Forum Post: Why OWS is not getting the support & participation it needs to succeed.
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 26, 2011, 9:14 p.m. EST by username2011
(59)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Occupy Wall Street is one of the most important and necessary movements in the history of our nation. Unfortunately, it is playing right into the hands of the corporate-controlled media and their campaign to diminish its credibility. Images of drum circles, revolutionary slogans, goofy street theatrics, cliche protest chants from the 60s - and the absence of a focused, succinctly articulated message - are like rocket fuel for the corporate spin machine. The well financed forces of corruption and greed are doing an excellent job of portraying OWS as a bunch of disheveled, disorganized, delusional extremists and wackos, and OWS appears to be doing little to counter that image. Although the organizers obviously cannot control the words and actions of all participants, they CAN and SHOULD articulate a more succinct, mainstream message that will attract a more politically and ideologically diverse base of supporters.
Progressives alone cannot win this battle. The Goliath that we face is too powerful, too deeply entrenched, too well-financed, brutal and devious to be conquered by anything less than a significant majority of Americans. If we are going to gain the kind of widespread, mainstream support that will be needed to clean up such deeply rooted corruption, this movement must present a more grounded, coherent, mainstream image, and it must focus its message on a few core issues that resonate with a LARGE MAJORITY of citizens.
Despite our other ideological differences, there is one common goal around which we can unite massive numbers from the left, right and center: We must take our democracy back from the lobbyists, campaign donors, partisan gangsters and other well financed special interests, and return true political power to the people (the 99%). If we put this single issue at the forefront of the movement - focusing first on purging the corruption, money and influence peddling from our political system - we can amass the overwhelming majority support needed to achieve real change. Once such reforms have been accomplished, we can argue our other ideological and political differences on a level playing field where the diverse voices of ordinary citizens can once again be heard. If, however, OWS becomes stereotyped as strictly a left wing movement, nothing will ever change. We will remain a divided nation with a corrupt, divided government that accomplishes nothing. The left and the right will continue to throw rocks at each other in front of TV cameras while the corrupt power brokers make their backroom deals and continue to steal from all who are too distracted by their own ideological bickering to notice.
It is time for Occupy Wall Street to join forces with frustrated citizens from the center and the right in creating create one massive, unstoppable movement to get money and influence peddling out of our political process. While this may only be one of many societal wrongs that need to be righted, it is by far the most urgent first step. Let's not blow this critical opportunity for change by ignoring or alienating huge numbers of potential supporters just because we might not agree with them on other issues. If we really expect to wrestle the power from the corrupt and the powerful, we're going to need all the help we can get. It's time to get realistic and reach out to a broader base of Americans.
OWS is already considerably more politically mature than progressive movement that have preceeded it in the last 40 years. Unlike the student movement of the 60s, very early on OWS built a solid relationship with organized labor. It has also helped to reinvigorate the student movement and has been a valuable ally to many other social movements from the anti-tar sand movement to the stop stop and frisk movement.
In terms of reaching out to the right, I'm not sure what that means and the right seems to be mean spirited and not especially in favor of any social program that would in fact benefit the vast majority.
I couldn't disagree more with the first part of your comment. The OWS movement is a joke right now and the original post outlines it very well.
I keep saying this over and over again, even the people that support the OWS movement hardly know what it is about. They keep trying to push their own political agenda into the mix and muddy the water. It's time for a leader to emerge and the focus and true goal of the OWS to be drilled into the brains of the sheeple. Until that happens the OWS movement will never move foreword and accomplish anything.
I certainly think that the vast majority of people on this forum who say they support OWS don't really seem to know what it's about, but I don't think that is the case at the occupations. For most people (though not everyone) 24 hours at an occupation really is a life changing experience. I'm 68 years old. I've been around left wing social movements since 1964 and OWS, in my experience is the most politically mature progressive movement I've seen in my lifetime.
Part of the ethos of OWS is that everybody is responsible for themselves. It puts a very high value on personal autonomy, so naturally people will have the space to express their own views.
In terms of leadership, we are all leaders. That's what personal autonomy and personal responsibility are all about. Different people rise to leadership positions in different contexts depending on the need. Occupiers need to be fed, somebody rises to the occasion of organizing a kitchen. Occupiers need warm cloths. Somebody rises to the occasion of organizing a group to supply cloths. People organize teach ins. Others organize demonstrations. Somebody organizes a library. Everybody rises to fulfill a need and exert leadership where it is needed.
