Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: why doesn't the occupy movement adopt the declaration and support it.

Posted 8 years ago on Nov. 26, 2011, 11:40 a.m. EST by paulg5 (673)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

why doesn't the occupy movement as a whole adopt the declaration and support it. As far as this website presents the movement it seems fractured into small group that seldom agree on any issue. The declaration seems to be an idea that finally gets the movement off the ground but on here it's treated like just another post. By not recognizing and implementing ideas that unify and categorize grievances nothing is going to get done! At least http://occupywallst.org/ should create a tab at the top of the home page so visitors can vote for it, and if this website doesn't support the declaration they should say so and give the reasons why not! As for me voting I had not luck signing the petition because I forgot my password and for some reason yet to be explained the website will not email me a password reset message.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/endorse-wwwthe99declarationorg-which-petition-redress-grievances/Q6qYt2H9

67 Comments

67 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by PandoraK (1678) 8 years ago

I suppose I'll get bashed for this but here goes anyway...

What I see is that the two 'lists' aren't so far apart, some less than key points are different but the basics are the same. One is written emotionally the other written intellectually. Both appear to want to work within the Constitutional system we've enjoyed for over 2 centuries.

The 99PercentDeclaration proposes a semi government within a government, delegates from all districts to attend a GA the other simply proposes creating a crisis situation to gain 'audience'.

The two should work in conjunction to gain the best possible outcome. It also should be realized that change comes about slowly and we (generic we) don't always get everything we want nor should we.

Reading this forum, one finds anarchist, socialists and a mix of every other 'ist' known to man. Democracy, especially direct democracy is messy, it's time consuming and the majority rule isn't always the best rule...too often the majority are not as well informed as they believe (which covers most of us, including myself) or have not thought of the consequences of certain actions.

We want change, and we need to act in ways that will bring at least SOME of those changes we want about in a timely fashion. Getting a few changes done, such as reinstating Glass/Steagall, opens the way to affecting other changes.

It has been commented that Martin Luther King did not have a plan, yet he did, a very loose plan but one that existed none the less. He understood that to affect change he had to create an affect on government and a result from government to 'back his play'.

Every time Dr. King spoke he laid out the official declaration, listen, read, it's there in plain English.

This isn't Dr. King's time, in inequities aren't as obvious, staring us in the face. How many of us knew or cared about derivatives and the banks gambling away 401K's and pension funds? We started caring when it began to affect us.

In this situation it is not only possible to 'run a two front war' but practical. Work with the system and work outside the system at the same time, there is in reality only one enemy with many arms.

I've spoken with many people here locally and nationally, international friends have also given view points. Sometimes it's a good thing to have someone on the outside looking in, they aren't so close to it and see things some of us miss.

Those people pretty much agree that working 'both sides' would yield results in the shortest time frame, where as, working one or the other would drag this out for more years than most of us would be comfortable with, or simply end up being a moot point when changes we DO NOT want occur because we couldn't 'get it together'.

OWS is doing it's job, it's creating awareness, it's opening dialogues that would not other wise have occurred.

The 99PercentDeclaration is also doing a job. Attempting to give the nay sayers who keep asking 'what do you want?' something to 'bite into'.

This has to be both social and political. Not on one front but on two or even more.

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

Right on. Agree.

[-] 2 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Excellent,,,,

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 8 years ago

I would ask: to which declaration do you refer? There are at least two that I am aware of, and both are in the draft process.

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

The Ninety-Nine Percent Declaration Post Office Box 190 Red Hook, New York 12571 the99declaration@gmail.com

second proposed petition: http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 8 years ago

That one is an outgrowth of both of the others.

It may in fact be premature - the numbers of signatories alone suggest that, as does the climate in which it is scheduled to take place - that in the middle of an election year - which holds the potential of either being taken up or drowned out by the electoral process.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

But in terms of the agenda seems like it covers most of the main issues that most reasonable people are concerned about?

