Harassment of 99% Declaration supporters by OWS-NYC Leadership

[khad]

http://www.nycga.net/members/the99declaration/

In a case eerily similar to the scandal over the Demands Working Group, backers of the 99% declaration have been attacked and slandered by the NYC leadership. The 99% declaration is an explicitly anti-capitalist platform that demands an end to unemployment and the wars overseas. It has been well received by people from other Occupations; Occupy Philly is a good example.

Note the similar tactics that the NYC clique employs--revising history to accuse working groups of not being working groups in the first place.

Of course, they don't have a response when they're caught in their own bullshit lie.

Visit the 99% Declaration website here: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/


We’d love to have a 99% Working Group here at Liberty Plaza but it seems to us no one is interested.
Despite consistently claiming some kind of ”victim” status, the requests from everyone including myself and Stanley have been simple. Go through the process or declare yourself independent. You have declined to do either, and autonomously raised money through a 501 c4. This makes you autonomous and independent of this movement. That is perfectly acceptable and fine. We do not have a monopoly on movements. However, what is not acceptable is that you continue to claim affiliation with Occupy Wall Street despite not having reached consensus on your document, which was clearly written unilaterally and not through any kind of working group process (at least until much after the fact).
Fact is the group has not come to Spokes Council to present their WG & no one at Liberty Plaza seems to have an interest in creating it for them.

Michael lives in Upstate NY & does not understand the nature of the NYCGA & it’s working groups.

It’s microlocal & we are the 99% we’re in ALL working groups.

This declaration he proposes did not emerge from #OWS but is something he has been working on for year
You are not a working group, never have been.

Why lie? #justasking
Look that is not what happened and here is the video to prove it.
I followed all rules and procedures in place on 10-15-11.
Here is the video of me announcing the formation of the 99% Working Group on the 99% Declaration to the NYC GA on 10-15-11 at about 7:45 pm. This appearance did not appear in the official minutes like all of the other speakers that night:
Le5YI_QPPKk
Did you have authority form the 99% Declaration wiring group to delete that page? Did Stan have authority for us or me to delete that page. Of course not. You guys controlled the forum and you destroyed it unilaterally without any authority from me or anyone else.


Are you kidding me. You and ”Stan Ford” were the only two admins of that group after Drew gave up that job. Why did you let ”Stand Ford” delete the group? This guy had no authority from us to delete the working group. Why would we do that? He deleted it because he disagreed with our goal of holding an election and he admitted it. I have no idea if you are working with this guy but I will continue to tell the truth and I will tell the truth about this when we go on television in the next couple weeks for interviews.


If you do not serve the NYCGA Oligarchy this will happen to you: https://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/forum/

Wiped from history into the memory hole. They also deleted us from the minutes when we addressed the GA in Liberty Park on 10-15-11 at 7:45PM. These people are worse than the corporations we are fighting!


My name is Michael Pollok and I am the facilitator of the Working Group on the 99% Declaration http://www.the99declaration.org. The members of our group have been injured and treated differently than other working groups and we request restorative justice. I have tried having our grievances heard by contacting the NYCGA facilitators, the members of the internet working group and the mediation group, the direct action group, the demands group and others connected to the NYCGA without any response to address the issues we raise. Based on the emails I get and the comments made in our Facebook group, this division is causing people to turn away from the OWS movement.

On October 15, 2011 I appeared before the New York City General Assembly and addressed the General Assembly to announce the formation of the working group on the 99% Declaration. See video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le5YI_QPPKk

During my time before the GA, I described the formation of the Working Group on the 99% Declaration and our purpose which is to organize an election of 870 delegates to a National General Assembly to draft a petition for a redress of grievances in July 2012. This petition shall be served on all three branches of the United States government. I received a warm reception, was not blocked or told to wrap it up and held a two hour meeting following the General Assembly.

First Injury/Grievance against the NYCGA and Facilitators/Minute Keepers. We have been injured because all of the speakers before the NYCGA on October 15, 2011 appear in the minutes but my announcement does appear. Indeed, my appearance and all mentions of me and the Working Group on the 99% Declaration do not appear in the minutes and we have asked the minutes group to add my appearance to the minutes and even sent them the video. No response or action. This deletion from the minutes and lack of response from the groups running the NYCGA constitute our first injury for restorative justice. I wish to emphasize that I carefully followed all of the procedures to start an #OWS Working Group and appeared before the General Assembly on October 15, 2011 at 7:45pm to announce the formation of the Working Group and its first live meeting in Liberty Park that night. Since that announcement to the General Assembly on October 15th, the internet group set up a forum for us on the official NYCGA website called the 99% Declaration and the main working group established a page on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/www.the99declaration.org) which currently has over 2400 members. The 99% Declaration webpage http://www.the99declaration.org, has received more than 178,000 hits since October 18th. The 99% declaration has been edited several times by using polls on the Facebook page and a yahoo site so anyone can propose edits, polls and substantive changes to be approved by majority vote. We also have an ongoing vibrant discussion of the issues.

Second & Third Injuries/Grievances Against The Internet Working Group, ”Stan Ford”, ”Brad B.”, ”Jake Deg” and the Spokes Committee. Our second injury for restorative justice involves the official NYCGA website and the removal of our forum on that page. See https://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/forum/ which is the link to where the group used to be. I and other members bitterly complained about this unilateral action which is nothing more or less than censorship. In response to our complaints, a sarcastic and erroneous article was written by ”Jake Deg” and posted on the NYCGA. See http://www.nycga.net/2011/11/01/the-nycga-true-hollywood-story-the-99declaration-group-an-expose/ This article constitutes our third injury for restorative justice. I wish to be very clear. The 99% Declaration forum on the official NYCGA website was NOT set up by me or anyone else connected to the 99% Declaration Working Group. Instead it was started by Drew of the Internet Working Group and taken over by the admins ”Stan Ford” a/k/a [email protected] and ”Brad B.” who exercised sole control of that forum. Our members could only post and we did so to keep an open line of communication between our members (who are from all over the country) and the NYCGA. I never had any admin control over the forum so the statements in the ”True Hollywood Story” are simply false or misleading. No one in our group authorized a self deletion because we did not have admin control. I did criticize the NYCGA because this forum was taken down unilaterally by one person: ”Stan Ford” a/k/a [email protected] who had nothing to do with the 99% Working Group and represented himself to be an official liaison from the NYCGA. ”Stan Ford” was acting without authority from anyone and the 99% Declaration group should be restored to the NYCGA website.

Proposed Resolution. I suggest that the working group website formerly at https://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/forum/ be restored. I suggest that I be an admin along with a co-admin from the internet working group so now one can delete the page without an agreement between our grow and the internet working group.

