I went to Zuccotti Park last night.

[alberg]

The energy was there, the passion, the commitment. I talked to a lot of folks about what’s going on and what might happen next. There is a sense of history and possibility in the air, and community and adventure and love.

Sustainable change requires three elements to succeed:

- 1.) dissatisfaction with the status quo
- 2.) vision of the desired state
- 3.) first practical steps

The first element is there is abundance. The second element is evolving in real time through countless individual conversations and the nightly General Assembly meetings. But what about step 3?

The 1% control the wealth and power in our society because they control the government. They literally own the elected representatives of both parties. The decisions our government makes are in the service of what benefits the 1%, not the majority of the citizens. For change to occur, this control structure must be broken.

How to do that? Here are 3 practical steps:

- Take the money out of the political process and remove the corrupting effects of campaign donations by instituting publicly financed elections.

- Abolish Corporate Personhood – Corporations are not citizens, they are legal fictions created to facilitate commerce. They should not enjoy the rights and freedoms of citizens.

- Institute a Financial Transaction Tax to remove the ability of the financial oligarchy from manipulating world financial markets and removing the wealth of society from productive use.

As a final thought, let’s use a General Strike to send the message that we’re serious.

Let’s pick a date sometime in 2012 and on that day we, the 99%, just sit down. That means, for one day the wheels of the big machine we call our economy just come to a stop. No violence, no hostility – just the majority saying we want change and we actually do have the power because, really, none of this works unless we go along with it. Because, you see, Ayn Rand had it wrong – Atlas is really us. If we shrug, the world stops.

Let’s make it stop so we can start it going again in the right direction.

[NYC_SKP]

1. I think you nailed it-- Campaign Finance; Corporate Personhood; Taxation/Regulation...

I added that regulation part because without it the rest will fail.

We should remember, BTW, that we got where we got without the Corporate Personhood part, which is a recent development.

With that in place there's gonna be an even greater acceleration toward poverty for all.

Unless we act.

:patriot:

[femrap]

6. Corporate Personhood

has been around for a very long time...it has been just of late that we have Corporate Personhood on STEROIDS!! Citizen United really took it up a few thousand notches.

We're acting, alright. We're the 99%.

[iris27]

12. Yeah, a lot of people don't realize that Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific was decided in 1886.

It's just that recently, corporations have pushed the concept to utterly insane limits, as in Citizens United.

It should still be overturned, though.

[femrap]

13. Corporations are a

menace to society IMHO. I prefer a Cooperative Business Model.

[vets74]

61. Occupy Wall Steet does K.I.S.S. -- Three principles + four ideas

This is an anti-crime movement. Between bogus mortgages and the phony-tranche not-a-bond schemes, the Wall Street managers and their mortgage crook brethren hijacked America for $7-trillion.

The whole country is worth $55-trillion. All of it.

Smash-and-grab, except that it was fraud. Common Law Fraud.

Local jurisdiction, which is a joke in Manhattan where the Wall Street top managers are prosecution-proof.

1. If Manhattan's prosecutor prosecutes Wall Street, they will leave.

2. We can't live if they leave.

3. Therefore, we can't prosecute anybody on Wall Street for anything. Not really.

Google -- george anderson florence cioffi -- if you don't believe it. Hit-and-run DUI killing.... and a 16-day sentence.

[femrap]

78. That's a great visual. nt.

[vets74]

79. Feel free to email it, copy and distribute it.

The center came out of Boston.

The outliers come from OWSGA NYC, plus a nod to Paul the Apostle.

Only psychopaths such as Rupert Murdoch argue seriously against 1st Corinthians, Ch. 13.

-- Love

1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, Mt. 17.20 ; 21.21 · Mk. 11.23 and have not charity, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

----------------

Promoting such as Murdoch -- one great weakness of capitalism. Dictatorships are worse.

We the People do live and die by democracy.

[fasttense]

51. But the court NEVER ruled on corporate person-hood in 1886 in Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific.

"The whole thing began as a courtroom comment by a judge, which was elevated to the status of legal precedent by an overreaching court reporter.

Here's what happened. Santa Clara County in California was trying to levy a property tax against the Southern Pacific Railroad. The railroad gave numerous reasons why it shouldn't have to pay, one of which rested on the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause: the railroad was being held to a different standard than human taxpayers.

When the case reached the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Morrison Waite supposedly prefaced the proceedings by saying, "The Court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution which forbids a state to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does." In its published opinion, however, the court ducked the person-hood issue, deciding the case on other grounds.

Then the court reporter, J.C. Bancroft Davis, stepped in. Although the title makes him sound like a mere clerk, the court reporter is an important official who digests dense rulings and summarizes key findings in published "headnotes." (Davis had already had a long career in public service, and at one point was president of the board of directors for the Newburgh & New York Railroad Company.) In a letter, Davis asked Waite whether he could include the latter's courtroom comment--which would ordinarily never see print--in the headnotes. Waite gave an ambivalent response that Davis took as a yes. Eureka, instant landmark ruling."

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2469/how-can-a-corporation-be-legally-considered-a-person

Yes, courts have cited that case but NO Ruling was ever made on corporate person-hood in the case. It's just bad law and a never ending conservative court gone wild.

[vets74]

62. As announced by President McCain's new appointee for an AJ opening....

[jwirr]

66. Hmmm, that sounds like it may be grounds for a challenge. Laws

made by court reporters should not stand. However, I think we would need to lay the grounds for any such challenge.

