Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Why not create a new political party, call it "The99Percent".

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 18, 2011, 4:32 p.m. EST by kmanpdx (105)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

If we really want change, we will elect and vote for people that are part of that party. If we don't, well then we are happy with the existing system (or too dumb and lazy to change anything). This, is the only way, to effect change in our environment. The government and legal processes are too slow for anything else to work.

58 Comments

58 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by RMR (3) 13 years ago

This would be an excellent idea so long as the party was organized and had an actual platform. It wouldn't really go anywhere if the average person A: Didn't know what the party's goals were B: didn't see the party as one united group working towards the same general set of goals.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

why not support the green party

[-] 1 points by TheFitter (2) from Morganville, NJ 13 years ago

FLASH---PAY ATTENTION TO THIS BLOG IF ANYTHING!!! THE MECHANISM IS ALREADY IN PLACE!!! AmericansElect.org: The web site is a candidate nomination locus that is reistered in all 50 state ballots. Log on and register and the new party exists de facto. We have it now... WE DO! There already exists a mechanism for our next step... REALLY!! IT HAPPENED IN PARALLEL TO THIS MOVEMENT. PLEASE LOG IN AND TAKE A LOOK. And let the party platform develop organically.

Please... Please... Please... RESIST the temptation to let this movement be co-opted by the existing machine... If we are part of it... We become part of it. DON'T LET UNIONS, DEMOCRATS, WHATEVER SPECIAL INTERESTS YOU HAVE, hang their shingle on this... no matter how simpatico we might be to a cause. We MUST recognize the reality - It only gives talking/attack points to the 1% and the lucky sperm club. That's exactly what they, the Bush/House-of-Saude cabal, and the corporate media want. They ruin their jeans for the opportunity to frame their debate under their trivialized terms and demeane the adgenda. It doesn't mean we don't support the causes for these volunteers to the cause, whatever it might be.... It just speaks to suspending support for those leaders of that cause whose ass-is-wider-than-their-shoulders... Take the wait-and-see position until it's an appropriate time to commit... AFTER SOME GOALS HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED. WE SHOULD RESIST THE TEMPTATION TO TRAVEL THAT ROAD - POLITICS, LIKE IT OR NOT - IS A BUSINESS THAT THRIVES ON A LACK OF DIETARY FIBER. We can support our friends later, when we agree who they really are. If they support us... be a part without bagage... let them show their support individually, like the rest of us... AND THAT WORKS.

The Tea Party, agree with them or not, was an organic movement that morphed into right-wing lunatics AFTER they got co-opted by Republicans, the Religious Right, the gun lobby, the Koch brothers, Heritage Foundation, Uncle Rupie Murduch and his turd spawn, etc. Where the F--k do you think the Tea Bagger campaign money came from? We MUST resist a similar fate from the left. The concequence will only be a more radical version of biz as usual... A HARDER RIGHT-A HARDER LEFT. And while we duke it out with each other, that 1% A-hole thrive. Let's break the usual and create a NEW paridymn.

Other recommendations: LISTEN TO THE MOST RECENT EPISODE OF "DAN CARLIN - COMMON SENSE". Also: MoveToAmend.com... Devoted of a Constitutional amendment to deny corporations legal personhood. SCREW JOHN "Lieing-works-for-me" ROBERTS, CLARENCE "Give-the-Koch Brothers-a-satisrying-BJ" THOMAS. "Bench-Legislate" SCALLIA, et al, the populist rear-entry they deserve for selling the country out.

Folks: LET'S USE MECHANISMS OTHER BROTHERS AND SISTERS HAVE ALREADY STARTED FOR US. PASS IT ON AND WE CAN COMBINE RESORCES.

[-] 1 points by Christy (62) 13 years ago

I love that idea. That sounds better than 'Occupy Wall Street' (that sounds too radical, and it scares people all around the world)- we shouldn't want to be hated or feared.