In terms of accomplishing anything it has already changed the nature and content of public discourse in the nation. It has forged the first alliance between organized labor and the radical left since the 1940s. It has re-energized an American left and already accomplished many things while still barely in its infancy as a social movement.
We have a leader. We have thousands of leaders. Each and every one of us is the leader. We all have different reasons for being here.
Can we pass laws demanding business and Corporations be ethical and moral? Not likely. They already think they are. If we chose a leader, that person will be shot at best. More likely they will be used to pigeon hole us into an agenda that we don't stand for.
The media will find "one leader" easier to dismiss and vilify. The success so far that we have reached, is due to the thousands of leaders that we have (even the uninformed idiots out there who make us look stupid). You do not have to be a college graduate to be here. You don't have to be a doctor. You don't have to be a homeless person. You don't have to be a hippie. All are welcome. We even welcome a 1% who spontaneously gains a conscience and decides to reform and comes down to get advice on how to run a fair and just business.
What do we want? What you want is what we want. As long as the "you" is really the thousands who are protesting. We want the thousand things that fit under the label: Fair, just, ethical, moral, kind, concerned. A thousand demands is the very reason we need to Not have a leader. We lead ourselves. We each are asking for a change to make our world better. Some of us are better at getting our points across. The mass media will focus on the ones who are not so good at sounding intelligent. Either way, we are being heard and change will happen. This is spreading. World wide.
OWS and #the 99% movement have the benefit of hindsight; lessons learned from all activist movements that have proceeded it: the civil rights movement, the anti-war (Vietnam) movement, womens lib, gay lib, the environmental movement, etc. I believe that public sentiment will come to rest on the side of #OWS and the 99% movement. Momentum is ours. And remember this: America loves an underdog. The more pepper spraying that occurs, the more peaceful protesters are poked and clubbed with night sticks and dragged along the ground, the more that people of the world will see who the righteous truly are in this cause. ~ Thunderclap
You're right about OWS's accomplishments so far. The movement deserves a lot of credit for these things. The main points I'm trying to make are:
If a fire was spreading through your neighborhood, and all of the firemen in town were too busy drinking and playing poker to respond, would you prohibit the neighbors you don't like from bringing hoses and shovels onto your property? As far as the right being "mean-spirited," many of them are. Especially the pundits and attack dogs of the right wing media. But that's no more representative of ALL conservatives than the idea that all liberals are nutty professors, potheads, slackers and misfits. If we allow such stereotypes on either side to cloud our vision, close our minds and shut us off to new possibilities, we will never advance beyond the name-calling, food fights, schoolyard cliques and cronyism that continue to plague so many humans of all ages and paralyze our society.
The crisis is not jest a crisis of democracy. That is a symptom. The real crisis is a fundamental crisis in capitalism, in the way the entire society is organized, and I am not just referring to the US, but the entire world. OWS, after all resonated not just in the US but all over the world It is the same crisis everywhere: the maldistribution of wealth upwards and the virtual disappearance of the middle class everywhere.
A crisis of such boundless limits is not to be solved by changing whomever happens to be in office or legislation or even Constitutional amendements. It suggests changes ad broad and comprehensive and as different as contemporary society is from medieval Europe. It is a process that will take at least years, probably decades and perhaps several lifetimes.
With regard to liberalism, both conservatives and for that matter most TV commentators can't seem to think beyond liberalism and when they do they tend to conflate liberalism with political tendencies to the left of liberalism. In fact, liberalism is a centerist political doctrine, not at all a leftist doctrine. Only in the US would somebody like NancyPelosi be considered of the left. On the other hand she's not exactly a liberal either--perhaps a corporate liberal.
A lot of trade unionists have conservative political views, but there is also a lot of congnitive dissonance in terms of ideology vs. behavior and somebody with articulated conservative political views may not act at all conservatively on a picket line.
Interesting points, especially re: the issues of human/societal behavior that go much deeper than politics, and the cognitive dissonance between ideology & behavior. Lots to think about here. I do feel that it's worth trying to address the more immediate issues to whatever extent possible, however, despite the existence of deeper, underlying forces.
I don't believe that capitalism itself is the basic root of the problem (not sure if that is what you meant?). It is more about human behavior & psychology. The scoundrels, thieves and bullies have always managed to make their way to the top of every system.
