OccupyWallStreet FAQ - from theNation.com

[flamingdem]

http://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faq

excerpt:
Q: So nobody is in charge? How do decisions get made?

A: The General Assembly has become the de facto decision-making body for the occupation at Liberty Plaza, just a few blocks north of Wall Street. (That was Zuccotti Park's name before 2006, when the space was rebuilt by Brookfield Properties and renamed after its chairman, John Zuccotti.) Get ready for jargon: the General Assembly is a horizontal, autonomous, leaderless, modified-consensus-based system with roots in anarchist thought, and it's akin to the assemblies that have been driving recent social movements around the world, in places like Argentina, Egypt's Tahrir Square, Madrid's Puerta del Sol and so on. Working toward consensus is really hard, frustrating and slow. But the occupiers are taking their time. When they finally get to consensus on some issue, often after days and days of trying, the feeling is quite incredible. A mighty cheer fills the plaza. It's hard to describe the experience of being among hundreds of passionate, rebellious, creative people who are all in agreement about something.

Fortunately, though, they don't need to come to consensus about everything. Working alongside the General Assembly are an ever-growing number of committees and working groups—from Food and Media to Direct Action and Sanitation. Anyone is welcome to join one, and they each do their own thing, working in tacit coordination with the General Assembly as a whole. In the end, the hope is that every individual is empowered to make decisions and act as her or himself, for the good of the group.

Q: What are the demands of the protesters?

A: Ugh—the zillion-dollar question. Again, the original Adbusters call asked, "What is our one demand?" Technically, there isn't one yet. In the weeks leading up to September 17, the NYC General Assembly seemed to be veering away from the language of "demands" in the first place, largely because government institutions are already so shot through with corporate money that making specific demands would be pointless until the movement grew stronger politically. Instead, to begin with, they opted to make their demand the occupation itself—and the direct democracy taking place there—which in turn may or may not come up with some specific demand. When you think about it, this act is actually a pretty powerful statement against the corruption that Wall Street has come to represent. But since thinking is often too much to ask of the American mass media, the question of demands has turned into a massive PR challenge.

The General Assembly is currently in the midst of determining how it will come to consensus about unifying demands. It's a really messy and interesting discussion. But don't hold your breath.

[steve2470]

1. k&r nt

[NYC_SKP]

2. So "Liberty Park" was renamed for the chairman of a property developer. How very special.

Perfect. Just perfect.

K/R

[Amonester]

13. Yep. Imagine if his name was...

Mubarshrek, or Quackdaffy... :rofl:

But I bet the guy gave to charities (so he could claim to be 'good').

[Fire Walk With Me]

3. I have a very good feeling about this.

A very, very good feeling about this.

Making demands of a dead system is useless. There are no demands. There is only building the future.

[flamingdem]

6. They were smart to avoid the "demands" trap

the media etc. would just use that to create divisions

The idea of an occupied space is stronger.

[Fire Walk With Me]

7. Exactly, and corporations would just say "NO". Then they'd have to gain traction after that...

[Luminous Animal]

10. Yep. There were quite a few cross support for different movements in the 60s & 70s.

First educate, then agitate.

[flamingdem]

14. I'm trying to remember what went wrong back then

disenfranchisement of women and minorities was one big one. Violent acts didn't help, but they did get news coverage. I am thinking of Abbie Hoffman, he was very creative. Sometimes a strong personality does need to arise. But that carries it's own downside.

[Luminous Animal]

21. Nothing. A lot of forward motion was accomplished. There has been remarkable

changes in society since then. Violent acts don't help at all and are a result of impatience... you can see the impatience exhibited on this board. So many people whining, "but what do they want" or "what are their goals."

There is an old saying that you've probably heard, "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem."

[flamingdem]

22. I used to wear a button with that!

Dang it was a BIG button too.

[Luminous Animal]

28. Nice! It is time to bring it back.

[Luminous Animal]

4. A wonderful work in progress. I belonged to a 500 member women's org

with consensus as the model. I believe ACT UP was a consensus org, as well.

It is a difficult process but rewarding. Some things had to be dropped but most things could go forward after hours and hours and hours (and weeks and days) of discussion.

[flamingdem]

5. I have to admit it reminds me of when I was an idealistic 20 something

who read Anarchist texts and believed in non-hierarchical structures.

I even worked at a place where we were all paid the same, a collective!

Maybe those days are back, who'd a thunk.

[Aerows]

8. The message is pretty clear, imho

Wealth inequality is destroying our nation, as is failure to prosecute those responsible for said wealth inequality.

Not to mention, there is no justice for those at that top, only for those at the bottom, which is most of us. We don't tax or otherwise hold the wealthy accountable whatsoever.

[Davis_X_Machina]

9. Ok. Fact. True.

Now, what do you do next? And after that?

What is the movement moving towards? And how do we get there?

I think anybody who doesn't live in a cave has figured out that the FIRE sector is not our friend, and that macroeconomically we're in a deep hole. Making that point again is useful, but sterile.

