What is the purpose of OWS, if not to send a message?

[pnwmom]

And if so, then what is the message?

Some supporters seem to think that a coherent message isn't important, but the public is unlikely to support unending demonstrations with no clearly defined aim.

[mmonk]

1. You haven't figured it out yet?

[pnwmom]

2. Apparently you haven't either. nt

[mmonk]

5. Your judgment is off.

It's about representation and Wall Street has it all at the expense to the public interest.

[pnwmom]

16. When we demonstrated against the Vietnam War, it was clear to everyone

what it would take for the demonstrations to end.

It isn't clear with the OWS demonstrations what the goal is or what it would take for them to end.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Oh it is very clear

but it helps when the press does not edit your message.

Will give you an example... and you chose to fill in blanks

Last night there was a demonstration here... I took over 180 photos.

I CHOSE to file the ones showing the mass number of people and the clear signs of medicare for all.

I also took a couple very iconic photos of a few anarchists. Which photos do you think my local paper would run to muddle the message?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

44. This

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2323416

[procon]

62. The system is broken.

If that isn't a "clear" message to you, then perhaps you aren't even listening?

As a activist in some earlier social movements, I say to you that the message was not always clear cut or condensed to fit neaty on a bumper sticker. Looking back at all those great social upheavals -- women's rights, anti-war, civil-rights -- that occurred during my lifetime, I say to you that they were many years in the making... not just the scant 60 days that OWS has been in existence.

Perhaps great ideas warrant great expectations when we're talking about a movement that will -- with luck and the devil's wink -- bring a sea-change in the direction and purpose of our country. That's not going to be accomplished according to a script, and it won't be concluded in a half-hour like a TV sitcom, or be pre-packed and ready to serve like a fast-food happy meal with a plastic toy.

In the "olden days" we did not have the powerful communication tools -- is there a doubt why the Republicans want to control the Internet!?!! -- that are available now, and that ability to instantly broadcast the iconic images of injustice, and the simple and powerful message that the whole damned system is broken, has resonated around the world.

Because of that awesome ability, the movement OWS is generating will reach critical mass much sooner, and maybe give them -- us! -- the chance to alter the course of history. It must change; there is simply no way to continue as is. When ordinary people no longer have ANY opportunities to achieve equality or that oh-so elusive, socio-economic road to success... OWS is the result.

[KittyWampus]

135. Silly, it's about "Free Mumia". I get your point and agree. But a lot of DU'ers

have their bias and it interferes with their assessment of how it's being perceived.

[Cid_B]

21. If you have to ask then you just aren't cool enough...

It's like the emperor without his clothes. Not enough people want to admit that they don't know what the actual goals and message is..

[pnwmom]

23. I think there would be more support from the broader public if there could be a strong message about

JOBS, for instance.

That isn't coming across.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. There is

just that the press is being a very effective filter

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. What is unclear about ECONOMIC JUSTICE

Or END THE WARS?

Or MEDICARE FOR ALL?

[Common Sense Party]

50. What is clear about marching for better public education, and then

"occupying" a BofA branch and chanting? (see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x5062408)

The public reads this and thinks :wtf:

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. Let me connect a dot for ya

One of the chancellors for the UC system IS a member of BOA board.

And that is just ONE example.

Sadly we need to do the dot connecting since you, or most likely your lovely media, will NOT connect those dots.

[pnwmom]

122. Why do you say "sadly." Part of any movement's job is education,

but you're expecting it to be obvious -- that everyone should know -- that a chancellor for the U.C. system is a member of the BOA board.

You can't expect everyone to connect the dots. You have to figure out how to deliver a clear, consistent message.

[Cid_B]

112. Fine.. It's like the Bible...

Anyone can find their particular message and claim that "this" is what the movement is all about.

Environmental issues; banking reform; legislative reform; specific legal acts and their reinstatement or removal; socialism; communism; anti-semitism; ending the wars; universal health care; lobbys; unions; workers rights etc.. etc.. etc.. etc..

All things to all people apparently...

[Common Sense Party]

123. It's a smorgasbord, a hodge-podge.

It's pretty hard to get all the 99% to get behind a muddled smorgasbord.

[H2O Man]

3. It seems clear enough

to me. In fact, I have yet to encounter a single human being who does not understand the OWS message.

[PETRUS]

6. +1

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. In real life I have met two

otherwise, no, the message is clear.

And one was purely stuck in the narrative that them were commies. The second was a freelancer for CNN...