Nostrums and incremental reforms might actually end up strengthening an essentially untenable system, making a systemic crisis, when it comes, all the more drastic. One of the best examples of this are the regulatory agencies, virtually all of which are captive of the very industries they are supposedly charged to regulate.
That doesn't mean that OWS has nothing to do. Indeed it has a lot to do, but ironically history suggests that an attitude of intransigent opposition actually does more to foster the institution of real reforms than does "working within the system," which, by definition, starts with a compromise. I'm not suggesting that OWS go off and do absolutely kooky things that alienate everyone. Quite the contrary, but its greatest successes are in working in solidarity with other social movements at their most militant. For example unions involved in strikes or recognition struggles or the recent Tar sands demo, which I think was much more effective than any lobbying or supporting any candidate might have been.
I'm not suggesting that OWS should never consider organizing in the electoral arena or running someone for office, but I think it is way, way too premature to think about that. Once we have 10 or 20 million people in the streets and active in GAs on a daily or at least weekly basis, will be time enough to begin thinking about working in the electoral arena. Before that we would be faced too much with being co-opted by the Democrats, the grave yard of every mass movement since the Populists, or going off into the irrelevancy of some so called third party campaign.
In many respects we are already a party. We are doing everything that a real progressive party ought to do except run candidates and it is perfectly appropriate for us not to run candidates until we are in a position to seriously contend for power at whatever level we choose to run.
Part of the problem is that the parties of the 1% have basically so constrained political activity that they have convinced the American public that the ONLY role for a political party is to run candidates whereas, historically, the opposite is the case. It is not that parties ought not run candidates for public office, but rather, in a truely democratic society, running candidates is among the least important of the many important things a political party does, especially a mass party of the people. A genuine mass party of the people ought to be much more than a mere electoral machine. It should be the organizing center for a new society, which is exactly what OWS is.
Your first paragraph above makes an excellent point re: the danger of accidentally strengthening an untenable system, and your example of the regulatory agencies hits that nail on the head. I do not mean to imply that running candidates and other within-the-system strategies are the only (or even the most effective) ways of achieving the necessary changes. I would love to see many millions of people peacefully assembled at well-organized marches/rallies in Washington and elsewhere to articulate clear goals and demand specific reforms. I'm just afraid that, unless we start by focusing on specific, widely-held principles and goals that will motivate moderates and conservatives to unite with us, we will always have fewer people in attendance than a Justin Bieber concert, and we will never have anywhere near the numbers needed to tackle the incredibly powerful and tenacious beast of corruption. This is the one issue that is so egregious, so destructive and so offensive to almost everyone that it can unite extraordinary numbers of people across political and ideological lines. And there are many other issues that cannot be effectively addressed by any means until this problem is tackled.
Structurally there is really no difference between Washington and Wall Street. They are really just two different aspects of the same corporate state. Logistically there is a great deal of difference. You could put a quarter of a million people on the Washington Mall on a work day and no one would notice. It would be business as usual. In contrast one tenth that number in lower Manhattan would bring commerce to a screeching halt.
To me the real project of the movement is to do what Naomi Klein, Chris Hedges and Michael Moore all say that it should be doing: Keep on keeping on. After all it is only weeks old. In the matter of a few weeks it has managed to organize more people than the experienced professional organizers in the labor movement have been able to do in the last two decades. But it is still a tiny, tiny movement. So its main project remains to organize. Once there are 10 or 20 million people actively engaged in occupations then we can reasonably talk about a next stage. Before then it is premature and we would only be squandering our very limited human resources.
Agreed that organizing needs to be at the top of the to-do list. But don't you think we could organize a lot more people a lot faster if we focus squarely on this one gigantic issue that resonates deeply with people of all political/ideological persuasions? And could we not recruit a lot more support from a much broader base if we create a more organized, mainstream image?
Regardless of what you or I are for, no matter how passionately we feel about it. The concrete question is how do you move OWS in this or that direction. Frankly, I think most of the people with the very best intentions on this forum are dilletante kibbitzers without the foggiest idea how to do that, so it's really hard to take their ideas seriously in the absence of a program that outlines precisely how to move OWS in a particular direction, whether I like that direction or not.
