Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Occupy's Return From Hibernation
As winter fades, the Occupy Wall Street movement is heating up again. But don’t expect the same focus on physical encampments and rowdy protests. While the blood of the 99 percent is still boiling at the injustice of growing inequality, in organizing meetings and workgroups, cooler heads are prevailing. This is Occupy 2.0—the mainstreaming of momentum.
From my conversations with Occupy organizers and supporters, my sense is that the main thrust of organizing energy and attention will go toward Occupy Our Homes— a coalition of Occupy activists joining with existing grassroots groups to support families that are facing foreclosure or have been evicted by big banks. Prioritizing Occupy Our Homes is great choice for two reasons.
First, the foreclosure crisis is immense and growing. Despite the recent mortgage settlement with state attorneys general that will grant 750,000 foreclosed-upon families a whopping $2,000 each (!), 4.2 million families have already been foreclosed upon during the economic crisis. The industry site RealtyTrac estimates that number will skyrocket to 10 million in 2012. Besides literally pulling the rug out of millions of American families at the worst possible moment, according to the Federal Reserve, high rates of foreclosed properties drive down home prices and values, hurting all homeowners and the economy as a whole. There may be no more powerful illustration of the abuses of the 1 percent than the taxpayer-bailed-out big banks foreclosing on struggling families and driving down the economy for the entire 99 percent.
But organizing around Occupy Our Homes is a strategic second phase choice for Occupy for another reason, one best summed up by my own mother. She sent money to Zuccotti Park and her own local Occupy site in Allentown, Pennsylvania but, at age 64 (sorry mom!), told me there was no way she was sleeping on the ground outside in the cold. The great thing about Occupy Our Homes as a tactic is that there’s still a tangible way for the tents and sleeping bags set to be involved (as when Occupy supporters camped out on the lawn of the home of an Iraq War veteran near Atlanta, ultimately saving her home from foreclosure) but foreclosure prevention also creates avenues for other types of engagement, whether bringing a casserole, writing a letter to a bank, or joining a prayer vigil. Such actions put a broader face on the 99 percent movement, not just punk kids in bandanas but middle class families threatened with homelessness standing with block association presidents and pastors and grandmothers (i.e., my mom).
Say what you will about mainstreaming, that’s how movements evolve being a fringe concern to a force for change. I don’t mean to disregard the role of the vanguard, those at the leading edge of a movement’s origins who take the first, bold steps and, often, risks. But vanguard leaders should be self-aware and situate themselves in a larger context, seeing the prospect of mainstream appeal as a sign of their success not a threat to undermine it. It’s absurd to pave a road and then get angry when other people follow it. Instead, the next step is to pave a new one.
Unfortunately, I predict that a crowd of die-hard Occupiers will stubbornly cling to the tactic of public Occupy encampments and mass, edgy protests, confusing these tactics for the entirety of the movement and overlooking the possibility that these tactics may have outlived their symbolic power. Related debates about the political utility of black bloc tactics have been springing up and hopefully, these important debates will continue, knitting together various philosophies within Occupy into a diverse whole. But as with many movements, it looks like this next phase will divide the movement into factions, with the radical anarchist wing splitting off from the rest. Perhaps the best outcome of this will be that even though the anarchists will continue their “day of rage” type actions and police aggression, they will make the Occupy Our Homes wing seem more reasonable and rational. At best, the more radical wing will continue to pave new, innovative roads for future momentum. That would be the vanguard-y thing to do.
Lastly, look in the spring for another wing to emerge—existing grassroots organizations driving sets of actions tied to the mission of Occupy Our Homes but with a more radical, confrontational edge. This will include perhaps the most visible, systematic disruption of corporate shareholder meetings ever seen in our country as well as other targeted direct actions on big banks in particular. No doubt there will be some missteps but, to be clear, the difference with this cluster of organizers and actions is that it will explicitly seek to bolster the same message and goals as Occupy Our Homes and implicitly create political pressure and space through edgier tactics that legitimize other arms of the movement.