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 8 years ago

yes

[-] 1 points by dldine (1) 8 years ago

I appreciate the diverse views on this question and the myriad of food for thought in the comments below. My thoughts:

1) The system is corrupt but can be fixed.

2) The first step in fixing the broken system is to get money out of politics. Only then can we have an honest democracy whereby each citizen truly has a voice.

3) Many average Americans are terrified of dramatic change. They will cling to the old familiar "safe" system if the alternative leaves them with too much uncertainty.

4) We need as much support and backing from our fellow citizens as possible. So while the end goal is a dramatic reclaiming of our government with the eventual result of meaningful change in policies that benefit society as a whole, we cannot alienate the majority of the population with refusals to act in a manner that lends them some degree of comfort.

5) Many citizens have given up on the system. They will not vote because of the obvious corruption that pervades our system. They will not demonstrate because they are working, afraid, or unclear as to goals and many other reasons. We need to get them involved and behind the movement.

6) My personal opinion is the the 99% Declaration provides a method to clarify to average citizens, not yet awakened to the real possibilities for change, the tenets and ideals of the movement. It also provides a familiar structure by which to make the changes thereby removing or limiting the element of fear.

I would love to see this be worked by all of us concerned for our future and the future generations of the planet. Part of the appeal and success of the movement has been the willingness to be inclusive. The appearance of fracture or discord will undermine the effort to those who have yet to become familiar with our goals. We must stand as one and figure out a plan to move forward. Unlike the civil rights movement which had a specific goal (the fair treatment of our citizens regardless of color), our movement has many, many goals. While we can aspire to follow Dr. King's legacy of non-violent action, we cannot compare this movement to the Civil Rights movement. This movement is a movement for all of the people of this country and the world, and seeks to rethink some of the fundamental beliefs and practices of our entire government and economic systems. With this amount of work to do we must stick together. Awareness has been raised, action has begun. In order to keep the momentum going, we must now actually form a workable plan.

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

Because it isn't a political movement, its a social movement for change. It doesn't have a document and that's intentional. What is with this fetish for some piece of "official" text? Do you think the Civil Rights Movement had some "official" declaration? No, it never did.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

Civil Rights Act was a pretty specific document and did a lot of good. Also, who says it's only a social movement and not a political movement?

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

Yeah, but it was a bill in government, not a charter of the movement itself.

And things are, what they are. People can say what they like, but a red door will still be a red door under any other name.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

The movement supported the bill and other legislation Bigtime. They were very specific about it. What is a red door?

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

Who says there won't be legislation OWS supports? There's support for some specific legislation in the 99% Declaration.

Do you know how long it takes to craft a bill? Some of them are years in the making before they are ever even introduced as bills. Aren't you being a little impatient to expect a 2 month old movement to be introducing all kinds of new legislation?

A red door is just a door that's red. The point is it's still red even if you call it green.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

I worked on Capitol Hill for my congressman. I am well aware of how quickly or slowly a bill can move through congress depending upon outside pressure. What I'm talking about is this movement focusing on legislation that will get the foot off our collective neck (Glass Steagall, campaign finance reform, effectively reverse.Citizens United decision, eliminate corporate personhood, etc. PS - The door IS green.

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

What I'm talking about is this movement focusing on legislation that will get the foot off our collective neck (Glass Steagall, campaign finance reform, effectively reverse.Citizens United decision, eliminate corporate personhood

No disagreement there.

But the door isn't green. "What's in a name? that which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet," to quote the Bard.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

So what are you saying.... because what I think you're saying is you think movement will never take a position and that will result in huge decline in support over time. I believe that we should unify and grow so that we can make decisions from a position of power rather than demands from a position of weakness. I too look forward to that day. But how do we get there Edgewaters? How do we get there?

We get there by growing the movement. And how do we do that when the movement has plateaued and is maybe even in decline? By standing for something. By fighting nonviolently for the soul of this country, fighting nonviolently to preserve what the founding fathers so lovingly bequeathed to us. That's what garners support. And that what matters. Standing for a negative will only get us so far.

