Forum Post: OWS needs focus - this is it - COMMENTS PLEASE
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 5, 2011, 10:38 p.m. EST by petebilling
(5)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Public Forum
0 comments 6 hours ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 days ago by agkaiser
1 comments 1 week ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 weeks ago by agkaiser
1 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
0 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
7 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 2 months ago by factsrfun
4 comments 3 months ago by gsw
7 comments 3 months ago by factsrfun
3 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 4 months ago by grapes
2 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
4 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
2 comments 5 months ago by rachelodell
2 comments 7 months ago by gsw
2 comments 11 months ago by factsrfun
5 comments 2 years ago by agkaiser
6 comments 2 years ago by grapes
15 comments 2 years ago by gsw
12 comments 2 years ago by BrentWeirick81
Personally, from a general point of view, I think OWS is just fine and has all the focus it needs. Of course it has a lot of stuff distracting it like police intimidation, cold weather, antisocial elements at the encampment, etc., but these are all small potatoes compared to efforts on the part of the Democratic Party and its ancillary elements like MoveOn to co-opt OWS. Other than that the focus of OWS is just fine and it has the Declaration of the Occupation, one of the finest documents ever produced by a popular opposition movement in the United States to continue to guide it and its individual adherents.
True but on TV OWS comes across as a cacophony of disintegrated protestors. The general public does not understand what the demands are - just that OWS is unhappy - this is natural for a new movement, but it needs to be sharpened, and it will be with time and success. That is where OWS needs one voice and a list of clear soundbyte demands.
My perception is that the vast majority of the 99% is still asleep, which is to say they have no opinion regarding OWS one way or the other largely because they remain blissfully unaware of its existence. It's our job, of course, to awaken these people. As far a opposition goes, aside from the kibbitzers on lists like this, I don't see much of it. If anything quite the opposite is the case. The latest survey suggests that 39% of the population supports OWS. That's a minority but a very substantial minority. Our job is to get them engaged. I'm not saying that hostility to OWS is absent, I just don't think it's all that significant. What I think is considerably more signficant is public apathy. But the objective conditions are changing that too. Unemployment is an objective reality as is student debt, foreclosures, the errosion of workers rights, stop and frisk and American colonialism.
OWS is a broad inclusive movement. That is its strength. It would not be well served by narrowing its perspective nor is that likely to happen given the structure of the General Assemblies that govern it.
The issue is simply more complex than can be captured in a simple set of demands. Probably the only unified sound byte that we could all agree on is:
Abolish Plutocracy.
But the exact method of achieving this is complex. There is no simple reform or measure we could take (say like curtailing lobbying and bribery through some finance law) that can singularly solve the problem--- or even permanently improve matters. The system isn't corrupt. Its criminal. How would you reform the Mafia? We are challenged with making fundamental systemic changes--- changes that cannot come from within the political order it seeks to replace. Focusing on some sound bytes might be good marketing for TV but it isn't a good strategy for a global social movement. In any case print media and television are dying--- our successes have come from using the internet which doesn't have the same limitations. Most people understand and support our message--- even if the corporate media keeps pretending that there is something unclear about it, the public isn't falling for it.
The abolishment of plutocracy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutocracy can occur within the framework our government has. The first step is to follow the money, and legislate out the ability of corporations to gooble up huge percentages of their particular markets. The current example is financial services - and the most criminal aspect is "too big to fail". This needs to be legislated out. Whether simply limiting the maximum capitalization a financial services corp can reach is the way to this end or not, the extreme concentration of power (ie, money combined with political influence) has to be throttled. Perhaps the way to do this is to make political contributions illegal. Give candidates a slot of free airtime/press/whatever. Dollars provided by contributors are essentially illegal votes for legislation. In any case, OWS needs to refine and distill its message so that it can be comprehended by the average Joe out there who has a 100 IQ - because we the 99% have a 100 IQ on average, and the 1% is substantially higher on average.
Because if OWS does not sharpen and focus, it will be co-opted into one of the major parties (they are all the same) run by the 1%.
On the face of it, it looks like a good write up. I'll read it when I can...
Think about it "too big to fail" - that means the govt will bail out failure due to investment risk. This is PRIVATATIZED PROFIT because taxpayers don't get paid when the big banks make money - but SOCIALIZED LOSS because taxpayers pay for the bailouts. And the banks game the failures, such as Goldman-Sachs buying CDS instruments (insurance policy against investment loss) against investments they made, knowing that they would fail and get bailed out with taxpayer money. GS made money on the way up and on the way down, and received taxpayer bailouts.
Focus on occupying the empty property.
AGREED. With emphasis on 'greed'.
This could all be solved with one piece of legislation - limit the maximum capitalization of financial institutions to well below what the biggest banks are - force breakups and decentralize power back to where it belongs. This should be the first demand of OWS - that is focus and a good soundbyte.
I like it. But also run campaigns from a public fund. All candidates getting x number of petition signees get the same space on the government's candidate web site. Saves billions in campaign jockeying for companies as well.
Vote out ALL incumbents in 2012!
First, get the authority to change . . . something. _
Article 5 convention NOW!
Great post. The more money they steal the more influence they buy.
This is why we desperately need constant internet voting now, to stop this assault upon our democracy.