Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The 99percent Declaration

Posted 3 years ago on Dec. 2, 2011, 4:35 p.m. EST by yasminec001 (584)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

How do you feel about it? I'm looking for honest and sincere opinions with respect to one another.

32 Comments

32 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by WilsonSC (2) 3 years ago

I support the idea of networks of organized political action being generated in relationship with the Occupy Movement. Further, I think the time will come when such action is appropriate, and my hope is that as many as possible will have a chance to meaningfully participate in that process. With that said, M.P. and his cadre are being a little presumptuous in attempting to organize a National Delegation, with 876 delegates to represent the entire 99%. Their Declaration leaves many unanswered questions (yes, I read it thoroughly) and instead of touching bases and establishing dialogue, they went ahead and made a commercial. Unfortunately, this is opportunistic vanguardism, and it will cause a problem when GA's start coming to consensus about dissassociating themselves with what is basically a few individuals with their own agenda who are trying to get the rest of the 99% on their bandwagon. If they genuinely wanted to make an effort to represent the 99%, they would have more transparency, would have tried much harder to establish consensus on a broad basis, and would have called for more collaboration and discussion before hastily attempting to hoist their own platform on the backs of so many who have contributed some much. I feel it shows a lack of respect for solidarity, and demonstrates a lack of genuine desire to come together with the 99% in a real way. Lastly, when the time for political organizing and proposals does come, everyone should get a chance to contribute from the very beginning, and not be invited once a few people have already framed the discussion. This is a Hard Block from me.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

Hmm..I understand your approach, though. And I do understand your frustration. I believe they have petitioned to all GA's for support on this, including Occupy Philly. They seem to be transparent from what I've read here https://www.facebook.com/#!/www.the99declaration.org I know it's a facebook page but the owner posts updates often and is very clear on finances. However, I did hear how Occupy and the declaration were opposed to eachother. If it did represent all of the 99% and had respected the Occupy movement from the start, would you support it?

Also, I'm curious as to your personal solution/strategy for the problems that we face?

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 3 years ago

I think it looks legit. They have the clearly stated goal of working with and through government to affect change. I'm signed up. OWS is basically anarchy. Direct Action. Direct Democracy. Revolution. Zero plan. Unless you like that sort of thing. Pretty much - absurdity.

But its big and has alot of good discussion on the forum.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

I personally really think it has a lot of potential. I saw that it already has a down payment for a venue for the NGA happening next year. I feel like it's legit, too, and that it has a more clear and..I don't know, I guess a more structured plan of action. I also really love the demand to throw out all members of congress, etc. and hold a new election.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 3 years ago

Your last statement is misleading. Members of congress have to be voted out, and there is no alteration of the election cycles. The National General Assembly has no authority to do anything except prepare a petition to present to the government (President, Supreme Court, Congress) a list of grievances with the expectation of redress in a timely and satisfactory manner. This is as per the 1st Amendment.

WHEREAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THAT: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

Er, I guess I worded it wrong but isn't a throw-out voted for by the american voters?

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 3 years ago

ok i see what your getting at. If the 99% formed an independent 3rd party as per the final resolve in the Declaration, it would aim to supplant Republican and Democrat members of congress with 99rs starting with the midterm elections in 2014 and finishing in 2016.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

Oh man. I see so many things going wrong if we create a new party, but I also see it as being one of the more practical solutions.

Can't we just vote (by majority of American voters) all the members of Congress & House of Senate and all that out? Right now, if we wanted to?

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 3 years ago

in theory you could vote out every incumbent, sure. They would of course be replaced by other RepubliCrats. hmmm this isn't looking so hot...

The NGA effectively puts the Republican and Democratic parties between a rock and a hard place. Delivering the List of Grievances as the 2012 campaigns are in full swing means candidates are going to have to start answering hard questions. Thus, in order to attract the 99r votes, they are going to have to start competing with each other. OWS will have a profound impact on the 2012 election, and the NGA establishes the framework to keep that pressure on. If promises are broken, if The List is ignored, the NGA reconvenes and moves OWS/99% to the next level, the independent third party.

And if an ART V Convention is required, 100% of Americans will know about it through the voice of the NGA.

[-] 1 points by xobehtedistuognikniht (1) 3 years ago

The grievances are a great start, but logistically it's a nightmare.

In today's convoluted and bloated political system the amount of money it would take just to inform and educate the public is obscene. And, lets face it, a truly informed and educated public would not have voted in the current congress ... so prolific, public awareness is crucial to the success of the GA portion of the declaration. And, let's not forget about vetting potential candidates for the GA because the last thing anyone wants is for someone who appears to talk a good game derailing the whole thing with silliness, venom or hate. Logistically speaking the vetting and public awareness has to be done in an impossible amount of time to meet the GA date of July 4, 2012.

And then there's the logistics of inclusion in order to be truly representative of the 99% who would like to participate and vote for delegates. First, there appears to be no concerted effort to organize or control the voting process so that it's fair and democratic. It has to be the identical system across the states, you can't just say "do it at the local level, however." You could use the internet to reach more voters but this would still potentially exclude the aged and lower income citizenry. Not to mention that portion of the populace who due to financial, job related, familial or health reasons cannot attend to cast a delegate vote. Will there be an early or mail in ballot for those who want to participate? And, then how will you eliminate the sabotage factor, because honestly, there are many groups of anti OWS like people who would love to make a mockery and media spectacle of the whole thing; again where vetting pays off.