[-] 0 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

It is not a political movement because it does not engage in political dialogue, and never will. It is a social protest using direct action with the hope of forcing a revolution. It wants to topple the government like in the Arab Spring protests which are Occupy's main inspiration.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

I hear what you're saying. I really do. I understand you and many others feel that way. But where is it being defined that way officially? Many people think it is both political and social and many want to save our republic, not destroy it. Many people are not ready to throw away what our radical founding fathers worked so hard to build, what our great grandfathers and grandfathers and fathers fought to defend. Just because corporate interests have weedled their way in and temporarily hijacked things doesn't mean we have to destroy the system itself. What the founding fathers produced is beautiful. A beautiful slallion. Why would we shoot the stallion? Let's just nonviolently remove the rider. It's a perfectly good horse.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

So what are you gonna do...... yell arrest those bad wall street guys their super bad! And sure monetary policy is gonna change just because OWS and the 99ers say so! You have to work the system for any changes like these. If you look at the civil rights movement there were leaders and people behind the scenes working the system to get the bill enacted

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=97

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

The purpose of a social movement is to change attitudes among the general public. There is no point drafting reforms that won't pass. Cart, horse, you have to put them together the right way around to work.

And yes, there were people in the civil rights movement working behind the scenes to get a bill passed. Years into it, after it had achieved a shift in public thinking. We're 2 months in to OWS. But it seems we live in an instant gratification type of society now. That's one of the false mentalities that needs to be overcome.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Actually we have two very different situations here, the government was trying to correct long overdue injustices in the system and the general public mostly in the south were opposed. The government was working towards civil right in 1946 when the US supreme court banned segregation from interstate bus travel, this action caused riots in Athens, Alabama and race riots also erupted in Philadelphia. In December of that year The National Committee on Civil Rights was created by President Harry Truman to investigate racism in America May 1954 U.S Supreme Court rules that racial segregation in the public schools of America was unconstitutional May 1955: U.S. Supreme Court orders desegregation of the public schools. January 1957 The Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) is formed to create a strategy for ending segregation, and Martin Luther King is elected president. June 23 1958 Dr. King meets with President Eisenhower May 6 1960 President Eisenhower signs the Civil Rights Act of 1960 into law What I'm getting at with this time line is you have to work the system from within as well. As far as changing attitudes I think that there are many more people for the movement than against it. So the only problem is to get them to come out. As the time line shows, as early as 1946 the problems were beginning to be addressed from within! And one other issue the supreme court rulings cause many of the riots, well before public sentiment shifted!

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

I think that there are many more people for the movement than against it. So the only problem is to get them to come out. As the time line shows, as early as 1946 the problems were beginning to be addressed from within!

Right but the efforts in 1946 weren't actually part of the Civil Rights Movement proper, were they? In that respect, there is no difference with what's happening now. There are efforts from within to reform the system. They're not part of OWS just like the same efforts in your case weren't actually part of the CRM. Not everything has to happen under the name "OWS". People approach the problem in all different ways and there are many different individuals and organizations tackling this problem, in their own ways.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

In 1946 they were probably precursors to, and influences of the civil rights movement. But I don't have the expertise to tell you exactly if the people involved at the time were government officials or concerned citizens or both. But usually when government responds in a profound way they are acting to correct injustices reported by victims. So were the victims part of the movement and was there reporting the crime the spark that created the movement, possibly. There is a lot of difference in whats happening now, are you kidding! People are not protesting to repress other people's civil rights. People are protesting to get their right back! They are tired of having there finances and homes swindled out from under them, and on and on! In the background I hear the TV it's another republican debate. I listened to one a couple of night ago with the intent of counting how many issues that were OWS and 99% related, when it was over my tally equaled 0! They are just ignoring OWS issues like they don't exist.

