Forum Post: So much of what's here is contrary to the actual movement...*sigh*
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 16, 2011, 9:33 p.m. EST by breakingcode
(137)
from Newport, KY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Too many of the messages put out, and the people (especially the ones showing up on TV and opinion talk shows) are contrary to the OWS movement. "The Message" suffers from the fact that it's bastardized by anyone and everyone who has a microphone in their face, and the fact that even from person to person the expectations are completely different with only a shared underlying theme.
I've been a project manager for close to 20 years now...
The very tools and size of the groups that are needed to enact change have been owned and studied and are obvious, readable, and are as predictable as a sign printed in 200 point font to the people who do not want this group to have power. They are rife with people who's lives revolve around the aquisition of power/public opinion/finance.
OWS can NOT continue to exist as a wide open "rah rah" movement any longer and hope to make meaningful progress.
That worked fine for organizing simple things like "Show up at a time and a place" but let's be honest,..even the most Basic "message" is completely contestable from one memeber to another. For the long game this simply will not work. You can't throw boulders UP a ladder.
OWS needs something more rigid, formal and/or (dare I say) clandestine. Unfortunately that very type of structure would never be tolerated by it's members unless some amazing new means of checks and balances were created for the people "representing"
So instead the best we get is something like this site, where we get post after post of "WharrrbleGarrble" and counter "WharrbleGarrrble" and a rare idea of merit lost in the howl. This works in the "Their" favor,..because it wastes time and resources (Something they have limitless supplies of)
As horrible a concept as it is,..OWS needs to elect leaders and design some kind of structure, get some trustworthy people who can actually take responsibility and assume some accountability for the message and the actions. (As I said before, new checks and balances must be created for such)
Otherwise we're doomed to simply spitting in the wind in a war of attrition we can not win.
EDIT*
Ok, you asked for it, you got it. proclamation99 (yeah we'll come up with a better name that everyone likes later)
The OFFICIAL petition of the "rest of the 99%" "A intro based on information gathered from OWS sites and the reoccurring themes therein." http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/proclamation99/
EDIT*
Wow! I had to go deal with family issues for a couple of days and I have to say I didn't really expect this thread to be this big. Or for the petition to have gotten any real eyeballs on it yet. So that's a cool surpise to come back to.
Also while I appreciate everyone's support for this concept PLEASE don't go trolling people or shutting down anyone out of turn. I mean feel free to engage in debate and point out misinformation but lets not assume everyone is stupid for not agreeing with us. (that's the tactics of the 1% and OWS, lets move beyond that)
Cool news,.. People are signing the petition, Rokysopp donated domain names and web hosting space for a page. And so far I've had only positive support for all the suggestions.
There's a million ideas we need to sift/sort/prioritize but just some of the interesting/cool ideas that have been presented as concepts.
I have several programmers that are working on a Wii/PS/droid/iphone app that will allow people to see "town hall" information. Using video game consoles to organize?! C'mon no matter how big a detractor you are, you have to admit That's AMAZINGLY COOL!! One of the guys is even testing a small device that you can plug into a wall socket and any phone line that will give you the same info (old school modem BBS style) but with a local "pretty" user interface and display options (with a port you can plug into ANY old school/new TV with.) All using recycled materials, Free OS's etc.. if we could make these super cheap, or free and get them to people who don't have internet connections that would plug a huge information gap between us and the people as I really think the only place to truly centralize and dissiminate information and action is the internet. But like I said that's just ONE cool idea that will be "up for people to talk about"
I'm really jazzed about this and I'm looking for people who have Project managment backgrounds to help out. Just PM me. I'll be playing with the web site this week and we'll see what happens.
EDIT My edits just made the content too long, new post in body
I whole heartedly applaud this thread!!!! Breakingcode is 100% correct and has stated my exact sentiments!! In fact, I made a post on my facebook last night similar to this one. I own a small music production and promotions company and I am currently creating a web site for an idea that struck me like a ton of bricks. It goes right in line with the ideas posted here. If breakingcode doesn't mind I would like to use part of his/her post on the website. I will be creating a thread here about my idea with a link for more information.
I don't mind you using this thread as a post elsewhere, but I wouldn't want this thread used to promote any goods or services. Feel free to put a link to your site as a closing sig line but only if your post is relevant to the discussion of Organizational structure for OWS. I mean I love supporting small business, but that's not what this thread in particular is about. I will say quickly that I think part of having a good OWS "structure" would be so have news and info about small businesses that embrace he philosophy, get researched and promoted in local areas. (Hey,..here's a great farmers maket, don't go to Wal-Mart and they're hiring someone to help with selling items) get that info out as part of an everyday service to the people who want to make things better, and the people who want to support them. But there's the little nagging voice in my head that ALSO says "Hey, this guy just wants to threadjack a fast growing thread, maybe he makes tons of money, and never gives back to anyone" That's where having some kind of "community research and vetting organizations should come in. But again, that's for a different thread.
Thanks for the reply breakingcode. My idea is actually a personal project in which I will use the resources of my company in support of the Occupy movement. The focus is strictly on the movement and expanding it, and getting more and more people involved. Last year I put on two events in our city in support of different causes. The first was an event to raise awareness of child abuse. A local group was having problems gaining interest in their anti child abuse rally. The subject is close to my heart and I joined forces with them and the gathering rose from ten to twenty people in the past to hundreds last year. The second was in support of our local Christmas Sharing program and that helped the less fortunate have a better Christmas. They were sadly lacking in support last year. Again I put on an event to raise funds and awareness and support grew. You can see more information about these events here: http://www.getshipwrecked.ca/events.html
My plan is to do for the Occupy movement what I did for the above mentioned organisations. Raise awareness, bring people together, and help bring about change. As NLake72 states in their post, the media will control the message until the movement has it's own messangers and spokes people. My plan is to build a platform for those spokes people to get the message out to the masses via various methods. I've put up a quick web page for people to read information about the events I will be planning here: http://www.getshipwrecked.ca/otw/
I think the worry on the part of most people is that no matter how well intentioned and/or needed these efforts are until there's some accountability people will ask: What qulifies "these" spokespeople. What's to say they won't "damage" the message, give only one person's view etc..