I was recently trying to explain hibernation to my three-year-old. I told her that animals like bears store food in the fall, dig in and gather strength in the winter and then come out ready for spring. The 99 percent movement gathered tremendous public will and political momentum in the fall of 2011. Now, the movement is quietly planning and gathering strategic strength. In the spring, populist activism will bloom across America with a density and diversity unheard of for decades. It’s going to be a very hot spring indeed.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
99 Comments so far
Show AllThat may be clear to you, but it is not clear to me.
As I wrote to OS, why would we be looking for uniformity at this stage?
I'd argue that uniformity in action is antithetical to the Occupation ethos (such as it is this early on).
IMHO, the uniformity-path that was chosen in creating Venezuela's PSUV was a mistake, and that was POST-revolutionary!
Certainly we should be encouraging diversity and innovation with our embryonic movement here in the U.S. ;)
Durrutix,
Thank you very much. This is a very important set of practical details, tactics, and strategies that deceptive manipulators use, to subvert and discourage social change.
Like to better learn, discern, and distinguish those COINTELPRO and agent provocateur activities, to invalidate, disrupt, and "marginalize "anarchists" and "radicals"."
This is to me (abstractly) -- a huge and critical recurring problem, to otherwise increasing: solidarity, coalescence, and beneficial synergistic growth and cooperation.
Broadly brushing and/or tainting, or attempting to taint the supposedly 'best and brightest' of the "anarchists" and "radicals", as supposedly mostly following Black Bloc's gratuitous property violence (as starkly contrasted with general non-violence), seems to me -- to be tantamount to what you post.
Is it ?
There are several issues raised by the Black Bloc.
One is the tactic of property damage. Does damaging property aid our cause? I think it depends on the type of property and the circumstance. So for example, I think it is laudatory when activists disable WMD, rendering them inoperable. On the other hand, such an action can come with a lengthy prison sentence, and the worst place for an activist to be is in prison.
The type of property damage associated with the Black Bloc -- namely breaking windows -- is utterly useless, if not counter-productive. That is why undercover police have been caught engaging in the "black bloc".
That raises another important issue -- agent provocateurs. While the majority of people who use the black bloc tactic are probably just angry youth, it is plausible that agent provocateurs are sometimes involved. What to do?
Here's what NOT to do -- start accusing everyone of being government agents. I have interviewed several victims of the FBI's COINTELPRO programs, and they all agreed -- debate the TACTICS, not the question of whether this or that activist is an informant. Why is this so important? Here's an example --
In a 1970 memo, "FBI agents were instructed to plant in the hands of Panthers phony documents (on FBI stationery) that would lead them to suspect one another of being police informers.” Another FBI directive tells agents to question those in the new left at every opportunity: “It will enhance the paranoia endmic in these circles and will furher serve to get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox” Louois Tackwood notes that the effort to create “an atmosphere of the big brother thing. Everybody’s being watched, everybody’s phone is being tapped.” (Citizens’ Research Committee 1973).
So while acknowledging that infiltration and provocation are real threats, the best way of circumventing them is to stick to tactical arguments, rather than snitch-jacketing.
The black bloc also raises the issue of violence. Most of the arguments around the bloc revolve around whether property damage is actually violence. So we often hear things like "you're upset over a broken window when activists are being clubbed over the head!?" This is fair enough, and indeed the question of public outrage over property damage or even real violence depends on circumstance.
In his study of the subject, Gary T. Marx points out that --
“Even acts of violence provoked or committed by agents may have consequences quite different from those desired by authorities. In an atmosphere of intense grievances, such as early 20th-century Russia, such actions may backfire. The strategic consequences envisioned by radicals may prove more correct than those envisioned by authorities. Organizations may profit from dramatic events that serve as example and inspiration to others. The subsequent repression of the group may create martyrs and sympathy for it and help to publicize its cause. The exposure of the role of the agent provocateur may further reduce the legitimacy of the government."
Nevertheless, he concludes that the consequences of provocateurs are overwhelmingly negative. Based on my study of the issue, I think that -- generally speaking -- acts of general mayhem and terrorism serve the state. This does not mean that militancy should be discouraged, however.