[alberg]

7. Agreed, we should re-institute Glass-Steagall.

[flamingdem]

44. plus

it's cool to be broke again, like it was in the seventies!
:)

[no_hypocrisy]

2. The Corporate Masters didn't calculate that "the Masses" would object

to be given a lesser status with less security, less promise, less healthcare -- scratch that, make that no security, no promise, no healthcare.

They didn't really think anyone would organize to object.

[deutsey]

55. It's like some Wall Street stooge wrote last week on why he thinks OWS will fail

Brett Arends expressed how the elites see us as a dull-wiited, herd-like mass of easily distracted imbeciles when he wrote:


"Sure, people are paying attention to Occupy Wall Street now. But just wait till something interesting happens on the Kardashians. Or there’s a bust-up on America’s Top Pastry Chef. Or some child pretends to get trapped on a balloon.

"OWS will go as stale as last month’s bread. Look! Over there! Monkeys running amok in Ohio!"

http://beta.finance.yahoo.com/news/why-occupy-wall-street-fail-040134995.html

They've been successful in dangling new, bright and shiny objects for a long time, but what they didn't count on was even Dancing with the Stars or Survivor can't distract you when, no matter how hard you work, you're facing foreclosure, or losing your job, or watching your savings evaporate, or realizing your kids will probably have it much worse than you ever had it, etc.

Oh, and by the way: Fuck you, Brett. :mad:

[SammyWinstonJack]

60. What an absolute asshole that guy is.

:wow:

[jwirr]

67. He is telling us what the elite think and he is right - they think that all

the bread and circuses they have given us to distract us from our problems is going to work again. I do not think so. Too many of us know that this is IT. If we do not do something now we are going to lose. They have tightened the stranglehold on us so that we are already having trouble breathing. Now or never.

[Tippy]

3. K&R,,,Good idea....implimentation may be difficult

one problem I see....we need huge numbers to make a difference...many my lose their jobs because of it...was refering to this part..."As a final thought, let’s use a General Strike to send the message that we’re serious."

[yogini]

9. General Strike? National Sick Day!

If you want to find your Power you’ve got to drop the Fear. Fear of losing your job is what they're banking on – literally! If you're working you get sick days.

So we all decide to call in sick on the same day because- We're sick of how things are going. We're sick of not being represented by our elected officials. We’re sick of the inequity of a rigged system. We’re sick of the 1% treating us like serfs. We’re sick of being unable to get or afford healthcare when we are actually sick… You know the rest.

You want to call it a National Sick Day instead of a General Strike? I'm fine with that. Let's just do it.

[Tippy]

11. National Sick day works for me

[Amonester]

68. Propose July 5, 2012.

The 1% can't fire everyone.

[PETRUS]

4. We need a wealth tax

Concentrations of property and power are inherently anti-democratic. We are suffering because of this. Our economic system promotes this kind of concentration, the most successful have managed to rig the system to further enrich themselves - WE DO NOT HAVE FREE MARKETS OR A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. Many policies need to be undone.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. When was the last effective general strike in the US?

[TreasonousBastard]

8. You'll get an answer as soon as they figure out how to overturn Supreme Court decisions.

[alberg]

10. I'm not sure if there has evere been a General Strike in the US.

The strikes I'm aware of have been organized by individual unions or groups of unions working together. I think that is one of the reasons why people are not yet aware of the possibilty and power that a General Strike offers. One does not need to be in a "Union" to participate. All that's necessary is for folks to decide that on this particular day, I will not play my normal economic role. The simple power of "No action", when expressed by millions of citizens would send an incredbily powerful message to the powers that be. It would be like an "anti-matter flash mob". Instead of everybody showing up at a particular place, nobody shows up. There would obviously be exceptions for critical occupations like medical care and emergency responders. But the shopping malls, gas stations and the banks - shut them all down for one day. The idea will go viral when enough people are talking about the possibility. At first, the media will try to ignore the ground swell, but at some point, high profile media people and some business people and even some politicians will get behind it and then a much larger segment of the population will get on board. Ideas are funny like that.

[starroute]

14. Reclaiming government from the corporations may not be sufficient

You look at countries like Greece and you see a situation where even left-wing governments are pushing through crippling austerity programs because they are at the mercy of international lenders.

The United States has been exempt from those kinds of outside pressure because we are effectively above it all. Our dollar is the world's reserve currency, our bonds have no lack of buyers, and so forth.

But what if that were to change? What if global corporations and global capital were to realize they could no longer control the US and depend on the US military to secure resources and markets for their use and decided to cut us loose?

I don't know enough about the underlying economics to say exactly how this would happen -- but I do know that it's a real possibility. And I suspect it may underlie some of the thinking of the Obama administration when they seem to be kowtowing to business interests.

So the question is not merely how to free ourselves of corporate control but how to do it in a way that does not leave us economically crippled and beset on all sides by far more savage global forces, many of them with an active desire to punish us for our temerity.

This may be the real reason the occupy movement needs to be global. The existing system needs to be deconstructed on a global basis -- and a more authentic alternative put in its place -- because without that there's no way to simply extract yourself from it safely.

[lunatica]

15. If we're all going to strike we have to do it for more than one day

One day is easy to withstand by any institution or corporation. We have to think in terms of what will hurt their bottom line more since money is their major concern.

