Forum Post: If you believe OWS needs to stick to "no demands" and "no organization"
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 22, 2011, 2:41 p.m. EST by hairlessOrphan
(522)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
...I won't disagree with you. I know you have reasons for it.
I just want you to also recognize that there is a cost.
First, you are shrugging off the responsibility of defining what your issues are. If you let everyone else define what your problem is, you will have to live with whatever narrative takes hold. Whether that is anti-semitism, or libertarianism, or polytheism, or whatever, you have to live with it.
Second, you are shrugging off the responsibility of defining what is an acceptable solution. If you let everyone else decide how to solve your problem, you will have to live with their solution. Whatever that is.
Third, you are shrugging off the responsibility of defining who you are. "The 99%" isn't a definition, it's a symbol. So you will own the image the world imposes on you. Whether that's as idealistic freedom fighters, or revolutionary socialists, or psychotic anti-semites. You will have to own it.
You have no ability to disown these things. As loud as any individual one of you may cry out against it, no voice - individually or in any combination - has the recognized legitimacy to speak for the movement.
Ok, so let's roll the dice. Good luck, my friends.
I agree. Without issuing a list of demands, #OWS can stand for anything or it can stand for nothing, depending how outside observers or participants, for that matter, perceive it to be. The organizers of #OWS may think it is clever or even transcendent to disdain and reject the issuance of firm demands, but the lack thereof unfortunately may mean nothing gets accomplished in a practical sense. Certainly, there are a number of positive positions that can be delineated and adopted with broad support by the group as a whole. Focused energy with a defined message is superior than unfocused energy without a defined message if the intent is to improve the lot of a vast majority of Americans. In other words, unharnessed energy without stated objectives is impressive as far as it goes, but harnessed energy with stated objectives is much more effective and powerful.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
As you state, yes, we require a consensus on issues, solutions, direction, and goals. But how to properly determine this consensus? Are we not the 99%? Step back from our corporatocracy and practice a new, truer, grass roots Democracy by implementing a Purple Finger Vote within Occupy.
Develop a series of survey-style ballots within the General Assembly; distribute them online and on the ground; ink the fingers of all those who mobilize to participate to ensure no one may vote more than once.
Envision the mass image of a multitude of purple fingers raised together in solidarity and solution. Re-work the angry, black-fisted logo with a single, purple finger rising, and add wristbands with Stars & Stripes, Union Jacks, City Flags, etc.
Mobilize maximum numbers out of their homes into the streets for bi-monthly polling, to bouy support as winter drives some Occupiers indoors. Let's be counted. Let's develop a harmonious, resonate voice. Thoughts?
My opinion: OWS should study how things get accomplished in 12 step groups and adapt those guidelines for organization in the movement.
12 step groups use some very simple principles to remain leaderless and loosely organized while at the same time having a structure that lets them accomplish great things and make decisions that reflect the "group conscience" without get bogged down discussing trivial points for hours & hours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Traditions
I don't think OWS needs "demands" per se, but they do need a platform of issues that describes what we stand for and intend to fight for.
Doesn't have to be a huge all-encompassing list, but we should pick a couple of issues to work on first.
We have a difficult task, an awesome duty to awaken people; startle them without scaring them. We need a non-divisive, internally consistent, easily discernible and relate-able narrative. Our one goal, as I believe that is all we can afford without division, needs to be: Amend the Constitution for government ONLY financing of elections, no contributions, from anyone; rendering Citizens United a moot point. It’s the only piece of this that resonates with the anti-establishment left, the anti-establishment right and everyone in between, including many of those who make 350k+. Sure It’s great to make that kind of money but that doesn't mean you want to spend it on some one's (or even your own) campaign. There, your tiny breath will be drowned by the deafening wind of the mega-corps, the uber-unions, and by treacherous and selfish interests of all types, to the detriment of society. This is the banner under which we can unite, indeed must unite. We must amend, then we can debate what kind of society we want, which policies, parties, or politicians, or ideologies to endorse. Until democracy is unleashed and the republic restored there is no way forward. The pulse of this movement endlessly uniting and growing, immune to their false discourse will so tremble those who cannot be won, they will proactively try to appease us. Won't that be nice? They will try to buy our petty differences and desires, preying anew on the weary and the wavering. But we, the proud children of a free nation will not be appeased by half measures, promises and lies. We want what we deserve, that which is ours by moral right, paid for by the spirit of our martyrs, a meaningful say in the matters that properly concern us.
Why would you think that the members at the NYC General Assembly are qualified to define the movement for everyone? In the first place, to get consensus on a specific demand, they will need unanimity. Since you can never be sure that every interested party is at the GA this is impossible. Not to mention the fact that true unanimity would require every person on earth not just in NY.