Liberals often present us with a false choice -- break windows/attack police vs. "strict non-violence"/work within the system. Yet there are many potential tactics at our disposable, some of which may be illegal but nevertheless justified. The most important thing is to increase the level of coordination/organization. For the first time in history, communication technologies may allow a real international. National and international coordination could enable us to use our numbers to our advantage, thereby minimizing confrontations with the state.
thank you for this balanced post. i watched the film 'psywars' (thank you for the link) it was an excellent overview of the extent to which we are controlled. thank you. yes, it's better to think strategies through before acting irrationally - and potentially tainting a broader "movement".
your points about cointelpro tactics - creating paranoia and internal divisions w/in a broader "movement" - are also relevant.
imho, what we are experiencing is the breakdown of modern capitalism as we know it. i think it's naive to imagine any group will be able to harness the energy of the tiger once it is awakened. the occupy movt has shown that ordinary people can govern themselves w/out intermediaries. that's a good model. it's one of the reasons the federal government was obsessed with targeting the black panthers.
grassroots community organizing creates the infrastructure that exists outside of the state (including churches) - as the corporate state slowly disintegrates, these organizations will have a more direct impact on the people (like foreign aid trucks in drought struck countries in africa). also a good idea (co-ops, community banking). occupy unified different activists that were aware and introduced ideas to others including the disenfranchised.
and we will be able to share our successes through the filtered lenses of the internet.
until ??? patriot act 4, the national defense authorization act of 2014...
is occupy a tactic (a public gathering space, participatory democracy, the accoutrements of a village) or an expression of first amendment rights - the right to assemble ? is occupy a new political movt - an opening for a third party (ironic for a group that uses consensus decision making) ? i saw it as an expression of 1st amendment rights. it will be more challenging to assert this right to assemble (b/c of occupy) in the future.
i also appreciate the idea that uprisings occurring around the world should be examined from a broader perspective. empires exist across nation-state borders - and in turn, resistance draws strength when it can communicate with,and understand the other victims of empire.
...peace...
Thanks Blackbird. Glad you enjoyed Psywar. There are several other of my films at the link below which you may find of interest. All are free. My film on Occupy is entitled "Rise Like Lions". It has been screened at many Occupy locations, including Amsterdam, London, Auckland and Detroit.
http://metanoia-films.org/films/
Next one "The Power Principle" should be out in about a month. Good luck in Oakland.
Durrutix,
Thank you for responding in detail, and providing the benefit of your experience in somehow finding the right balance, when surrounded by conflicting emotions of how best to support the community.
You offer the advantageous perspective of encouraging us, who are interested, to look under the hood, and get to the essence of what a person is about. That integrous people authentically express themselves, particularly in describing their "tactics," or their 'carefully planned action or strategy, to achieve a specific end.'
If the means and end results and the reasons and beliefs behind that -- are carefully shown to be beneficial and worthwhile -- and of course agreeable for collective support, then that is all that matters, and thus we need to do, as you say :
"Debate the tactics"
"So while acknowledging that infiltration and provocation are real threats, the best way of circumventing them is to stick to tactical arguments, rather than snitch-jacketing."
My growing sense of this is similar, based upon honoring fleeting intuitions -- when confronted with clear inconsistencies -- that debating and discerning what might have lead to such apparently self-contradictory elements, is incumbent and required of us.
Essentially, that in these times -- we all have increasing responsibility for 'due diligence,' to ascertain if some tactic is a good fit with the situation and circumstances. That no one need question the 'mother of a good idea,' as that once tested that a good idea or tactic -- is intrinsically good -- that it then stands on it's own, each and everyone of them. Unless they don't.
"Debate the tactics," not the person (i.e. avoid ad hominem personal attacks).
If I understand your response, that it far better to be exceedingly cautious than take the severe risk of falsely accusing an innocent, and/or attempting to brand a possible ally as deceptively supporting those a group opposes.
That each of our own experiences, commitment, and depth of knowledge of previous tactics and explanations -- instills a unique ability to understand as best we can, what may or may not work. Our individual contribution, is to represent that to the group, be it one or more other similarly inclined people
That in a group, each person's unique abilities and ideas are then roughly assembled, synthesized, "debated," and adapted as needed -- also as best we can collectively understand, what may or may not work.
That challenging loosely looped together tactics, and seeking to tie each portion to what is more steadfast and mutually agreeable, is because in a way that hammering out or forging process, acts as something like a truth machine.