If we're going to strike we have to make it count or just not bother.

How about 3 days, or a week or more? The more billions of dollars they lose the better our message is. The 99% have muscle now. We need to use it.

[alberg]

17. I agree with your sentiment, but I think we have a better chance of getting it off the ground

if we focus on one day. If we can get Americans to do it for even one day and they see that it really happened and the significant effect it had (and even one day would be a very significant event) - then I think there is more of a possibility to build on it and implement stronger future actions.

[NBachers]

63. Sorry- call me a traitor to the cause- but I need my job, and I like the company I work for

It's a small local business that's thriving despite the big box stores encroaching. I'm 62 with health issues and I need my job and health insurance.

I have no interest in damaging this business. This is like "Make your team lose for a day, or a week, or whatever."

I'm not going out on a general strike. If that makes me a traitor, so be it.

But thanks for volunteering me to strike, though.

[jwirr]

73. Is there any chance that you boss in this small business would actually

be willing to join this one day protest? Because most of us do not want to damage small local businesses either. We are actually hoping to rebuild our country around those small local businesses. That is a good point and needs to be considered.

[customerserviceguy]

81. You see the problem you've got already?

The small businesses are not the problem. If they close, they lose customers, not only for that day, but for every day when the person they pissed off remembers it.

We don't need to shut down the entire banking system, we just need consumers and small business people to quit the "too big to fail" banks. We don't make things better by painting everybody with the same broad brush.

The average American is fat, lazy and happy, and only too willing to go to Wally World for a bunch of cheap Chinese-made crap. The challenge is to get them to see why they should support the mom and pop stores, and if those small businesses are not better than the big box stores, then there's no reason to do so.

[NBachers]

87. No- our stock-in-trade is contractors, home owners, building owners, trades people

craft people, maintenance workers, home-project people, and lots of hard-working people scrambling to make a living. We've developed a loyal customer base by staying open and providing knowledgeable service and help. I can't betray their loyalty.

Yes, if we change our economic system in a way that benefits our customer base, it will be good. But the reality is, there's work to be done right now, schedules to be met, and no time for fucking around. People get up in the morning and expect us to be there for them. I'm not giving them an excuse to go over to Loew's or Home Despot.

[GreenStormCloud]

90. How much food and water do you have stored?

You won't be able to buy food or anything else. Your water comes from a public utility which will not be manned. That also means no water to flush your commode. Are you ready for a week's worth of shit in your commode?

Hospitals won't be able to get supplies as the trains and trucks won't be running.

With the gas stations closed the doctors, nurses and other emergency responder folks won't be able to get to their jobs. Hospitals will become unstaffed.

And you can forget your internet, cell phones, TV, etc as electric power will shut down. Even if electric power is kept on, the systems that such stuff runs on will not be manned.

Once you completely stop everything, how do you get it started again? How do you get the word out to go back to work?

People who call for a general strike seem to have never thought it through.

[customerserviceguy]

16. Gee I sure hope you don't need a doctor or ambulance driver that day

Maybe you won't need a lot of other things that people who are just trying to do their everyday jobs provide to you, either.

[alberg]

18. There would obviously be exceptions for critical occupations like medical care and

emergency responders. But the shopping malls, gas stations and the banks - shut them all down for one day. The idea will go viral when enough people are talking about the possibility. At first, the media will try to ignore the ground swell, but at some point, high profile media people and some business people and even some politicians will get behind it and then a much larger segment of the population will get on board. Ideas are funny like that.

[customerserviceguy]

20. And people get funny

when you inconvenience them. If some hard working person only has one day a week to have to get something done, and you pick that day, you've made an enemy. You sure won't please anybody who has to depend on day care workers, or schools to be open so that they can get to work, either.

I'm certain that the prospect of being put out on the street by one's employer for even taking a legitimate sick day on this national strike day would keep 99% of people on their jobs. In other words, it simply won't happen here.

[yogini]

21. National Sick Day

Schedules can be rearranged. You gas up your car the night before. Day care workers get sick, just like everyone else. Adjustments are made everyday. In other words, it can happen here. Lack of imagination is the enemy. And you can't get fired for being sick for one day. There are clearly certain services that are essential and those would be clearly exempt. If it doesn't inconvenience people it doesn't work. Business as usual isn't going to change things.

[customerserviceguy]

22. Good luck with that

I say that even if you could get it to happen (which I sincerely doubt) it has the potential to do more harm than good to the cause. You don't get people to sympathize with you when you screw around with their lives and their schedules.

[pipi_k]

70. You certainly could get fired

for being "sick" one day if your employer suspects it wasn't a legitimate illness and demands a doctor's note.

So what are people going to do that day...flood hospital ERs and doctors offices hoping to get a note for a day they weren't really sick?

Nice mess that would be, taking time away from REAL emergency illnesses.

[alberg]

23. When enough Americans decide it's worth the inconvenience

to work to change the fundamental and growing inequality in our system, then it will happen. I think we're approaching that tipping point. OWS is an indicator.

[customerserviceguy]

30. The reason I think it will not happen

is because we have elections as a nominal safety valve. Yes, it might be meet the new boss, same as the old boss, but nobody rules for life. When you get a political system where the only changes are brought about by the death of one man, and the succession of his puke son, then you get the unchecked anger that leads to either a series of general strikes or something like an Arab spring.