Sounds logical to me
Love your conversation. The average American doesn't want to loose what little they have. They all want to be rich and they are afraid this movement will make that impossible for them. We will not get their support until they understand that we support the rich. We like the rich. We are here to get rid of the greed and corruption.
Without the help of the mass media, we are left with facebook interactions, blogs and neighborhood interactions for getting our message across. Again, this will take time, specifically because we are being painted as something other than what we are. We are average Americans fed up with being abused by some corporations. We want our government back.
Thank you!
And this I say to you, "you are a wise soul". Stay and write more. These things take time. The collective here is sad, down-trodden, angry, beaten, scared and fed up. Your words are like rain during a drought. Salve on a wound. Only time and wise words will help get us on a faster track to change. Yes. One leader could help this. Except. One leader will fail us faster. Our society ruled by the mass media will dismiss us once we have a single leader. I am afraid this movement needs time, to cause the effect of change needed, in this day and age.
While I agree that the corruption of money in our political process is an important issue, I don't think it truly is what will reach to a broader base of Americans. Ask the general public what they know about lobbying and money in politics, and a lot will not understand what you're talking about.
Right now I think that OWS has reached so many because it has been all-inclusive. Because it does not make a specific demand. People have been brought together by the growing realization that the system we live under is broken. They don't agree on how to fix it yet. That's alright, because the movement, as others have pointed out, is very young. I think if you make this your focus you will lose support instead of gaining it.
Is there image issues? Yes. But every social movement has suffered from image issues, and having the actions of a few cast bad light on the movement as a whole. And those very things being caught on by the opposition and claimed to be what the movement is about. (Women's Suffrage was particularly subjected to this in it's earliest days) Unfortunately, media is suffering it's own form of corruption and is not aiding in sending the true message. However, these image problems and radical elements have never stopped previous movements, and I feel that it won't stop OWS either.
"Ask the general public what they know about lobbying and money in politics, and a lot will not understand what you're talking about."
That's one of the reasons why we need to bring these issues to the forefront. Show the general public how they're being conned and cheated by a corrupt system and, hopefully, enough of them will get mad enough to help clean things up. But, if we're going to get anyone to listen and take us seriously, we have to have a more focused, credible image.
Occupy needs to go to the TV stations, surround them with their real message so they just can't miss it.
Stop letting them come to you. Glenn Beck is probably hiring his own actors and pretending they are the movement.
Take the movement to the TV stations, stand outside with signs with demands, concrete demands like 'hold Congress accountable for insider trading' and ' Stop Goldman Sachs from speculating- Wheat rose from $4 to $25 on speculation alone!"
This will make even republicans very angry, because everyone knows, above all else, Republicans like to hoard their money!
The media and the Republican party like to create their own reality, always have, now it's time for us to turn that bullshit on it's head!
This is what they are doing... "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." Karl Rove
The Occupy movement is the real news, and they know it, that is why they are continuing this parade of moronic republican candidates to distract.
While they are busy creating their own reality on the 'liberal' media this Sunday, Occupy can show up and surround Rockefeller center, block their cars, shout so loudly you disrupt that bullshit.
Those are our public airwaves. They have a duty to serve the public on our public airwaves. Clearly they are failing miserably and need to be held accountable.
OWS should represent all views. I happen to think that Communism is the only way to go. Look at China. They are doing well. 10% growth for 30 plus years straight. We gotta end capitalism.
China has a brutally oppressive government, and their fraudulent, corrupt economic system is already showing the cracks that will eventually cause it to crumble. Have you been paying attention? Were you even born yet when the tanks rolled into Tiananmen Square?
Updated protest chants
Newt and Mitt and all that shit!
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United corporations of the fed, and to the Profits for which they stand, one scam, above the law and government, unjust, with poverty and misery for all, but the 1%.
Houston we have a problem!
Your wecome!
Progressive tax rates, regulation of the financial sector and job creation (New Deal-style) need to be at the core of the OWS message. No need to pander to the right, the Dems are already doing that.
As for image and tactics, OWS needs some serious work. Violent imagery (including anarchist, thuggish or militaristic clothing and hints at riotous behavior), contempt for police, and even counter-culturalism should probably be discouraged.
I don't think the Occupy Movement has an image problem.
Who cares what a bunch of squares at Fox News think of us?
Anyway...
Direct Digital Democracy will be here sooner or later.
