Forum Post: ONE DEMAND!?! It seems like only spam and trolls exist here
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 12, 2011, 12:59 a.m. EST by RobEliakimJanos
(15)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
If we would consolidate discussions within threads that already exist, and patiently and compassionately hear eachother out, there might be progress. But I guess everyone thinks they are smarter than everyone else, and Thier solution is the only solution. How about a legitimate ONE DEMAND. How about patient democratic process on the forums instead if shouting your ideas at every one else's. Be more ready to hear than to speak. Organize the threads, or there will be no progress, only reposts if last week's discussion. The discussion should be ONE DEMAND TO CENTRALIZE THE MOVEMENT. Otherwise this is a joke, and will grow old. Don't respond with lists. Respond with singular ideas. I propose the central point should be that we have a government that is only: OUR RESOURCES PULLED TOGETHER TO BENEFIT US AS WE CHOOSE. the simplest definition of a democratic government. Before we discuss means, and the goals accomplished after that, can we agree, or discuss, that idea?
This forum is beat. I hear there might be a new one coming. Let's hope it is a big improvement.
Occupytogether.org is more organized. NOT SAYING ANYTHING BUT THAT.
I hope so ...
I do kinda like the wild random nature of these forums but a more structured one would be nice. =)
They certainly are wild, and I feel wild for posting in them. I live in a small town (I would be too embarrassed to stand with the 12 people that have started protesting after work on main street) No need to create order here, people are just letting it all hang out and you can easily move on to avoid trolls, and to avoid becoming one. I'm borderline I think. I type too fast for my own good.
Here you go.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-central-message-we-need/
It speaks to all factions base principle gripes about corruption in government. If enacted, it would open the government and the general field of popular debate up to our up-till-now marginalized ideas, which have been overridden by the corporate and institutional interests whose corruption these ideological adversaries have camped out and been beaten and arrested for.
Seconded.
Same thing I just said. Count votes, not money. Direct democracy. Different words same goal. So three of us agree. WE WANT A DEMOCRACY WHERE VOTES COUNT, NOT MONEY. THE GOV IS NO MORE THAN OUR TAXES USED TO BENEFIT US AS WE CHOOSE. we have three people in unity, well maybe 4. ;) spread this. Keep the wording simple. It will be a fire.
Well, by direct democracy, do you mean a society wherein all laws are voted on by mass consensus of the people, or do you mean simply legitimate democracy in our elections?
Just keep where and when to go protest 'loud and clear' and the rest will take care of itself...
End the bought government and too big to fail seem to be the two most prevalent messages
Legalization of marijuana under the condition that 30-45% of all revenue be given to authorities to combat methamphetamine, cocaine, and heroine addiction.
seems like a bunch of crybabies that made a buch of bad decisions to spend 50,000 dollars on college
Unity.
I share your concern for the confusion a lack of clear demands poses the movement. The concerns/problems/issues/corruption that is spoken out against all has one common thread that I think would make a solid and broad sound-bite, while also encompassing every major issue mentioned here and on the other Occupy_ sites:
END THE UNSUSTAINABLE.
The inequitable influence of money upon our democracy is unsustainable. The concentration of our nation's wealth to fewer and fewer individuals is unsustainable. The unchecked and under-regulated greed of Wall Street is unsustainable. The subsidies given to Big Agro, Big Oil, and Big Pharma are unsustainable. The rising cost of healthcare for average Americans is unsustainable. The abuse of our natural resources in unsustainable. The low tax rate for capitol gains is unsustainable. The complexity of our tax code breeds loopholes which are unsustainable. The application of human rights to corporations is unsustainable.
The list goes on and on. We do so much that is unsustainable in this country, is it any wonder we are facing a crash?
The beauty of this demand is that it is self explanatory and impossible to refute. Something that is unsustainable must by its very definition come to an end. Why not end it now, before it gets any worse? We have perpetuated this fantasy that our actions carry no consequences, and now that they are all coming to a head we can choose to end them on our terms, or wait for the whole mess to crash down upon us. Taking a stand of meeting these blatantly unsustainable practices head on will have broad support.
I will agree that we do need better forums. These forums are terrible to navigate. and the posting and replying is hard to keep up with. I do like the notifications to replies though. That is very handy.