All of these things are just some of the factors that must be considered in order to legitimize the whole process, unless of course the real motive is to have only those actively participating in OWS or other related street level movements in each state select the delegates, which would not be representative of the 99% at all.

I love the idea of a third, viable party elected by an educated and fully aware populace who agree wholeheartedly with the petition of grievances set forth in the declaration. It would be an arduous and excruciating process to chip away at the old and stagnant order of our political system but a MUST. And we have to start somewhere. And the petition of grievances, while not complete, is something that can be easily constructed and agreed upon to solicit a humongous amount of signatures with a door to door and active street level drive that could actually work as an informative tool and have the ability to unite many more 99 percenters that aren't necessarily represented within active, street level protests.

However, I will not endorse the declaration until the OWS movement has signed on because I don't want anything to split, detract, distract or derail the momentum and focus of the single most important thing that is happening in our country right now, and that is OWS.

[-] 1 points by stuartchase (861) 3 years ago

The perfect place to occupy!

http://occupywallst.org/forum/make-a-stand-join-the-clan/

The Revolution starts here!

[-] 1 points by TommyNYC (730) 3 years ago

I don't support the 99% declaration because it calls for ending the Federal Reserve. "END THE FED" is a red herring created by the far right. It is also a port of entry for violence and racism to enter OWS.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/end-the-fed-movement-has-ties-to-domestic-terroris/

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 3 years ago

Could I get a link to the declaration please?

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 3 years ago

I still think it sucks and nobody has yet answered my objections to it. First, the most principled objection. It specifically excludes minors and noncitizens from serving as delegates to its proposed national assembly. The specific language it uses says that "citizens over the age of 18" are eligible to serve as delegates. The fact is that many minors and noncitizens serve in leading roles in Working Groups at OWS. Excluding them from any body is offensive and antithetical to the universalist principles of OWS.

Secondly, how in the world are delegates to be chosen in Congressional Districts were there are no GAs, much less occupations. That's just silly.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

Well, if I had it my way, anyone that was fit enough to serve a particular job could have it. But I think there should be some type of age limit. Perhaps at 16.

As for your second question, I don't have enough knowledge on the matter to discuss that. I'm in the middle of trying to aquire that.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 3 years ago

The point is nobody who is interested in this proposition really has their way. It is being very undemocratically controlled in a way that is antithetical to the values of OWS. IMHO an age limit for participation in OWS should be self determined. I've seen 8 year olds make outstanding contributions.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 3 years ago

This is the only document I've seen that has a realistic approach to reforming the system. Frankly, I signed it and I've done my best to push it out to the public. Of all the documents I've seen, this is the one that I think should be going viral. I highly encourage people interested in reforming the system to get behind this document, print a few copies for friends, and try to give it legs. When people say this movement has no agenda but anarchy, show them this document. I think it is the best hope for progressive reform. And, no, I don't think it's 100% perfect, but it's not my place to suggest solutions, rather, I think all the points are of timely concern, and worthy of public debate. This movement needs celebrity endorsement, and this is the document that I think can rally the support of "serious" people. Please, pass it along to all your friends, and get it spread via the internet grassroots of email and forums. It deserves to be read and discussed.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

Yes, I think so, too. They've already gathered a down payment for a venue next year for the NGA, and they've got things already 'rolling', per se. They need more attention. I think they also need to send a message to all GA's.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 3 years ago

I think so too. I think it's time we let some leaders in the movement get it together. The time for 50 different occupation groups is passing, we need a solid agenda to get behind. I don't think that document is perfect, but it's something we can rally behind (unless there's something better out there.) It's up to us, and now is the time.

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 3 years ago

It;'s a darned good start! As stated on the page, the 'list' is not conclusive nor firm it is a suggested list which could be used for the base grievance list the delegates would create.

I like the concept of a semi-government (short term) within the government to address our concerns via democratically elected delegates, and then presenting those concerns to the Congress etc.

I think this, if necessary, would be our best shot at enacting an Article 5 and actually having it work.

[-] 0 points by doctorlove (-10) 3 years ago

Let's call a spade a spade; you all are bunch of pole smoking assholes. How is your OWS project going? What a bunch of fucking assholes. Next up, Occupy My Ass; a cult function for queers, trannies and liberal fudgepackers. What a disgusting disgrace

[-] -1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 3 years ago

The problem is only about 0.5% agree with it so the name needs to be changed.

[-] 1 points by yasminec001 (584) 3 years ago

In the long-term scheme of things, the name is the least of my worries. But I understand people feel a need to have an integrating and respectful representation. Do you have any ideas?

[-] 2 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 3 years ago

Sure,

  1. Stop government subsidizing of anything.
  2. Stop government bailing out anything
  3. Stop government funding most things.
  4. Encourage corporations to locate in the USA.

And personally, take care of my children, take care of my parents, and take some time to help those in need.

[-] 1 points by NLake72 (510) 3 years ago

.5% of people have actually read it. And, of those who disagree with most of it's ideas, I would be willing to bet most of those people stop reading when their lips get tired. The issues we face are complicated, that doesn't mean the solutions are going to be simple. This document addresses a lot of the underlying corruption in the system.