I learned a couple of valuable lessons in the late 1960's and early 1970's. First, movements that seem like 'everything's changing' are not as universal as I'd like to think they are. Yes, I let myself get entranced by news coverage, but reportage is not change in and of itself. Also, I ignore the fact that many people are either oblivious to the movement, or even actively oppose it, even though I don't see it. Nixon tapped into this when he called that opposition "the silent majority".

Second, I had a Jehovah's Witnesses friend whose religion was predicting an end to the world in 1972, at least that was their guestimate the last time I saw him in 1969. As a kid, I was highly impressionable, and found the growing antiwar movement and environmental movements to seem to be shoving the world into that direction, I thought it might actually be true. It was only after that, and some time came for reflection that I believed all eschatological movements to be pure bullshit, in order to keep believers in line.

Don't get caught up in believing that everybody sees things the way you do. You're bound to be very disappointed.

[girl gone mad]

32. People here swore up and down that Americans would never take to the streets..

over financial crimes and austerity economics.

When I said that backlash was inevitable because too many were being pushed to the brink and the fraud and inequality were too rampant to ignore, I was assured that Americans were perfectly content with their iphones and flat screens.

Those posters were wrong then, as I'm certain you are now.

[customerserviceguy]

37. Any idea what percentage have, as you put it, taken to the streets?

I'd say it was way less than 1% so far. Most people in this country either don't vote, or don't make up their minds until the weekend before an election who to vote for. Unfortunately, any election, any movement, any change depends on them.

[alberg]

39. You seem to have a good grasp of the obstacles we face.

Check out “emergent properties” and “chaos theory” in physics – there is a moment when as existing system reaches a tipping point and then shifts to new level. I think we are approaching that point now. The leaders of the German transformation movement thought that they were at least a year away from open movement between East and West Germany – the Berlin Wall fell within 12 hours – the point is no one of us knows how all this will turn out. We can only hold true to what we believe are the desired outcomes and keep moving towards them.

I have ultimate faith that human beings will figure this out. How can I not have this faith - I'm one of them.

[customerserviceguy]

45. In Western societies

We use elections to effectuate changes. Yes, they seem inefficient at times, and can be heavily manipulated, but if you cannot get someone to vote for change, you have a low likelihood of getting them to risk their lives, their property, and their jobs for it.

[yogini]

35. There was always someone around who said stuff like:

Hey, Martin, you’re just going to make people hate the Negroes more if you try that stuff. And stop being so eloquent or they'll think you’re uppity. (Civil Rights - one for us)

Hey, girls, you’re just going to make it harder for yourselves to get a decent job and decent pay if you act like a bunch of pushy bitches. (Women's Rights - one for us)

Hey, honey, you don’t get to decide if you want to carry that fetus to term…women have the babies and men make the laws. (Reproductive Rights - one for us)

Yeah, just call me an Idealist. I’ve seen these changes in my lifetime and I’ve got the gray hairs to prove it.

So, change does happen; even here in America! I don’t need you to wish me luck. Just ‘cause we won a few rounds, doesn’t mean the fight is over. That’s called vigilance; but that doesn’t automatically make me a vigilante

[customerserviceguy]

38. OK, you're an idealist

Let's go over your list:

Civil rights - Yes, MLK's peaceful marches were lucky to have a Southern Democratic President who turned against the recent history of his party, and we did get the civil rights acts of the mid-1960's. However, from 65-68, we had the race riots of that era, and the reaction was to get Richard Nixon elected President, and that was with George Wallace already bleeding off the worst of the racists. Did those civil rights acts end racism? I don't think so.

Yeah, that push for the Equal Rights Amendment was a great success, too, wasn't it? And we still needed the Lilly Ledbetter act some forty years later.

The abortion battle wasn't won in most of the legislatures or in Congress, and no President ever was presented with legislation legalizing it, that was all the doing of the courts. And if I recall correctly, that battle is raging on just as much today as it was in 1973.

What did ACT-UP get us? Homophobic propaganda, and we now have the vast majority of US states with a stain on their constitutions concerning equal marriage.

When you fail to get your own message across clearly, you offer your enemies the opportunity to define you first, and I feel that those enemies will probably do just as good a job on us now as they did with all the things I cite above.

[jwirr]

74. Yet those movements in the 60-70s did bring about change - civil

rights changed for the good, environmental actions took place, women's rights leaped ahead, ending poverty was taken seriously for the first time in our history, college funding was offered to a much wider range of people. We did not lose - we won even though we had opposition. The problem I saw is that we did not go far enough in recognizing the part that the financial sector played in the war and other issues even at that time. These are the wins that the corporations are now trying to roll back. They need to be stopped.

You are objecting to a general strike. What are you suggesting we do? And do not tell us to vote - we will but few of us believe that the vote is enough.

[customerserviceguy]

80. How old are you?

Do you have any actual memories of that time, or do you just have some romanticized notions from history books written by people who thought that they made some kind of a difference?

We didn't see that Equal Rights Amendment happen, now did we? The women who marched for their rights were described as bra-burning "wimmin's libbers" so many times that it caused many a young woman after that to start out discussions of equality with, "I'm not a women's libber or anything, but...", denying they were any part of the stereotype that the reich wing caused to emerge.