[pnwmom]

8. Then what is it? I haven't seen any consistent message or terms

that, if met, would be enough to end the demonstrations.

Unlike the demonstrations against the war in Vietnam, for example, which had a clear cut goal.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. The PRESS will not tell you this, serious

the message is very clear

[CTyankee]

14. Yes, it is different but the people in the streets are people without hope, without a future,

robbed of the only wealth they could possibly amass, and this constitutes a crisis in our society. If they could, they would be working at well paying jobs, having benefits and making a contribution to society. As it is now, this is the only contribution they can make to society. As such, they are doing a good job. At least they are THERE. At least, they are speaking out. This is what happens when people are down to their last options...

[bigtree]

131. why should folks get answered like this?

I'd think supporters would be more than willing to outline the demands, goals, etc.. And, everyone understands the message? I think it's clear that the focus of the protests is economic, but I think folks are looking for something that has cause and effect, clear goals. MMonk listed some below.

Personally, I've heard and read several perspectives, many on this one thread. It just stands to reason that someone might not get where this protest is going or coming from. At any rate, what's the harm in explaining, if only for the benefit of folks looking on? Not you, necessarily, H2OMan, because I've read several perspectives from you about the movement. But, is there really no explaining necessary for folks who say they have questions?

I like the answer above, 'If you don't know you aren't cool enough. The reluctance to answer the question and the ridicule from some toward the questioner makes it seem like the movement already has enough support and is some sort of clique, instead of a movement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Let me give you some specifics

that I am sure the media will not...
Glass Steagall
Medicate for All (Or whatever form single payor takes)
Deal with student debt (the next crisis)
End the wars
End Citizens United
Corporate money out of politics

This is far from comprehensive by the way. Go down to your local encampment and TALK to them. I swear they don't byte.

[mmonk]

9. Reinstate Glass Steagall.

[pnwmom]

12. See what I mean? The movement lacks a coherent message. n/t

[mmonk]

17. No I don't see.

The movement is for reinstating Glass Steagall.

[pnwmom]

19. That's not what all of its supporters say, as was just shown here.

Apparently, that was just mistake, but my point is the same: OWS needs a clearer message.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. OWS needs a friendly media

The country needs a free press

[pnwmom]

11. Why would they want to end Glass Steagall? It was repealed in the 1990's.

It was put into place in 1933 to help prevent another banking crash; and it was repealed in the 90's. The repeal of Glass Steagall is thought to have been one of the causes of our current economic crisis.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Reinstate it

Sorry, I was thinking end corporate personhood

[pnwmom]

18. That isn't what you said. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. I just edited it

but I gave you specifics... REAL SPECIFICS.. DIDN"T I?

You are telling me that there are no specific messages.

So is reinstating that specific enough for you?

How about Single payor health care?

Ending Corporate personhood?

Perhaps the student debt crisis and the cost of college is specific enough?

I just gave you SOME SPECIFICS.

It is summarized in ECONOMIC JUSTICE

I do not expect the news critters to tell you any of this. Jesus on a stick after they are prevented from covering a story I guess they are back at the same crap.

[pnwmom]

25. But there is disagreement in the movement about how organized to get

and how specific to make their goals.

I think they would have more public support if they had a stronger organizational voice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. Two things I will predict here, actually three

the camps are a real threat... and flashpoint for when the super committee comes down. So they will be gone by thanksgiving... it will be brutal, but they will.

The movement is actually having an internal new left... kids dynamic right now, so you will see splits. They are not unique at how to do this. And some will go form new "more traditional" groups.

If this is pushed underground... there will be violence and i do not mean police riots.

Oh and lastly the red baiting will continue until people get it... them hippies are unamerican.

[lbrtbell]

32. I'd like to, but I can't afford to drive there :-(

[nadinbrzezinski]

38. I understand

[Courtesy Flush]

10. I think the message isn't muddled

The press about the message is.

[Enrique]

20. message

[lunatica]

27. Wide ranging financial inequality and joblessness, homelessness and growing poverty

Is that succinct enough? It's really crystal clear if you bother to look.

There's also corporate corruption and plutocracy which is the root cause off government corruption and all the above.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

28. Their message IS clear -- apparently it is so clear....

that some are looking right through it:

Economic justice and fairness.

Now, how that issue is resolved will take many forms and many years of hard work, both on a local and national level.

