Forum Post: What is Occupy movement: founders of Occupy, 20k people in GA's, the 43% of Americans who support Occupy or is it this website?
Posted 1 year ago on Feb. 24, 2012, 12:34 a.m. EST by therising
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
**The following isn't really advocating for a position. It's simply gathering in one place the genuine questions that seem to be on the lips of many who support the Occupy movement. I believe that this can be a healthy and productive discussion no matter which side of the debate you're on.**
Here are the genuine questions I keep hearing people ask:
Will the Occupy movement always and forever be defined the way it was in September 2011 when this all began? Or will the definition of the Occupy movement evolve? What are the positives and negatives to standing firm on the one hand and evolving on the other?
What is the Occupy movement:
- the founders of Occupy?
- the 20,000 people in GA's around the country?
- the 43% of Americans who support the particular Occupy goals of getting the money out of politics and addressing the widening wealth gap?
- or this website?
Who determines the answer to that question? Is this movement what one or another group on the list above SAYS it is? Or is it what it ACTUALLY is (measured by number of supporters)? If 43% of the American public think it's a movement to get the money out of politics and address the dramatic and increasing wealth gap then doesn't that become what the movement is? And doesn't that inform our methods? OR, if all the GA's have consensus of what defines the movement, doesn't that forever define what Occupy is and will be?
Whose voice will carry the day regarding the issue of the national assembly being held in Philadelphia this summer? Whose voice should carry the day? What's best for the movement? What's best for the country? What's best for the citizens? Are people who support the national gathering in Philadelphia falling prey to something that FEELS GOOD or something that's actually good? Are they actually undermining the very cause they claim to support?
Is getting the money out of politics and addressing the widening income gap enough? Should we be setting the bar higher? Should we be seeking a total paradigm shift to direct democracy / Internet voting on every issue on a slate determined by some group of people? Or should we maintain the general framework of our founders and simply work to extricate the corporate hijackerswho have inserted themselves between we the people and our government? Which group is in position to define "what occupy is" now? Who will be in that position this spring? How about in July?
Who gets to define "who's a real Occupy supporter"?
What if millions of Americans get behind specific action steps that will help get the money out of politics and address the wealth gap? Will the people in the GA's attempt to stand in the way of that momentum? And, if so, will they be successful in keeping the movement on the direct democracy course (every citizen voting on every single issue) rather than representative democracy?
Is there a point at which the overwhelming momentum of the movement prevents the GA consensus model from controlling the movement?
And finally: Will our slogan in the end be "We are the 100%?" Isn't it true that the 1% are just as much slaves to the current system as we the 99% are? Aren't the 1% actually to be pitied because they still retain the delusion that materialism will suffice? Shouldn't we have compassion for them both from a moral/spiritual standpoint and also from a practical "let's get things done" perspective?
To me, no matter what side of this evolving and escalating debate you're on, the questions are relevant and the answers will be fascinating. Please share your thoughts on where this is going and why.