At this point I'd say more power to you,.. I would argue that it doesn't even matter until there's some structure as no one can distort a message that doesn't exsist.
That's part of my idea. To help bring more structure to the movement. Find credible people assist in coordinating events, people with credible backgrounds and education on the issues. I did have a rather lengthy description of my idea to post here for you. However, the description came from the content I am putting together for the Occupy The World website. So instead of being redundant I will ask that oyu be patient and I iwll post here when I have updated the site in a few hours and you can read it there. Trust me, my intentions are totally pure and in direct correlation with the Occupy movement. It's an idea I have had for many years, but interest was hard to gain. In order to be succesful the movement needs to grow and become more consistent and clear in it's goals and message. My intention is to help it do that.
THIS THIS a thousand times THIS.
This is one of the best most cojent things I've read here yet. This i sthe kind of spokesperson OWS needs someone who can actually bring a little real world to the rainboows unicorns and drum circles.
After all the majority of the 99%'ers aren't 20-somethings, it's just easier for them to be on site and god bless them for it but there's MORE of us out here, still working to support our families, that want to see some non space cases talking about the cause The mainstream media will only look for the most contreversial people to talk to, not the most reasonable and sane
I agree completely. I'm a freshman at MIT and I'm 100% behind OWS, but I don't have the time to get involved physically and living in Dewey Square is hardly conducive to keeping up with coursework. Different strokes for different folks is all well and good, but at some point we need to agree on a general platform and get people all on the same page. I already suggested creating a PR workgroup composed almost completely of moderates and responsible for giving interviews, going on talk shows, etc. to promote us. The idea would be for OWS to shell out a couple of hundred bucks per member for a suit, a shave, and a haircut, and to require the members of the group to abstain from drugs and heavy drinking while involved. If people felt it necessary to put checks on the PR workgroup it would always be possible to staff it on a rotating basis.
I think this would be a great "subset" of a real organization. Have some people who are comfortable with public speaking go out as (I hate to use the word but I will) evangelists for the message.
I for one have always hated that the president of the US "opens malls" and "visits factories"
The message should be "Look, I have to do my job, just like you do and here are my "citizen ambassadors" they'll be there for all that stuff, get the messages across etc.." Maybe I'll do a small remote 2 min via satellite thing here and there but that's not "The job"
Agreed. It's time for leaders, it's time for a coherent series of demands. The intelligentsia are behind the movement, they know the necessary reforms, but it is time to move forward. The media will control the message until we have our own messengers step forward to be a spokesman for the many reforms our country requires. I have my own list, and it is similar to many I've seen. The media will report it's own story until we tell the tale and demand the truth. Now or never, NOW is the time. The movement has done well thus far, the people are passionate and primed... But, we need a serious face to come forth with a full list of grievances against the corruption that has undermined our government.
dont forget the fact that our government is itself corrupt, can we fix that too?
If there are enough non-corrupt people infilitrating the corrupt, change is inevitable.
Frankly, major reforms are required, that includes lobbyists, campaign finance reform, pac reform... The list is rather long, but the system has been usurped for decades, it's gonna take a serious overhaul. I sat down the other night and quickly listed 20 areas of reform that really have to be addressed before our government can be expected to start representing and serving the people's needs. Wall St. and banking reform were on the list as well, which was actually about the survival of our economy, and less directly about how our government functions. I'm not sure we actually have any politicians who aren't bought and sold, but then again, our entire country has been bought and sold-- and without the people's permission. Frankly, this is 1984 (which is a free .pdf available online, start with first chapter and see how much of it rings true.) The 24/7 media controls the message, the politicians control the legislation, and you have people like the Koch brothers (among many others) who are quite open and bald-faced about buying our elections in order to install their own puppets to further their own personal and/or corporate interests. These interests do not include things like... the future of our environment, the viability of our economy, or the social safety net. Our colonial forefathers never really made provisions for political parties, because it was almost unthinkable to them that "we the people" would actually allow our politicians to vote in lockstep, along party lines (to the detriment of the principles of good governance.) This corrupt cabal is not even close to a representative form of government. At the same time, when we, the citizens, get to vote every 2 or 4 years for a candidate, and call that our sum total input into the democratic process, then we should admit that we are all being conned, or that we just don't care enough to be bothered (again, refer to 1984...) So yeah, the question: how much reform is actually required to save our country and the basic principles for which we stand? Well, I have 20 items on my list, and there are many pieces of legislation that might have once tried to address the rank corruption of the political system, but which will never see the light of day.
There are a lot of smart people out there who know what needs to be done. But, we first have to do for ourselves, and we have to demonstrate that this isn't just a big party, because that's all they are seeing on t.v. The time to step it up is now.
While I agree there are fundamental changes that need to happen in the government (as I said,..I'm a project manager, I plan the long game) getting an organization who's base is stable and cojent is imperitive to be able to approach those issues and be recognized for.
Until you have that kind of base, you can't challenge these other issues and make any headway. I think the fundamental difference between us and others is that they have organizations that can hemmorage money to change circumstances to further their agenda. We have to spread just as much knowlege and use people to make our marks.
The whole lobby issue alone is beyond criminal and is allowed to be so right in the face of the public because it's business as usual.
I also try to shy away from mass generalizations like "it's becoming 1984, Orwellian comparisons etc.." because while I believe there are certain similarities, jumping to those extremes is a tool that political parites use and I won't. I hear enough "They're communists, oh yeah well they're Facists" on a daily basis from our two dominant political parties, I don't want to bring that into this arena as well.
I tend to agree with you on every point, I'll be the first to admit that I am sometimes strident and overly passionate, and probably I do simplify matters. I'll do my best to stay on track in this thread.