[pnwmom]

34. I think that is the crux of the problem. "Fairness" isn't a very definable goal.

Although every American should agree with it as an ideal. But how specifically to achieve it is the question -- what will satisfy the OWS movement?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

36. Actually it is a VERY definable goal.

A fair taxation system -- pretty flippin' simple, no?

I really don't get what you are on about. :shrug:

[pnwmom]

40. No, that's not. In the view of some Americans (not me)

the fairest system would mean the same tax for everyone -- i.e., a flat tax. Then there are the Libertarians who think that no one should be taxed for anything but the military. Everything else - schools, police, etc., should be paid for privately.

You have to be more specific. "Fairness" isn't specific. And a "fair taxation system" isn't either.

[Common Sense Party]

52. Apparently asking for specificity = fascism.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. I gave you specifics on this thread

QUITE A BIT OF SPECIFICS.

It is up to you and the OP to either get it or not

[pnwmom]

64. Those are YOUR specifics. But since there is no coordinated effort,

they can't be seen to be the specifics shared by the movement as a whole.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

67. "...there is no coordinated effort..."

Good lord, you really have no clue about how OWS works do you?

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Do you even understand how the movement works?

Do you realize that the statements voted by NY were adopted by General Assemblies nationwide?

Do you undersand that GA's SHARE these things?

I think part of your problem is that you want this masticated and digested by a press that actually... does not get it. In their case, it is on purpose.

[pnwmom]

70. Great. Could you give me a link for that?

[nadinbrzezinski]

72. Yup

you want to truly educate yourself

OCCUPYWALLSTREET. ORG

[pnwmom]

80. I don't see any list of particular goals on that site, which identifies itself

as an "unofficial" site, of course -- meaning they're not speaking for anyone in particular.

[nadinbrzezinski]

85. Leaderless resistance

read on it.

You really need to, but that is the place to go for statements and all that happy horse, It is a repository of sorts.

[vcc]

92. sorry but it seems more like "everyone else is clueless....

...but a few UNELECTED people are running the show with extreme methods"

[nadinbrzezinski]

94. really... ok

At the risk of scaring you off the deep end... bakunin might be a good read on some of the procedures used.

[vcc]

101. not everyone who takes issue and has questions is a philistine...

...who's unfamiliar with the history of ideas. Nor are they all cowards or Marie Antoinette. A few people keep insisting that the movement's beliefs, goals and methods are perfectly clear, coherent and consistent but that doesn't change the fact that they are definitely not. Not least because sometimes it's "perfectly clear" and other times the public is told that the insistence on being affiliated with any specific demand, or ideology, weakens the strength of the movement. So that right there is inconsistent and confusing as fuck. Then it's "leaderless", but obviously someone's making decisions that are supposed to represent ---and certainly will affect--- "the 99%". Another glaring inconsistency. If there is any consistent coherence, it's not known to anyone outside a small group of people who apparently agree with each other and not everybody else. If that were not the case, there would be no need to resist affiliation with other people or principles. Do you think the Civil Rights movement felt that need? Of course not. You knew who they were and what they were about and they got things done. I can't help but get the ever-growing impression that the "leaderlessness", and the vagueness, and then the mind-fuck that the vagueness is actually specificity, is ominous.

[nadinbrzezinski]

102. No, we have tried to answer questions

there is a limit on how many times I can repeat ECONOMIC JUSTICE...

IF this is not clear...

As to BAKUNIN... yes, it matters as the procedures for self governance are coming partially from there.

[vcc]

106. it's not clear because there are no specific terms....

As we have seen all too clearly, some people's definition of "economic justice" is the rich get richer at everyone's expense. So obviously it needs to be much more clearly explained.

[nadinbrzezinski]

108. I posted a partial list that falls in that rubric

single payor healthcare
Student debt relief
Reinstate Glass Steagal
Get corporate money out of politics.

I could go on. But at this point I feel people drew lines.

Also I KNOW for a fact the media, except for Countdown, are busy creating a media narrative of shiftless, drug addled young un-american kids.

[pnwmom]

116. No matter how many times you repeat it, "Economic justice" is not specific enough

to give a clear message. Marx thought that he described economic justice. So did Ayn Rand.

The term isn't enough. Sorry.

[pnwmom]

115. Welcome to DU, vcc! n/t

[Capitalocracy]

29. The government isn't of, by, and for the people.

And that's not OK, and it's about time it changed. That's the message.

[On the Road]

33. IMO, the Primary Purpose *Is* to Send a Message

and compared to other protest movements it has already succeeded enormously in raising consciousness and entering the public discussion.

