, an obvious question is: how did you come to that very wrong conclusion? It's not very good reading you practice, I'm afraid.

You insult the mirror.