Censorship is completely at odds with the #OWS movement and as demonstrated in the video above, I not only properly founded a working group in Liberty Park on 10-15-11, I took the extra step of announcing the group to the NYCGA even though I did not have to do so. As far as the claim that we somehow claimed to be representatives of the NYCGA, that is false. We announced our group to the NYCGA on October 15th and our webpage posting the declaration for edits and announcements was detected by Russell Simmons webpage and the Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/18/occupy-wall-street-planning-convention_n_1018570.html on October 18, 2011. We had nothing to do with these articles and were not interviewed for them. Our document is and was clearly marked as a draft working document and does not state that it was ever approved by any GA. The writers of those articles assumed that our list of 21 grievances were somehow approved by the NYCGA but that is not the case and we never told anyone that. Had we been interviewed by these reporters we would have told them this. We were never interviewed by the New York Times or anyone else. We will be going public on our own if we cannot repair our relationship with the NYCGA.

In sum, I ask that our forum be restored to the official NYCGA website with me as a co-admin with one of the members of the Internet working group and that our working group of 2400 people by treated with the same level of respect as any other working group.
As some of you may know, this Working Group started with seven people in Liberty Park. It was announced to the NYCGA on 10-15-11 at 7:45pm. Since then, the NYCGA has done everything it can to tear down this group because our goal of electing 870 delegates to a National General Assembly does not serve their the interests of the oligarchy that runs #OWS in NYC. They seem to think #OWS is their movement to be controlled from NYC where it started. In any event, they have now taken down our Working Group that was set up on the official NYCGA webpage. have repeatedly asked for the admins of this website to restore the 99% Working Group that was deleted by Stand Ford. No one in the actual working group formed in Liberty Park on 10-15-11 ever had admin control of the Working Group webpage that was deleted by Stan Ford. We are waiting to see if NYCGA will reintroduce the 99% Declaration Working Group to this website so we can have our point of view heard and developed here. We are not holding our breath because our goals do not serve this small group of people who run the website and facilitate the NYCGA. I really have no faith in the NYC chapter of #OWS and have no desire to work with them again.

[Die Neue Zeit]

http://www.nycga.net/members/the99declaration/

In a case eerily similar to the scandal over the Demands Working Group, backers of the 99% declaration have been attacked and slandered by the NYC leadership. The 99% declaration is an explicitly anti-capitalist platform that demands an end to unemployment and the wars overseas. It has been well received by people from other Occupations; Occupy Philly is a good example.

Note the similar tactics that the NYC clique employs--revising history to accuse working groups of not being working groups in the first place.

Of course, they don't have a response when they're caught in their own bullshit lie.

This time it's not in NYC, and yet the NYC leadership's at it again?

[khad]

This time it's not in NYC, and yet the NYC leadership's at it again?
It actually was an announced Working Group in NYC. You can watch the video; for some reason, this never made it into the "official" minutes....hmmm....

It's telling that they've had a much better reception in the auxiliary Occupations while in NYC they're being told that "there's no interest" and, barring that, that they don't deserve to be a working group in the first place.

They've apparently found a more receptive audience in Philly, however.

[Yazman]

What the hell is going on here? Are they deliberately attempting to sabotage the declaration?

Furthermore, how much support among the various national movements does the declaration have?

[khad]

At this point, though, it might be too big for the NYC clique to contain with their dirty tactics. It's been generating quite a bit of buzz among the Occupations, and many are already planning to send delegates.

http://occupyasheville.org/forum/99-declaration/here-are-florida-occupies-going-to-phila-on-july-4/

[Yazman]

Nice, the Floridians certainly seem to have their shit together. I will not formulate an opinion on the issue until I know more, though.

[KurtFF8]

Nice, the Floridians certainly seem to have their shit together. I will not formulate an opinion on the issue until I know more, though.

Hmm, I've heard quite the contrary from many comrades in FL

[Yazman]

Hmm, I've heard quite the contrary from many comrades in FL

Care to elaborate? It's not always easy to get an accurate view of the Occupy movement given there's so much conflicting information everywhere.

[Leo]

The 99% declaration is an explicitly anti-capitalist platform

I haven't heard much that is positive about the NYC leadership, and they do indeed seem to be politically maneuvering.

However the "99% Declaration" quite frankly seems to be utter nationalist, reformist and parliamentarian crap. It is not in anyway an explicitly anti-capitalist platform. It is rather hard to be so if there is to be not a singe mention of the term capitalist or capitalism.

Perhaps a deeper evaluation of the document would be in order. It starts saying:


WHEREAS THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION PROVIDES THAT:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.";

AND WHEREAS, the United States Declaration of Independence provides, We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,";

AND WHEREAS, the current government no longer derives its powers from the consent of the governed but from the excessive, illegitimate and corrupting influence of corporations that have usurped the citizenry's just powers;

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

WE, THE NINETY-NINE PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in order to form a more perfect Union

It evidently starts citing the nationalist/patriotic American tradition, and sets its goal as forming "a more perfect Union". This is a plan for the American nation, and by extension for American capital.

Lets see what it says point by point:


1. Elimination of the Corporate State. Implementing an immediate ban on all private contributions of money and gifts, to all politicians in federal office, from individuals, corporations, "political action committees," "super political action committees," lobbyists, unions and all other private sources of money or thing of value to be replaced by the fair, equal and total public financing of all federal political campaigns.

3. Elimination of Private Contributions to Politicians.

4. Term Limits. Members of the United States House of Representatives shall be limited to serving no more than four two-year terms in their lifetime. Members of the United States Senate shall be limited to serving no more than two six-year terms in their lifetime

This is an appeal for clean bourgeois politics, campaigns, elections and a more democratic capitalism. Clearly reformist demands.


5. A Fair Tax Code. A complete reformation of the United States Tax Code to require ALL citizens to pay a fair share of a progressive, graduated income tax by eliminating loopholes, unfair tax breaks, exemptions and deductions, subsidies (e.g. oil, gas and farm) and ending all other methods of evading taxes.

6. Healthcare for All. Medicare for all or adoption of a single-payer healthcare system. The Medicaid program will be eliminated.

Social democratic measures.


7. Protection of the Planet. New comprehensive regulations to give the Environmental Protection Agency expanded powers to shut down corporations, businesses or any entities that intentionally or recklessly damage the environment, and to criminally prosecute individuals who intentionally or recklessly damage the environment. We also demand the immediate adoption of the most recent international protocols, including the "Washington Declaration" to cap carbon emissions and implement new and existing programs to transition away from fossil fuels to reusable or carbon neutral sources of energy.

Green reformism. The first part is nearly impossible to practice without corruption in a capitalist economy and the second part is completely meaningless in practice.