[-] 1 points by AmericanArtist (53) from New York, NY 13 years ago

Wiki Occupy Wall Street

http://www.wikioccupywallst.org

United We Stand ! Let's Build it Together ! Yes we are Us . . .

[-] 1 points by booshington (397) 13 years ago

I think it should be called The Pickle Party personally.

[-] 1 points by NYprotester (80) 13 years ago

We are the Dirt Bagger Party!

No more name changes. If you change the NY name it will confuse people.

[-] 1 points by Mike122333 (102) 13 years ago

In the U.S., we are a nation of laws. Laws come into being, are tested, modified, repealed through legislatures and courts. Only through force of law will OWS obtain satisfaction. Legislators are elected by and represent voter-constituents. To oust corrupt leaders, change laws, change the constitution, OWS needs representation in legislatures. Those are the facts. There are many organizations out there in full agreement with OWS who have been at these issues for years and years (e.g., The Sierra Club http://www.sierraclub.org/ , CREW http://www.citizensforethics.org/ , etc.). Seek them out and build coalitions and participate.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 13 years ago

great idea.

[-] 1 points by SmallBizGuy (378) from Savannah, GA 13 years ago

Get rid of all the political crooks.......then we can call it the The100percent.

[-] 1 points by Mike122333 (102) 13 years ago

Parties are the most effective way. But, this movement sooner or later is going to have to face the fact that change is incremental; politics and government is a very difficult business; there isn't time or strength in the movement to stand up a party in time; get over its self; get over the idea that there is a silver bullet that can bring about utopia; roll up its sleeves; merge with the Obama campaign; and work like hell to get he and as many democrats elected as possible who advocate its values. Learn and work very hard with the tools at hand (people/knowledge/technology/constitution of the U.S.) to make the repairs the Government needs. And remember it is ludicrous to imagine a bloody revolution scenario on so many levels so drop that foolish rhetoric (fyi: there is no such thing as "off the grid" anymore).

[-] 1 points by michaelbravo (222) 13 years ago

how about we call it the evolution party ....cause thats what we are trying to do....we are trying to evolve the planet

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 13 years ago

Agreed, this is an excellent idea, but start the war against Injustice by starting our own banks to double the income of the Bottom 99% of Workers, for many more people will come to your side when you are proactive (for “new” Business & Government solutions), instead of reactive (against “old” Business & Government solutions), which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive “new” strategy that implements all our various socioeconomic demands at the same time, regardless of party, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 1% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves, and thus doubling our income from Bank Profits which are 40% of all Corporate Profits; that is, using a Focused Direct Democracy organized according to our current Occupations & Generations. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategically Weighted Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:

http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo

Join http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/ because we need 100,000 “support clicks” at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.

Most importantly, remember, as cited in the first link, that as Bank Owner-Voters in your 1 of 48 "new" Business Investment Groups (or "new" Congressional Committees) you become the "new" Online Congress, and related “new” Businesses, REPLACING the "old" Congress, and related “old” Businesses, according to your current Occupations & Generations, called a Focused Direct Democracy.

Therefore, any Candidate (or Leader) therein, regardless of party, is a straw man, a puppet, a political opportunist, just like today; what's important is the STRATEGY – the sequence of steps – that the people organize themselves under in Military Internet Formation of their Individual Purchasing Power & Group Investment Power. In this, sequence is key, and if the correct mathematical sequence is followed then it results in doubling the income of the Bottom 99% of Workers from today's Bank Profits, which are 40% of all Corporate Profits.

Why? Because there are Natural Social Laws – in mathematical sequence – that are just like Natural Physical Laws, such as the Law of Gravity. You must follow those Natural Social Laws or the result will be Injustice, War, etc.

The FIRST step in Natural Social Law is to CONTROL the Banks as Bank Owner-Voters. If you do not, you will inevitably be UNJUSTLY EXPLOITED by the Top 1% Management System of Business & Government who have a Legitimate Profit Motive, just like you, to do so.