It's only a matter of time:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/approaching-a-metapolitical-discourse/
http://metapolitik.org/article/approaching-metapolitical-discourse
http://rebooting.personaldemocracy.com/
http://rebootingdemocracy.org/
http://rebooting.personaldemocracy.com/files/Rebooting_America.pdf
http://digital-democracy.org/
http://www.digitaldemocracy.org.uk/
http://www.rushkoff.com/open-source-democracy/
http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/10753/pg10753.html
"Who care what a bunch of squares at Fox News think of us?" That comment is so naive, insular, and short-sighted that I didn't even bother to click on your links. Do you have any idea how many people it will take to clean up the deeply-rooted corruption, graft and political-financial gangsterism that has been so many years in the making? If you really think that a small minority of reformers can win this battle without the widespread support of "average" Americans, I have a bridge to sell you.
Well I agree with you on what it's going to take to "clean up" the system.
But as long as the "average" American is glued to Faux News or believes any of the tripe that passes for journalism there, we are pretty much fucked as a country.
Thankfully, more and more people seem to be waking up.
"Faux News" Love it! Thanks for sharing that. Here's hoping that the big wakeup keeps expanding...
I saw posters about Canadian issues in the occupy in my university.
And I live in the US!
I wasn't allowed to take them out but it did frustrate me.
Every time an OWS whines about the wealthy, we look ignorant, jealous and petty. Please stop whining about the rich.
Every single one of us would love to be rich. This movement is not about leveling the rich down to be poor. The anger you are feeling right now, is not because someone else is rich (that is called jealousy). So stop. Think. Use your brain. Please, I beg you. I am embarrassed to be an OWS at this point and time because of all the whiners.
This movement is about how certain rich people make their money. At the expense of others. Rich person A, pays decent wages, gives good benefits (health insurance, retirement plans, vacation and sick days), is a steward of the planet and its resources. Rich person A deserves our support. Rich person A deserves their money. Every last penny. Please stop whining about Rich person A and support these people and let them in here.
We are here, Angry and Pissed off. Why? Because of Rich person B.
Who is Rich person B?
Rich person A also hates Rich person B
Rich persons B are greedy, corrupt, selfish, self centered, numb, uncaring, destructive, mean jerks. They make their millions by purposely not checking to making sure their employees are payed decent wages. By purposely not visiting the factories, to see that the work site is safe, just and fair.
They plunder the planet without care for the future. They rape the economy by not hiring full-time employees, and they do this on purpose to save a buck. They screw the little man or child by manipulating the government to do their bidding. Profit over people.
They yank a poisonous ingredient after protests break out, only to resubmit it under a different name labeled "natural" when no one is looking.
Rich person B is our target. Take them down. Take them all down. How? Peacefully. If you have the time to sit. Then by all means. Sit in a park. And thank you for doing so. Everyone else? Stop purchasing items from these assholes. Will you lose your job?
Yes, if you work at Walmart and they go under. Yes. Yes you will. Will it be worth the change? Only if you are concerned about the welfare of your grandchildren more than your own welfare. Only if a decent business starts up, in the gigantic opening in the market after Big Oil Companies go down. Only if there is room for the small business to expand and hire you at a decent rate with benefits. Only if we regard Rich person A as worth our support, so they can grow and hire us. We like working for Rich person A. We support them. We wish to be them.
I am here with OWS to protest the 1% and I realize you don't have to be a billionaire to be an asshole. If you are in business, practice justice.
The wealthiest Americans need to pay much higher taxes. This doesn't have to do with a "contempt" for rich people. A healthy society, and a healthy economy for that matter, can't have such a gap between rich and poor. When larger amounts of Americans (consumers) are struggling, there is insufficient demand (people don't buy stuff). Then as a result jobs are lost, and more demand is lost. America was doing best in the 1950s when top marginal tax rates on the wealthiest Americans were as high as 92%.
Tommy, you are correct. This is a belief that I have as well. I was venting about how many comments in the new, media in general and many of the forums around here that have people shouting about how rich people suck. A lot of rich people feel that the system is unjust right now and are afraid to join the movement because of the slurs towards people who are not poverty stricken. We need to tax the rich and set laws in place to govern the businesses. We should never expect businesses to just be nice. We have found out that a great many, will not.
OK I see. So what you're saying is that we should avoid rhetoric that villainizes the wealthy, and we should take care not to promote such sentiments. I would agree with that, although pointing out greed can be a fair and effective tool as long as its directed accurately.