< o > Good ideas pop out, and are recognized as such, collectively
< o > Tentative ideas are recognized as such, needing more work.
Implicit in this, is accepting that all are intending and committed to roughly the same end goals, or at a minimum, there are shared goals.
That each person, as part of this assembly of people, voluntarily chooses to put their raw and possibly too rough ideas, into this process (machinery of truth) in order to create a consensus. To round off the sharp edges, or not, as is mutually agreeable.
That each person, must be vulnerable and open to questions as to what any particular element or idea represents to them, and why -- and that the group itself will take them at their word (as sincere) -- even if some incongruities emerge.
Keeping in mind, that is not the differences that matter per se, but forging the connections.
That the raw ingredients need not be perfectly aligned going into the process, to create something of good quality.
That some degree of inconsistency is part of each of our human existences, and that as long as we work together overall -- to resolve such without blame or guilt -- to reach effective consensus, that the process and results are good.
That even with the best of minds and intentions, sometimes good tactics are still ineffective, and sometimes we must re-apprasie strategies and approaches once again, going back to the drawing board.
I have been in the Occupy movement for over four months now. The author apparently thinks only kids and homeless are members of the Occupy movement. The Occupation I am associated with is Occupy Little Rock. The core group is rather small, maybe fifty people. Of those, at least 15, like myself are veterans. In the physical Occupation site (which is still up and running) there are seven veterans, most of us over fifty.
We are, at present circulating petitions to overturn the Citizen's United decision and to reenstate the Glass Stegall laws on banking. We are also working on a couple of local issues. Every day we have people coming in to find more about the movement. We have university classes come out to speak with us. We attend city council meetings, court actions and state government functions.
The dismissive tone of the writer is something we have come to expect from most in the press. It is not unusual for reporters to come out and receive several interviews from well informed citizens. They choose to only report and broadcast when they can find a person they can marginalize. They look for long hair and dirty clothes.
Members of Occupy do not have police powers. Short of calling the police to escort unruly people away, Occupy has no coercive means to get folks who wander in to leave. Unless these folks break one of our rules, such as no alcohol or drug use on site, we have little power under our city provided permit to get them to leave.
Despite working under these difficult circumstances our movement continues to grow and we are having a real effect in our area. Winter didn't drive off most of the Occupiers, it has been the government attempting to limit our free speech.
Keep up the good work!
But remember that there is room for contructive criticisms and additive innovations.
You liken this writer to a reporter, but she is "Chief Agitation Officer for the Movement Vison Lab." She is within the movement(s) not outside.
She is the founder of that organization. That is not "within the movement."
How so?
She's not a reporter.
She started a group called "Movement Vision Lab."
Unless that group is some sort of scam, that sounds "within the movement(s)" to me?
Anyone, especially a person with experience working in the grant industry, can set up a non-profit, give themselves a title, and claim to be a "movement."
"Movement Vision Lab." OK.
Anyone, especially a person with time on their hands, can camp at an Occupation, or get themselves a CD login, and claim to represent "Occupy".
I guess I'm just trusting CD to filter out fakers.
"Movement Vision Lab" isn't a "group." It is her. The domain movementvision.org/ re-directs to sallykohn.com/ where she promotes her own career.
"Sally Kohn is an energetic, funny and accessible speaker on a wide range of topics - winning broad praise from the diverse audiences she speaks to, whether universities, philanthropic executives, grassroots volunteers, emerging business leaders or others."
Nothing wrong with any of that, necessarily, but let's not misrepresent it.
Well, hopefully folks will read the comments and see that information.
Should have been at the end of the article itself.
Seems misrepresentative to me.
But Occupy Our Homes and shareholder meeting disruptions -and diversity in the movement- are still good ideas. ;)
Thanks for this clear and detailed report Mac. Little Rock. Who wouldda thunk it? And congrats for surviving the repression.
Clearly, your experience shows the importance of having physical public space as a base. It's a university where folks can get a real-world education, a place of solidarity and love, a place to get off the street and maybe set up some kind of personal space.
Anyway, this piece, unlike Kohn's liberal drivel is damned fine journalism.
Welcome Home Mac. That's to you and all the vets and the homeless who have found one.