8. Debt Reduction. Adoption of an immediate plan to reduce the national debt to a sustainable percentage of GDP by 2020. Reduction of the national debt to be achieved by BOTH fair taxation and cuts in spending to corporations engaged in perpetual war for profit, the "healthcare" industry, the pharmaceutical industry, the communications industry, the oil and gas industry, and all other sectors that use the federal budget as their income stream. We agree that spending cuts are necessary but those cuts must be made to facilitate what is best for the People of the United States of America, not multinational and domestic corporations who currently have a stranglehold on all politicians in Washington, D.C. in both parties.

This part is simply accepting cuts as long as they are dressed more social democratically!


9. Jobs for All Americans.

American jobs for Americans? This is a very reactionary and nationalist slogan.


Passage of a comprehensive job and job-training act like the American Jobs Act to employ our citizens in jobs that are available with specialized training and by putting People to work now by repairing America's crumbling infrastructure. We also recommend the establishment of an online international job exchange to match employers with skilled workers or employers willing to train workers in 21st century skills. In conjunction with a new jobs act, reinstitution of the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps or a similar emergency governmental agency tasked with creating new public works projects

10. ... The tax code must also be amended so that employers will receive a student loan repayment tax deduction for paying off the loans of their employees.


This part clearly demonstrates that there is nothing anti-capitalist whatsoever about this declaration.


11. Immigration Reform. Immediate passage of the Dream Act and comprehensive immigration and border security reform including offering visas, lawful permanent resident status and citizenship to the worlds brightest People to stay and work in our industries and schools after they obtain their education and training in the United States.

Needless to say, The Dream Act is the immigration plan of a certain faction of the US Senate composed of both Democrats and Republicans.


12. Ending of Perpetual War for Profit. Recalling all military personnel at all non-essential bases and refocusing national defense goals to address threats posed by the geopolitics of the 21st century, including terrorism and limiting the large scale deployment of military forces to instances where Congressional approval has been granted to counter the Military Industrial Complex's goal of perpetual war for profit. The annual estimated savings of one trillion dollars per year saved by updating our military posture will be applied to the social programs outlined herein to improve the quality of life for human beings rather than assisting corporations to make ever-increasing profits distributed to the top 1\% of wealth owners.

Despite sounding left this simply offers a "better way" for American imperialism.


14. End Outsourcing. Subject to the elimination of corporate tax loopholes and exploited exemptions and deductions stated above, offering tax incentives to businesses to remain in the United States and hire our citizens rather than outsource jobs.

Again, an extremely nationalistic demand. American jobs for American workers.


15. End Currency Manipulation. Implementing immediate legislation and WTO intervention if need be, to encourage China and our other trading partners to end currency manipulation and reduce the trade deficit.

I marvel at how anyone who read this point can still claim this document is opposed to capitalism in the slightest way. Or has the WTO become a force of anti-capitalism while we were sleeping?


16. Banking and Securities Reform. Immediate reenactment of the Glass-Steagall Act

Or has the New Deal become anti-capitalist recently?


17. Foreclosure Moratorium. Adoption of a plan similar to President Clinton's proposal to end the mortgage crisis.

And President Clinton is also a big anti-capitalist apparently.


20. Ending the War in Afghanistan.

Won't make the US cease to be an imperialist power. Pacifism isn't anti-capitalism.


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

And last comes parliamentarianism. Wishful thinking though, these points are as radical as the Progressive Democrats of America, if they are made public I'm sure enough Democrats will say they support them to channelize the energies of the movement into the Democratic campaign in the upcoming elections.

A last word on the conflict between the Working Group in Philadelphia which authored this bullshit of a document and the Working Groups and committees etc. in NYC. The impression I've got is that the working groups and the committees, full of leftist or liberal profession activists, are the main force against the proper functioning of the general assemblies (for more on this: http://en.internationalism.org/internationalismusa/201110/4549/occupy-wall-street-protests-capitalist-system-itself-enemy). This incident seems to be a clash of wanna-be bureaucrats to be honest.

[khad]

I haven't heard much that is positive about the NYC leadership, and they do indeed seem to be politically maneuvering.

However the "99% Declaration" quite frankly seems to be utter nationalist, reformist and parliamentarian crap. It is not in anyway an explicitly anti-capitalist platform. It is rather hard to be so if there is to be not a singe mention of the term capitalist or capitalism.

On the contrary, it's the first time I've seen any official occupy statement mention capitalism by name.

This is quite literally the furthest left that the occupy movement has gone, and anyone who disagrees has no idea how difficult it is to even get any kind of audience for the left at these venues.


1. Elimination of the Corporate State. The merger of the American political system of republican democracy with the economic system of capitalism has resulted in the establishment of a corporate government of, by and for the benefit of domestic and multi-national corporations.


A last word on the conflict between the Working Group in Philadelphia which authored this bullshit of a document and the Working Groups and committees etc. in NYC. The impression I've got is that the working groups and the committees, full of leftist or liberal profession activists, are the main force against the proper functioning of the general assemblies (for more on this: http://en.internationalism.org/internationalismusa/201110/4549/occupy-wall-street-protests-capitalist-system-itself-enemy). This incident seems to be a clash of wanna-be bureaucrats to be honest.

http://www.nycga.net/2011/11/19/draft-proposal-for-saturday-11192011-general-assembly-visions-and-goals-working-group-statement/

Take a look at the NYCGA-sponsored "visions group." I would give a shit if all you supporters of the NYC clique could come up with anything better.


Our Vision is that of [1] a free, democratic, and just society; [2] where we, the people, come together and solve our problems by consensus; [3] where people are encouraged to take personal responsibility and participate in decision making; [4] where political and economic institutions work to benefit all, not just a privileged few; [5] where we learn to live in harmony and embrace principles of toleration and respect for the differing views of others; [6] where we secure the civil and human rights of all from infringement by tyrannical forces and unjust governments; [7] where we provide full and free education to everyone, not merely to get jobs but to grow and flourish as human beings; [8] where we value human needs over monetary gain, because when people lack security, education, or a standard of living adequate for their well being, effective democracy is impossible; [9] where we work together to protect the global environment to ensure that future generations will have safe and clean air, water, and food supplies, and will be able to enjoy the beauty and bounty of nature that past generations have enjoyed.

[Leo]

Not in the version I read: http://www.petitiononline.com/99declar/petition.html


1. Elimination of the Corporate State. Implementing an immediate ban on all private contributions of money and gifts, to all politicians in federal office, from individuals, corporations, "political action committees," "super political action committees," lobbyists, unions and all other private sources of money or thing of value to be replaced by the fair, equal and total public financing of all federal political campaigns. We categorically REJECT the concepts that corporations are persons or that money is equal to free speech because if that were so, then only the wealthiest people and corporations would have a voice. The complete elimination of private contributions must be enacted by law or Constitutional amendment because it has become clear that politicians in the United States cannot regulate themselves and have become the exclusive representatives of corporations, unions and the very wealthy who indirectly and directly spend vast sums of money on political campaigns to influence the candidates decisions when they attain office and ensure their reelection year after year. Our elected representatives spend far too much of their time fundraising for the next election rather than doing the People's business. The current system's propagation of legalized bribery and perpetual conflicts of interests has reduced our once great republican democracy to a greed driven corporatocracy run by boardroom oligarchs who represent .05 to 1% of the population but own 38% of the wealth and whose incomes have increased 275% since 1979.


