Everyone. HOLD YOUR DAMN HORSES. OWS has not issued a call for a National General Assembly

[Luminous Animal]

they have not issued a position paper.

What is being touted here as a product of OWS is no such thing. It comes from these people who, it appears, have only been in existence for a few days (and who claim that they are a working group of OWS General Assembly but no such group is listed on the NYC General Assembly list):

https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/home/who-are-we

This project began as a collaboration between college students and the pro bono lawyers who went to represent the students when they got arrested in NYC during an Occupy Wall Street demonstration.

In short, we believe that the time has come to harness the momentum of this movement and direct it at constructive goals to make a dramatic change; the foremost of which is getting money out of politics once and for all. All politicians in this country should immediately take a pledge to refuse all sources of private campaign contributions which we view as legalized bribery.

Here is the link to NYCGA working groups and this group is not on it:
http://nycga.cc/groups/

Some advice, please take a moment to do some research before posting anything reported as "official" from OWS.

[Fire Walk With Me]

1. This will probably happen again, well-meaners forcing ideas upon them.

The organism will adapt and adjust appropriately. Thanks for the heads-up, something didn't feel right.

[Luminous Animal]

2. Kick and a link to the post that inspired this post...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2142872&mesg_id=2143638

As you can see, it now has 55 recs. Unfortunate for a post that has dubious, if not outright false, information.

[xiamiam]

3. thanks..i posted it on facebook..took it down..nt

[Luminous Animal]

4. You are welcome. And thanks for doing that!

[Luminous Animal]

5. Kick because another misguided OP has cropped up.

[Luminous Animal]

6. Everytime misinformation makes it to the top of GE, I am kicking this.

[NewForceNow]

8. Huffington Post is Covering them as if

they are the "official group"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/occupy-wall-street-planning-convention_n_1018570.html


could some of you please get in contact with them and clarify matters. thanks

[Luminous Animal]

14. Sorry, I can't. I am boycotting HuffPo for their anti-union model. But you can.

[slipslidingaway]

7. Thanks knr nt

[lonestarnot]

9. Pin it to the top!

K & R!

[socialist_n_TN]

10. I would tentatively approve of the idea

It would be the first step towards a dual power setup.

[Luminous Animal]

15. Yes. But it would have to go through the General Assembly and a decision

reached by consensus.

Whoever is putting this out there wants to take charge by mere proclamation.

[Selatius]

16. This has been a trend throughout history.

Whenever a rebellion or a revolution erupts, there will always be some vanguard that tries to direct the uncontrolled energy in a certain direction. Whether it's for a good purpose or not is left up to history. Regardless, it teaches all of us to be wary of those seeking leadership positions in a nascent uprising against entrenched power. In the worst cases, the movement becomes co-opted by elements of the existing power structure that the movement originally began against.

[Luminous Animal]

17. That's true. And this group is staying undercover.

No way to participate, to contact info. Nothing.

https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/home/who-are-we

I am particularly suspicious of their lumping unions in the same category as corps and organizations such as ALEC in their list of "demands".

[Selatius]

19. My best guess is they want an "unintended consequence" of a major change.

I remember reading about the passage of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890. While it was originally conceived with the purpose of breaking apart monopolistic enterprises, it also became a weapon to prevent labor unions from operating, under the logic that labor unions were intentionally distorting the market for labor in an "unfair" manner in the eyes of business owners.

[Luminous Animal]

20. Yep. This is important to remember as we move forward to undo any damage

by the Citizen's United SCOTUS decision.

[socialist_n_TN]

30. Your last sentence is what will happen here

I hate to be pessimistic about this (normally I'm the biggest optimist in the world), but I don't see anything other than co-option happening. The energy will dissipate and a few of the hidden "leadership" will get VERY wealthy thanks to Wall Street.

These guys think they're reinventing the wheel, but this kind of shit has happened before. Against an entrenched system like greed (capitalism), you need a majority to fight it, but you'll NEVER get consensus. WAY too many different ideas to take into account. INCLUDING the ideas of the very people you're (supposedly) fighting against. How will you reach a consensus when the people you're trying to reach a consensus WITH are in bed with and supporting the ideas of your enemy?