And how do you go about determining whether somebody is an A or a B? I agree with the gist of what you're saying but I think you miss the point. The good rich and the bad rich are not good and bad because of the subjective reasons that you are talking about. They are good based on whether they make their money by providing services and goods that people actually want and pay wages that their workers are willing to take. The bad rich are bad when they bribe government officials to get special privileges i.e. McDonald's, GE etc. They are bad when the Federal Reserve prints money to create artificially low interest rates so that some corporations are able to speculate with our money. They are bad when regulations are in place that limit competition in the market and allow those on top to stay on top. Those are the bad rich. Every worker thinks they deserve more money and every employer would like to pay less. That's human nature. It's not greed. Is it greed for me to want to pay as little as possible for gas or groceries. No. The problem is theft. Theft through inflation and theft through government enforced monopolies and cartels.
I like your response. Intelligence is better than the slurs I have been reading, hearing and seeing in a lot of different places. Focusing on the real issues that you state is better than going off on how "it is so bad to be rich" and "if you are rich you must be bad". Being rich does not make you a bad person and we definitely need to make some big changes in our laws to keep businesses in line, because it is obvious, several of them will not self check.
Raychel & 99thpercentile: There is truth in both of your arguments and, within your somewhat differing views, some core principles that both of you (and all of us) can agree on (misplaced preposition notwithstanding). This is the kind of dialog we should be bringing to the forefront. Thank you for your thoughtful contributions.
Thank you for taking the time and consideration to share your thoughts with us. I like the dialog as well.
The responses between the two of you are a welcome bust of fresh air. In vilifying ALL the rich as if they are carbon copies of evil, we OFFEND and lose the respect of every single American citizen who knows and loves and respects (for good reasons) a whole lot of people who are "rich".
It is the ACT of destroying the reputations/lives/and businesses of GOOD people, along with those who are bad-that people recoil from. If you're that willing to hurt and bring down GOOD people just to get at the BAD people-what's to stop you or your movement from hurting and bringing down OTHER good people who aren't rich?
If you want the TRUST-and by association-the SUPPORT of the good, honest, sincere, and law abiding citizens of this country-you must earn it. By doing things the way THEY would do them. By being so similar to them in word and act that they identify YOU with THEMSELVES. Every single word/deed/act that draws a distinction between you and them makes them withdraw one more step.
It is human nature to resist-and resist FIRMLY-stepping outside our comfort zones. Most people won't do it at all. If you want to succeed, you need to MAKE them COMFORTABLE with you.
Amen! Thank you!
we should enlargen this movement and come up with 24 hours global activism date an annual holiday of activism globally ....
+25...Thank you for your post.
In general terms I do agree. The problem is that conservatives are easily swayed by the lies of the right, and quick to be divided on the basis of stereotype, and on the upper end of the economic scale are indebted to the very system of corruption that is in such dire need of destruction.
Good points. All true. However, I still believe that there is hope within certain grassroots constituencies (such as the more moderate elements of the Tea Party) to at least agree on some basic rules of integrity, honesty and fair play that are important to everyone, regardless of their individual political or ideological leanings. While such reforms will obviously not appeal to those at the top who benefit from the corruption and graft, there are middle-class and blue-collar conservatives who realize they are being screwed just like the rest of us. They are part of the 99% but may not want to affiliate with the movement at this stage because they perceive it as being strictly a far left effort.
well . . . . focus on the bushite tax breaks for the one percent. they should be on board with that.
o wait. you said that.
Just wondering: How many of us are willing to do the difficult, tedious work of figuring out practical solutions and negotiating with people we don't always agree with, and how many just want to indulge in histrionic, masturbatory tantrums like our politicians in Washington?
Interesting question. While we do need to create a large, well-organized, PEACEFUL presence "in the streets," we must be careful not to overemphasize theatrics and noise at the expense of hard work and practical, attainable solutions. You're right about the need to do a better job than those who have so thoroughly screwed up our democracy with their partisan gangsterism, childish spitball fights and posturing for the cameras.
There are a huge number of great, well thought out, COMPLICATED ideas that will require a huge amount of "selling" and explanation" and will garner GREAT OPPOSITION.
We need to be realistic & pick an issue that is simple - that is popular -
that 83% of Americans already agree on -
that 56% of TP already agree on -
that will bring together the people in OWS with the people outside of OWS.