This is quite literally the furthest left that the occupy movement has gone, and anyone who disagrees has no idea how difficult it is to even get any kind of audience for the left at these venues.

Right, "anyone who disagrees has no idea" :rolleyes:

Well, lets see. This is from Oakland:

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2011/11/02/640_2011-11-02_11-50-55_421.jpg

The "official documents" aside, my understanding is that there has been a wide-spread indignation against capitalism present in the occupy movement although whether people involved actually understand what capitalism is, that is another question.

[OHumanista]

Thanks for the news Khad, quite informative and interesting. I find it funny when some people immediately prefer apathy or the current estabilishment if the demands aren't "end capitalism now" and label them all as reactionary ultra-capitalist bullshit because of that. But then again these people always prefer inaction, making demands, talking with ppl is too exhaustive.:rolleyes:

[khad]

Not in the version I read: http://www.petitiononline.com/99declar/petition.html
I go by the version actually on the official website.

Want cheese with that whine?

[Leo]

I go by the version actually on the official website.

Which doesn't seem to work at the moment.


I would give a shit if all you supporters of the NYC clique

You lack reading capacities if you failed to understand that I am not a supporter of any NYC clique.

[khad]

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2011/11/02/640_2011-11-02_11-50-55_421.jpg

The people who did that banner were promptly marginalized afterwards.

You can read the redbaiting here:

http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/death-to-capitalism/

Again, not officially endorsed.

But someone who's never been involved with anything on the ground wouldn't know.


Which doesn't seem to work at the moment.

Which is just you.

http://doj.me/?url=the99declaration.org

[Leo]

The people who did that banner were promptly marginalized afterwards.

You can read the redbaiting here:

http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11...to-capitalism/ (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/death-to-capitalism/)Right cause... one person posted something, five people responded to it and two of them actually defended the banner. And this person says "I just want to register my voice, outside the GA and here in this forum, because some have told me this is an inherently anti-capitalist movement." So horribly marginalized.


Again, not officially endorsed.A sentiment does not have to be officially endorsed to be wide-spread. Besides, it is not the task of general assemblies to endorse a statement of political positions the way professional activists in working groups tend to do. Their main function is the control and direct the movement, the exact function they seem to have lost to the precious working-groups of would-be bureaucrats and careerists.


But someone who's never been involved with anything on the ground wouldn't know. Are you saying I can't comment on the documents coming out of the occupy movement in America because I live in a different country or are you claiming that I've never been involved with any movements?

If the former is the case, I am not surprised why you are such a partisan of this nationalist declaration. If the latter is the case, I will suffice to say that I've been involved in movements far larger and more clearer movements than the occupy movement in the US which, as exciting as it might be for lots of people not just in North America, wouldn't get nearly as much coverage had it been in any other part of the world and isn't actually that big.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

This is quite literally the furthest left that the occupy movement has gone, and anyone who disagrees has no idea how difficult it is to even get any kind of audience for the left at these venues.

Perhaps if your political work is limited to trying to influence the people running the website, kitchen, etc.?

I've received a great audience for communist positions on several different occasions. Most were times of action or immediately afterward, but some developed during "down time." I've also developed a lot of contacts, mainly from people who came up to me wanting to discuss capitalism and communism after hearing me talk about it.

Scheduled/"facilitated" GAs, working groups dominated by professional activists, official avenues, and the rest are exactly what I would expect. But if limit Occupy to those things, then you might as wall eliminate it.

I'm not sure how you would know whether or not there is an audience for communist arguments if the positions you put forward are limited to things like "public works programs" and "jobs for Americans" anyway. You have to make communist arguments first to find out if they will be received or not.

"People aren't ready" is a bad argument. Militants are supposed to represent the future in the present; to represent the working class struggle for communism in all situations, pushing as far forward as possible; to fight for what we need, even if we don't get it. The capitalists can try to fix their system on their own.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

wouldn't get nearly as much coverage had it been in any other part of the world and isn't actually that big.It's not as much about size as it is about what exactly is happening. The many huge anti-war parades had many, many more participants and didn't get nearly as much coverage.

In this case you have people all across the country meeting on a regular basis, discussing, trying to come up with solutions... there is fraternization, contacts across city and state lines, cooperative effort... people talking about shutting down ports, general strikes, seizing foreclosed homes, etc., etc.

Occupy is much bigger than the encampments.

[kurr]

You know, I can't help but think that this is an indictment of Anarchism. This whole "leaderless", partipatory democracy. The tactics of decentralized (but still centralized at the same time) leadership. I myself am a former Anarchist but still somewhat sympathetic to the ideas of Anarchism.

I mean. I can only recall just weeks ago when anarchist on this forum, Agnixie, went out of his/her way to defend such a totalitarian leadership as the NYC-GA. I can only imagine that he/she would defend the bureaucracy.

And with the recent stifiling of any progressive groups like the 99 Declaration or the Demands Working Group, the Anarchists attacks on the working class in Greece, and the overall nihilism and degenerate attitudes of Anarchists, Libertarian Socialists and Left Communists on this forum, I can only conclude that these are bankrupt tendencies. The proof is right in front of my eyes for the first time and after weeks of soul-searching, it's still hard to believe.

I mean, you have a Left Communist just above calling the ideas of a proposal for a movement for much needed reforms as "reactionary". Do you want the working class in this country to still be where they are right now? Or do you want to beat back the Right-wing onslaught that we have seen the past few years or so?
At this point, so what if they adopt some nationalist or populist slogans? More working class Americans need to be on board with this and all avenues need to be pursued so that they don't end up completely demoralized and/or down the road of Fascism. You didn't get to 1917 without getting to 1905.

The working class in this country needs victories and we can't count on unions with bureaucratic leadership and alignment with the Democrats to do so. We need a real movement to get some reforms and to display the true power of the working class. How is this so hard to understand?

[Os Cangaceiros]

You know, I can't help but think that this is an indictment of Anarchism. This whole "leaderless", partipatory democracy. The tactics of decentralized (but still centralized at the same time) leadership. I myself am a former Anarchist but still somewhat sympathetic to the ideas of Anarchism.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2275832&postcount=51

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

You know, I can't help but think that this is an indictment of Anarchism. This whole "leaderless", partipatory democracy. The tactics of decentralized (but still centralized at the same time) leadership. I myself am a former Anarchist but still somewhat sympathetic to the ideas of Anarchism.