As to "....be(ing)wary of those seeking leadership positions in a nascent uprising against entrenched power", if they're seeking a leadership position, they should have a particular program. Judge them BY their program. Is it on the side of the people or is it on the side of the entrenched interests.

[joshcryer]

26. The ever encroaching monster of the state.

I wonder who is behind it.

[socialist_n_TN]

29. So is the GANYC now the ONLY spokesgroup for

these protests? That sounds like a "leadership" position to me. Maybe somebody was too quick to TRY to jump into the leadership role, but they're at least ASKING for something specific that historically HAS worked, rather than platitudes that never have.

It doesn't matter though. This is another flash in the pan. It's been a month now and they still won't even name the system. Because of the "consensus" requirement, nothing will get done because anything that might work will be watered down to the lowest common denominator. Whatever happened to majority rule?

Eventually the whole movement will be co-opted by Wall Street and dissapate in frustration because nothing will ever get done. Of course, some of the "leaders" of this "leaderless" movement will get VERY wealthy off of it.

[icymist]

11. Wow! people are trying to hijack OWS!

I guess there's lots of money to be made here.

[NewForceNow]

12. Please, people

go to google news and hunt down sites announcing this fake national assembly and correct it.

[Rex]

13. Hell ya!

This really has scared the GOPNAC paymasters! They are flopping all over themselves without knowing what to say or do...I LOVE IT. THIS IS JUST GETTING STARTED...

[flamingdem]

18. k n r nt

[Hutzpa]

21. Now that's fuckin weird

I looked at that thread and found most of the usual suspects all
on that thread.. :wow:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
yikes!

:yoiks:

[snot]

22. K&R'd!

[snot]

23. Go unrec the posts with the bad info.

[coalition_unwilling]

24. Re-read your history of the French Revolution, specifically

the "Tennis Court Oath" (June 20, 1789). "We are the National Assembly," said 99% of the delegates from the Third Estate.

[me b zola]

25. I wondered about the video posted here, "our one demand"

It portrayed itself as being from OWS, and stated that the "one demand" was "money out of politics". And although I'm sure that everyone agrees that is a good thing, I wasn't aware that they had decided on one demand. Furthermore, it featured a clip of Dylan Ratigan and his "money out of politics" rant. I just could not see them using him to voice their one demand if they had one. Ratigan has been trying to interject himself in this and it has made me uneasy.

I think we all need to use caution when something claims to be from OWS.

[Luminous Animal]

27. Kick.

[Luminous Animal]

28. Kick because misinformation has made it to the top of GE. Again. Now with 69 recs.

[chill_wind]

31. It looks like they've created a group now here at the nycga site:

http://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/

(Their link to the NYCGA on their own google site is broken.)

I don't know what that means exactly - ie I don't know what the site permissions are for being able to establish a group on the NYCGA pages. Like just whether anybody with an account can hop on and create one.

The best sense that I can get of this is that they have this big proposal. It isn't clear at all that it's been formally adopted by the larger assembly yet. But they are now on the "official site" with their working group.

[TBF]

32. All you have to do is read the last paragraph to know this an effort to derail OWS -

"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that IF the PETITION OF GRIEVANCES approved by the 870 Delegates of the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY in consultation with the PEOPLE, is not acted upon by Congress, the President, and Supreme Court, to the satisfaction of the Delegates of the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY, said Delegates shall organize a THIRD, COMPLETELY NON-PARTISAN, INDEPENDENT POLITICAL PARTY to run candidates for every available Congressional seat in the mid-term election of 2014 and again in 2016 until all vestiges of the existing corrupt corporatocracy have been removed by the ballot box."

The focus is on getting folks back to voting - ie no resisting.

[socialist_n_TN]

33. I'm not sure it's an effort to derail OWS

OWS hasn't done a ton in the last three weeks to be "railed". They outlined their list of grievances the first week and have gained followers since, but OWS is still about working within the system. To me, protests without a programme is about the same as voting. It's still part of the established systemic protocol. OWS hasn't gone outside that protocol. Very far anyway.