[-] 1 points by Edgewaters (912) 8 years ago

OK but what I'm saying is, the CRM never had any sort of "official" charter, and if it did have precursors from '46 on, it waited twelve years before it got MLK. Twelve years. We're two months in.

Two months isn't even enough time to ratify any sort of charter. I don't offhand know how long it took from conception to authorship to ratification for the Declaration of Independance, but I can guarantee they sure didn't slap it together in under two months. And there are documents in the works, like the 99% Declaration, which gets into some pretty specific demands and calls for specific bills to be passed (eg HR 639 and so on).

Not only are they ignoring OWS issues, they are pretending documents like this don't exist. I'm not sure that will change if they are ratified. They have decided to play dumb, and I expect they will continue to do so.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Making demands recognizes authority. Recognizing corrupt authority legitimizes tyranny.

Create the change you want to see with personal responsibility and productive cooperation within your community.

[-] 3 points by weepngwillo2 (277) 8 years ago

But I do still recognize the authority of our Constitution, and I don't believe I am alone on that. I do not recognize the authority of the 1%, or the major political parties. I don't want to destroy our government, I want to take it back.

Creating change takes time, forethought, organization, unity and hard work and sufferring. Let us not be deterred because we don't immediately make sweeping changes. If we don't show the rest of the 99% a mature and intelligent plan of action we will lose our chance to bring change about.

Do not be blinded to the fact that if we do not succeed the 1% will make it harder for any future groups that take up the cause.

[-] 2 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Agreed. From my point of view it is not the constitution that is bad, but the people who have ignore and usurp it for their own benefit.

The difficulty is in how to correct a system over which we seemingly have no control.

[-] 4 points by betsydoula (143) from Beverly Hills, FL 8 years ago

Nucleus, you are right in my humble opinion. It is people who have brought us to this crisis. Systems, and declarations after all are created by people. We have control over what we say and do. That is all really. Building unity within the movement seems like a monumental task when you read through these forums and read some of the posts from egos going at it. Yet, there are many people here who know that the current systems of government, finance and education will not sustain us for many more years. Nobody knows whether it will be a slow transformation, revolution, or some natural disaster that will force us more and more to connect with each other. Humans desire to be happy and many people think that the more they have of material possessions the happier they will be. Studies have proved otherwise. This global crisis has awakened many to the fact that when life is solely about obtaining possessions it is truly meaningless. OWS has inspired many to re-evaluate and rethink what has always been. This is a good thing. We all have to begin the change from within. We can not make anybody think, act or feel a certain way. Yes, the media has dumbed down America, as have the schools. But, they can't do it to us if we won't allow it. Getting back to the original post there were some very big egos bantering back and forth when this declaration went viral a couple of months back. I think it was the process of how it came to be and not its content that bothered many on OWS. It really doesn't matter as the awareness is the first change in shifting a culture. There are many other groups doing amazing things as well. www.unitinghumans.org, www.peoplescongress.org, www.unitedrepublic.org. Those are just a few. Let's continue the dialogue, and be the change we wish to see in the world. Maybe this time we will get it right.

[-] 1 points by weepngwillo2 (277) 8 years ago

That is the point. We have been duped into believing we don't have control. If we can find a way to bring the 99% together, we will win by numbers alone.

[-] 1 points by viewfromBeijing (4) from Beijing, Beijing 8 years ago

You mean like recognizing the authority of the government provided by the Constitution? Luckily for us, the same document that gives power to this "corrupt authority" also recognizes the people's right to petition government. And if the "corrupt authority" should fail to meet the demands of the people, the Constitution also give us the power and opportunity to overthrow a big part of the authority every 2 years.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

The capitalist perversion of the constitution gives those with mountains of money MORE power and opportunity.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Oh come on you really don't believe that! So we just ignore the elephant in the room right? Ok.....so the change you create through responsibility and cooperation whats to prevent that change to be undermined by the elephant in the room? Just by not recognizing it doesn't make it go away, that's silly logic.....will never work in a democracy!