I mean. I can only recall just weeks ago when anarchist on this forum, Agnixie, went out of his/her way to defend such a totalitarian leadership as the NYC-GA. I can only imagine that he/she would defend the bureaucracy.

And with the recent stifiling of any progressive groups like the 99 Declaration or the Demands Working Group, the Anarchists attacks on the working class in Greece, and the overall nihilism and degenerate attitudes of Anarchists, Libertarian Socialists and Left Communists on this forum, I can only conclude that these are bankrupt tendencies. The proof is right in front of my eyes for the first time and after weeks of soul-searching, it's still hard to believe.

I mean, you have a Left Communist just above calling the ideas of a proposal for a movement for much needed reforms as "reactionary". Do you want the working class in this country to still be where they are right now? Or do you want to beat back the Right-wing onslaught that we have seen the past few years or so?
At this point, so what if they adopt some nationalist or populist slogans? More working class Americans need to be on board with this and all avenues need to be pursued so that they don't end up completely demoralized and/or down the road of Fascism. You didn't get to 1917 without getting to 1905.

The working class in this country needs victories and we can't count on unions with bureaucratic leadership and alignment with the Democrats to do so. We need a real movement to get some reforms and to display the true power of the working class. How is this so hard to understand?

You use the word 'reforms'. That is key.

There are two tasks, that must be performed by the working class.

1) To defend any welfare gains/push back neo-liberal attacks under Capitalism. This is often under the guise of Social Democracy.

2) To advance Socialism, revolution and the end of the rule of capital.

Now, this is a revolutionary left forum. Thus, those on here (who are not restricted) have as their job the second option, to advance revolution. You do not do this by 'advancing much need reforms'. In fact, i'd be worried if this forum descended into 'advancing reforms' as some sort of viable strategy for revolutionary.

From Lassalle to Bernstein to Kautsky and onwards, we have seen the utter immiseration of the working class as a direct result of putting our eggs in the 'reforms' basket.

So, whilst compared, say, to the position of the working class 12 months ago, the advance of the Occupy movement in the US is certainly a positive stride, we cannot simply say that improvement = better = let's support it wholeheartedly. The truth is that if we do not demand revolution then we are only demanding more Capitalism.

[RadioRaheem84]

I read the Declaration, and I am surprised that it's being pushed by Khad of all people.

I am not knocking it, I mean anything at this point is a step in the right direction, but the thing reads like a mesh of Ron Paul libertarian demands and the Progressive Left demands.

I am not sure if I dislike it or like it. But it's like a lukewarm movie, meh

[RadioRaheem84]

This just makes me feel like anti-NWO type of forecasters like Gerald Celente are more accurate at predicting world events than Marxists are. I mean this is the type of stuff that he said would happen; a mixing of progressive left and libertarian anti-corporate anti-NWO ideals.

These two groups have been far more active in shaping political discourse among the marginalized and now they have their own Declaration. I feel they've done far more than we've done and it's showing in bigger rewards for their mixed cause.

This declaration is something both a Ron Paul supporter and a Huffington Post reading progressive can sink their teeth into.

A Kucinich/Ron Paul ticket promoting this Declaration as their platform and it's all over.

[Smyg]

I am not sure if I dislike it or like it. But it's like a lukewarm movie, meh

"Lukewarm" is exactly how I would describe this whole thing.

[khad]

A Kucinich/Ron Paul ticket promoting this Declaration as their platform and it's all over.
http://www.nycga.net/2011/11/19/draft-proposal-for-saturday-11192011-general-assembly-visions-and-goals-working-group-statement/
Meanwhile, the NYCGA officially-sponsored "visions" group:


Our Vision is that of [1] a free, democratic, and just society; [2] where we, the people, come together and solve our problems by consensus; [3] where people are encouraged to take personal responsibility and participate in decision making; [4] where political and economic institutions work to benefit all, not just a privileged few; [5] where we learn to live in harmony and embrace principles of toleration and respect for the differing views of others; [6] where we secure the civil and human rights of all from infringement by tyrannical forces and unjust governments; [7] where we provide full and free education to everyone, not merely to get jobs but to grow and flourish as human beings; [8] where we value human needs over monetary gain, because when people lack security, education, or a standard of living adequate for their well being, effective democracy is impossible; [9] where we work together to protect the global environment to ensure that future generations will have safe and clean air, water, and food supplies, and will be able to enjoy the beauty and bounty of nature that past generations have enjoyed. It's been over.

[Ocean Seal]

So the NYC leadership is essentially like the social-democratic parties in 1918 Germany (I understand that the situation is far different and that the example doesn't fully hold). The question now is how do we stop them from bringing the movement in New York to its knees and how do we stop other opportunists from springing up. Who are these people, and what can we as leftists from close and afar do to stop them? I'm in Boston where the occupation doesn't really see to much action. From what I've seen of our leadership, its not too bad, they are able to handle themselves quite well without falling into opportunist traps or plots by the police. But how can I stop leaders like NYC from taking over here?

[RadioRaheem84]

http://www.nycga.net/2011/11/19/draft-proposal-for-saturday-11192011-general-assembly-visions-and-goals-working-group-statement/
Meanwhile, the NYCGA officially-sponsored "visions" group:

It's been over.

Went right over my head. Not sure where you're going with this? Both statements read like a mesh of anti-corporate libertarian and progressive left ideas.

[Ocean Seal]

Our Vision is that of [1] a free, democratic, and just society; [2] where we, the people, come together and solve our problems by consensus; [3] where people are encouraged to take personal responsibility and participate in decision making; [4] where political and economic institutions work to benefit all, not just a privileged few; [5] where we learn to live in harmony and embrace principles of toleration and respect for the differing views of others; [6] where we secure the civil and human rights of all from infringement by tyrannical forces and unjust governments; [7] where we provide full and free education to everyone, not merely to get jobs but to grow and flourish as human beings; [8] where we value human needs over monetary gain, because when people lack security, education, or a standard of living adequate for their well being, effective democracy is impossible; [9] where we work together to protect the global environment to ensure that future generations will have safe and clean air, water, and food supplies, and will be able to enjoy the beauty and bounty of nature that past generations have enjoyed.

I almost threw up reading that piece of garbage. Its trendy liberals trying to make themselves feel morally superior without any concern to the needs of the 99%. Its absolutely disgusting that this piece of shit get passed off as 'demands'. Loving beauty and all that hippie shit isn't a proposal, its a masturbatory aid for the richest factions of the 99% who have absolutely no idea how the working class lives.