Everybody wins!
Our only goal should be to pass a constitutional amendment to counter Supreme Court decisions Citizens United (2010) & Buckley v. Valeo (1976), that enable unlimited amounts of anonymous money to flood into our political system.
“Corporations and organizations are not a persons & have no personhood rights”
and
“money is not free speech”.
We don’t have to explain or persuade people to accept our position – we have to persuade them to ACT based on their own position. Pursuing this goal will prove to the world that we, at OWS, are a serious realistic Movement, with serious realistic goals. Achieving this goal will make virtually every other goal – jobs, taxes, infrastructure, Medicare – much easier to achieve –
by disarming our greatest enemy – GREED.
THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE AMENDING PROCESS The Prohibition movement started as a disjointed effort by conservative teetotalers who thought the consumption of alcohol was immoral. They ransacked saloons and garnered press coverage here and there for a few years. Then they began to gain support from the liberals because many considered alcohol partially responsible for spousal and child abuse, among other social ills. This odd alliance, after many years of failing to influence change consistently across jurisdictions, decided to concentrate on one issue nationally—a constitutional amendment. They pressured all politicians on every level to sign a pledge to support the amendment. Any who did not, they defeated easily at the ballot box since they controlled a huge number of liberal, and conservative and independent swing votes in every election. By being a single-issue constituency attacking from all sides of the political spectrum, they very quickly amassed enough votes (2/3) to pass the amendment in Congress. And, within just 17 months, they were successful in getting ¾ of the state legislatures to ratify the constitutional amendment into law. (Others were ratified even faster: Eight —took less than a year. The 26th, granting 18-year-olds the right to vote, took just three months and eight days.)
If they could tie the left and right into a success -
WHY CAN'T WE??????????
I feel that we should stay with this simple text to overturn CU:
”corporations are not people” and “money is not free speech”
for four simple reasons and one – not so simple:
1
83% of Americans have already opposed CU in the ABC/Washington post poll and the above
IS THEIR POSITION ALREADY.
2
We don’t have to work to convince people on the validity of our position.
3
Simple is almost always better.
4
This simple Amendment is REQUIRED to overturn CU.
And all other electoral reform can be passed through the normal legislative process.
5
OWS and these pages are chock full of ( mostly ) excellent ideas to improve our country.
All of them have strong advocates – and some have strong opposition.
None of them has been “pre-approved” by 83% of Americans !
Pursuing this goal – without additional specifics is exactly what Americans want.
What do we want? Look at that almost endless list of demands – goals - aims.
Tax the rich. End the Fed. Jobs for all, Medicare for all. So easy to state! Can you imagine how hard it would be to formulate a “sales pitch” for any of these to convince your Republican friends to vote for any of them?
83% of Americans have ALREADY “voted” against CU. And 76% of the Rs did too.
All we have to do ask Americans is to pressure their representatives – by letters - emails – petitions.
Wanna take your family on vacation?
Convince the 7 year old and the 10 year old to go to Mt Rushmore.
Then try to convince them to go to Disneyland.
Prioritizing this goal will introduce us to the world – not as a bunch of hippie radical anarchist socialist commie rabblerousers – but as a responsible, mature movement that is fighting for what America wants.
I feel that using the tactics of the NRA, the AARP an the TP – who all represent a minority – who have successfully used their voting power to achieve their minority goals - plus the Prohibition Amendment tactics – bringing all sides together - is a straight path for us to success that cannot fail to enable us to create and complete one MAJORITY task.
Join the Restore Democracy Working Group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NYCRDWG Plan details with supporting documentation found at: http://bit.ly/vK2pGI
Hear Hear! Money out of politics is the main issue!
Thanks! Check out Dylan Ratigan's petition also: http://www.dylanratigan.com/
Yes!!! We need to unite with those in the center and on the right who also feel that the corruption and manipulation of our government by lobbyists and other special interests is a dire emergency. If Bono & Rick Santorum could work together on aid to Africa, we can work with Tea Party supporters to clean up Washington! It is pointless to argue about other issues until the bribery and partisan gangsterism are purged from our political system.