Consequently, you have no choice but to become Candidates (or Leaders) yourselves as Bank Owner-Voters according to your current Occupations & Generations.

So JOIN the 2nd link, and spread the word, so we can make 100,000 support clicks at AmericansElect.org when called for, at exactly the right time, by an e-mail from that group, in support of the above the bank-focused platform. If so, then you will see and feel how your goals can be accomplished within the above strategy as a “new” Candidate (or Leader) of your current Occupation & Generation.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

I must admit, what you are talking about is pretty complicated and unrealistic. I think you need to dumb it down a little and use less verbiage to get your point across. That's just me tho ;-) Maybe everyone else gets your point.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 13 years ago

Einstein said that we must have a higher level of thinking (or complexity) in solving today's problems than the lower level of thinking (or simplicity) that created those problems in the first place,. Nevertheless, I have been trying for the last 27 years in doing the above Business Analysis as a Marine, Certified Public Accountant, Computer Programmer, and Socioeconomic Analyst to “dumb down the message” as you rightly suggested, so please forgive me if I'm not talented enough to condense it any further.

As for being "realistic", I think if you take the time to read the 1st link above very carefully and critically then you will come to the conclusion that's it very realistic. Why? Because it's highly consistent with the existing system while overriding that system -- at same time -- in favor of the 99%, agreed?

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

I was not trying to insult you, for the record! I read through your information and came to the same conclusion as your last sentence. I still do not get the 'how' of your idea. Forgive my simplistic mind. Perhaps a spreadsheet showing the numbers or a table that breaks it down vs wordy descriptions will get your message out to a larger audience? Not that I endorse that yet - since I still don't quite get what you are saying.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 13 years ago

Could you be more specific? Which parts of the summary are you having difficulty understanding, for the summary is highly technical (or mathematical) already, and therefore a spreadsheet already, so what which statements need further technical (or mathematical) clarification?

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

I'll have to re-read it to provide a reasonable answer to you. I will try to do that later, I am at work today working for the man ;-)

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 13 years ago

Thanks, I very deeply appreciate your feedback.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

The real change is going to ultimately occur when critical mass is assembled and organized, and massive boycotts start taking place. To believe that we can install leaders to correct the broken system is delusion. The government is too big, and the system has become too corrupted, and there is too much legislation that needs to be reformed/ repealed. it would take hundreds of elected officials on all levels of local, state, and federal government to facilitate the change we are all seeking.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

Registering independent will ultimately establish our disgust and disenchantment with the entire political system. In all honestly, this seems to me like it shouldn't even be a conversation. Clearly, the political parties raise the money for the candidates, and then the candidates cater to those interests, and this is the exact thing we are fighting against. Any new political party will be destroyed against the amount of money either one of these parties can raise, because these are the richest corporate entities in the world. Attempting to compete against that just nullifies all of this, because in its action, it is playing into the system we are attempting to tear down.

[-] 1 points by Mike122333 (102) 13 years ago

Yes, the money out of politics issue can't be done from within; it must be done by constitutional convention (which people can bring about w/out congress I've learned). The rest of the clean up work can be done within the system, assuming people remain vigilant and educated and voting.

[-] 1 points by Mike122333 (102) 13 years ago

Yes, the money out of politics issue can't be done from within; it must be done by constitutional convention (which people can bring about w/out congress I've learned). The rest of the clean up work can be done within the system, assuming people remain vigilant and educated and voting.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

But, if we really have 99% behind us, would that not be enough to get our changes (which are admittedly nebulous) inserted into the government, at all levels? If 99% register as a new party and insert normal, everyday people into the various levels of government, could we not change things? Registering independent will only take votes away from one of the 2 parties there are today.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

It is ultimately the media who has forced us into believing that our votes are meaningless, and that we should only vote for one party or the other. If people were simply educating themselves, they would vote for the best candidates regardless of political orientation. But our system isn't going to be corrected by any elected official. As someone else said in another thread, we would literally have to replace almost all the members of Congress to do so.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

I thought things would have gone differently in the last election, as the country was melting down in 2010. The media drove people to believe that there was a choice between the Democrats or the Republicans, and most uninformed people voted straight down Republican party lines because they campaigned on the platform of being against Obama. That was how RIck Scott got elected. His major platform was that his candidate was a staunch Obama supporter. People were voting blindly down party lines because that's how the media played it.