[khad]

I almost threw up reading that piece of garbage. Its trendy liberals trying to make themselves feel morally superior without any concern to the needs of the 99%. Its absolutely disgusting that this piece of shit get passed off as 'demands'. Loving beauty and all that hippie shit isn't a proposal, its a masturbatory aid for the richest factions of the 99% who have absolutely no idea how the working class lives.
Here, I have an updated version for you.

http://www.nycga.net/groups/vision-and-goals/forum/topic/vision-statement-work-in-progress/

Education out, Pacifism in, consensus enshrined as fundamental principle.


Vision Statement – Group Document 11/27/11 (Not final consensus, but no blocks as of the end of the meeting) (edited slightly to connect the principles with the visions):
(Note: I couldn’t use tabs or formatting, so I separated ideas with balnk lines. We’ll probably format the document differently before we present it to the GA.)

What follows is a living document that will be revised through the democratic process of the General Assembly.

From the General Assembly of the Occupy Wall Street movement, To the People of the World we offer a Declaration of our Vision.

We, the people, envision a truly free, democratic, and just society, built on these principles:

Liberty: whereby we secure the civil and human rights of all against violation or infringement, particularly
by unchecked corporate power and unjust governments;

People Power: whereby governments, in any form, at every level, derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, not from the wealth of corporate treasuries;

Inclusiveness: whereby all people come together to make decisions through a process by which everyone’s voice is heard, and no one is marginalized;

Responsibility: whereby all who reap society’s benefits accept a fair share of its responsibilities;

Harmony: whereby we learn to live in harmony and embrace principles of tolerance and respect for diversity and the differing views of others;

Equality: whereby institutionalized racism, sexism, and all other forms of discrimination based on socially constructed labels have been wiped out;

Non – Violence: whereby non – violence is embraced as a way of life;

Fairness: whereby political and economic institutions work to benefit all, not just a privileged few;

People First: whereby we value human needs over monetary gain, ensuring decent standards of living, without which effective democracy is impossible;

Environmental Stewardship: whereby we work together to protect the global environment and all species to ensure that life is sustainable, and that future generations will have safe and clean air, water, and food supplies.

The Working Group on Vision and Goals continues to work toward a more comprehensive statement of visions and goals to be incorporated as soon as possible into this living document.

This is an official document crafted by the Working Group on Vision and Goals. The New York City General Assembly came to consensus on ______________ to accept this working draft and make it accessible to the public by posting it online.

[RadioRaheem84]

Good god, someone please stop these trendy liberals from usurping a genuine revolutionary movement.

This is worse than a Hallmark Card.

[the Leftâ„¢]

Good god, someone please stop these trendy liberals from usurping a genuine revolutionary movement.

This is worse than a Hallmark Card.


I think I'm in love :lol:

[Die Neue Zeit]

Thanks for the news Khad, quite informative and interesting. I find it funny when some people immediately prefer apathy or the current estabilishment if the demands aren't "end capitalism now" and label them all as reactionary ultra-capitalist bullshit because of that. But then again these people always prefer inaction, making demands, talking with ppl is too exhaustive.:rolleyes:

Or just damn cheap sloganeering, in the case of Leo's photo.


You use the word 'reforms'. That is key.

There are two tasks, that must be performed by the working class.

1) To defend any welfare gains/push back neo-liberal attacks under Capitalism. This is often under the guise of Social Democracy.

2) To advance Socialism, revolution and the end of the rule of capital.

Now, this is a revolutionary left forum. Thus, those on here (who are not restricted) have as their job the second option, to advance revolution. You do not do this by 'advancing much need reforms'. In fact, i'd be worried if this forum descended into 'advancing reforms' as some sort of viable strategy for revolutionary.

From Lassalle to Bernstein to Kautsky and onwards, we have seen the utter immiseration of the working class as a direct result of putting our eggs in the 'reforms' basket.

You advance initial steps in class struggle through various means, but that includes structural, radical, pro-labour reforms.

The problem with the broad left-com approach is that much of its "maximum program" opportunistically borrows those same reforms just to pad the program.

In any event, I'm in agreement with RadioRaheem. It really is a wash, and "End the Fed," though tagging along the Treasury Department, reeks of "libertard" sloganeering. Meanwhile, "jobs for all" doesn't get the picture re. services and both structural and cyclical unemployment.

[Rocky Rococo]

As a subscriber to its listserve since shortly after it was formed, I would suggest that the Demands Working Group is hardly anything revolutionary leftists have any need or desire to be championing. Intellectually and ideologically it is completely dominated by a coalition of convenience between "centrist Democrat" Manhattan professionals, including self-admitted banksters, and "Defund the Fed" Paulbots. The milquetoast social democratic wing, for perspective the far left edge of the Demands Group is Doug Henwood of "Left Business Observer", consistently rolls over when the "centrists" start red-baiting them, which is almost daily. If you all want to see some of the crudest red-baiting since the glory days of Joe McCarthy, I can go into the message archive and c&p some for you.

I should say "was almost daily until the expulsion of OWS from Zuccotti"; any topic concerning OWS NY may be now moot if the collapse of activity of the Demands Working Group after the crackdown is at all typical. Bloomie's action may have been much more crushing than those of us who have been supportive of the movement would like to think. There's been less traffic on the listserve in total in the ten days since the crackdown combined than there was on any single day before then.

[khad]

As a subscriber to its listserve since shortly after it was formed, I would suggest that the Demands Working Group is hardly anything revolutionary leftists have any need or desire to be championing. Intellectually and ideologically it is completely dominated by a coalition of convenience between "centrist Democrat" Manhattan professionals, including self-admitted banksters, and "Defund the Fed" Paulbots. The milquetoast social democratic wing, for perspective the far left edge of the Demands Group is Doug Henwood of "Left Business Observer", consistently rolls over when the "centrists" start red-baiting them, which is almost daily. If you all want to see some of the crudest red-baiting since the glory days of Joe McCarthy, I can go into the message archive and c&p some for you.
Check my thread on the DWG affair.
http://www.revleft.com/vb/attempted-coup-occupywallst-t163299/index.html

You can see the resident GA-bot defend those same paulites as legitimate dissent and that the DWG was "undemocratic" for trying to outvote them.

[A Marxist Historian]

This just makes me feel like anti-NWO type of forecasters like Gerald Celente are more accurate at predicting world events than Marxists are. I mean this is the type of stuff that he said would happen; a mixing of progressive left and libertarian anti-corporate anti-NWO ideals.

These two groups have been far more active in shaping political discourse among the marginalized and now they have their own Declaration. I feel they've done far more than we've done and it's showing in bigger rewards for their mixed cause.

This declaration is something both a Ron Paul supporter and a Huffington Post reading progressive can sink their teeth into.

A Kucinich/Ron Paul ticket promoting this Declaration as their platform and it's all over.