PS: I'm sure that Billary are regular visitors when they're not globe hopping :-}
Peace and Solidarity,
tj
I think both the Occupy Our Homes and shareholder meeting disruptions are good avenues for action that should see real, on the ground, results and grow public support.
I understand the protective attitude that has grown up around the camp-outs and street confrontations. But I also understand why a whole helluva lot of people -frankly, including myself- are not going to actually want to camp-out or fight the cops. We're just not in that place (yet?) as a society.
The danger of co-optation is there of course.
But it shouldn't stifle innovation or evolution -especially not with the current situation of diminishing returns.
"Camping out and fighting the cops" is not what Occupy was about. That is part of the false and malicious narrative being used to discredit it, scare people away, and herd them back into safe (for those in power) channels.
Maybe matti will power up a "safe nuke" at his Occupy site.
If they only existed -and I was a billionaire- you bet your ass I would!
Talk about a real demonstration of a new and better way.
(electric) Power to the People. ;)
'Course, they don't yet exist, and perhaps never will. And certainly never will without support that they do not currently have. :(
Matti The Contradictive- "I won't be joining in the protests, I just have some real constructive advice: you should stop, they are not effective" . You hit almost every mark here on this one thread: Direct Coordinated Action Against Seats Of Power-Bad Idea, let's all split up; Nukes Could Be Made Safe If There Was Enough Support-Protesters Are Uneducated and Technically Illiterate, The People Driving Wedge Issues Should Be Supported-when you don't it is really yourself who is dividing the movement, (and my favorite) I am for the People-but I dream of being a billionaire so I can nuke the Occupy Movement. I guess I took some poetic liberty........ but does any one else see the pattern?
Nah, there's no pattern, unless you call schizoid a pattern.
I in NO way support shcizoid, but in this case.........
It is what the People think Occupy is about.
That is how it has been portrayed, so that is what people know.
And while the "fighting the cops" may be a minority blown out of proportion, the "camping out" has been an integral part of this thing from day one, has been the major cause of the "fighting the cops", and has -IMHO- been a real albatross-around-the-neck for the movement for about 3 months now.
This won't become a genuine popular movement by complaining in echo-chambers like this one that the movement has been portrayed falsely.
A counter-story generated by organization of new and better methods is needed.
Those in covert opposition to Occupy, in a coordinated national effort, started claiming that "fighting the cops" was a problem and started blaming radicals and anarchists for that. It those people making those underhanded and deceitful attacks on Occupy , using "Black Bloc" as a scapegoat and then expanding their attacks to any and all who refused to go along with that - calling critics "crazy" and "dangerous" and accusing them of "advocating violence" - who are "a real albatross-around-the-neck for the movement for about 3 months now," not the radicals and anarchists they are attacking.
So you just wish to drive the wedge in further?
I don't see the sense of that.
You sound like a mother hen sitting on her egg.
The street confrontations were real, they were intented to be confrontations by the protesters, they were justified by evictions of the camps, and -again IMHO- went badly for the broader movement and the larger goals.
I very much don't like the way that all the "lefty" writers worked together to paint the situation as bad as could be.
But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't explore other methods just to spite Chris Hedges. ;)
I have no doubt that the point of view you are promoting will "win" in liberal and progressive circles, but I will continue to patiently and respectfully express a dissenting view.
I don't see how that is "like a mother hen sitting on her egg," nor how it would "drive the wedge in further." I am rejecting the attempts at driving a wedge, not driving a wedge.
You are kidding, right?
"I have no doubt that the point of view you are promoting will "win" in liberal and progressive circles,..."
If Kohn is doing what you say, this is the other side, and you are doing the same.
And the "mother hen" is overly-protective of her egg, see?
No, I am not kidding, and I have no "egg" to protect.
This statement makes no sense to me:
"If Kohn is doing what you say, this is the other side, and you are doing the same."
Good article! But we must keep mind that this OWS movement is and will be a target for a hostile takeover and betrayal by this president. That should and must be resisted at all costs. He has been the death of all progressive movements in the USA. It's time to cut him loose. Now is that time. "The fierce urgency of now" is upon us
"The street confrontations were real, they were intented to be confrontations by the protesters, they were justified by evictions of the camps, and -again IMHO- went badly for the broader movement and the larger goals."