However, your point is well taken. There is no specific step that any politician, executive, or corporation can take that would be seen as meeting the complaints of the protests.

And when you point that out, you are accused of simply "not getting it" (as you just observed in your first response). IMO, the shoe's on the other foot. A sense of economic injustice is only the merest starting point -- you have to have a plan that starts somewhere involves tactics, coalition building, legal maneuvering, and hundreds of tactical and political decisions.

Based on the responses from OWS supporters on DU, it looks like the movement is totally oblivious to your points and will inevitably fizzle. I just it comes back in some other form, because these issues badly need to be addressed.

[pnwmom]

37. Finally, someone who understands what I was trying to say.

I support OWS but am afraid it will "fizzle" without -- as you say -- "more tactics, coalition building, legal maneuvering," etc.

Strong feelings alone will not be enough to sustain the movement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. You do realize Labor has become a strong ally

right?

[pnwmom]

42. Yes. And I am a donating supporter. But I think they need to be more organized

and specific in their goals.

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. They are

I will ask again. what photo do you think my local rag would run?

a.- Women of middle age, white, with a sign that says Medicare for all

b.- Anarchist carrying an upside down flag, with black leather and spiky hair, oh and steel toe boots?

When you can answer this question you will be able to answer why the message is not coming out clearly.

[Hangingon]

53. I think the message is simply Change

There is no consensus of what is first. There is no agenda. Some of those speaking loudest for OWS merely mouth phrases that they cannot explain. If there is not a transformation, the movement will expire.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. And lack of response from the powers that be will be

the responsibility of OWS exactly how...

(expect some spell nanny as well)

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. And lack of response from the powers that be will be

the responsibility of OWS exactly how...

(expect some spell nanny as well)

[Hangingon]

77. I think many posters have said a clear message is needed.

The OWS movement must come together to articulate a program people can understand. In this thread, many posters have said the message is simple - why can't it be understood. Yes, I understand "Change" but change what. When I have asked I have gotten slogans, bumperstickers. The problem is that Glass Stegall changes have to explained so people can understand it. More is required than the repetetive chant of "Glass Stegall economic justice" by those who have no idea of what that actually means. The message has to be clear enough for the mythical PTB to understand and too compelling to ignore. The burden to move the PTB is on the OWS movement. Don't blame the press.

As to the spelling nanny - it was not about spelling. It was about lack of knowledge. CONTRELPRO was never explained. You only said you have heard of COINTELPRO. Many of us were around for COINTELPRO. Hope that is simple enough for those who only pose to understand.

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. many by my count

is FIVE

[Hangingon]

98. Good for you. 5 is "many". That is just precious.

That is probably why the movement will end. There are too many of you. Keep up the good work. Do not get distracted by facts.

edit for typos due to laughing.

[bigtree]

132. how many more are intimidated away from questions by the arrogant answers

. . . and the ridicule expressed right on this thread? Is it so hard to just answer the question? Here we have a huge thread full of ridicule and just a few rational, complete answers to the query. If I had a new protest movement and wanted support, I'd have the answers at the ready and offer them without rancor or ridicule. There's something insecure about the attacks on the questioners that seems entirely unnecessary. Just answer the question, completely, and move on. How hard is that?

[nadinbrzezinski]

39. What is so not clear about reinstate Glass Steagall?

Single Payor?

Just to give two examples.

The message is there, but it is being edited by a non friendly media.

On a meta level... this is part of the arc...

Them kids in the anti war movement had a slightly more focused press, even friendly... and in the beginning the message was we want equality.

This is a historic arc.. in fact they are far more specific than the anti war marches were in the early beginning. Partly they are relying on recent past.

[pnwmom]

45. As you know, you originally said the opposite -- so it didn't seem that clear.

Single payer is clear, but are you sure that that is a shared goal of the majority of OWS people? Maybe some of them would just be satisfied with a 4% unemployment rate.

If OWS doesn't organize and determine the actual issues of its members, how can it be said to have a specific shared message?

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. I gave you that as the list

medicare for all... how more specific you want it?

[On the Road]

54. Reinstating Glass-Steagall is Good

I agree with you -- that is a worthy goal. I have heard other specific aims as well from protesters, even including things like implementing the proposed uptick rule on short sales, which may be a good idea but doesn't directly affect most of the 99%.