A more traditional forum would be better i think. With main topics posted by the "organizers" and such. One that has a polling system and such. We REALLY need one with a polling system.
So can anyone in a simple fashion simply agree that a true democracy would be a starting point? Where only votes count, not money? And every voice is as loud as every other? I can suggest means and ends all day, as we all can. But do we agree?
I agree completely.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/four-attainable-goals/
THOSE ARE decisions a democracy could vote on. Do you agree with the initial central point? If so respond, and spread it. If not, respond why.
I do not believe in a central demand. We are the voice of the people. Every person reflects their core ideology. Every core ideology is different. We believe in a just, and constitutional government. We dream of a sustainable economy. We will achieve these goals. Mark my words.
This forum is for people at home, typing on their computers.
The Occupy Wall Street movement is on the street, talking to one another. They don't need forums.
Protect property and lives is the lowest common denominator you are likely to get among so many people. Not as in protect corporate interests but as in prevent corporations and con men from using the law as a weapon to disenfranchise the middle class by siphoning off their property and wealth to wasteful ends. I don't care about one demand, I think its kind of a stupid stunt actually even though I am excited that other people feel as frustrated as I do and wish the protesters well.
I would like to be able to assign blame where it is deserved instead of remaining in a state of vague paranoia that the republic is about to fail dramatically.
The feeds are kind of neat. I would take this with a grain of salt because while I am mad this seems to be a safe place to lash out and hear other people. Some ideas I find appealing and some I reject. Some are pointlessly offensive and ignorant but that it us. That is America in some profound way. American democracy has always involved a great deal of vulgarity.
Acknowledgement that our system is outdated, and then a controlled movement towards a resource based economy.
the demand?
END CORRUPTION
Remove the corruption in our government and close the doors to keep it from happening again. That is a demand that 99% of people would likely to be in favor of.
Any demand that would not be embraced by all Americans (liberal AND conservative) will not work and will end up causing dissension in the movement.
Ending corruption is going to be a big enough challenge as it is. That is what we should focus on.
Thats what I said. A direct democracy, where votes, not money count. and government is only a means of us accomplishing our goals with our tax money, not a singular entity that makes decisions on its own and can take bribes. So you agree?
No. I'm sorry, but not with what you just wrote there. I'm against a direct democracy because I worry about the tyranny of the majority. I'm okay with a republic provided we have checks and balances in place to avoid corruption.
restore tax rate on the rich under Bill Clinton and exempt payroll tax on first 20K income.
RobEliakimJanos, are you suggesting that government control every aspect of the means of production, to redistribute any and all resources as it sees fit?
I'm saying we need direct democratic control over the government. By "resources" I am refering to tax money, not a broad government control over everything. (All a government should be is a means of accomplishing our goals as a community. )
Term limits, salary reductions(elimate politics as a profession), no coporate or special interest group lobbying or donations to candidates. Only U.S. citizens should be allowed to donate to candidates, and amount should be capped. Equal free air time for candidates. Take the money out of politics. Make it a job.
tax cuts for middle class modernize roads and bridges invest in middle class not banking class by raising minimum wage thats the oocupy wall street message
Um, that was tried once already recently. We were promised shovel ready jobs. What happened? We have to get our public servants working for us again. Then there will be money available and accountable for exactly that.
what happen you ever heard of the tea party
What? Now you wanna blame the tea party? That money went to the people your protesting, isn't that what this is? The tea party did not do that. This movement has more in common with the tea party then either side wants to admit.
the republicans have demonized the movement but democracts have done nothing but support so read the signs that there holding and listen or watch real news not fox
Sigh .Any movememt gets demonized by either side. That is how they keep the populace fighting amongst themselves. They don't want us to realize it's not us, it's them(politicians).
The only reason Dems support, because it diverts attention. Same goes with the Repubs.
Seems to me that you are full of division. BOTH parties are corrupt!
stop trying to divide ows has never supported a republican policy and never will
Ows, if successful, will lead to an uncorrupted democracy. Noone yet knows who the people will vote for, or what that candidate will call themself. What we are looking for is someone who will create a means of direct voting on issues, not just candidates: I hope.
tax cuts for middle class modernize roads and bridges invest in middle class not banking class by raising minimum wage thats the occupy wall street message
abolish money
Imagine.