As for environmental actions, we were lucky that Richard Nixon thought that was something he could "give" us, to keep on getting away with waging war in Southeast Asia. If he had vetoed the legislation creating the Environmental Protection Agency, we wouldn't have had anywhere near enough votes to override it. Besides, I don't remember environmentalism being a part of too many active protests, it was soft stuff like Earth Day that caused any progress to me made. We got a bunch of bottle deposit laws passed, but no more states were added, and if you haven't noticed, those deposits are still only a nickel, no big whoop today.

College funding? I don't remember that being a part of any protest movement, either. The generation that represented the parents of the baby boomers wanted to increase funding to get their kids in, and yes, I was one of them. The belief was that a college sheepskin was the ticket to the good life, only it was slightly less of a lie then, than it is now. At least I managed to drop out after I had only accumulated a mere thousand dollars of student loan debt that I took ten years to pay off. It boggles my mind to see people put themselves in hock for tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars for a worthless college education.

Civil rights? Well, I'll give you something there - partially. The marches of the early 1960's were rewarded with a Southern Democratic President who chose to go against the grain of the politicians of his party in that area, fortunately. But what happened after the Acts were approved? We had race riots in most big cities from 1965-68, culminating in incredibly violent ones after Dr. King was murdered. That led to the election of "law and order" candidate Richard Nixon, even with the worst of the worst racists having been bled off by George Wallace. His EPA support notwithstanding, he was a disaster for this country.

You know why MLK succeeded? He made sure his marchers kept their "eyes on the prize", and they were sympathetic victims of the Southern sheriffs who turned dogs and fire hoses on them. If the OWS protesters can learn from that, and from the Gandhi experience in India, they might be able to accomplish something. The second they fight back, they lose sympathy, and the reich wing is more than willing and able to demonize them for an election year.

You'll see how little elections matter if that happens, at least as far as advancing progressivism is concerned. I fear that we are marching down the same path we took 40-45 years ago.

[jwirr]

82. LOL I am 70 years old and I not only have memories I have experiences.

[customerserviceguy]

83. Ok, I find a lot of people here

who think this is their chance to be some sort of Sixties radical.

You obviously have enough experience to know that every fact I've stated above is true. As for my opinions, you can agree or disagree with them.

[jwirr]

84. So all these years when my family got to vote, got to run for office,

had affirmative action in getting into school and work, had access to better schools it was just given to us by some nice white guy who thought it would be a nice thing to do? I do not believe it.

No everything did not work out perfectly but there was change. My niece is a doctor - from farm laborer/housewife to doctor is one hell of a jump in rights. The other is an accountant. My own children are that endangered middle class we talk about - they came from welfare to that status.

I am sorry you did not see any progress for the last 50+ years but we do.

[customerserviceguy]

85. It's not that I don't see any progress

I just distinguish between the progress made by 100% peaceful protest (like Dr. King's) and the mess that resulted from the late Sixties protests that set us back a very long time. I would suppose that affirmative action came from that, too, but it's been a two-edged sword.

I'm glad things worked out for your family, but I think that was in spite of the protests, not necessarily because of the ones that turned ugly. I saw an interesting ad run today in the middle of the Sunday morning talking heads shows that I like to watch, it focused on the anti-semitism of at least a few of the OWS protesters. And that's not the reich wing trying to demonize, its a Jewish organization, they usually vote for our side.

[pipi_k]

71. See, that's the problem...

thinking of it as only an "inconvenience".

yeah...for some it might only BE an inconvenience.

For others, it could be a MAJOR problem, and will not do anything to help the cause.

[lunatica]

19. Traditionally health sector workers have been excempt from striking

Unions workers know this.

[Zorra]

26. “Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety,

deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"
Benjamin Franklin

I'm sure Jefferson, Madison, and Franklin took ideas such as your post into consideration when they went about changing the circumstances of their situation back in the day.

It's the same shit, different day.

We are not genuinely democratically represented in government anymore.

Many of us recognize this fact.

We are discussing ways of changing our situation for the better.

Change can sometimes be uncomfortable, but it is often necessary nonetheless.

[customerserviceguy]

31. They were fighting an unelected king

Try and convince Joe Average American that a strike against some faceless banksters (unlikely to do anything but make them laugh) is the same thing, worth pledging lives, fortunes, and sacred honors. (I can quote the FF's, too.)

[alberg]

33. We don't have to convince "Joe Average American" - he's already convincing himself.

The Sixties were about civil rights, the war in Vietnam etc. - stuff that a'lot of folks in America were able to convince themselves didn't apply to them. There was still a strong middle class so average Americans were not so motivated to get into the streets.

It's different now. the middle class has been decimated - jobs gone, 401k gone, house upside down. A lot more people are now feeling the pain.

And a General Strike does not require anybody to get "into the streets" or to risk "their sacred honor", it's about not doing something. Not going to work, not shopping, not traveling - on just this one special day to make a very special point: we don't like it the way it's going and we want to see it change.

Think of it like a national "Snow Day!". Every American loves a snow day 'cause that's the special day when you can hang out with your friends and go sledding. Maybe that's what we should call it instead of a General Strike - Snow Day!

[customerserviceguy]

36. It's early

And the reich wing smear machine has barely had time to warm up on the OWS protests. Frankly, most of them assume the protests will wither away in winter's chill.

I'm sure the tea party was fairly popular as long as they were in their early cute stage, too. Then, they started winning elections and getting what they want. Also, besides harassing congresscritters, they haven't made too much direct trouble for those Joe Average Americans who don't connect the TP to the current government paralysis.