I think that a "counter" national assembly COULD possibly be a good idea. And it could lead to some concrete steps transitionally to define a possibly anti-capitalist and probably anti-austerity agenda for mass consumption. And THAT would be a step up from what OWS is doing now.

[Luminous Animal]

34. I agree and their Declaration is littered with inside the beltway Demcratic agenda.

[socialist_n_TN]

35. If it were a Democratic agenda

why would they talk about running third party candidates? All the DLC types on here HATE the idea of a third party horning in on the elections.

I'm not saying it's not some sort of effort at co-opting by SOMEBODY, it just doesn't make sense that it's a Dem effort.

[Luminous Animal]

37. You've heard of threats haven't you?

[socialist_n_TN]

38. I STILL don't get it. I guess I'm thick. Threats to whom?

The Dems in office? The President? Those people ARE Dems. Why would they want to third party them?

[Luminous Animal]

39. How do you know they are Dems?

[socialist_n_TN]

50. OK, now I'm REALLY confused. You

were the one that stated in this subthread that this org was full of Democratic Party talking points (or something to that effect). So do you think they are a Dem Party group?

[chill_wind]

40. I guess I'd like to know a little more about the affiliations, if any,

of the pro bono lawyers involved. The first thing that jumped out at me was the specific citation of the American Jobs Act legislation, with no mention either way of the enacted FTA's. But further along they advocate for much larger job works. I agree with you, though. Advocating for a whole new non-partisan party if the grievances go unaddressed doesn't really jibe with it as representative of an insiders' dem partisan org.

[Cal Carpenter]

36. As of now, this group has been added to the OWS GA website

This, of course, does not mean that the proposal is officially sanctioned or approved by GA, just that the group is recognized.

http://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/

(eta: I think this declaration/proposal is a bunch of hooey, fwiw)

[Luminous Animal]

41. The NYCGA definitely is having a problem with this group presenting themselves

and their declaration as "official"

Here is an exchange on the 99% working groups forum...

http://the99delegation.forumotion.com/t111-re-press-and-demands

The occupiers on the ground in Zuccotti Park take the General Assembly meetings very seriously, as well they should. It's their collective voice, and after battling the police, and living outside in the elements, they deserve to not be manipulated, no matter the good intentions.

The internal dispute -- http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-should-the-ows-movement-decide-to-spend-the-mo/#comment-122814 -- was even linked to in this Huffington Post article -- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/occupy-wall-street-planning-convention_n_1018570.html -- and needs to be cleared up and the record set straight before moving forward.

Your passion and initiative are appreciated, and the growth of your site is encouraging, but we can't bulldoze over the General Assembly.

-Rob Miller

I also agree that the declaration is a bunch of hooey.

[chill_wind]

43. Thanks for keeping after this.

Now I'm really curious to know more about who Michael S. Parsons is. The facilitator of this group.
Is he one of the pro bono lawyers, or is he one of the students within this group?

[chill_wind]

46. Check out these comments:

http://www.nycga.net/2011/10/16/announcing-events-system-live/

[Ganja Ninja]

42. I kind of figured it was a false report.

A business website reporting on the inside workings of OWS? That automatically seemed fishy to me.

[Luminous Animal]

44. Yeah, Businessinsider was also one of the 1st to report an "official" list of demands which,

of course, it was no such thing.

They have also published the authentic list of grievances produced by the NYCGA with a liberal dose of snarky commentary.

[chill_wind]

45. Would like to know more about the facilitator Michael S Parsons

From their about page:

"This project began as a collaboration between college students and the pro bono lawyers who went to represent the students when they got arrested in NYC during an Occupy Wall Street demonstration."

Is that likely to be a student or one of the lawyers?

Quick google scan of attorneys by that name has me curious, but not much turns up but this.

http://www.lawyers.com/District-of-Columbia/Washington/Michael-S-Parsons-30931883-a.html
http://www.skgf.com/professionals.php?PeopleID=353

[a simple pattern]

47. Kicking

[Luminous Animal]

48. Kick because someone needs to cut through the truthiness.

Truthiness is a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or that it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.

[markpkessinger]

49. As I said a couple of days ago . . .. . .

. . . http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2137535

[eleny]

51. thank you!