That would be the final death agony of the alleged liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Hmm, maybe not such a bad idea...

Meanwhile of course Paul has been denouncing OWS as a bunch of filthy hippies, and making it as clear as he possibly can at Republican debates that he hates the working class and poor people just as much as the rest of them.

-M.H.-

[RadioRaheem84]

Meanwhile of course Paul has been denouncing OWS as a bunch of filthy hippies, and making it as clear as he possibly can at Republican debates that he hates the working class and poor people just as much as the rest of them.

I thought Paul was pro-OWS?

[Ocean Seal]

I thought Paul was pro-OWS?
Nope he says that we're there asking for a handout.

[RadioRaheem84]

Nope he says that we're there asking for a handout.

When was this? You sure you don't mean Rand Paul.

[Martin Blank]

When was this? You sure you don't mean Rand Paul.

No, he doesn't. Ron Paul has been courting the Tea Party heavily, in order to boost his poll numbers in the GOP nomination sweepstakes. There was a Tea Party event in Iowa where, allegedly, Paul was contrasting OWS to the Tea Party:


“Some are demonstrating, because they’re scared to death they won’t get their handouts,” Paul said yesterday. “And the other half are demonstrating, because they’re sick and tired of paying for it. I’m on the side of sick and tired of paying for it.”

Source here (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&ved=0CGYQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffirstread.msnbc.msn.com%2F_news%2 F2011%2F10%2F30%2F8546673-paul-tea-party-godfather-says-occupy-all-about-handouts&ei=y8PVToa-MuXo0QGvqPyjAg&usg=AFQjCNE9DycDPeg-W-ls8ygOUz0raTSlnA).

I have a feeling, though, that this might have been a misinterpretation. I suspect that he was talking about the two wings of OWS: the latter are his Paulistas and the former are ... everyone else. Either way, he is certainly not supporting #Occupy; if anything, he is only supporting his army of infiltrators.

[RadioRaheem84]

Well that much is certain. He is only supportive of his fringe wing within the ows.

[Jimmie Higgins]

The people who did that banner were promptly marginalized afterwards.

You can read the redbaiting here:

http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/death-to-capitalism/

Again, not officially endorsed.

Just clarification on the Oakland situation, not a comment about the main debate here.

Yes there has been red-baiting in Oakland - most heavily from the local media and politicians acting as "concern trolls" who don't want us to wreak the movement by being too political. But the only people who have been marginalized are people working with Jean Quan and a couple of lone-Ron Paul zealots who tried to bum-rush the stage and complain about how their voices aren't being heard. The informal clique in Oakland is generally soft (liberal) anarchists (I don't know what to call them, lifestylists etc) to revolutionary (real) anarchists of various stripes.

In one committee I was in someone said, "there are public spaces for us to occupy, like Congress" and the facilitator basically said, "why not start your own committee over there... keep going... ok... no, keep going... a little further away now..."

My experience has been that people are very receptive towards radical arguments and politics. Until the repression and the heavy media push around "isolate the radicals" and "people who break windows are anarchists and they don't care about the 99%" there was little red-baiting, it's really been the combination of repression by the city and the media hype which has caused "fear of radical elements".

Just as a concrete example, several non-violence proposals have lost, the General Strike vote won overwhelmingly with a few thousand people gathered at that particular GA and the port-shut down vote won unanimously.

So other occupations may be different, and I've heard there's more red-baiting of anarchists in NYC, but I think in general there is a big audience for anti-capitalists and radical ideas in this movement - the political questions, uncertainty, loss of momentum in the movement at various times, and the repression can potentially work against some of the political openness though IMO.

[Jimmie Higgins]

You can read the redbaiting here:

http://www.occupyoakland.org/2011/11/death-to-capitalism/



Also, not to mention, the above red-baiting was on the chat section of the website and people like "July4thPatriot" were lamenting that all this radical anti-capitalism is causing the occupy movement to loose support among right-wing militias!


With the mere presence of Communists and Marxist in the ranks, you are already being labeled just that. MARXISTS! Most Americans are buying into this and are dropping support real fast. Militias are greatly split on wether to support or trash you all. Many are just buying into the biased media campaign to slander you all. I am one that is trying to help, but Americans at large will never help Communists and Marxists. This Black Block tactic also has to go. If that keeps up, then you will loose what little help you once had.
Signs calling for the end of capitolism*, will make you hardened enemies, to say the least. I beg you all not to go that route. There is another way and that is to restore our Constitution. We are not a democracy either. We are a “Constitutional Republic”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgdTkfvQ4ao&feature=channel_video_title It is imperative that we Americans return to our roots! Return to the essence of our Founding Fathers.
Because our leaders have forgoten those principles over that last several decades, if not an entire century, we are in the shape we are in today. Our Founders knew this would happen at some point and do have a blue print for getting back on track. This blueprint has been hidden by the Global elitists, from our youth, taken out of our schools, so their own Global agenda could be achieved.


Wow a fascist concern-troll. Yeah, I don't think this guy represents people in the movement. So subtracting the militia supporter, basically there are 2 posters (including the person who started the thread) against the banner and 2 arguing against red-baiting.

*EDIT: Lol, down with capitolism!

[Ocean Seal]

I'm also wondering what July 4th Patriot had in mind when he refers to militias. Did he go and ask all of the lolbertarian groups roaming the hills of the American countryside with their beer buddies pretending that they're going to take out the big govt one day?

[Renegade Saint]

People who reject any demand that isn't "END CAPITALISM NOW" have apparently never heard of the "Minimum Program".

[Raúl Duke]

Care to elaborate? It's not always easy to get an accurate view of the Occupy movement given there's so much conflicting information everywhere.

It's different for each occupy. While I'm guessing that in the larger Florida cities yes they have their shit together at the local level however in Ft.Myers and areas across the Southwest (below Tampa) the Occupy movement is a mess ideologically and in more or less dissaray practically.

However, concerning this call for a state-wide GA (which is also in some way connected to the 99% declaration and call for a nation wide convention) that came from Orlando (or Ocala). While a friend of mine was one of the few first to suggest the idea locally, I'm assuming a woman in the Orlando Occupy was the one who took initiative to start a FB group and get the ball rolling for this state-wide GA.

Nevertheless, as it concerns locally, Occupy FT.Myers might be nearing death. There may or may not be a Occupy FGCU and Occupy Edison College however in the near future.

[KurtFF8]

It's different for each occupy. While I'm guessing that in the larger Florida cities yes they have their shit together at the local level however in Ft.Myers and areas across the Southwest (below Tampa) the Occupy movement is a mess ideologically and in more or less dissaray practically.