I hope the OWS movement can keep the high ground, but it has some powerful and articulate enemies who are experienced in the politics of fear. I saw it happen with the Vietnam antiwar protests, too.

[Ikonoklast]

77. They were not successful, the war in Viet Nam ended.

But good luck spreading your fud around, it must pain you to see that your side is losing the narrative.

[Zorra]

43. I'm working on it, and so far nobody at all has laughed. In fact, Joe

does not seem to care for banksters even a little bit.

Ironically, I just got done explaining the plan to a man named Joe before I read your post. No shit.

He thought it was a good idea. He knows that that the elite are controlling our government, and that they are screwing us.

I'm pretty sure he'll be down with taking a day off from work.

He'll be expecting it.

[customerserviceguy]

46. Get outside the bus routes

and see how people feel about it. I doubt you'd be terribly persuasive outside the metropolitan areas. It's pretty easy for people to think that the rest of the country consists of people who think like everybody in their circle.

I've lived in big cities, and in tiny towns in the boondocks, and I know that there is a divide between the proposed solutions to our economic problems. The OWS movement might do well to partner with tea party groups on things of common cause, like preventing another bank bailout. Millionaire taxes might be supported by the tea party groups, but only if they can be sure that the surtaxes won't dribble down to a middle class level, like the AMT did.

[Zorra]

49. I'm out in rural Arizona right now, 45 miles from the nearest bus station.

Many folks here are supportive, but not actively. Some thank me for what I am doing and tell me they wish they had time to participate.

I'm totally backcountry, born and raised, never lived in a city, hardly ever even lived in a town except when I was in college.

I drive 200 miles total back and forth to participate in Occupy Phoenix, and sleep down there when I can.

[customerserviceguy]

75. Ok, I guess I made a wrong assumption there

But I think it does generally apply to a lot of folks here at DU.

Clearly, with the laws regarding illegal immigrants that have passed in AZ, can you really call the general tone of that state progressive?

[Zorra]

76. Progressive? Moderate republicans are often suspected to be closet communists here

because of their ultra-liberal views.
;-)
But the whole point of OWS is to raise awareness and bring about positive change. One advantage the OWS movement has with a fairly good sized segment of the conservative population here is that they are pissed off at the banksters also.

This will never lead them to vote Democratic.

But it may lead some of them to participate in a general strike.

Also, there are independents and apolitical folks that are sympathetic to OWS who will engage in a general strike.

So many people have asked me, "What is the purpose of OWS?"

I tell them that it is simple: Rich people, like banksters for instance, pay off legislators in order to buy influence and control our government. OWS wants to prevent the rich from controlling our lives and our government, by taking away the power of the rich to do this. We want to make it so that banksters can never again ruin our economy and put so many people out of work. Even Joe/Jane six pack, no matter what their political beliefs, knows that just about every legislator is bribed, and they don't like it.

So I've found that most people I talk to can readily understand and resonate with this. Some seem a bit upset that they can actually agree with what a bunch of hippies in the park are doing. IMO, it is very important to spread this message through our personal relationships and contacts. Naturally, I am usually selective about who I have this discussion with, and do not cloud the issue with any secondary concerns.

IMO, OWS will be the last opportunity we will have in our lifetime to establish genuine egalitarian democracy. This would be a beautiful legacy for our children and subsequent generations to enjoy.

[Zorra]

24. Great post. Mic check...

Before the 3 practical steps you mentioned can be taken, we must first either remove all corrupt legislators from office or force them to legislate in the interests of the 99%. Since, as you said, they are owned by wealthy private interests and that is where their allegiance lies, they will not pass legislation to establish those 3 practical steps as law without substantial coercion.

So,

A one day general strike, combined with a general boycott and mass regional urban occupations of financial districts, would slash their assets overnight.

We surround them and render them powerless (no violence).

Having many assets requires having enormous amounts of cash, and a way to accrue more cash, to maintain those assets. Otherwise, assets become a giant, bottomless money pit.

With enough workers, we dig this bottomless money hole for them almost overnight.

If we sudden cut off a substantial percentage of the cash flow, we will shock the system and quickly create devastating, irrevocable financial chaos in the affairs of the 1%. They'll lose enormous sums of money in the time it takes to say Herbert Hoover. And if Anonymous happened to enter the game at the same time as well, that would put a giant exclamation point on the seriousness of our demands and our ability to enforce those demands.

Then we have leverage: "Look, Mr. Scrooge, either do what we the people, the 99%, want you to do, or we will plunge you so far into the red that a free cup of really bad, cold coffee from the mission will be the only black you see for the rest of your life. The choice is yours".

Since federal legislators are themselves generally fairly wealthy, they too will be stunned by this sudden financial chaos, and will want to maintain whatever "economic security" they have left. I suspect that we will then have their full attention, and that they may develop a sudden desire to actually do what 99% of their constituents want and need them to do.

If they don't yield to the demands of we the people, we continue to crash the system until we beggar them completely.

Most of us don't care if someone has a lot of money. Good on them.

It is their use of their wealth in order to neutralize democracy and control us and our government that gives us the ethical and moral right to remove their power over us by any non-violent means necessary.

Mic check, pass the mic.