Wrong, we do not need to unite with the right. The worst elements within OWS, the "END THE FED" libertarians have already brought anti-Semitism and violence to the movement.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/end-the-fed-movement-has-ties-to-domestic-terroris/
Roger Dee: It's great that OWS has articulate, level-headed voices like Jesse LaGreca, and that OWS has changed the national conversation...but that's only a start. Much more needs to be done to build a much broader base of support.
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Ego_Centered_Front_Burnerism-_Whats_wrong_with_putting_your_pet_issue_to_the_front_of_the_priority_list.
I agree that this is a core issue and that focus needs to happen and the movement needs to grow up and shape up and get organized. I do not agree that it should as a whole focus on this issue but would be happy to work with you to bring more attention to it.
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Issues_%2B_Political_Platform_Items
Occupying this will improve your image immediately. All the reasons are listed in detail. All you have to do is read the literature and occupy.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/something-to-think-about-part-2/
The Revolution starts here1
Huh???
Toshiba makes a lot of it's profit through warranty fraud. Who could agrue with us protesting them. Once we get good will, we go after others.
The problem with this is that the most extreme fringe already is a minority in the movement, it's the media coverage that is skewed to portray these as representing the whole movement. Go check out the protests for yourself, bongo banging hippies are standing next to working class americans, retirees, moms and dads, minorities, etc etc. If the news rejects the broad pan showing this in favor of zooming in on the fringe, nothing can be done but the slow slog of getting out the truth via you tube, keeping it up till people see that the media has an agenda.
I do agree that we need to do as much as possible to reach out to the center without doing anything amounting to shutting out the people on the further left who have a right to speak their mind too.
The Oakland general strike was a perfect example. There were a ton of hippies and very countercultural people there, not just in the press but in all the home videos on youtube as well.
I believe that the message should be from the center-left (ie. far to the left of Obama and Pelosi). The message should be presented using carefully planned non-violence (ie. Ghandi, MLK), and counter-culturalism should be discouraged. This was a major difference between the civil rights movement and the anti-Vietnam war movement. A political candidate or someone at a job interview wouldn't dress like a hippie, why should protestors dress that way?
Unfortunately, it is playing right into the hands of the corporate-controlled media and their campaign to diminish its credibility. Images of drum circles, revolutionary slogans, goofy street theatrics, cliche protest chants from the 60s - and the absence of a focused, well-articulated message - are like rocket fuel for the corporate spin machine.
I do agree with the first part of your statement, that stuff is really not helping.
The second part, the absence of an articulated message. I don't know. I think you're just repeated a media talking point here. There are articulate messages (like the 99% Declaration) if anyone cares to look. Furthermore it's a bit of a media fetish in and of itself. Where's the spin? Where's the PR release? This is how journalists, long used to regurgitating statements verbatim from PR departments, think. "You mean I actually have to report something? Screw that, I'm just going to play dumb and pretend I don't understand what they're saying."
The 99% declaration, at the time when I read it, was much too long & complex to appeal to a mass audience that has been trained to get their info from tweets, texts, 10-second soundbites, and other dumbed-down, impatient, overly simplistic means.
1) Try using paragraph breaks. makes it way easier to read. 2) Ever heard of Jesse LaGreca? 3) OWS has changed the national conversation, and transcended Political parties.
Tried using par. breaks but site kept formatting as one long paragraph. How do you control formatting here?
Saw Jesse LaGreca interview and thought he was great!
For paragraph breaks, I think you need to hit 'return' or 'enter' twice instead of just once. I may be wrong but I think someone else made this suggestion recently in an answer to the same question.
Aha! It works. Thanks!
Which one, Jesse did 3 on Ed Show, 2 on Olberman, ABC This week with Christiam Amanpour, Rosie OdDonell, Moveon.org
ABC This Week...
Of course there is an image problem. This protest is being run by a bunch of anarchists. And their Serbian Revolution fighter friends Otpor.
All this at the expense of the legitimate demands of the regular protesters who want to end the corruption of government. Maybe if we can manage to lose the anarchy, and the Serbs, we'd have a chance to move the protest forward.
We need new leadership and an effective organizational strategy. Not that direct democracy nonsense where absolutely nothing meaningful or substantial is allowed to happen because of the sheer absurdity of that manipulative process.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
We occupy this, and we get our support back!
http://occupywallst.org/forum/something-to-think-about-part-2/
This is the most intelligent thing I've read on this site.unfortunately this movement, because of the hippy bongo playing 60's retard chants etc...
[Removed]