I also agree that a solid organization should be put in place (although being a "moving target" seems to have been a major strength to date, I'm not sure how to balance that, to be honest.) I'll even agree that the power is in the hands of the people, should they choose to engage the democratic process in general, and various reforms specifically. Those reforms need to be clearly defined, and the list should be boldly comprehensive. Right now, a lot of people are sitting on the fence on whether to openly support OWS or not, partly because the message is incoherent, undefined, or possibly even non-existent. This is a people's movement, and it's impossible to boil down the long list of reforms into a soundbite, which is what any major network will seek to do. All I know for sure is that there's some free love and drug abuse going on down there, and that it's mostly a bunch of homeless people scamming a free lunch. That's not very inspirational to the broad base of Americans.
I think that there are many common sense reforms that 99% of us will agree need to be addressed, and we need some real intellectuals to step up to bat in order to make use of the limelight-- credible people committed to educating the masses, with a list of reforms that simply must be addressed. From what I've seen, the story right now is that there a lot of angry people fighting with really angry cops, and regular citizens are getting really angry and tired of a mindless protest. Pathetic. And, insulting to practically everyone involved. breaking code is correct, as sad as it may seem, OWS needs to join the system to a certain degree. OWS needs to find talking heads from among their own-- people who college professors, and hairdressers and lowly stock brokers can genuinely endorse once they step up to bat. I can't believe I'm hearing myself type this... We need talking heads or we'll never be invited to share our collective points of view on CNN. With that dearth of a spokespeople, the media will happily make up whatever story supports their ratings, which right now is police in riot gear vs a couple thousand ne'er-do-wells. It's balogne, but don't expect everyone to automatically see it that way.
breakingcode is correct... The time has come when OWS needs a real organization, with real voices, and a really serious, comprehensive message. The alternative is to be slowly relegated to mediocrity. Winter is coming, the man is coming, and we have to deliver a messenger from amongst ourselves. breakingcode is correct, necessary figureheads have to be found within the movement, with a solid organization, and a very serious list of major league reforms. The moment is now, the clock is ticking.
breakingcode, I'm done on your thread, sorry if I hijacked it.
To be honest,..I don't know how well this would work but I think the best "Eye opener" scenario that would educate the members as well as inform the decisions would be to get some people in that have NO political backgrounds, Ivy league ties etc.. make them learn the system from the ground up and share that knowledge with the movement "Hey, I'm blogging daily about this..." then get feedback from everyone round table/community wise on a regular basis (as all parts of any "structure" for OWS should). This would be a slower way to go about things, but it would eliminate pre-conceived notions, give everyone a chance to "mentor their representatives" and force information to flow in both directions. Maybe get some "outside" mentors in who have extensive non-partisan experience as well (Guest speakers and consultants) and truly give a bit of communal life to our representation. Again keep in mind this is stuff I'm coming up with off the top of my head, but I like the "feel" of that type of concept. (I also think that the concept is novel enough that those people would get air time as well, of course when confronted with an issue they didn't understand they could just tell the truth and say "I'm not sure but I'm learning to try to come up with the best answer" as opposed to just flat lying like other spokespeople are taught to do.
I am all for a group this is interested in working with and through government to affect positive change. I do not believe that OWS has the structure or intent to do that.
There are some (many?) of us who are also interested in such a group. Lets get this started!
I agree with you 100% that the movement needs to step it up quickly since they are beginning to show that the masses are losing interest in all of the negative publicity it has been getting.
Of course, the lastest stunt by the police using pepper spray on these peaceful protestors has pissed off the public and while I do feel compassion for those that got hurt, the situation actually presents an opportunity to get the public interest back on the movement.
That is why it is so important now to get a plan in motion to get back on track.
One of the problems with being a leaderful (as opposed to leaderless) movement is that all us leaders keep "shoulding" all over the movement. The movement should do this, the movement should do that, blah, blah. But the thing is, that is not how movements work. Movements are not organizations. If you want an organization go organize one or join one that already exists. But OWS will go on as a movement pretty much oblivious to the leaders that keep shoulding all over it.
Well said!
[Removed]
@breakingcode - Agreed and thanks for sharing
I very much agree.. they need one voice, one code of message to let people know what the 99% stand for, so those who get interviewed do not have to try and answer off the cuff, poisoning the the cohort with it's message of inaccuracy. Also they (we) sadly need money to advertise the message on a larger scale.
I agree, but we need more than a unified list of grievances we and demands. We need a list of real creative solutions. Not the same old same far left or far right Ideas. New creative ideas. I'm one who beleive the truth and the best choices are very often somewhere in the middle of two extremes. But as alluded to above it seems to me we been doing a whole lot of pissing into the wind and offering no real answers no real solutions. Though outside the box thinking is also needed as I said above, we also need to learn to work within the existing systems to bring necessary changes to them.
That's why I think it's important to "Identify, list, assess, prioritize, and track" action items and the methods by which they're addressed.
If you're going to have an "occupy this store" event. Have GOALS for that event beforehand (we're getting petition signatures, giving out info, etc.. etc..) then do a post mortem on the event, capture the things you did right, and the things you did wrong, engage the community with the results and information, and refine your process so that your efforts are ALWAYS more efficient than the last. (this is all basic project managment stuff and I think it really applies)
That's what I mean when I talk about the new checks and balances,.. We as a society know how to build an efficient structure for managing ideas, helping people, getting information out, coming up with/managing lists and ideas etc.. etc.. What we're terrible at is keeping people from corrupting those structures and/or keeping corrupt people from infiltrating.
Of course we live in a cool time when (when you're not a mega corporation trying to hide all your dirty dealings and secrets) you can be open with people and have them see what it is you're doing (supposedly on their behalf) and give them the opportunity to give you a second (or a million) pairs of extra eyes to keep things on track.
I don't propose to know how to do that,...it's a great project to think about (the risk mitigation alone would be staggering) but at least it's a "possibility"
Excellent post
There needs to be some spokesperson for the cause, because the people speaking for the movement on TV are saying some stuff that's sorta out there. And the message is getting all muddled. It just looks like unfocused, disorganization.