[alberg]

28. Great reply!

Politicians respond to pressure – the big “or else”. In the last decades, the “or else” has come by way of big campaign donors saying “vote my way or I cut off the money". Now, the Occupy/99% movement holds the promise that the people can generate sufficient, non-violent “or else’s” to push existing government officials to do what’s best for the majority as well as elect new government representatives who will actually put the “general welfare” above greed and the desire to get re-elected (Bernie Sanders is an example that it’s possible).

In the 30’s, social; unrest became strong enough to both elect FDR and then to compel him and the congress to do the right thing. I believe we are approaching such a moment again in America. The question, as always, is what are the practical steps we can take to achieve the goal? Part of what we are now starting to overcome is the belief on the part of many Americans that collective action is futile – that it can’t really lead to sustainable, worthwhile change. This pessimism does not come about accidentally – the oligarchy has created and nurtured this false belief as part of their mechanism of control.

But people are waking up – not just here but around the world. Unregulated capitalism does not work for the common good. Some form of Social Democracy is a better choice for most people’s welfare and well being.

A General Strike would be one very visible and empowering "or else".

Mic check - pass the mic.

[WillyT]

25. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

:kick:

[Fire Walk With Me]

27. Kick and Recommend!

:hi:

[Douglas Carpenter]

29. thanks for your great article -- I am right now watching last night's activities via streaming

link:

http://www.livestream.com/occupynyc

.

[Laelth]

34. k&r for a general strike. n/t

-Laelth

[Remember Me]

40. Are these your ideas, or were they being discussed at Zucotti?

And one more thing:

The energy was there, the passion, the commitment....There is a sense of history and possibility in the air, and community and adventure and love.

Thank you. For many years I've tried to find some way to express the essence of what it was like in the late 60s and early 70s, that rare, sublime, surreal zeitgeist. I think this comes as close to any assemblage of that many words I've seen.

[alberg]

41. They are not "my" ideas - I've heard them discussed in many different forums.

They were discussed at Zucotti along with a lot of other ideas. And every day there is a General Assembly and additional ideas get discussed. At some point there will be a conscensus and folks will take action. It's all happening in real time. If you are close enough geograhically, I recommend you go there and see for your self.

[Remember Me]

42. I'm not

close enough, that is. I'll just count on your to keep us posted, eh??

Thanks for the report. These folks have got it goin' on. I have known it, but the video with Chris Hedges -- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x626281 -- and reports like this really help me understand it more fully. And I LIKE it. A lot.

[bluestate10]

47. Again, the cart before the horse.

And (HOW?????????)do you propose that the 99% accomplish your three practical steps?

The fact is that if you attempt to take over the country anywhere other than the ballot box, there will be MUCH blood in the streets.

Teabaggers have it right. The OWS people have yet to get it figured out. MAKE THE FUCKING CHANGE YOU WANT THROUGH VOTING. Until the OWS people realize that blaring fact, a small minority like the tea-fucks will have influence that is far, far beyond their numbers.

[airplaneman]

48. An idea to share

I think OWS needs to evolve to a set of demands.
Here is a suggested list:
1.)Break up all the too big to fail companies with antitrust laws into smaller ones that cant be so dangerous.
2.)Get our money back and then some by taxing all stock and derivative trades at 0.1%
3.)Repeal the bush tax cuts for the rich and then add more tax.
4.)Review and repeal any law that benefits a few rich and not society as a whole - replace those laws with ones that are fair to society as a whole.
5.)Tax heavily corporations that send jobs overseas and subsidize those that don't and crate jobs here.
6.)Improve law that allow easy access to the marketplace and repeal those that support monopolies.
-Airplane

[Democracydiva]

50. Excellent!

I would add along with election reform and publicly financed campaigns...HAND COUNTED PAPER BALLOTS!!

http://www.handcountedpaperballots.org/index.html www.bradblog.com

[cyglet]

86. Also...

Get rid of the entrenchment of the 2 parties. This only hurts our ability to depose anyone who is too influenced by corporate lobbying, and provides us no real choice (unless you only like "right" and "center right" as options).

[99th_Monkey]

52. You've got my vote, or whatever OWS calls it these daze. Very practical and doable all 3.

Plus there are folks in Congress who have been fighting for similar actions for years, such as Bernie Sanders.

[glowing]

53. General strike seems to be gaining popularity. I'd say by spring, it's more than possible

It's something everyone can do without having to camp out or what not. The US shutting down for just a day or 2 would have a severe impact on the world. And I'm assumIng that if we did it worldwide, they would know the gig was up.

[dotymed]

54. That is a great idea,but emergency personnel

like our great nurses and Dr.'s will probably still have to work. If not it will be the 99% dying. The wealthy will have theirs covered.

[Pacifist Patriot]

56. When I experienced a general strike in Europe years ago, such people were neither asked to nor

expected to participate. That's a pretty common assumption. General Strikes are about inconvenience and economic sanctions, not punishing the masses.

[handmade34]

57. in the meantime...

maybe "Sponsor an Occupier" for those of us who can't be there all the time... I'm headed to OccupyBoston this morning to see what little bit I can do...

[Javaman]

58. How to achieve #3...

Put people from the OWS on the ballot.

[izquierdista]

59. Step #4

It's time to make politics more about issues and less about personalities. I'm glad to see there is no "leader" to the OWS movement. No Fuhrer or Duce or Caudillo for the weak minded to rally around. We need to have elections about whether there should be a public option instead of relying on Mr. Change-we-can-believe-in to change his mind and decide that this is not the time for a public option once he's elected.