I think the movement serves the 99% best by simply providing education. This site is a great example of that. Since I began following this movement, I have learned so many things. For example, I have a better understanding of the Citizen's United verdict, and the Glass-Steagle act.
Also, for the first time in my life, I now know how money is created. I am 40 years old and can literally say I never had a clue. It literally never crossed my mind to even wonder about it. If you are not sure you know either, check out the following paper on macro economics and monetary theory,
http://mosler2012.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/7deadly.pdf
and a pretty funny video critical of the FED.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGk5ioEXlIM&feature=related
Another way that this movement can serve the 99% is by encouraging specific economic activity. For example, if you have any money in a commercial bank you really should consider moving it to a credit union.
Two notes:
1) I don't think NYCGA is qualified to do anything. In fact, my entire point is that, as of right now, no one is qualified to do anything. That is the cost.
2) No offense meant at all, because I know the world is full of information, and we all have to make choices about what we learn and when. But if you're 40 years old and only now understanding the financial system, and your first exposure to macroeconomics is Austrian School propaganda, my only advice to you - well-meaning advice, whether you give me the benefit of the doubt or not - is "never buy from the first salesman who rings your doorbell."
Thanks for the advice. I try to read every side on every issue, so to be clear I am under no impression that either of the links I put up are the entire story.
I put the first one up because it offers some basic facts about money and government. For example, the government's supply of money cannot run out since the government will never be denied a request for money from the central bank. Another is that the national debt is essentially a measure of all the money in circulation and in savings. To pay the debt off would require all the money there is. The facts are facts, the guy's opinion is not my interest.
I put the second one up since I thought is was funny. It is a pretty extreme perspective for sure, and I am not sold on it entirely. Nonetheless, I do find it strange that something as powerful as the agency that supplies the monetary supply is so well protected from oversight.
I see the collective consciousness defining energy of the movement. It is what it is and THAT is great!!!!
I agree that is great.
But there is also a cost.
That's all I'm saying.
MIAMI (CBSMiami.com) – Florida is touting the new jobs it created Friday after a positive unemployment report. But based on numbers from all W-2’s filed in the country, the wages simply aren’t keeping up.
According to the Social Security Administration, 50 percent of U.S. workers made less than $26,364 in 2010. In addition, those making less than $200,000, or 99 percent of Americans, saw their earnings fall by $4.5 billion collectively.
The sobering numbers were a far cry from what was going on for the richest one percent of Americans.
The incomes of the top one percent of the wage scale in the U.S. rose in 2010; and their collective wage earnings jumped by $120 billion.
In addition, those earning at least $1 million a year in wages, which is roughly 93,000 Americans, reported payroll income jumped 22 percent from 2009.
Overall, the economy has shed 5.2 million jobs since the start of the Great Recession in 2007. It’s the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the 1930’s.
I need to take 3 days off for work. Keep up the protest.
Income inequality isn't a cause. It's a symptom.
If you let the outside world define the cause of the problem, and they decide the the cause of income inequality is too much regulation, you will have to abide by it. If they decide the the cause is too much taxation of "job creators," or too many social programs, or not enough social programs, or not enough lobbying, or too many Jews, or not enough White Power, or not enough drilling and fracking, you will have to abide by it.
They don't need an plan outright but they should at least start with some goals everyone can agree on like overturning Citizens United (corporate personhood). Accomplish one thing and then go on to another, step by step.
Volumes of dialogue and Youtube videos have been wonderful. I think the 1% are awakening from their self-serving dream. The 1% must change the system because they now know the opposition is overwhelming against them. They've been caught with their hand in the cookie jar and now it's time to come clean....I'm optimistic while knowing this grassroots movement is fragile.
I'm sorry but idealism aside, I don't expect people that knowingly exploit the general population on a regular basis to stop because of "volumes of dialogue and Youtube videos" that have helped OWS or because of "[overwhelming] opposition". So long as they're making bank, they will continue to do so.
Yes, I agree. There are consequences to continue the status quo, one, that history shows, is a revolution. I believe the 99% will prevail.
Agreed, and I particularly like the statement -- if you let everyone else decide how to solve your problem, you will have to live with their solution -- so perhaps you would consider our group's proposal of an alternative online direct democracy of government and business at http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo , hit the facebook “like” button if agreed, and then join our group's 20 members committed to that plan at http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/ Why? Because our group recognizes no central authority, and like the internet itself, is as varied and distributed in its solutions as it is 4.600 Home Town Banks of 65,000 Bank Owner-Voters, and therein as 48 Business Investment Groups as Business Owner-Voters, at the Online Business, Industry, Town, County, State, National, and International Congressional Levels -- from the small-business-bottom-up, not the big-business-top-down. Given such a vast decentralization of individual decision-making over Individual Business Assets, this allows a vast order of magnitude greater competition and innovation as "new" small business owners than today's ineffective and inefficient Top 1% Management System of Business & Government, agreed?