However, specific things like this tend to get lost in the multitude of words, faces, and images. To anyone who's moderately followed the protests, Glass-Stegall is not what jumps out at you. Focusing on that as a goal might be good, but it would require a different sort of effort and even risk alienating some protesters who want a complete change in the US political and economic system.

Avoiding a formal leaderhip, which was originally a strength of the protests, is a liability for the next phase. Right now, OWS is like the Cain campaign, with national visibility but no staff or ground game to present a coherent face to the public, set priorities and tactics, and pursue some of these intermediate goals.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. No, what should jump at you is medicare for all

or whatever else you want to call single payor.

Those signs are like everywhere

Last night SPECIFICALLY, they were concentrating on police abuse, so there were a few moe of those.

:-)

[vcc]

43. +1

[girl gone mad]

51. At some point you have to also be willing to make a small effort..

and read some of the many proposals put out by the various occupy movements.

This is only the beginning.

I find it amusing that the same people who have relentlessly defended the lack of change from tour current political leadership over the past few years are now complaining that OWS hasn't solved all of our problems overnight.

[girl gone mad]

47. How much clearer could it possibly be?

You really have to go out of your way not to be able to understand their message.

The message is even encompassed by the name.

The vast economic inequities promoted by Wall Street and the corporate world are immensely harmful to countless millions of people, and to the well-being of our country itself. The financiers whose massively fraudulent activities played a key role in taking our economy over the side of a cliff have not been held accountable for their crimes.

What are the Occupy Wall Street protesters seeking? Critics of this endeavor claim that there is a lack of a clear focus, agenda and strong leadership. But the overall message of the protesters is crystal clear and hugely important: we all need to become broadly conscious of what is wrong with our present political economy, and we have to promote the political will needed to transform it in fundamental ways.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/occupy-wall-street-does-have-a-clear-message-2011-10-24

[Lyric]

49. What part of "These people ARE the Public" do you not understand?

This is an uprising OF the public, and it's only the vanguard at that. The longer that the economic injustice in this nation continues without relief, the larger this movement is going to get.

This is not about politics. It's not a popularity contest. So many here speak about OWS as if they are outside of it, or apart from it. As if OWS are "those OTHER people", and have little or no relevancy to real life or real people. But that's just not true. They are the physical manifestation of working class grief and rage, and if you're expecting that grief and rage to be pretty and polite, you are very unrealistic.

OWS is US. They are no better or worse than we are. They are divinely and tragically human in every way, just as we are.

They don't need "public support", as if they're just one of the thousands of political action committees out there. What they need is what WE need: class solidarity, and physical support in every way that we can provide it. Warm bodies in the street would be best, but material support and class solidarity are important too. They need us to look at them and see ourselves--not "others".

[pnwmom]

59. Then what is their message?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

63. You are being purposefully obtuse.

The "answer" has been given to you repeatedly and with great clarity in this thread and in others like it. I can only conclude you are not truly interested in an answer.

[vcc]

95. looks more like s/he's being purposely railroaded.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

100. Hardly.

Those of us who are familiar with this poster know this to be their MO.

Stick around and learn something.

[randome]

66. Oh, pnwmom...

...you have my admiration for daring to raise the questions you have.

Brave, you are.

[MilesColtrane]

104. The message is the rich are screwing us and they own the political process in this country.

Everybody is down with that.

The problem is in condensing a solution to this into a digestible bite that your average joe can understand and can get behind. (especially difficult because solving the problem will require many changes, not just One Big Thing to declare victory)

The closest successful approach would be Roosevelt's branding of multiple program's to combat the Depression as the "New Deal". He was able to muster support, but he was working within the system and he had plenty of allies. He wasn't trying to alter it from without.

[Spazito]

60. The message is economic injustice...

and economic injustice results in:

Politicians being bought which results in:

- The justice system being bought

- The education system being privatized

- Social programs being cut while the richest 1% get tax cuts

- Multinational corporations being subsidized and bailed out with tax payers' dollars.


This is only a few of the results of economic injustice but I think it makes the point.



OWS is raising awareness of the the results of economic injustice and is being successful in doing so as one has only to see how the discussion of it has now entered 'mainstream' media.

OWS doesn't have to provide THE solution to the issue in order for it's message to succeed or be understood, imo.

[TheKentuckian]

65. End corporate personhood, stop corporate capture of government, end too big to fail,

establish publicly funded elections, renegotiation of home and student loans, throw out the damn lobbyists, and that is just the start.