It's too easy for personalities to hoodwink and bamboozle the voters with their bullshit. All social movements, from Prohibition to Civil Rights to Gay Marriage are ideas, and if they have a personality at the forefront, it is only temporary, with a constant changing of the faces promoting the idea.

Such a change would leave the right-wingers disoriented, since they rely on personality traits to laud or demonize. They even fall for false personality traits, voting for the 'Mission Accomplished' draft dodger than the real war hero who earned his medals. When you throw the real issue in front of them, like "this is going to take away your Medicare", that's when they begin to notice what is in their self interest and they bellow "keep your Government hands off my Medicare!" Pollsters are always telling us that Americans are far more liberal when issues are polled than they are on which snake-oil salesman they prefer.

Those three practical steps will go a lot farther without a face promoting them as part of his campaign. They need to be stand alone issues that candidates support because they want the support of the OWS movement. And if they betray a support that they promised after they are elected, they need to get on their comfortable walking shoes and take a hike.

[alberg]

88. Agreed.

[Jim_Shorts]

64. While I agree with you alberg, I see this as a long term fight

Don't underestimate what we're up against, the oligarchs haven't even begun fighting us. We need to dig in and grow our numbers.

----------------------------------------
No, while there will still be elections and presidents and a new Congress, no matter who those people are in 2013, they will all be cut from the same cloth, and I guarantee you that you can’t afford that frock. This country is going to have pretty much go all Egypt on the ruling class to have any hope of changing what fundamentally ails us. That doesn't’t mean the Constitution has to be shredded and new institutions of government created. It just means that, at the end of the day, the people in government must be responsive to the public interest, not the oligarchy’s.
David Michael Green: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/10/18-9
----------------------------------------

By going "all Egypt" I don't mean violence, but to be very serious about what we're up against. People will continue to wake up as the affects of these austerity cuts become apparent and new laws by the super congress are passed.

My list would be:

1) grow our numbers - the protests are changing the national dialog as they grow

2) call for a peoples convention next year - We can refine a list of demands there and plot a future course

[Maineman]

65. Constitutional amendments are needed. Like these:

1. A CORPORATION IS NOT A PERSON:

“Constitutional rights and protections as provided herein extend only to natural persons, not to business entities, corporations, or governments. Persons representing or advocating for the interests of entities and organizations must clearly identify themselves as such.”

2. MONEY IS NOT SPEECH, LYING IS NOT PROTECTED:

“Constitutionally protected speech is auditory or visual messages that are intended to be an accurate reflection of ideas, facts, or artistic expression. Deceit or intentional misrepresentation, whether or not recognized by human sensory mechanisms, whether put forth by persons, entities, or governments or their representatives is not protected speech. No form of money or barter is protected speech.”

3. GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS:

“All campaign and campaign related expense for public office, whether for federal office or elected office in any of the several states, shall be paid from public funds fairly distributed to viable candidates. No candidate or campaign shall accept donations or spend personal funds for or on behalf of his or her campaign.”

4. FORCE THE SENATE TO FUNCTION:

“If three-fifths of the House of Representatives conclude that the Senate is unable to function effectively or to carry out its constitutional duties, all members of the Senate shall immediately be subject to recall elections. Such elections shall be held no sooner than 90 days and no later than 120 days from the date of recall.”

5. FAIR VOTING, STOP GERRYMANDERING:

“States may not consider political affiliation, socioeconomic circumstances, or religious preferences when determining representation and voting districts for members of the House of Representatives. All existing districts shall be redrawn within one year of final passage of this amendment. Allotted time and facilities for voting shall be equally and fairly distributed. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purpose of voting on federal candidates.”

6. DISCONTINUE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE:

“Henceforth, the President and Vice President of the United State of America shall be elected by popular vote of the people, each citizen having one vote.”

[Amonester]

69. July 5, 2012.

Stop.The.Machine.

+Extra.Day.Off. :party:

[jwirr]

72. I agree with this post and would like to see steps taken to implement

it. Of the 3 practical steps - we do need to change our ways of funding our elections. One of the things we can do immediately is quit funding the political organizations and begin funding candidates we support: Elizabeth Warren, Alan Grayson, Bernie Saunders, Al Franken, (President Obama as opposed to a rethug), etc. Progressive candidates that will work for us and the good of all. Let the DCCC, DNC, etc. know that we are not happy with candidates that sell out to corporations.

For the tax,regulations and the corporate personhood we need someone in Congress who will present bills that we want - Bernie Saunders comes to mind as he has already presented a few of them. Also he is an independent which keeps us out of the political games they play. I would guess that we have people in OWS who know how to write our own version of bills we would like presented. When there is something tangible that we can get behind we can begin educating the 99% as to why we need to change these issues.

Then when it is at a crucial time for a vote - that is the time for the general strike. I am not real sure what a general strike consists of - for instance are there people who do not take part in it because of the nature of their jobs - nurses, doctors, police, firemen? If they do not take part then I would give them a specific armband or something like that to wear on the job to show that they are in solidarity with the strikers. Likewise give those of us who are unemployed, elderly or disabled and do not have jobs a way to show solidarity.

These are my thoughts and I do not speak for anyone else so I am just throwing these ideas out for consideration.

[Courtesy Flush]

89. Those actions require the consent of the 1%

The three items you listed before the part about the general strike are all actions that require the cooperation of politicians. As you already pointed out, they are against us.

How do you tackle that?