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

A list of demands is not going to achieve change. It may help unify the movement, or it may work to fragment it - no doubt that is part of the opposition plan - but in the end you can't negotiate with sociopaths . Terrorists, maybe, but not sociopaths.

When the existing order is abandoned, a new order will emerge. It is up to us to reject the old order. It is up to us to create a new order.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

Our republic is worth saving. The founding fathers, radicals, put their lives at great risk to create it. Our great great grandfathers, great grandfathers, grandfathers fought for it. Others have fought to keep it fair and broaden access to its benefits.

It has been hijacked.

Some say, well, the horse has been stolen so let's shoot it. I don't buy that logic. I think we should remove the rider and it can be done.

Why the tendency to throw the baby out with the bath water? What gives us the right to throw away a system with a declaration and constitution so carefully thought out and so lovingly defended? We have not earned the right to crumple it up and throw it in the trash. It's time to eject the riser that has hijacked the horse.

Occupying congress. (first in the form of protest and then in the form of 99% candidates winning seats) would make it possible to construct guardrails for Wall Street and government by eliminating corporate personhood status, reinstating a form of Glass-Steagall, enacting legislation effectively overturning Citizens United, enacting campaign finance reform etc.

Of course that doesn't solve every problem. But it does get the proverbial foot off our neck long enough for American citizens to breathe and go after the next wave of change. The waves should come ceaselessly, one after the other, waves of reform. It will take time. It all begins by occupying congress with nonviolent protest on a massive scale and then occupying congress with elected. 99% candidates.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

The tendency to see things as either and exclusively "black" or "white" is a uniquely American cultural characteristic.

Do you really think the only possibilities are either

1) begging the existing corrupt power structure to reform itself

OR

2) open civil war?

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Unfortunately beating around the bush is to! Yes if you want change in our lifetime, besides it's not begging it's replacing, redistributing.

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

wow, you just took a trait of maturity and blanketed an entire country with it. good job fake supporter. you couldn't be more divisive. you better stay in canadu then homie.

[-] 2 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Here's a metaphor for you.

If I viewed the world in terms of black and white, I would always treat you like a spamming troll.

But since I tend to reject absolutes and view the world in infinite shades of gray, I respond to your trolling in one fashion and to those non-spamming participatory comments you've post in these forums (there have been some!) on the basis of their content.

I find that American culture has largely been dumbed down by corporate media (TV), public education by rote for testing, entertainment culture, etc.

I suggest you look at Taoist philosophy, especially the concept of yin yang.

"Yin yang are not opposing forces (dualities), but complementary opposites that interact within a greater whole, as part of a dynamic system. Everything has both yin and yang aspects as light cannot exist without darkness and vice-versa, but either of these aspects may manifest more strongly in particular objects, and may ebb or flow over time."

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

i don't need your reasoning. as i have stated. you are divisive. for whatever reason. i am not deterred by your name calling. in fact, i get more emails when you're being an ass then i do all the rest of the day. i also don't care how you see the world. your behavior and views are not in line with OWS or the 99%.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

Thanks for illustrating the metaphor.

As for my views not being in line with OWS or the 99%, how would you know? You are widely recognized as a troll who does not support the movement, and you have stated as much in a number of posts here.

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

hmm. must be why i get a lot of conversion in private messages. or they just don't want you stalking them too. you really have no clue.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 8 years ago

You making any money off those people who write for you for free yet?

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 8 years ago

awww. lashing out. how cute.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 8 years ago

July 4, 2012 in the City Of Philadelphia

[-] 0 points by Glaucon (296) 8 years ago

Occupy's goal is revolution, not political dialogue.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

I do not agree!

[-] 0 points by owsrulez (75) 8 years ago

I do not support it. We have no demands so I do not support demands made by a few people.

[-] 1 points by viewfromBeijing (4) from Beijing, Beijing 8 years ago

Can you elaborate on your response? If OWS is about changing the political/corporate system, wouldn't it be in the interest of the 99% to create consensus-built list of demands to give to the people who make the laws (i.e. Congress)?