Again that's because the media doesn't want to talk to someone who has their sh*t together and actually understands things, they want to find the spaced out hippy, or the really young guy who has a bunch of signatures but no real idea of how things work in the real world because -those- make better news stories.
Talking to someone who knows what they're doing is only interesting if you're John Stewart
I understand the desire of OWS to not have leaders, with leaders it's a simple matter of discrediting them, even with lies, to removing them physically, without creating martyrs.
I do believe some sort of leadership is in the making, perhaps not as some of us would like it to be but a leadership all the same.
Smaller groupings with a small contingent of 'leaders', in communication with other 'leaders', each grouping putting forward their views, ideas etc and the 'leaders' each returning the views and ideas of their particular group to others for consideration.
Most of us would like to see two or three central issues concentrated on. Most of us agree that ending the stranglehold money has over our elected officials is one of those issues, many of us would like to see the reinstatement of Glass/Steagall...the problem is that many differing groups saw OWS as an opportunity to present their particular issue to the public at large, and naturally each group sees their own issue as the most central issue.
We're all in a hurry to see 'things get done', but doing things in a hurry is the way to repent in leisure.
Two months...today makes it two months...give it time.
Again,..my whole point is that there's a pre-existing playing field that OWS has to "play in" in order to get things done. Promoting change in key concepts is difficult enough without trying to re-invent the entire socio-political infrasttrucre of the US at the same time. No matter how great the ideas, if you don't make some concessions as to how things are done in our society (for better or worse) then you're tilting at windmills.
Please take a look at this video...they understand that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dtD8RnGaRQ&feature=player_embedded
Wow,..that's a great link. I've been there. I've done that. This works on a small scale with a small group of people. When I make it down to the other end of the block the messages have changed and or have completely different people espousing completely different ideas. (if I had a dime for every person in a group who was trying to be in the limelight as being " the only guy with the best idea" or "the next spokesperson for OWS" I'd be one of the 1%'ers right now. For better or worse, when you try to scale up to metropolitan/national/global populations it all falls apart w/out some kind of real structure.
As it stands right now,.OWS = Great Ideas about change, coupled with completely unrealistic ideas about how to get them enacted (largely because the proposed methods (rooted in non-applicable theory and in some cases fantasy.) were proposed by many of the same people who brought together the great ideas about what needed to be changed. The two aren't married in anyway, accepting one does not condemn the other.
Every OWS gathering I've been to (3 major 6 minor) have suffered from message creep within their own locations nevermind going from one group to the next.
Ie this is not a methodolgy that can scale and progress. Some people will never want to admit this, and those people despite their best intentions (like the majority of the posts on this web page) will work counter to the OWS movement as it stands at this time.
Obviously you missed the part where he says, 'when you go home...'
They get it.
I saw it but I agree with subby, the people who are actually at the protests aren't the majority of the movement they're just the most vocal. Of the 99%ers less than .001% are at all the Occupy demonstrations combined. So unless the Occupy movement is trying to say that .001%ers should determine the fate of the other 98.999% (which is what got us into this whole damn problem in the first place) that leaves a heck of a lot of us out here with other ideas. Maybe the Occupy group and the 99%ers should go their seperate ways, I think you'll find the majority of rational Americans would go the route of "other" if that was the case.
PandoraK, enjoy your wishful thinking I'm glad that a bunch of people fixate on a way to get their message across as being more important than the message. That's a sure fire recipie for success there.
I've owned business, always been self employed, usually had employees...I've worked forums online, I've learned a great deal about listening and actually hearing what is being said...
I am hearing you say you don't like the way things are going with OWS and believe there is a better way. I say go for it.
I hope that emerges... I just don't like people falsely representing me (fellow citizens or government alike) and I think OWS thrives on pushing the false image that "they are the 99%" (when like I said,..1% would be a stretch)
Thanks for the polite reply though, it's a pleasure to debate with reasonable people no matter how we disagree.
You are welcome.
I do believe the concept of the 99% isn't so much a representation of any individual or group, but rather a statistic that was adopted as a catch phrase. When looked at that way, one can conciliate it with governmental representation or any other representation. You might be a 'member of the club' but it doesn't mean you have to do anything with it.
Thanks for being civil everyone, I think being responsible, intelligent, civil, and reasonable is the grease that keeps the tracks of progress nice and slippery. Uhm.. well you know what I mean. (Ok so I'm better at planning than metaphor cut me some slack :)
Slack cut.
Being responsible, intelligent, civil and reasonable is the balm that soothes a troubled society.
Is that better?
Much less "ewww" yes thank you :)
Welcome.
[Removed]
I'm not saying that's absolutely what needs to happen, I'm just saying that from my experience it's the only way I can see to solidify things, insure that they stay relevant, and to keep forward momentum and progress w/out falling to apathy and other risk factors.
It's like when gas got expensive in the US... 1.00-2.50ish people were ok to annoyed. it hit 3.00/gal and people were MAD, when it hit 3.50-4.00 they started driving less, talking about buying electric cars etc.. So the gas companies let the price drop just enough to shut people up but still got away with keeping it WAY above the acceptable profit margin because they knew people would be relieved from the big 4.00. I don't want to see this movement go the same way (a very real risk if a couple of small concessions are made)
As I said I've been a PM for about 20 years and I tell you, just the basic logistics as an exercise make my head spin.
A group of people who largely shun organization and demonize power structures
The checks and balances come into play as the biggies, how do you find someone you can trust in the first place (because tons of people will be angry it's not them so they'll reject them, anyone who's got the kind of skills to do this has probably had a 401k or some stocks or something and people will instantly get angry about that,.. (and that's even before you fall back on the standard election social things (can't be ugly, can't be single etc... etc.. because people will rant...)