Those confrontations brought over 10,000 people into the streets of Oakland and closed the Port! Something the anti-war movement had tried to do, and failed, years earlier.
They demonstrated the power of mass direct action, in an alliance between Occupy and the ILWU.
That wasn't the only street confrontation, though.
While I agree that the Port Shutdown demonstrated the power of mass direct action today, I don't think I would agree with you as to how powerful that demonstration showed mass direct action is currently.
But the point is that these sorts of things don't really need to stop, the folks doing them just need to stay aware of these actions place in the larger movement, and maintain solidarity with others taking other actions.
"But don’t expect the same focus on physical encampments and rowdy protests."
occupy was able to release a meme into the mainstream imagination. the awareness that great inequities of wealth exist and this great inequity is unhealthy for our society on many levels.
occupy is looking for new tactics b/c the tactics that they used last fall are no longer practical. our parks have become more restricted protest spaces b/c of occupy. any future demonstration that wants to last for longer than daylight hours on a designated free speech day, w/ a permit - will be severely scrutinized, if allowed at all.
even though OWS raised consciousness, occupy was not able to change the mainstream american perception that dissenters are the other (they're dirty, violent, flaky). the slogan 99% was a clever way to draw the argument back to economic disparities - the failure of capitalism. but, the slogan itself did not change the long held biases that have been cultivated by the elites for generations.
occupy can shift it's focus to foreclosed homes (a good idea), to draw attention to the housing crisis (homelessness, foreclosed homes, empty unproductive buildings boarded in out communities), and this message will also be co-opted by the president during the campaign this year. obama will point to his mortgage relief act - to suggest that at least he's trying, and then he will heap promise upon promise on the american electorate as he collects untold campaign contributions from bankers.
perhaps house by house occupy can gain a physical space to organize (the function of the occupied parks), before the police show up and arrest everyone. i don't believe the authorities will ever willingly concede a large building (like the convention center in oakland) in an urban space w/out the police intervening. we'll see.
there's a danger i see this spring. many are suggesting that occupy embodies the activist community in america. may day is coming up, the g8/NATO meeting is on the calendar, there are 2 corrupt political national conventions on the horizon. occupying homes and encouraging outreach is a good idea (even tea and cookies sounds good) but we don't have to relinquish that which we were endowed w/ (at a high cost) the first amendment. the right to go into the street and express our discontent. the right to dissent in public.
let's not relinquish that right, b/c occupy chooses new tactics or because of fear of police brutality. we would be expressing our discontent whether occupy had existed or not.
...peace...
"high rates of foreclosed properties drive down home prices and values, hurting all homeowners and the economy as a whole"
It's very clear now that the people have to choose between The People's Agenda and the liberal agenda. The liberal agenda with its intrinsic corruption has already failed the people mightily and the people are very much at the end of the liberal rope. The idea conveyed in the quote above is very typically liberal. Corrupt to the core, the idea absolutely corrupts and halts the people's campaign for justice, because the idea appeals to the people's greed, instead of to the people's better aspirations. Motivated by internal greed, the people cannot fight external greed. We have to forget about "home values". That is nothing more than a pickup call to turn the people into small-time spekulators, to stop them from pursuing justice against the high-rollers. We have to apply Kant's Categorical Imperative. Sorry, but that's just a fact of life, if you want to live in a just world. KCI says that if everyone does it, and it works, it's right. If everyone does it and it explodes, then it's wrong. Ok? Spekulation - everyone lurches for high property values, you get financial catastrophe. Instead, if everyone demands affordable, stable, sustainable shelter, then wow, look at that - we get to see happiness on the horizon, for a friggin change. Ready to give liberalism the big boot, people? It's roadkill. Kick it off the road. Compost it.
RE: While the blood of the 99 percent is still boiling at the injustice of growing inequality
LOL Does the author really buy that nonsense of the 99%. If so, would they please at least wear an adult diaper so when they are amongst they peers they can restrain themselves from dumping in public? It is just some loonies wanting and thinking they are owed 'stuff' and not have to work for it or do without.
Yes, those loonies running Wall Street do think they are owed stuff, and they think they shouldn't either have to work for it or do without.