The crowd in Tahrir Square had a big thing in mind. So did the Spartacists, so did the Chartists, and before them the crowd that stormed the Tuilleries...

How do we get from what we have to the end of the capitalist system, or whatever?

[Luminous Animal]

16. As I said above. First educate, then agitate.

The thrust of the women's movement was born out of consciousness-raising.
http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/wlm/fem/sarachild.html



In Egypt, activists worked for a decade against impossible odd to create a mass movement.

[Davis_X_Machina]

20. The women's movement..

...had a thrust. All this has so far is the consciousness-raising.

I don't think America's problem is one of inadequately-raised consciousness. How many of us don't have out-of-work family members, or a friend 'between jobs' who's 'temporarily' stashed in the spare room, or a neighborhood of empty storefronts and commercial buildings that were recently going concerns?

In Egypt, activists worked for a decade against impossible odd to create a mass movement.

They had a goal, too. Not just a movement.

[flamingdem]

23. The Unions that join will help form the goals and help fund nt

[Luminous Animal]

27. They are getting so many calls from labor orgs that they can't handle them.

[Luminous Animal]

25. No, it did not. Consciousness-raising was an important part of the movement.

And yes, nearly every one of us is intimate or acquainted with someone who is hurting. Unfortunately, their best bet for relief is within the current capitalism on steroids system. And that is what most people rely on until they end up stashed somewhere.


You fool yourself if you think the activists in Egypt's only goal is democracy. There are dozens of goals from feminism, to religious bigotry, to economic justice, to education reform, to police reform, to military reform.

And they worked for a decade, mostly underground, to bring these goals to light.

[flamingdem]

17. It's not the capitalist system - more the rules to contain it

and how they were loosened and destroyed by repukes over the last decades.

We need to rewind and then with fresh creative brains re-imagine our country.

The GOP is a dying party and we need to hasten its end.

[Amonester]

24. Many demands will come next week (Freedom Plaza, D.C.)

http://www.october2011.org

October 6 will occupy D.C., followed by the Iraq Veterans Against the War demands, October 7.

[flamingdem]

11. They won't give a dime without being forced

but social shame can help grease the wheels of change.

What worries me is that so much damage has been done by creating an uber wealthy class.
That plus Citizens United and voter suppression. So much work to do.

We need the energy of of a movement right now for sure.

[Davis_X_Machina]

15. A movement towards what?

A declaration that property is theft? A second New Deal? A Scandinavian social democracy?

Energy without direction? Sounds to me like Brownian motion.

[Luminous Animal]

18. For you? Whining about this movement, apparently.

[flamingdem]

19. There's every reason to take the best ideas, that benefit the people vs. the

corporations and make that the new direction.

We need to get rid of Citizens United for starters. Corporations are not people.

[Davis_X_Machina]

29. OK. There's a platform. A target.

Legislative repeal of the dicta in Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific Railroad. And of Citizens United. Or nomination of judges who'll do it from the bench. Or both. Lawyers to litigate it. Candidates to support it. People to get in the faces of legislators who don't.

The civil rights movement was a movement, not just a bunch of justifiably angry and demonstrably oppressed African Americans. It always had a goal, or goals. A federal anti-lynching statute. The ballot. An end to discrimination, first in public accommodation, then education, then everything. And it had institutions -- the churches, the NAACP and its Legal Defense Fund, SNCC...

Hell, the Chartists had a Charter -- they weren't just a bunch of justifiably angry and demonstrably oppressed victims of a newborn Industrial Revolution.

[flamingdem]

30. Citizens United needs to be targeted

since there's no apparent legal mechanism to get rid of it.

[Davis_X_Machina]

31. 5 Justices with an alternative view of what comprises...

...'speech', and/or what comprises a 'person', and it's gone that afternoon.

Or Lily-Ledbetter-style legislation that overturns by statute Buckley v. Valleo. That goes, the rest goes with it.

[Luminous Animal]

32. Constitutional Amendment comes to mind. The current version floating around

the net are crap but it could be done. 3/4s of U.S. citizens believe corps have to much power.

[Davis_X_Machina]

33. A hundred and seventy years ago....

...there were abolition societies, that agitated for the abolition of slavery in a political environment where no political party, yet, was willing or able to do such a thing. Some of their members would have been Conscience Whigs, probably a few renegade Democrats too, some members otherwise non-political, coming in via the churches, some intensely political. But the overarching idea held them together.

Same thing with prohibition.

I wonder why there aren't non-partisan issue-based entities like that today. A quarter of our children in poverty is as much a moral issue as anything. A quarter of our workers working less than they want, or not working at all.

[Voice for Peace]

12. Demand universal voting access/fairness/transparency.

that would be a good start, or one piece of a good start.

[flamingdem]

26. Link for DIY media focused on OccupyWallStreet

http://diymedia.net/archive/0911.htm#092911