Not practical. Bartering doesn't work when you have perishable goods, and intangible services. Also, our civilization is too advanced with too many specialized jobs and careers. unless you want a complete socialism, not practical. And even then we would not be ready for that without a dictatorship.
with abundance (modern machinery) bartering & hoarding is unnecessary. Half the ppl in U$A work at unnecessary jobs.
Yes, this is becoming a joke that's getting old because this is a protest movement that doesn't stand for anything except for protesting. What's bringing people together right now is the illusion that "the 99%" are united in solidarity. But they're only united when they don't get specific. As soon as you start talking about specifics, nobody agrees on anything. The sad truth is that as soon as you pick an issue and a position on that issue, you're going to alienate people.
Its Ok not to agree on everything. If we did we would so stifled as a free people. I like that there is no agenda, it makes the whole thing that much more appealing. I like that I can express solidarity here with ideas I agree with and that I can also reject ideas here. America will always be a place where people are free to disagree. American democracy is messy, always has been. What makes the difference between messy and civil war though is the ability to hear people you don't agree with and reach sustainable consensus. Its not like TEA party activists are any more eloquent as they hold up Obama posters with swastikas and shout things like "you lie" and "you aren't an American." A significant number of people feel like they are not being heard. No one at the top of the food chain seems to be listening as they continue to bicker amongst themselves. What do you expect people to do? We have a responsibility to to take action when things aren't right. Fixing it is a rather abstract idea for most of us because most of what is wrong is deliberately hidden from view or filtered through a narrative that has already been written.
The only thing 99% represents is a dramatic income divide. This divide highlights the presence of moral and legal corruption among us. This isn't academic, bad things are happening to us because of the greed that helped create that divide.
This frustration doesn't need to be built into a new party platform to be fairly responded to. Congress could have a revelation that they are supposed to be working together to solve our problems right now instead of day after day of meaningless grandstanding.
Nothing happening here so far has amounted to "action". If you want to take action, then select core issues, establish positions on those issues, and focus on electing candidates to represent your positions. That's how democracy works. The Tea Party understands this, but you can see from the comments on this post that people here generally don't get it yet. Unless they do, this will be academic, yes.
When the federal government was recently almost shut down over a dispute over raising the debt ceiling, that appeared to you like it was meaningless grandstanding. But actually that was the Tea Party getting what they wanted, after successfully electing candidates who made government more responsive to their concerns. Their big concern is spiraling federal debt, and big government. They succeeded in bringing those issues to the forefront, and they twisted Obama's arm to get what they were looking for. They didn't get 100% of what they were looking for, but they did get what they were looking for. Not getting 100% of what you're looking for is a natural outcome of the democratic process when it's working correctly, because as you said people disagree. Democracy is a system for arbitrating disagreement and creating compromise.
This idiotic consensus fantasy that I'm seeing from the videos of the general assemblies all over the country are a really misguided distraction from the work of participating in democracy in order to achieve a more responsive government. I'm talking about the thing where people are repeating the speakers' words in unison and pretending like that establishes consensus. That doesn't establish a unanimous consensus, and pretending that it does isn't going to help anybody.
I don't have time to create a platform, I go to work in 3 hours. I hate the Tea party and wouldn't join any group that behaved as beastly as they have in the last two years. That isn't the system I want to be a part of, you are asking people to deliberately co-opt themselves into a system they are trying to say is broken and corrupt. You are acting like you have all the answers. Try listening instead. The problems we all face are real, not academic.
Anyway I feel like we got Obama elected and since he most strongly represents my views even among other democrats I should be very pleased according to you. Mission accomplished and I am very pleased with one senator from my state and marginally pleased with the other. My Rep is a TEA partier. I didn't vote for him. I still expect him to recognize that he represents a district where he won by 2 percentage points and that he does have constituents that don't agree with him. I'm not happy because there are people gaming the process for profit and throwing up roadblocks to National success for selfish and petty reasons.
I didn't say that anybody should behave like Tea Partiers, I'm suggesting that people should participate in the democratic process like they know how to do, instead of fantasizing about utopia. When you complain about the system but then refuse to participate in it, you guarantee that it will all remain academic, not real.
Did you vote in the 2010 mid-term elections?
Yes. Lets just say my voting for a one rep and one senator is not the thrilling end all be all of my democratic experience. The senators don't even have proportional representation so a senator elected by 18 million people has the same vote as a senator from say Wyoming which only has 250,000 people.