Touche!
The writer wants OWS to be a branch of the Democratic Party which has great rhetoric about justice and change, but implements policies of military and corporate hegemony
C.H.A.O.S. Direct*Action Communique
Citizens Helping Atone Our System
Open*Letter to Occupy,
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." - 'Abe Lincoln'
Occupy is an action, NOT an issue, it's an effective action that demands attention to many issues, and it embodies both those of Civil and Human Rights, of Labor and Capital, and calls to everyone concerned with these issues.
Your efforts are valiant, yet failing to fully engage the 99% while some of your actions provide a fertile environment for violent agitators.
There is a simple yet powerful way to create positive change in those aspects of the movement, while simultaneously bringing about many of your goals.
We propose a single action that creates equitable funding solutions for all these issues, one that draws everyone, Tea Party, Coffee Party, Any Party into the debate, an action that everyone can partake in and none could deny is both a basic civil and human right of every individual and group.
The right to direct the capital of their labor toward developing the world of our future.
This action would create both immediate and long term results, while setting the stage to change everything, empowering The*People to begin a paradigm shift toward Direct Democracy.
An action to SHAKE the system to it's ROTTEN-CORE ...
Occupy Hearts & Minds With One*Demand,
Individual Directed Capitalization 65% of YOUR TAX contribution directed to areas of funding of YOUR CHOICE Power 2 The*People A Single Step to begin all the change required, A Single Action to jump start the creation of global Equality and Fairness.
One*Demand for both immediate & long term change, N.O.W.
The time has come to convene The*Peoples Court, Nonviolent Vigils and Marches to every Court House in your State, every Court in the Nation and every City & Town Hall in the World.
The Justice System has FAILED and The*People DEMAND + JUSTICE.
Join*Us, Display your Heart 4 Peace & We*Will + Systematically Stop The Machine...
One*Demand
Individual Directed Capitalization
Power 2 The*People
Unite the C.H.A.O.S. + N.O.W.
Citizens Helping Atone Our System
No Opportunity Wasted
Convene The*Peoples Court
The Charges are many...
The Trial is Over...
The-System is Guilty...
The Sentence, Relinquish Power.
One*Demand
Individual Directed Capitalization
Power 2 The*Peaceful
Transition to Direct*Democracy
Some thirty years ago house buyers were required to make a 20% down payment to lessen the chance that their house would go under water. In the last several years less prudent house buyers paid nothing down and got caught with a bad investment when the value of the property went down. If they don't or can't keep up their payments, they are subject to foreclosure. This is the way investments have always worked so why should some people think that foreclosures should be stopped?
The purpose of the Occupy Movement was to increase awareness of income disparity which it had successfully done. It didn't have anything to do with foreclosures.
Why would you simply repeat the set of lies that is being used as a cover-up for massive fraud by the financial institutions? I can't understand why anyone would do that, unless they worked for the finance industry. Now, you could simply be repeating these things unwittingly, without realizing that you are parroting propaganda lines that you have been fed. But there is no hint of any independent thinking to self-doubt in your post. You state these lines as though they were factual.
The banks made the bad investments, not the home owners. Obviously. The banks intentionally made bad loans. It is their area of responsibility - and expertise. Why would they intentionally make bad loans? Because they had a scam going. Why are they now blaming the people THEY qualified for the loans? Because they are trying to cover up the scam. The banks made the loans. They sold them. They convinced people they were a good idea. They then gambled with them. They lost. They siphoned off massive amounts of money in the process and put it in their pockets. The banks are now trying to recoup their bad gambling debts by making all of us pay.
Then you want us to belief that income disparity has nothing to do with foreclosures. I suppose next you will be claiming that the sun setting has nothing to do with it getting darker.
Do you have any sense whatsoever for just how convoluted the logic would have to be to arrive at these statements you are making?
From Sally Kohn's own website: "Fox" "hired the openly gay liberal activist Sally Kohn as a contributor." Sorry folks but this is just another "leader"/infiltrator outsider media nitwit trying to destabilize Occupy or anyone attempting to know what is happening with Occupy. Occupy has not been dormant, hibernating or anything of the like. This article written by a Fox News contractor is archetypal confusionism... a mirror of how the newspaper media slices, dices, spins, flips and flops information and facts to create a state of complete gibberish in the mind of the reader. Also Movement Vision Lab is a fabrication of Sally Kohn because when one goes to movementvision.org the link is redirected to sallykohn.com. This is a fabrication and Common Dreams should be ashamed for publishing the writing of a climber like this.