I think if the movement can start facilitating and affecting real change through boycotts and action, more people will get behind it. Until then, I really think this conversation is premature. It will ultimately diminish the movement because it is playing in to the system that we are attempting to correct/ reset/ fix.. Whatever.

If you haven't already seen this, Chris Hedges gives a very realistic perspective of our reality in this interview -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SKw2j3XOY0

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

I must say, I felt the same with Obama and I have not seen a lot from his administration. I do blame a lot of that on the GOP and a more on a still racists America. But ultimately, he has not come through.

I don't think people will get behind this until, like another post I read to mentioned, this movement has solid goals and backing. Proof that the 99% gives a crap. Until then, most middle class Americans, like myself, are well-off enough not to rise up and fight the system. Life just isn't that bad. This is what the so-called 1% are banking on, and why they probably are not really sweating anything. That's why forming something like a 'political party' may be the only way to get real movement behind this thing.

If It's a rather bleak future if you believe all of what Chris Hedges has to say (he certainly made sense to me). If what he says is true, there is no real future for America until all the old bigots pass away and newer more tolerant youth replaces them. There is simply too much ignorance, religion, hatred, racism, and fear to allow for anything else. Even a movement like this, that I feel is loosing steam, cannot change that.

[-] 0 points by goeib1 (163) 13 years ago

That is the whole problem.... YOU are the 1%er's and could NEVER get anybody elected in any capacity. This is why I laugh when media compares you occupiers to the Tea Party. Tea Party has the backing of the people... they work for change in our system using our system.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

There is an overlap in what we care about. However, if the Tea Party were not a bunch of bigots, I might be more interested in them.

[-] 0 points by goeib1 (163) 13 years ago

There it goes again. Same with anything Fox News, or Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh, or ANYTHING conservative.... BIGOTS! Yet NOBODY can ever give FACTS to back up their baseless accusations. Again, such a lack of intelligence shown from this MOB

[-] 1 points by Hellomynameis (243) from Aptos, CA 13 years ago

Ewww... I didn't think even conservatives defended Glenn Beck any more...

[-] 0 points by goeib1 (163) 13 years ago

I love all the editorials from people deriding conservatives that they never have seen or heard. THAT is always an easy way to make a fool of yourself and remain uneducated. Use the normal MSNBC, CBS, ABC responses all your life and stay igonorant....

[-] 1 points by Hellomynameis (243) from Aptos, CA 13 years ago

I watch a good amount of conservative media... nice assumption though.

[-] 1 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 13 years ago

This would be called doing something to change things.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

Therefore, creating a political party just turns this movement into the Tea Party. In other words, in my opinion, it detracts from the real message here, which is to raise awareness and to start the conversation that has been largely muted from mainstream media and silenced in America for more than 30 years.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

Writer Chris Hedges said in his interview in the park on September 25th, “The only mechanism we have left for reform is civil disobedience. Any belief that the formal structures of power, including the Democratic Party, are going to ameliorate the injustices visited upon us, is self delusion.”

This is what I say to anyone believes a political party, or a political agenda is going to facilitate change in this country. Barack Obama has proven he is just as corrupt as anyone in government. To say he has been corrupted is a cop out. He had the people behind him, and the Change he promised turned out to be just a bunch of empty promises and rhetoric. Like Matt Taibbi said in Griptopia, "People aren't really needed for anything in the Griftopia, but since Americans require the illusion of self-government, we have elections."