Sorry, this isn't as simple and concise as "Stop the War" because the situation is much more comprehensive and complex. If you need a message that fits on a bumper sticker then "Economic Justice" should work for those who seek it.

[randome]

69. I'm not belittling your list. Not at all.

But that's your interpretation. Half a dozen other posters on this thread have different lists and different interpretations.

And that's the problem.

There is still no coherent message and the messages that are going out are not being delivered to the right people.

The only way to effect politics is to get political.

If 'getting political' is too distasteful for the movement then it is doomed to failure unless armed insurrection is the result.

[nadinbrzezinski]

71. If it is pushed underground

it might result in that.

And I guess all those demands do come down to ECONOMIC JUSTICE.

I told you before, will tell you again. put a jacket down and go down there.

[randome]

74. Not everyone can drop what they're doing and go 'occupy' a public park.

I have 2 14 y/o daughters to take care of. I know that's not like having babies or someone else who is dependent on me but it's enough that I'm not going to stand out in the cold unless I have a damned good reason for doing so.

'ECONOMIC JUSTICE' is not a rallying cry. It, too, is open to myriad interpretations, which dilutes the message and its effect.

If OWS could coalesce around one or two simple themes, it would have better success.

And, again, as someone else pointed out, you can't affect politics without being political.

And if effecting politics is NOT the goal, then what IS the goal? The only alternative I see is armed insurrection.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. Oh it is political

just that like OTHER MOVEMENTS in the past that were hard to comprehend at the TIME, powers that be don't get it.

Leaders, WE WANT LEADERS... there is JFK and MLK and RFK that come in conversation.

We want an agenda, the economic justice is your bumper sticker... it covers debt, it covers foreclosures. it covers the death of the middle class.

If you do not understand this after all day, quite frankly I am wasting my time and so are you.

Good luck raising the kid.. I think we are more than just done.

I HOPE for the sake of your daughter, that the movement succeeds. But it is one of those, Get in, get out or get out of the way.

[randome]

88. It's daughters. Plural. Twins.

And all day long, I have not seen you admit that anything in your world view might benefit from another's input. All day, you have simply been saying that no one understands you or the movement.

If there are that many people in DU who don't understand you -people who are ON YOUR SIDE- then you might at least consider the possibility that something might be wrong with your message.

We're not all crazy or stupid, although I'm certain it's easier to see people who disagree with you that way.

[nadinbrzezinski]

89. I have explained what this is about

good luck with the kids. Serious, But we are done.

As to many... I count FIVE posters.

[TBF]

73. OWS is protesting economic inequality -

how exactly we would fix that is likely to solicit many views, but that is the issue that they are protesting. The fascist Bloomberg understands, not sure why so many DUers are "confused".

:eyes:

[randome]

76. So you think we're simply not thinking clearly?

You wouldn't possibly conceive of the idea that if the message is not getting through to people who are VERY MUCH on your side, that maybe something is wrong with how that message is being sent?

[TBF]

83. Oh I think you are thinking quite clearly - and doing your best to fight OWS. That is what I think.

I have seen several OPs on this very subject today and I do not think it's an accident.

[randome]

91. Damn! The conspiracy's been broken wide open!

Withdraw! Withdraw!

If this many people at DU -people WHO ARE ON YOUR SIDE- are raising questions about this, you might consider the possibility that the message is not very clear.

The other alternative is to see everyone who disagrees with you as crazy or stupid.

I know which scenario is more likely.

I can't speak for anyone else but I am not your enemy. My posts are not designed to be 'Gotcha' posts! I don't think OWS is living up to its potential and I want things to change for the better.

For all of us.

[TBF]

93. There is also the possibility that posts are being coordinated for other reasons. nt

[randome]

99. And there is the possibility that you are mistaken.

[Spazito]

90. I have found very few people who don't understand the message behind OWS...

I do know people who don't support the message because they don't agree there are the inequities but they 'get' the message.

[pnwmom]

120. Someone else here just said the key issue is Single Payer.

And not, that's not the same as saying that the main issue is income inequality.

Many DUers and other progressives who support OWS are still confused because there isn't an overall organization with an agreed upon set of specific goals.

[jwirr]

75. I think what they want is clear but how to get those things is not. They

have taken the first steps - now what. I want them to succeed in this very much but this question of what now leaves a lot of us setting out here wondering what we can do to help. I am fortunate in that my senators seem to want what we want. And the only way to deal with craavack is to elect someone else in 2012 because no matter what we ask he follows the rethug line. Those who voted for him should have known better.