How interesting...I guess Common Dreams will put ANYONE'S drivel on their site anymore....This article and "writer's" thoughts are ALL OVER THE PLACE...if she was driving a car, I'd pull her over for a DUI check! Truth be told (wouldn't that be refreshing) Sally Kohn is a FRAUD as much as here "Movement Vision Lab" is. When you click on the title it takes you to her own page sallykohn.com NOT MUCH VISION THERE! Sally is a dyed-in-the-wool DEMOCRAT.....and you can watch her on Fox News stick up for DRONE-BAMA on the issue of birth control and Obama's taking PAC money from the Catholic church. PUKE!! Come on Common Dreams....CAN'T YOU DO BETTER THAN THIS???? Sally wouldn't know what an occupy mass movement is about if it hit her upside her head. FRAUD KOHN!
Amen.
Self-promotion and commercial hucksterism has no legitimate place in these political discussions, yet we are seeing more and more of it. There is a small army of people trying to cash in on Occupy, or use Occupy to promote their own careers and the Democratic party. It is truly depraved.
Depraved is right. The 99 percent who THINK they even have a place among the 1 percent are just sad people.....they are going to be tossed to the lions eventually....that is what the 1 percent do.....they'd even sacrifice their own if the situation required it. Read the story from Marie Claire...December 11, 2008 "The Billionaire's Black Sheep" about the "GREAT" Warren Buffet disowning step-grand-daughter from his family for speaking about the family in the film "The One Percent" by Johnson & Johnson heir, Jamie Johnson....I highly recommend everyone see it.
I agree with MSF and others who have spotted the faulty reasoning in this article, specifically the false division between occupying public spaces and helping those being foreclosed upon. The reason it's such a good idea to Occupy Our Homes is exactly because the occupy movement is about camping out. The fear of being out of doors helps enslave the 99%. There but for the grace of my Corporation go I.
When we are occupying a home with a family and the goons come to toss us out on the street, wouldn't it be nice if we had a place to go for a good meal and a hug?
Like others on this thread, I'm troubled that the author fails to connect these rather obvious dots.
Occupy isn't "about camping out"....where do you get such a strange conclusion? Occupy initially was taking THE PUBLIC COMMONS...and using them for the good of the public. We, the people, have been so marginalized and demoralized into thinking that we don't control what we own (air waves, forests, public utilities or the organizations which we created to protect us from corporate harm) that we don't even think we have the right to access the society we PAY FOR IN TAXES. The taking of our public commons was to connect and figure out how to get justice in a society that is OWNED AND CONTROLLED BY THE 1 PERCENT.... the injustice is more than just the foreclosure fraud that has taken place over the last 10 years....in part due to the Clinton Admin. repealing GLASS-STEGALL Act (getting the banks set up for their expanding role to make TONS of money) but also the massive roll-backs of reforms made in the 1970's to put corporations in check in the first place....the injustice is in protecting PROPERTY rights over PEOPLE rights.
We should occupy the commons, the empty homes, buildings and growing public school buildings..... NO.....WE CANNOT JUST OCCUPY OUR FORECLOSED HOUSES....WE MUST OCCUPY EVERYWHERE.....WE ARE THE ONES WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR..... : )
This author is a hack......she knows what she is doing....she gets PAID to do it. I don't.
I admit it: I've stayed indoors where it's warm the past several months, and haven't attended an Occupy event the whole winter.
But I'm STILL furious at the "legal" crimes of the 1%. I'm furious at the unconstitutional BIPARTISAN violence against peaceful Occupy demonstrators. I'm furious at the BIPARTISAN NDAA, which allows the military to arrest and detain indefinitely U.S. citizens, without charges.
I'm ready to contribute my energy and resources to defending the 99% against the economic (and physical) violence of the 1%.
The hibernation is ending.
LET'S ROLL!!
Right On Alan!