[-] 1 points by ThatAutisticGirl (150) from Alameda, CA 13 years ago

When you create a political party it becomes the vanguard for the movement. By organizing the message of the movement it directs the flow of ideas within the movement and thus takes control of those ideas. Ideas are power and through the control of ideas the party takes control of the movement. When the movement takes control of the country it is the party that holds the reigns.

If your revolution is spearheaded by a vanguard party then the most you can ever hope to accomplish is replacing the old masters with new party leaders.

Please! This is what has destroyed every single attempt at a communist state in the history of the world! History books: read them before you set the course of human affairs.

[-] 1 points by democracy2012 (1) 13 years ago

Pearl9999 poses an interesting argument. How can we change the corrupt system? Are we boycotting the elections this year? How will this help? Will it help? Will it hurt us - the 1% will vote I'm betting. Some of the 99% will vote and will vote for the same people as the 1%, unwittingly helping those out to destroy them. My thought is that a more open system with multiple parties (not just 2) would help more voices to be heard. Instead of a winner takes all election, the number of representatives should be proportionate to the number of votes a candidate/party gets. In European countries, for example, the Parliament could be divided into 20% the 99percenters, 20% Democrats, 20% Republicans, 10% Green Party, 15% Rainbow Party, 8% Tea Party and 7%Anarchists. That way no party would have a majority, there would be a lot of discussion and coalitions would have to be formed.

[-] 1 points by RillyKewl (218) 13 years ago

I'd say sure, if you don't mind losing. But I can't support it even that far. You probably don't remember Ralph Nader. He is the reason we got saddled with GW Bush. You can't split the vote. In fact, the only reason Clinton got in was because the republicans had split their vote with with another candidate, Perot. It doesn't work It never works. Do yourselves a favor + research it.

[-] 1 points by dillysd (2) 13 years ago

Parties can be assumed without politics in mind. We have the needs of many over the needs of few. Occupy Wall St needs to create a "Write-In". This movement needs leaders that can be written in on ballots instead of those bad political leaders. We need normal people in the helm for the future of this country. Elect by popular vote with "Write-In's" and this country will be forever changed.

People need to set up a voiced facts to change what needs to be changed. If you don't want a republican or democrat in the senate or house make sure to get people write in status so we can opt for new leaders. This will create a leader without a political party.

[-] 1 points by Steve15 (385) 13 years ago

Because it will get infiltrated in years to come

[-] 1 points by pearl9999 (0) 13 years ago

it doesn't matter who is at the Presidential helm. the system is not changed by the election of a different seeming President (as we have learned from this Obama experience). If we were to win the election as the 99%, how do we disassemble and restructure all the Washington bureaucracy that has been in place for so many years? Winning the election will not stop the House or Senate from conducting corrupt business as usual. Lobbyists and special interest fat cats--the 1%--will still control. They stole democracy. How do we take the reigns away from the the corporations? Obama went in with intentions of change, but once he got caught up in how the game is actually played, he couldn't escape the bureaucratic bullshit. I hope our strength in numbers continues. We can not let the machine silence us. We are going to have to strengthen ourselves for this movement to spread more thickly across the land.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

By creating a "new" political party, all we are doing is succumbing to the same forces we are attempting to divorce ourselves from in the first place. We need to promote intelligence and awareness, and in exempting ourselves from political affiliations is a start in the right direction. Just listen to Jeffery Sachs interview in the park. The forum is in place, and we can erect a spokesperson or spokespeople to monumental status all via Facebook and Twitter.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

If the movement does not play politics it will loose. I totally get that we should not 'have' to play the game. Heck, I moved out of a management position in a fortune 100 company because I didn't believe in playing the game. But that was a cop out. I was aware of the need and decided not to play - and it hurt my position as a manager as well as the direct reports that worked for me. By not playing the game, I lost. Same goes for this movement.