It is hard to see beyond that. We are bogged down in a street battle over camp sites and the police are happy to keep us there.

[vcc]

105. it needs to be figured out and airtight before they tell people to...

...assist with the shutting down of the fucking economy or pressure kids to go put themselves in the fray of lord knows what will happen tomorrow. You can't tell people to basically risk their lives and the stability of this country FOR THE 99% until there is no doubt whatsoever what the plan is and what they are laying it all on the line for. And frankly the only folks I see benefitting from a de-stabilized economy are those who've already stashed away a lot of assets. That troubles me and puts me on high alert.

[gkhouston]

78. To provide an opportunity for the expression of concern. n/t

[Zorra]

79. Oh, I'm so sorry; have you been in a coma? Or in a

cloistered Tibetan Monastery in a remote region of the Himalayas?

Everyone has been talking about this, it's even in the news!



http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/7003/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=8738

[randome]

81. 'Economic Injustice' means a thousand different things to a thousand different people.

It is not a coherent message. It will not be received by the right people.

We will not make corporations behave better by telling them, 'Behave better!'

It was our legislators who let the system break. It's not stealing if you open the door and say, 'Here. Take what you want.'

Do we want better laws passed? I doubt the Oakland police or the New York mayor have anything to do with that.

[TBF]

86. never mind. nt

[Zorra]

96. Epic Fail. This silly line of BS is getting very stale. We weren't born yesterday.

Please, go start your own movement instead of trying to denigrate ours.

Serious people who are conveying a clear, serious, and necessary message are getting hurt and having their rights trashed.

[randome]

97. 'Denigrate'?

So anyone who proposes a change in direction or tactics is automatically an enemy of OWS?

That seems a surefire way of excluding people instead of bringing them together.

[Common Sense Party]

125. Any "movement" that bristles and cannot withstand simple inquiries

about the message, the common goals, the specific steps to achieve desired results--that is a movement that is going nowhere. That is a movement with the emotional stability of a junior high school clique.

[applegrove]

84. Someone at one of the Occupy sites had a sign that said "I don't mind that you have money; I mind

that you are buying my government". I like that. But it will not work for everybody. I think to be the 99% we must continue to have many voices and opinions. But they do all boil down to much of current policy going to help the 1% while disregarding everybody else because power is skewed.

[Raksha]

103. There are basically two demands the 99% is making of the 1%:

1. Stop destroying the economy.
2. Stop destroying the environment.

The two are intertwined, and the cure for one will be the cure for the other. Naomi Klein explains the connection in a long but completely brilliant article I haven't had time to post as an OP yet. It's called "Capitalism vs. the Climate." The link is to page 1. It's very long--6 web pages, and I didn't even finish reading it when I posted it to my Facebook page yesterday. But I felt it was so important I wanted it to get as much exposure as possible as soon as possible.

Link: http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate

All other more specific and concrete demands, such as "reinstate Glass-Steagall" are contained within these two demands. The ultimate goal is a total paradigm shift in how human beings relate to each other and to the earth. It will mean the end of patriarchy (top-down authoritarianism) and the end of capitalism. Strangely enough, some of the 1% are even more aware of that than many of the 99%.

[randome]

107. Now you've added 'environment' to the mix.

Which I wholeheartedly agree with as an important goal. You can easily say that's more important than ANYthing else, including the economy.

But this proves my point that there are two many interpretations of what OWS is about.

I want OWS to succeed. I want the system to change.

[Raksha]

110. It isn't actually "added to the mix" but an intrinsic part of it,

whether explicitly stated or not. Is it really possible to separate the environment from the economy? Naomi Klein explains the connection much better than I can, writing in the context of her recent attendance at a conference for right-wing climate denialists. This is from page 2 of the article:

Re "Just as climate denialism has become a core identity issue on the right, utterly entwined with defending current systems of power and wealth, the scientific reality of climate change must, for progressives, occupy a central place in a coherent narrative about the perils of unrestrained greed and the need for real alternatives.

"Building such a transformative movement may not be as hard as it first appears. Indeed, if you ask the Heartlanders, climate change makes some kind of left-wing revolution virtually inevitable, which is precisely why they are so determined to deny its reality. Perhaps we should listen to their theories more closely—they might just understand something the left still doesn’t get."

"Climate change makes some kind of left-wing revolution virtually inevitable."

And here we are.