The democratic process is more expansive than voting. Civil disobedience, Moral Suasion, Free Speech are all part of the American tradition and our right as Americans. MLK statue being unveiled this week. How far do you think this celebrated American hero would have gotten by quietly voting?
Fair point, but here's another: none of it would amounted to anything if the civil rights movement hadn't successfully mobilized the vote. Protesting all by itself won't change anything.
We get it, you don't think this will work. Thanks for telling us. Again. If it's so hopeless then don't participate.
Naysayers... always trying to drag someone down to their level.
That is absolutely not what I'm saying. I'm pointing out that it CAN work. You CAN change your government and make it more responsive to your concerns, if you participate effectively in the process. The Tea Party is proof.
Democratic process has it's place. Your problem is that you're trying to preach partisan politics to a non-partisan group which is a completely different beast than the Tea Party.
Furthermore, I'm a bit amazed that you've managed to be this active on the boards, but still so ignorant. Repeating the speaker doesn't establish consensus, where did you get such an absurd notion? Protesters aren't allowed to use amplification equipment so when someone speaks to the group, those around repeat the message so everyone can hear. It's call the People's Mic. It has nothing to do with consensus. I saw a main stream media report FINALLY outlining this and other basic hand signals we use yesterday. Congrats, you've managed to lag behind even them.
Educate yourself.
I guess I've been overwhelmed by the sheer ridiculousness of people applauding with hand signals that I didn't get the part about the "People's Mic". I can assure you that I'm not going to be the only one who will see it that way. I don't watch television but I'm pretty sure that Fox News is going to have a field day with video of people repeating the speaker's words like zombies and applauding with hand signals.
You mean the American sign language for silent applause? Why is that ridiculous? We used to do that at camp.
Ridiculousness? It's efficient. Furthermore, it works extremely well.
What this conversation tells me is you actually have no idea what you're bashing about this movement. Why don't you go actually spend some physical time (as in off your computer, in the flesh) with your local Occupy protest before you jump to conclusions?
Educate yourself.
I watched a video tonight of my local Occupy protest, where there was a group of people too small to require amplification, repeating a speaker word-for-word like zombies as he talked about the AFL-CIO, demanded $25/hr jobs for all (all of my employees get pay cuts?) and after that I stopped watching.
Regardless of whether you think it's "efficient", people are going to use it against you because it's easy to make it appear to be very ridiculous no matter what it's really about.
I'm just going to stop pointing out the glaring issues with what your saying. You've making yourself look silly.
Educate yourself.
I did make an effort tonight to educate myself about the local Occupy protest, and I came away from it shaking my head in dismay. Kind of like the overall effect that this web site is having on me.
Agree!
Wow, tech, we agree on something!
Yes, this is a rebel movement, not a revolutionary movement.
Rebels oppose things. Revolutionaries propose things.
Then let's give them a productivity, so there is something to build on the ruins. Do you agree on the central point of the first post?
No. I think you should propose the one solution that will do the most improvement in society, not that will get you the most popular.
Stand for what is right and then convince others of your idea.
I do indeed think that I agree with your eloquent characterization.
The only thing that this movement really seems to stand for is an "us-verus-them" mentality. The idea that all of "our" problems are "their" fault.
But there isn't necessarily consensus on who "they" are. Some people stick to the line that the enemy is the wealthiest 1% of the American population. Others think that it's Wall Street investment banks. Others think that it's the Fed. Others think that it's corporations in general.
It is anyone who uses or let's money decide policy, instead of votes. We need a system that allows direct feedback from voters on issues, instead of direct feedback from corporations on issues. Count votes, not money, on all decisions. DEMOCRACY. agree?
Yes I agree, and that's why I keep trying to point out how vital it is for the people in this movement to participate in democracy.
tax cuts for middle class modernize roads and bridges invest in middle class not banking class by raising minimum wage thats the oocupy wall sreet message
There has been no conclusive consensus to say that that is the message. I don't even recall all of that as part of the list if grievances. Do you agree with the central point though? Direct, uncorrupted democracy as the one demand that will fix all the other issues?
the demands would not be on the street
if we had a government that represents the people
from the start ows has been democratic and all republicans do is demonize the movement you are not ows stop the fox spin