Off the top of my head I'd say you need a group with minimal financial support and a huge community support base (which again will make people say "only the people at the top get paid" but logistically you could have a small group of about 50 full time core people maintaining all the big stuff. (the overhead costs that other organizations incur are gone with this group, open source software, don't need expensive sexy business suites, less fundraising and/or dependence on donations etc.. etc..
I wouldn't suggest a single leader, rather a comittie of say 5, with some kind of open vote community/town hall access to all major decisions. (this way if one person is being and OBVIOUS roadblock or is going too contrary to the overall beliefs, there could be some kind of instant community vote of no confidence)
Like I said, it CAN be done, but it needs people with skills as well as people with passion to make it work, neither will go it alone.
I just worry at the end of the day there's going to be a big OWS organization who gets infiltrated by those who want to corrupt and/or derail the message so that it winds up a skewed clone of what it initially set out to challenge (ie the Tea Party)
*EDIT**
I got to talk to a "social organizational structure" group. Their main focus is working with hospitals on remote cousults, I wanted to know how they organize the best people to do the best job (because if you're remote you're picking from a pool, there could be 5 back specialists, but how do you know which one may have seen this issue before. We had an amazing conversation and they actually did more brainstorming on our side that I could ever have hoped for.
Their question was simple. OWS is based on direct democracy, but what happens when you have a brain tumor and "the majority" are back specialists? The "consensus" kills the patient even though one person had knowledge that was better than that of the group.
I didn't think about it that way but I've seen this VERY THING in action at OWS. My local gathering had a crowd talking about financial reform and one of the people there was a CPA, he kept trying to interject real world knowledge but got shot down time and time again by people who were just too emotionally "anti-suit" to even listen to him. Add to this that the people there didn't "understand" what he was saying in the first place, and weren't interested in taking the time to learn and THAT is a brilliant pointer to the structure issues in OWS.
So,..after many hours of discussion, one of the concepts we came up with is a "Citizen Expert" status for our forums to be. Basically you say "Hey when we talk about clean wind energy, I'm a CE, I've worked for clean wind companies and power my own home" We're still working on a "proof" system for this. (Maybe you submit a photo and real world info, or some kind of vetting system, not sure yet but THOSE people would actually have some kind of byline status and could really help direct the good ideas/eliminate the fluff in the subjects they're CE's on. And the more CE's the better for any action decision.
So, yet another really cool idea that would help us all, just from hanging with some people who are more concerned with helping people than pushing some political agenda.
I posted this point out to another post I think it deserves discussion but I linked back to this discussion, hope that is okay.
Maybe have Citizen Experts and Professional Experts. I am thinking some people would have expertise through non professional or acedemic means. I am extremely knowledgable about free trade products and help out in many places but it's not my career or a field of study. So I could be a CE for some thing like that. That way the community would be able to direct simple questions and discussions about processes and how things work to someone like me. I would also be a person that would be good to help give the basic outlines of some issues. I could help bridge the gap between the experts and the people who may be learning about some of these topics for the first time.
But here is something to consider that I think about.
What happens when you have the brain cancer and there aren't any specialists? That seems to be the more common scenario here.
I totally agree with you! I just fear there may be too many within the movement who do not understand the necessity of this.
I hope that in time they will either be correct and start making meaningful progress, join us or some other positive action, or both. The only way we lose is if people walk away/quit/give up. EVENTUALLY people will congregate to the ideas that make the most sense.
Wow! I had to go deal with family issues for a couple of days and I have to say I didn't really expect this thread to be this big. Or for the petition to have gotten any real eyeballs on it yet. So that's a cool surpise to come back to.
Also while I appreciate everyone's support for this concept PLEASE don't go trolling people or shutting down anyone out of turn. I mean feel free to engage in debate and point out misinformation but lets not assume everyone is stupid for not agreeing with us. (that's the tactics of the 1% and OWS, lets move beyond that)
Cool news,.. People are signing the petition, Rokysopp donated domain names and web hosting space for a page. And so far I've had only positive support for all the suggestions.
There's a million ideas we need to sift/sort/prioritize but just some of the interesting/cool ideas that have been presented as concepts.
I have several programmers that are working on a Wii/PS/droid/iphone app that will allow people to see "town hall" information. Using video game consoles to organize?! C'mon no matter how big a detractor you are, you have to admit That's AMAZINGLY COOL!! One of the guys is even testing a small device that you can plug into a wall socket and any phone line that will give you the same info (old school modem BBS style) but with a local "pretty" user interface and display options (with a port you can plug into ANY old school/new TV with.) All using recycled materials, Free OS's etc.. if we could make these super cheap, or free and get them to people who don't have internet connections that would plug a huge information gap between us and the people as I really think the only place to truly centralize and dissiminate information and action is the internet. But like I said that's just ONE cool idea that will be "up for people to talk about"
I'm really jazzed about this and I'm looking for people who have Project managment backgrounds to help out. Just PM me. I'll be playing with the web site this week and we'll see what happens.
Again, I think (personal opinion only) that OWS was maybe not founded with the structure it needs to go the long haul. Many people on this site alone agree with that.
Looking through the threads,..there's already a lot of people that see OWS is breaking up, and theyr'e building pages with $Adverts$ pushing political Partie$, and all trying to claim they're representing the 99% and what do you know... just like OWS they're already saying they know what's best for everyone, know what people want, etc.. you were right, the signal to noise ratio in OWS alone means that it can't be sustained.
bump for the love
Ok, you asked for it, you got it. proclamation99 The OFFICIAL petition of the "rest of the 99%" "A intro based on information gathered from OWS sites and the reoccurring themes therein."
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/proclamation99/
I like! The Occupy brand is tarnished beyond redemption in my mind, but this is something I can get behind.
Thanks! Like I said I'm kinda glad/amazed by the support. Please let people know (In a nice not ramming it down your throat way)
Also might want to point out things like, we speak for everyone because we dont' have demands yet, and no where is there a "donate/buy our stuff/or paid ads" as a lot of the pages where people are linking out to "99%blahblah.com" are just people trying to make donations/clickthrough money that they can pocket and or walk away with.