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 8 years ago

There is a small number of radical idealists here that are in the wrong movement. They mistakenly conflate The Zeitgeist Movement with OWS. I'm supportive of both but I see OWS as a pivot point, the climax scene in the film Zeitgeist: Moving Forward. http://www.youtube.com/user/TZMOfficialChannel

The 99% Declaration is the American way (1st Amendment) to get this job done. I don't think 99% would support the owsrulez approach.

[-] 1 points by owsrulez (75) 8 years ago

No, the system is corrupt. Don't waste your time trying to change a corrupt system.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 8 years ago

Our republic is worth saving. The founding fathers, radicals, put their lives at great risk to create it. Our great great grandfathers, great grandfathers, grandfathers fought for it. Others have fought to keep it fair and broaden access to its benefits.

It has been hijacked.

Some say, well, the horse has been stolen so let's shoot it. I don't buy that logic. I think we should remove the rider and it can be done.

Why the tendency to throw the baby out with the bath water? What gives you the right to throw away a system with a declaration and constitution so carefully thought out and so lovingly defended? We have not earned the right to crumple it up and throw it in the trash. It, time to eject the riser that has hijacked the horse. Occupying congress. (first in the form of protest and then in the form of 99% candidates winning seats) would make it possible to construct guardrails for Wall Street and government by eliminating corporate personhood status, reinstating a form of Glass-Steagall, enacting legislation effectively overturning Citizens United, enacting campaign finance reform etc.

Of course that doesn't solve every problem. But it does get the proverbial foot off our neck long enough for American citizens to breathe and go after the next wave of change. The waves should come ceaselessly, one after the other, waves of reform. It will take time. It all begins by occupying congress with nonviolent protest on a massive scale and then occupying congress with elected. 99% candidates.

[-] 1 points by viewfromBeijing (4) from Beijing, Beijing 8 years ago

You're saying the system is corrupt so we shouldn't do anything except say that the system is corrupt. What's the point of exposing the problems in the system, if you don't want to change and fix it?

[-] 1 points by buphiloman (840) 8 years ago

I don't want to reform the system. I want to destroy it. "I aim to misbehave". Only after we destroy this evil system can we build a just, equitable, and compassionate society. "Gotta kick at the darkness till it bleeds daylight."

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

If you have no demands whats your point?

[-] 2 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

If what you are saying is the general belief of this movement then I see no reason to be part of it because it will go nowhere. If you chose peaceful reconciliation and thus far that is what the movement has demonstrated it wants. Then I assumed you chose to work within the system. But now your saying no demands, can't change a corrupted system. So why be peaceful, all hell should be breaking loose because that's the only alternative means of changing the system besides working towards change from within!

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 8 years ago

We need to demand more raisins in Raisin Bran! They have been putting less and less every year. It is one more way the 1% profits off the 99%.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

Maybe you should get a hobby!

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 8 years ago

I have a hobby, astonomy.

[-] 2 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

then go back to it!

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 8 years ago

It's cloudy tonight.

[-] 1 points by paulg5 (673) 8 years ago

I bet your one of those guys that thinks you can see back in time by looking at the stars with a large enough telescope....you know like back to the dawn of time just before the big bang......That is such a crock of raisins

[-] -2 points by ajmacdonaldjr (0) 8 years ago

A leaderless movement will alway be adrift. It's part of the OWS "strategy". To say "we are all leaders now" means "we have no leaders, no direction, and no unity".

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 8 years ago

I don't think so. I think it means, this country will not change until the people in it change.

[-] -2 points by MrMiller (128) from Sandy, UT 8 years ago

I also don't support demands, but I do demand a reasonable figurehead that would help us move forward together. It's still too early to have a simple solution to the system, since we haven't been brainstorming long enough. We'll get around to it though.

[-] 2 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 8 years ago

I demand one thing: A National General Assembly composed of s/elected delegates.