This forum will gather no respect from those in power or the government. It is merely a avenue for self expression and enlightenment (for me anyway). I'd be surprised if any of our governmental leaders spend anytime here.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

Although this is off the topic of this thread, here is something I have drafted. An all encompassing one demand. Perhaps there is no reason to play politics at all, if we can simply transcend the system. It is just a rough draft, but let me know what you think -

That any act or legislation devised by any person, or legislative body, or any executive decision, or government agency, bureau, etc., that has been made in our history, written or devised or implemented by such an individual person, who in doing such act or passing such legislation, went on to receive a job, any sort of financial gift, bonus, benefit, position, or any kind of promotion, etc. within that industry or corporation, be reviewed by a new legislative body; if it is to be determined through review, that this collusion has occurred, that said specific legislation be repealed and disenacted immediately. If it was created in self-interest, and not in the interest of the majority of the population after unbiased review, consider this legislative act null and void. For this bears no relevance or significance in the promotion of humanity, and it shall not be recognized as such. This is the promise of America.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

I like it. In our history seems kinda unrealistic. What about on a go-forward basis? And, add in some type of monetary fine structure and possible jail time. And, verbiage to keep public officials off corporate books for some period of time after they leave office?

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

THinking about the possibilities of this demand, or petition, being handed to the press makes me realize the possibilities. The press would do all the work, and ultimately, the movement will be brought to the next level.

The beauty of this movement, is quite simply, that it raises awareness. To think of the enormity of the conversation the media would have with this, is almost hard to comprehend. They would elevate it to a new plateau, and they would do the work this group might not be capable of doing by just itself. And that is the tremendous task of informing the public. Really, the possibilities are endless, and we could for once, rely on the media to bring them all to light.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

I just reworked it a little. I'm meeting with a Constitutional Appeals Court Judge on Friday, and I'm going to perfect this. I will be in Liberty Square on Sunday to deliver. Tell me what you think with a little revision -

It is hereby ordered that any act or legislation devised by any person, or group, or legislative body, or any executive decision, or government agency, bureau, etc., that has been enacted, written or devised or implemented by such an individual or person, who in doing such act or passing such legislation, went on to receive a job, any sort of financial gift, bonus, benefit, position, or promotion, or anything of value, etc. within that industry or corporation, be reviewed by a new legislative body; if it is to be determined through review, that this collusion has occurred, that said specific legislation be repealed and disenacted immediately, and reparations be assessed. If it was done in self-interest, and not the interest of the majority of the population after unbiased review, than it shall be considered null and void. For this bears no relevance or significance in the promotion of humanity, and it shall not be recognized as such. This is the promise of America.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

What about adding verbiage regarding conflict of interest? Some other points to consider and work in:

  • no government agency shall consider economic advice from a person, corporation, college etc that is being paid or has a conflict of interest. A doctor should not receive kick backs for drugs they prescribe and an economic advisor should not offer advice if that advice is paid for by banks or financial institutions
  • your write up is a good past tense defense but something more stern to deter politicians from making those decisions In the first place I think would make sense.

I have to go for now but will circle back tomorrow.

[-] 1 points by MarcTwane (76) 13 years ago

Why not divorce ourselves from all political parties, and register Independent? For herein lies all the problems we are confronted with today in America.

[-] 1 points by RillyKewl (218) 13 years ago

No because then you have no say in the primaries.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

Not a bad idea, but wouldn't that be a political party in itself? I'm just saying, the system is in place because we have allowed it for over 100 years. Lets play the game, insert ourselves, and change it from the inside. Outside of a violent revolution, I think it may be the only way

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by NotOccupying (94) 13 years ago

Call it the 26% since that is who you represent. You don't represent 99% of this country.

[-] 1 points by kmanpdx (105) 13 years ago

Where do you get your numbers?

[-] 1 points by NotOccupying (94) 13 years ago

Politico