OK based on the problems I've seen in the past 48 hours (the "tone" of OWS) and after sitting down and looking at all the 50000ft variables, I've come to the conclusion that OWS can't survive "as is".
The "core" is too rigid in its unwillingness to change it's own methods, (and most people would agree) that all things being equal (ie not corrupt or exploitative) the methodology isn't nearly as important as the issues. OWS sees that as a fundamental flaw, and so there's where OWS and I part ways. To insist on doing things in a manner that is proven to be non-viable "just to be different" is as bad as not having done anything at all. The first step of a marathon should not be "Pull out shotgun and blow off both of your own kneecaps"
OWS also doesn't have the majority support from the group it's self-proclaiming to represent. (another poster here put it best "Of the 99%ers less than .001% are at all the Occupy demonstrations combined. So unless the Occupy movement is trying to say that .001%ers should determine the fate of the other 98.999% (which is what got us into this whole damn problem in the first place) that leaves a heck of a lot of us out here with other ideas." and THAT is the true message of the 99%ers. I'd love to pitch in and help "Some new organization" address the issues that OWS has drawn attention to, but really based on their own ignorance of the issues, how things work in society, and their unwillingness to work within a realistic set of parameters, OWS is not a viable entity for doing anything OTHER than drawing attention. (and really we have two political parties who already draw attention to issues and don't do anything about them, why do we need a 3rd?) When someone comes up with some kind of Proclamation99 let me know. I'll help out.
Till then OWS best of luck but you're inability to be rational and your adoption of partisan politic methods has doomed you to failure in the eyes of the other 98%.
Hmm,..looks like the threads vote up/down makes it hard for anyone to update a thread very easily w/out it getting dumped into the middle of the post :(
This post sums up one of the most important first steps. And I think this whole thread captures the underlying feelings of what should happen next, or at least what should be discussed next.
I think we need people who can maintain sensible discussions like breakincode and others like this to help roadmap things out better. This thread is more coherent then the last 2000 plus posts combined and way more on target than anything I've seen or heard on the TV or radio lately. If people come up with a true statment of intent I want it to be those who actually understand this stuff and weigh in all the options
Your preoccupation with leadership is understandable. OWS movement is spontaneous. It is the expression of common conditions that many share. Contrary to your view, its leaders if any will be products of the movement and not its vanguards.
"Your preoccupation with leadership is understandable. OWS movement is spontaneous. It is the expression of common conditions that many share."
I absolutely agree,.. My point was that if you look at the long term, that "method" gets you through "phase 1" brilliantly, but when it comes to the next steps, and addressing issues "in someone else's home court" that needs to evolve into something different (and in my opinion, completely new) in order to survive in any meaningful way.
Unfortunately "the movement" can't even get the 101 basics done on a daily basis, (thus the negative press and my initial point) so organically creating an infrastructure is time consuming trial and error process when most of "the members" want to move on to enacting change.
Hey, maybe we can partner up the Brand to Goldman and they can then package it and sell it as a new Financial product. Then we can invest the profits in a Chinese or Indian venture triple our money and put the profits in a Cayman bank where we can hire a US lobbying firm to get us a deal to re-patriot the $$ at a lower tax rate. We can then put the remaining money into tax free Muni bonds ...you get the picture right?
On the flip side maybe everyone can just stand in a crowd, and then 300000 web pages can all have different messages, and the rest of the world (you know the people we're trying to make see/deal with the issues) can just laugh this off as a one time disconbobulated bunch of silly kids that got out of hand.
The momentum of OWS is gone. Like the poster said, it's now just a war of atrition and without a clear message or direction or some clear organization it's just a matter of time until the people have to go home and/or the other citizens won't want to tolerate them anymore.
And really you think that when you click any of the -Donate to the OWS links- on any of these pages that there aren't people skimming thier share off the top, most of the OWS pages already have ads on them and/or are BS attempts for people to get their 15min of fame.
You can't have an organization that isn't organized, it's doomed to be nothing more than a historical footnote otherwise, I also think that's why the poster -clearly- stated that there would need to be some kinds of new checks and balances for such an organization -ie to keep it from being like a Goldman or a GOP or the like. Half the people in the OWS movement don't even know why they're there, THAT is a problem.
The #OWS was just the tip of an ice berg of anger out here. It will evolve. Stay tuned for even bigger protests and better ideas of how to do it.
If your spearhead is dull it doesn't matter how glorious the handle holding it is. OWS works because it has the rare mix of physical ability for people to be on the streets and in the news daily. Once that physical presence is gone without some kind of real structure and organization it will fall to the status of internet fringe group. I really hope someone can do it (again the post above is hands down the best expression of my thoughts as well) but so far everyone I've seen try to do it are just people who want to tie into the money making opportunities for themselves or they're pushing their -own- message and not that of the community.
Like right now in NY. Thousands of OWS people, and 10 stupid d-bags who don't care about the issues decide they want to be "cool" and start messing with the barracades and get the police riled up and make everyone there look like idiots. Those 10 people do more-have more impact than the other thousands because there's NO ORGANIZATION. The movement is exactly analogous to this.
Unfortunately, that sounds like a plan.
OK, due to some issues I personally have had with OWS and (from the sounds of the posts) others here have had (disagreeing with core philosophy, structure, methods etc..) we've taken a bit of a negative view of OWS, but one of the Petition signers today made me check myself. (See I'm already better for having been a part of this)
Here is the message from the petition:
I like this whole concept and I think the OWS group should embrace this concept. It looks like it will have many of the same goals, but is a place for the people they would normally lose due to oterh concerns. This way at least those people they would have lost can still contribute to many of the same key issues in a way that makes sense to them.
That's absolutely true. If we all agree on some of the BIG issues, having eveyone working at taking them on is MUCH better than losing anyone that could make any change for the better.