[girl gone mad]

113. They are just different ways of saying the same thing.

The message is not convoluted or complicated, it's extraordinarily simple. So simple, that it's easy to describe it in a thousand different ways. But it is always precisely the same message.

[mmonk]

109. OWS Demands (From OWS itself)

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.


Reinstate Glass-Steagall



The Depression era Glass-Steagall regulations partitioned the financial, insurance, and real estate industries into distinct businesses. This formed a kind of integrity infrastructure for the entire system. A business had to choose to be one and only one of a: commercial bank, a broker, an investment bank, an insurance company, a real estate company, etc. The goal was to insulate the various segments from problems in other segments. However, the one most important goal of this law is the separation of commercial banking, which creates the US money supply, from brokers and investment banks which often engage in speculation. This separation ensured that the public money supply was not leveraged to purely speculative, financial instruments. Instead, these brokers or investment banks would need to raise funds from private investors rather than use leverage from the US money supply. Any loss incurred by the speculative activity would be borne by the investors and not the US treasury, or taxpayer, nor impact the money supply. Today, these rules would apply to hedge funds and other investment organizations as well. This and the trade tax (see below) would serve to greatly limit the creation of derivative securities which are purely speculative in nature and threaten our financial system.

[nadinbrzezinski]

111. Oh wait they do?

he will ask you for a link you know.

:-)

[pnwmom]

118. Yes, I would like a link. Do you have one? n/t

[mmonk]

130. All they have to do is go to the Occupy web site themselves.

I'm a little bored with every statement I make being questioned. I'm not sure discussion is what some seek.

[pnwmom]

117. But there is no "OWS itself." There are many groups meeting under that name,

but no overall organization.

I notice you didn't provide a link to all your demands. Where did it come from?

[mmonk]

126. The GA from New York.

[Common Sense Party]

124. Okay, some specifics. WHOSE demands are these? Which one of

the many, varied, leaderless, rudderless Occupy groups came up with, voted on, and ratified this as THE all-inclusive List of Demands?

Has it somehow been agreed that THESE are what the 99% is after?

And while I do like the specificity, 13 is WAY TOO MANY "demands".

Not to mention the fact that we're going to lose about half or more of "the 99%" with some of these--open borders? That's dead in the water. Across the board forgiveness of all debts? Nonsense and foolish thinking.

[mmonk]

127. The GA in New York.

[Common Sense Party]

134. Who don't speak for all the other Occupy actions nationwide.

And their list of demands will never be met, so is the purpose of presenting such a list to ensure that the Occupation lasts forever?

[bigtree]

129. thanks for taking the time to post this

[Umbral]

114. The message that can be taken away from the Occupy movement...

...is the utter failure of Democratic Party. Isn't that obvious to everyone? They FAILED! They failed to represent their core constituency. They sold them out. They traded credibility for corporate cash. Do any of you think that people would be in the streets, as they are, if the Democrats had been doing their Job? REALLY?

[Fire Walk With Me]

119. To BE the change we cannot get from existing systems.

[ClassWarrior]

121. Really? You're admitting that you don't have a clue...

...about what they - really, we - are saying??

:crazy:

NGU.

[bigtree]

128. to me, it's just ignorant when someone asks this question and gets ridiculed

. . . you deserve to lose that potential supporter because you were just too arrogant to explain. The movement doesn't deserve losses in support like that, though. I'd think supporters would be more than willing to explain; politely and without all of the alienating ridicule. It's not as if OWS doesn't need supporters.

[ClassWarrior]

133. You're right, I should be spending my time explaining progressive values to someone...

...who claims to identify as a progressive.

:eyes:

NGU.

[Harmony Blue]

136. That sums it up

if it has to be explained on DU that is a bad sign.

[randome]

137. And yet you claim to speak for all progressives.

Nice job.

[ClassWarrior]

138. I do? Where?

I thought I was being berated for NOT speaking for all progressives.

:crazy:

NGU.

[Harmony Blue]

139. Okay Randome

Here is your chance.

In your view what do you consider as progressive values?

[randome]

140. So the purpose of OWS is to define progressive values now?

It keeps morphing into something else.

I do NOT speak for progressives. I will not offer a litany of what I think are progressive values.

I think OWS should take more direct action and not get bogged down with fighting cops for 'camping rights'.

I think the march on Wall Street is closer to the kind of direct action that I see is necessary to change the laws in this country.

I am not so presumptuous to think I have the answers or that my answers -and even my questions- can be modified with reasoned points made by others.

Do I make myself clear?