Forum Post: Mobilizing the latent support of millions of Americans requires a transformation in OWS

The literally millions of people on the sidelines waiting to see what happens might join Occupy if there is a clear victory and growing sense of purposeful power.

We have a lot of support, but without clear demands it is hard for that support to be mobilized, beyond donations for tents and food. Demands are important, as most community organizers will explain, because success comes from the other side meeting your demands. And success breeds future success; so far our movement is snowballing because just showing up is a success, the 99% meme is a success, and changing the national debate is a success.

But if Occupy simply melts in the snow, then what happens next? Some cynics on the sidelines predict that as the honeymoon period wears off, and we are no longer simply excited at the mere fact that we showed up together for the first time in over a decade, we will find our frustrations mount. The cold rains will fall, in-fighting will increase, paranoia will strike, people will drift home for the holidays, and only a few stalwarts will stay put.

Occupy as a movement is currently not capable of making a specific demand - the mechanism of the general assembly limits true engagement, and creates an environment where differences are submerged for lack of appropriate forums for authentic debate. A "last man standing" decision making structure (i.e., the general assembly, in which only the most stubborn have influence) coupled with an opaque "facilitation" team (i.e., hard to hold accountable leadership structure) is actually anti-democratic in effect. A more tried and true democratic practice is a spokes-council approach. Will a shift occur? This news is encouraging: http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-wall-street-adopts-spokes-council/

The adoption of a spokes-council creates the basis for real engagement, and demonstrates that OWS is still young and nimble and that there is not a lock-in, the initial conditions of Occupy have not determined its fate. The adoption of a spokes council procedural process is a step towards accountability and transparency in our own movement and that can bring increased coherence and further evolution of OWS. Our movement ought to contain the seeds of the world we hope to create.

For example, it would be awesome of Occupy Boston, LA, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. could all send representatives to Occupy Wall Street to work together to discuss shared concerns and possible demands, and could then relay this work back to their various cities for further debate and discussions, back and forth through accountable feedback chains. However the very notion of using "representatives" is seen as antithetical by some activists, and so would never be approved by the consensus of the GA. This is the feared "lock-in" - can we move beyond it?

I firmly believe that OWS is just scratching the surface and I am hopeful that as we grow and learn together, we are catalyzing ever widening circle of engagement. From thousands, to hundreds of thousands, to millions. Literally millions of Americans, and millions more across the planet, are watching unsure of what is happening but feeling something shift -- if this latency is to become manifest, then OWS will need to help provide the clarity of focus.

Otherwise, what happens next?