I'm still working on the webpage, should have something up soon.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/proclamation99/
mentions checks and balance
Thanks lol That's actually my petition from this thread :) (I edited my post and it's in the top of the post now) Thanks for getting the word out though :)
[Removed]
I think it's kind of funny that some troll comes in regularly and votes every message in this thread down and never has the balls to even make a post.
So I'm gessing O.W.S'ers pretty much hate you for saying this right? I went and signed the petition. This is much more what I was expecting from O.W.S. then got sickened when I learned more about them. I hope you get to do something but there's so much crap floating around out there it's a miracle I found this post at all.
Wow, I had 3 points yesterday and today it's one? Why would someone vote that down, it's a true statement and it's just my opinion, I didn't even call anyone out, sheesh, looks like some people just want to vote down anything that's not theirs. They must be maintiaing like a thousand accounts, that's some insane work just to be a d-bag.
[Removed]
[Removed]
I guess you don't yet know Occupy is based on anarchy.
Who said it was? Just because the original group had a few too many anarchists in it doesn't mean they have say over everything. Anarchy is not working for the movement, and besides, what I proposed was hardly a leaders' council but simply a more efficient way for the movement to communicate with ordinary Americans.
... the list goes on, but I'm tired of typing...
If it smells like, looks like, tastes like, and function like anarchy, it probably is an anarchy. anarcho-communism to be exact.
Looking through the posts, I think I understand your point as far as anarchy is concerned; you're using the technical academic definition of anarchism versus the colloquial definition (with appropriate negative connotations) that people sling around when they want to smear something they don't like. Like you, I dislike anarchism and communism as vehicles for organization (regardless of their merits on paper; I'm not getting into that argument here because it doesn't help) because the former makes it incredibly hard to build focus and send out a clear message, and the latter is a great way to scare away and/or piss off ordinary Americans, and I feel like it's time to try something different and better. People are trying to move in that direction, but the existing structure of the movement is inhibiting this development, and that needs to change.
As I said ,..let's skip the debate entirely by saying whatever OWS was at the start, it's evolved. The majority of the people I've talked to have NO care whatsoever for any of this.....they only care about enacting change. If you told them you could get the important issues addressed by a system developed by an as of yet undiscovered tribe in the wild. (as long as it wasn't illega immoral etc.. all things being equal) They would not care at all.
I see your point. I hope you're right, because what I'm reading on the anarchic boards seems like a whole different story. I'll start believing that Occupy is changing when I see them modify their poster imagery from anarcho-communist imagery to something completely different. Yesterday, I was still seeing a red and black poster with Tienanmen Tanks.
That sells more controversy,..and the media fixate on it.
You'll find that there's a LOT of people in OWS (as I said the ones who get the most attention) who can't see the forest for the trees. Luckily as time goes on, more and more surface who are sounding boards too good to be ignored.
At some point,..OWS is going to have a split, and it's going to be the "people experimenting with their idiology and people who only know talking points" in one camp, and the rest of us (many of whom have actually had the better part of lifetime to work that stuff out) moving forward in a realistic meaningful way.
I think you've hit it on the head, there's going to be a split. It's already starting to happen, the main message that media is reporting is "Occupy is dijointed" websites like occupynation are already becoming partisan shill points.
The whole thing is falling apart and the only out of all these sites there's no place for the smarter, more business savvy part of the 99% to go. No! being business savvy isn't a bad thing, some people seem to think if you have an education and any marketable skill set that you're somehow not part of the 99% and unfortunately they get all the press. I'd say out of the 99% we're only being represented by a group that truly speaks for about 20% The rest of us sit by and say to ourselves: "Oh yeah you have some good ideas there I'll see if those develop into something worthwhile that I can get behind" and now we're seeing that they don't. We need something for the rest of us, the people who can actually get past the cute pagentry and smarmy signs and be adults and make some changes. Make no mistake, for a lot of the people in occupy demonstations, this is all just a cute game that they want to be able to brag about at parties later, I mean the majority didn't really "give up" anything to be there. They're there so they can tell their friends about it at some party later down the road. The rest of us who actually care about the issues need a longer term plan. So, how do we galvenize and centralize the "less stupid" of the occupy movement? Because there's no signs of that happening right now.
I see your point and it makes a whole lot of sense. I think one reason the anarchists still seem to be dominating is because Occupy was designed to be what they wanted it to be at the beginning, and is still mostly following that mold. There might be many other ideologies, but I think they might still we wondering what to do, whereas the anarchists know exactly what they want. They want to block the subway and create strikes.
I don't know what will happen, but I think Occupy will lose a lot of steam after what they have done today. Going in the subway was not a good idea for their PR. The new polls show the support is dwindling.
I don't think we need to worry about that per se. If elements within the movement veer too far away from the vision of the average american then the movement will either splinter or dissipate all together into a marginalized far left entity and become ineffective.
True. Unless they can keep their real agenda hidden until the movement is big enough.
Actually it's not (yet again, the whole "distorting the message" thing has gotten out of hand since day 1.)
Even if it was based on anarchy (which it wasn't) at this point it's grown beyond that to a more realistic challenge to a basic set of corruptive behaviors and models. There's a million subsets to that, and that's one of the reasons there needs to be some structure.
There is no such thing as a stable or sustainable civilization with anarchy as it's base other than on paper. On paper you can make any pholosophy or political/anti-political movement look perfect. (or in Enron's case,..account balances.)
It wasn't designed by David Graeber and George Sagri at the first meeting? A design which called for an horizontal structure without leaders, and the use of direct democracy to give everyone a voice through consensus? That's basically what anarchy is - an absence of hierarchy.
I absolutely agree with you that anarchy in theory and practice are two different animals. I just don't agree that Occupy isn't structured as one.
A horizontal structure w/out leaders is not anarchy, it's one of the few structures that Anarchists will sometimes accept. But it's as different as night and day.
A horizontal structure in our society for anything other than the largest most generic of messages means that the noise to signal ratio is self defeating. (as we see with "the message") if you polled everyone who claims to be part of the movement and showed them the "list of demands/gripes/actions" you'd find that the majority of them would get shot down in an instant,..
