Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Intellectual foundation?

Posted 2 years ago on Oct. 5, 2011, 7:32 p.m. EST by wavefreak58 (134)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Once one goes beyond the palpable sense of injustice invoked by the widening wealth disparity of the 1% vs 99%, I'm having difficulty seeing any solid foundation of reason.

It is quite easy to be angry. I find a visceral reaction to the rapaciousness of corporate greed easy to muster. But answering the current economic paradigm with something quantitatively just and fair seems a much more daunting task.

Where is the intellectual core of this movement to be found? What vision drives this? Tear it down and replace it with what?

23 Comments

23 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 2 years ago

thats something we need to create together fer sure. I'm going to answer- lets get us all to sociology and game theory and systems theory textbooks.

[-] 1 points by eric1 (152) from Corona, CA 2 years ago
[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

Were such a Constitutional Convention convened, what would prevent those currently gaming the system from gaming the Convention? The flaw in such a draconian action is that you cannot control who comes to the table. Can you imagine the frenzy of lobbying that would be unleashed if a Constitutional Convention actually happened?

[-] 1 points by eric1 (152) from Corona, CA 2 years ago

First of all, one must remember that all a Convention does is propose amendments and any amendment coming out of a Convention HAS to be approved by 3/4 of the state legislatures or state Conventions. Moreover, a Convention is a state driven process and is designed for when the federal government itself becomes dysfunctional, which it is now and has been for some time.

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

Even as a state driven process, I can see it easily being appropriated by the very same forces that have hobbled the effectiveness of the federal government.

[-] 1 points by eric1 (152) from Corona, CA 2 years ago

True to some degree, but given the dire financial positions of most states I believe the time is ripe for action at the state level.

[-] 1 points by iseeamuse (155) 2 years ago

The theories for a solution have not yet had a proper forum for discussion within this movement. And so all that can feasibly be done now is make a list of the problems that the movement is taking issue with. From there we can determine how these problems are connected, and how we can "solve for pattern." Come up with a solution that can answer all of these problems without making new ones.

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

I suppose it is that forum I am looking for. I am quite interested in the events unfolding. But I, as of yet, see little more than an expression of moral outrage. I'm not so sure the Tea Party was really any different in it's nascent stages. But it was quickly appropriated and it's voice hollowed out by the very things it disdained.

[-] 1 points by mwagshol (120) from Seattle, WA 2 years ago

We do need to get that forum made- do you have any ideas or want assistance in getting it created? I posted a thread with some ideas on how to build this intellectual foundation- let me know what you think. I am ready and willing to put my time, energy, and heart into working on this...

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

I haven't the technical skills nor financial where-with-all to offer much. The nature of the movement in and of itself is problematic. Usually productive discussion requires moderators, but injecting moderators is a constraint that can limit openness. The downside to full openness is the type of vitriolic name calling and self-promotion of lunatic fringe ideas that infect many of the backwaters of the internet.

These events have a crowd sourced, distributed processing feel to them. The organic, unstructured nature is part of the appeal.

I would think some form of peer to peer system for the dissemination of ideas and information would be true to the spirit. And also more robust. If it comes to a point where agents in the circles of power would take action against such a movement, a peer to peer system would be much harder to take down. I'm not sure if such a system even exists.

[-] 1 points by mwagshol (120) from Seattle, WA 2 years ago

This is the sort of thing we need a technical team to be thinking of and working on. We must use the tool of the internet to create the desperately needed foundation. I also wish I had the programming expertise that is necessary, but it appears that some combination of the forms that are out there would be incredibly beneficial.

We need the creation of a platform that represents the complex and diverse nature of the movement while actually aiding in its understanding through discussion, sources, thought, analysis, and overall involvement.

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

I'm wondering if a peer to peer model could be an effective platform for the General Assemblies type of dynamic as described in the PDF posted in this forum under the title "Interesting PDF on group dynamics from the General Assembly" This description of arriving at consensus lacks a tightly controlled center and ideas flow in and out from many sources. This has a structural similarity to nodes in a distributed system.

Individuals could occupy a node in the system. Ideas would be passed between the nodes, ranked by and commented on by individuals. Ideas that take root would gain a larger presence in the system, through overall activity and rankings. If someone doesn't like an idea, they remove it from their node or lower its ranking.The consensus would emerge from the activity of the the entire network. Action could be taken when a particular threshold of consensus is reached.

Higher level nodes would be required to aggregate information and track rankings and activity. Sort of a distributed Wiki thingy.

Yeah. Sort of out there, conceptually. I'm just free associating.

[-] 1 points by mwagshol (120) from Seattle, WA 2 years ago

I really like your ideas, with my largest concern being to ensure that all of these discussions and peer sharing would be connected with verifiable sources and analysis (maybe having sources add to rankings?)- which sounds very possible within your general idea.

Perhaps we could work together on forming a post calling for help from programmers or web developers with the necessary skills to build the concept we are forming. Then we can discuss the possibilities and limitations and hopefully make something happen.

Interested?

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

Sure. I'm interested. I am a terrible person for the organizing/project management type stuff. But I'm willing to take part in the early stages and see where it goes. There's tons of computing power out there now that our desktops are gathering dust because we live on our smart phones and tablets.

[-] 1 points by mwagshol (120) from Seattle, WA 2 years ago

I need to take a break from this for a bit now, so shoot me an e-mail at mwagshol@gmail.com

Then, maybe I can work on putting together a post that would express our concept and call for help. So feel free to send me any additional details or comments on your concept. I'm very new to this type of thing too, but I think we have to give it a shot. This sort of foundation is desperately needed and as soon as possible..

[-] 1 points by pariscommune (205) 2 years ago

obviosuly if there was that they wouldnt be discussing all day in the general assembly lol. the drive comes from experience, not theory.

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

If you are suggesting that intellect can only provide theory then you have already lost the battle.

Any effective movement must have some foundation based in clear thinking. It is called civilization for a reason. Else why not run around smashing windows and burning cars?

[-] 1 points by pariscommune (205) 2 years ago

theory is a matter of intellect, thats what im suggesting. if the poster is asking for the "intellectual core" he wants to know about theories. i try to phrase it differently: this movement does not have agreement on the solution to shit at this point, but it has agreement on shit going wrong. about the civilization notion: why would you go around smashing windows and burning cars? do you feel like it? i mean if it was totally ok would it be your hobby?

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

Yes. Shit is going on.

It seems that a lot of old questions are being raised yet again. What will this iteration of the ancient struggle between justice and unrestrained self interest bring us?

I'm watching with interest. But I am not one to follow a crowd, even when I think there is some truth in the outcry. The emotion of a moment can start something. But it is the shape of what is finally birthed that endures.

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

The first video is nothing but a mash up of sepia toned images and ominous catch phrases.No intellect required.

A visually maudlin appeal to emotion.It wasn't inspiring enough to even look at the second. What separates this from the crap foisted upon us by mainstream media?

[-] 1 points by Lifestream (85) from Milan, IL 2 years ago

Figure it out if you're too ignorant not too that's your problem and discussions between us will be meaningless.

[-] 1 points by wavefreak58 (134) 2 years ago

Have it your way.

90 seconds of slickly produced video carries little weight with me. It is functionally equivalent to a Republican political ad. Substitute a waving flag, Michelle Bachmann and her favorite diatribes and you have the very same thing.