The message of OWS right now is (as I said in my original post) contrary to the the movement as a whole. We're running fast down the same path the tea party went down, endless distortion and corruption of the message until it's someone's money/political propganda machine. "Welcome to the official OWS webpage! *(with 200 Citibank ads down the side" etc...
This is where we disagree. Anarchy simply means without leader. It is the opposite of hierarchy. The practical setup for Occupy was made by David Graeber, a known anarchist intellectual, with his friend George Sagri. They were at the first meeting and helped design the structure of Occupy.
Here is the etymology of the word from the Oxford dictionary: ORIGIN mid 16th cent.: via medieval Latin from Greek anarkhia, from anarkhos, from an- ‘without’ + arkhos ‘chief, ruler.’
Here is an article detailed how Occupy was designed: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/david-graeber-the-antileader-of-occupy-wall-street-10262011.html It has 7 or so pages. Read all of them. It's a very interesting read. Make a coffee, read, and learn.
I see your point, but in modern society the "accepted" definition of anarchy is the other one "without structure/rules/or organization etc.." Either way "Based in/on anarchy" isn't the message I would use to promote if you have to specify beyond that.
Just dug through the article, it's good but agiain, what Graeber wanted and what the majority of the people in the movement want is different now. So he shouldn't really be the "go to guy" for direction anymore. (Not really pleasing for him I'm sure, but he got plenty of book sales out of it and he'll be ok) and again, I don't think many of his concepts are enactable/sustainable/realistic in our world)
My main sources of information are being at the actual OWS locations through the US on and off when I can and their core beliefs are in the needed changes, not the structure by which they're enacted.
OWS is well beyond being what it started as and it can either face some tough realizations, or it can be doomed to forever being a fringe movement. I guess in retrospect I should have said the movement was "already" hijacked into what it is now (I just think of it as a progesssion in a positive direction, so it's hard for me to think of it as a negative as it's the people and not a "conglomerate" who took over.) I don't want it to get further hijacked and/or pushed in a counterproductive direction...
Finally, someone who can discuss a subject like an adult and clearly explain hist points. You came at the right time, I was just about to give up on this forum.
If you have a moment, I'd love you to read a post of mine and give your comments. It discusses the problem of moving away from anarchy and into another system. I have a feeling you could guide me towards the right path. It also links to an article from anarchists who discuss tactics on how to keep Occupy an anarchy. You might find that interesting too.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-anarchic-dilemma-do-anarchies-self-destruct/
Good link, well thought out set of ideals, but again (and I'm not just being contrary) I honestly don't think it can exist outside the realm of theory "in today's world, at the scale we're talking about here, as things stand today"
I realize those are three HUGE qualifiers but they're the very real pre-exsisting conditions that we have today. And (as pertaining to this thread" I still think that if you ask the majority of the people "If we can find a clear long term way to stay relevant, and change the issues that we have problems with" The question of what structure that was built on doesn't come into play as being important any more. (if you presuppose that there are in either direction, checks and balances) And if you agree with that (as I do) then the next question is, what system gets us the most/furthest/best shot at making things better.
That is the point I started from.
I'm more than willing to look over any other ideas, but based on the knowledge and experience I have now, this is the best way/place/time to start laying the groundwork for a "permanant installation"
I don't believe in anarchy or direct democracy really. I simply wanted to debate the precise dilemma I put forward, not whether direct democracy or anarchy is the answer to our problems. I just find it interesting that the anarchists are working behind the scenes to keep the movement leaderless and without demands.
I think there are a lot of people who like to talk about their idiology (loudly in many cases) but I would hope most would agree that the the most important thing (all things being equal) for us is the results. If "how we get there" becomes the immovable object,...then the naysayers get proven right and this is all for naught.
Also I just finished the link within your article, I think the author has a big chip on their shoulder and isn't really interested in making change as much as making a name or venting or something.. There's obviously a huge agenda push there with everything already pre-determined in his/her mind.
We're trying to get around that - the "agenda". Please read this and help us.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/what-ows-is-really-about/
I think there are a lot of anarchists behind Occupy, and they all hope Occupy remains in a form of anarchy. Iv'e read a lot of anarchic forums and almost all the top organizers of Occupy post there. The admin and programmer of this site is often on there. She's an intense anarchist. As you can see, this website has a pretty nice anarcho-communist layout.
I would probably agree with you but I also believe anarchy is a "system" (really a lack thereof, eh?) that is embraced by people who simply have not been given an alternative they're happy with and are also not capable of brainstorming this alternative themselves. In this scenario we have a group of people who are looking to destroy something with no plans to rebuild, but I am willing to bet the majority of people here who represent a pro-anarchy mindset would quickly convert to a system they believe answers the problems of the system they're looking to destroy.
Of course, this is one of the chief complaints of OWS (and rightfully so) - no leaders, no solidified goals. There's not room for much outside anarchy with the absence of these things.
I do believe, however, that these will come with time. As a very nubile movement, I think it's ok for it to still be in such an un-evolved state. It seems important and moving enough to people that eventually a true system will fall in to place, and the TRUE anarchists will be a very small minority.
Your implication that anarchy is a less evolved system than others is but an assumption in your post. What arguments can you provide for this notion?
I didn't imply anything. I said outright it's what I believe, it doesn't mean you have to believe it too.
I'm not even sure there is the possibility of creating a system that exists that really works - if you leave the public on their own, the corruption that exists in human nature will destroy the balance. If you give them a governing body, that same corruption will seep in to the people in power and have a similar effect.
If every person was inherently good and put the balance of the human race with the planet and within itself before all other needs, then we wouldn't need any change. Because that's so incredibly unrealistic, we instead seek constant change.
As for anarchy, it's old news and it never seemed to have a mass appeal. This could be because we're all a bunch of sheep who have been guided by the power hungry, or maybe it's just a system doesn't quite meet people's expectations the way others do.