However, concerning this call for a state-wide GA (which is also in some way connected to the 99% declaration and call for a nation wide convention) that came from Orlando (or Ocala). While a friend of mine was one of the few first to suggest the idea locally, I'm assuming a woman in the Orlando Occupy was the one who took initiative to start a FB group and get the ball rolling for this state-wide GA.

Nevertheless, as it concerns locally, Occupy FT.Myers might be nearing death. There may or may not be a Occupy FGCU and Occupy Edison College however in the near future.

There was even an Occupy Naples at one point apparently. I would be surprised if there were an Occupy FGCU and even more surprised if there were an Occupy Edison. The only real organization in the area that is good is the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, but that's not exactly in the same location as the Occupy movements of SWFL.

I've heard some bad things about the Occupy movement in FL in general, although there will be the state wide thing soon, so that will be interesting to watch.

And the Tampa Occupy just got raided today apparently. 30 some arrests I believe.

[agnixie]

People who reject any demand that isn't "END CAPITALISM NOW" have apparently never heard of the "Minimum Program".

I have heard of and read the blueprint minimal programmes (Erfurt and Parti des Travailleurs) and this looks nothing like a minimal programme. For one, a proper minimum programme does not dig up nationalist exceptionnalist mythology.


Well that much is certain. He is only supportive of his fringe wing within the ows.
We've been trying to piss his fanboys off on ows.org (type his name on the forums and it becomes Ron Lawl).

And yeah, the VGWG platform is also a piece of crap IMO - I was tempted to say "goddamn hippies" when I read it the first time.


Oh, last point - and as you're again bucking on bureaucracy, I would recommend Khad to find and read the spokes council documents, which specify that you are in fact not a working group without assembly mandate; you do, however, have complete autonomy as an affinity group, you can even submit proposals to the assembly (24 hours in advance), you just need to talk to the facilitation working group, which is generally easier than trying to get through the red tape involved in the assembly website, which is a pain. That's about the only recommendation I can think of right now. Good luck.

[A Marxist Historian]

People who reject any demand that isn't "END CAPITALISM NOW" have apparently never heard of the "Minimum Program".

The oldstyle minimum program was for mass workers movements. OWS is an amorphous movement of "the 99%." So it can't really have a minimum program, as its different class components have different immediate material interests. That is why all attempts to come up with one have created stupid irrelevant laundry lists.

End capitalism and bring in socialism is really the only demand that reflects a genuine common interest of all of society except the super-rich.

-M.H.-

[Die Neue Zeit]

The oldstyle minimum program was for mass workers movements. OWS is an amorphous movement of "the 99%." So it can't really have a minimum program, as its different class components have different immediate material interests. That is why all attempts to come up with one have created stupid irrelevant laundry lists.

Laundry lists? Care to substantiate your rant?

Also, on the contrary, both the classical and orthodox Marxist minimum programs are more relevant today than cheap "transitional" sloganeering.

[A Marxist Historian]

Laundry lists? Care to substantiate your rant?

Also, on the contrary, both the classical and orthodox Marxist minimum programs are more relevant today than cheap "transitional" sloganeering.

Sigh... I'd really rather not directly critique Khad's laundry list, as at least he does want a working class orientation for New York OWS, unlike the unofficial New York OWS bureaucracy.

But look at the "official" demand list floated by New York OWS a month ago, if you can still find it. Forgotten by everybody fortunately. An incredibly long and dreadfully bad list of demands.

Other lists I've seen here have been almost as bad.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

Laundry lists? Care to substantiate your rant?

Also, on the contrary, both the classical and orthodox Marxist minimum programs are more relevant today than cheap "transitional" sloganeering.

As for minimum programs, they have their place. The programs of most unions are for higher wages and shorter hours and such. A perfectly reasonable minimum program when you go out on strike.

But back in the late 19th century, when socialist revolution in Germany and what have you was *not* on the immediate agenda, because capitalist was still developing and making progress, Social Democrats had to have a minimum program, as well as the maximum program of socialist revolution.

Nowadays, capitalism just doesn't work anymore, so a minimum program such as "stop the cuts," like that of anti-cuts coalitions on the British Isles, is inadequate and unworkable. So you need a transitional program, as the only solution is socialism, and just calling for Socialism Now doesn't exactly cut it either for a mass movement.

However, since the only way OWS can really go forward is to become a political movement, not of the "99%" but of the conscious minority, Socialism Now is indeed the program it needs right now. Once it has opted for socialism, then it can start worrying about what precise program to advance on day to day issues.

OWS will become a socialist movement, or just end up staying in the rut of "99%" bourgeois populism, like the Greens or something.

-M.H.-

[Binh]

The 99% group appeared quite a while ago and tried to sort of impose its will by fiat and declaration. I don't doubt that they were suppressed by facilitation and that there has been a lot of behind the scenes manipulation on their part but the 99% group already has a set agenda/demands that was decided upon by no collection of groups or people at OWS. I read it back in October. I'm in NYC and I know Jake, some of the demands people as well as a bunch of people in various working groups. You can see my reports here: http://www.planetanarchy.net/articles.htm

The difference between these two cliques is that one is leading a mass movement and the other is trying to hijack control from them.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I don't see articles written by you, comrade. :confused:

[Die Neue Zeit]

Sigh... I'd really rather not directly critique Khad's laundry list, as at least he does want a working class orientation for New York OWS, unlike the unofficial New York OWS bureaucracy.

But look at the "official" demand list floated by New York OWS a month ago, if you can still find it. Forgotten by everybody fortunately. An incredibly long and dreadfully bad list of demands.

Other lists I've seen here have been almost as bad.

-M.H.-

I didn't use "Khad's laundry list" in my commentary, or the "official demand list" wherever it is.

[Die Neue Zeit]

As for minimum programs, they have their place. The programs of most unions are for higher wages and shorter hours and such. A perfectly reasonable minimum program when you go out on strike.

Um, that reeks of economism. The "programs of most unions" are neither the classical Marxist minimum program (political DOTP plus economic reforms) nor the orthodox Marxist minimum program (which still retains a lot of "politico-political" demands).


But back in the late 19th century, when socialist revolution in Germany and what have you was *not* on the immediate agenda, because capitalist was still developing and making progress, Social Democrats had to have a minimum program, as well as the maximum program of socialist revolution.

Have you not been reading in greater detail the polemics in the Weekly Worker, comrade? Or my Chapters 5 and 6 commentary on why both minimum programs are necessary today?

Both minimum programs are directly related not so much to "the development of capitalist production" or whatever, but to the political development of proletarian demographic majorities and proletarian demographic minorities.


Nowadays, capitalism just doesn't work anymore, so a minimum program such as "stop the cuts," like that of anti-cuts coalitions on the British Isles, is inadequate and unworkable.

If you recall what I've wrote, the orthodox Marxist minimum program does not include anti-cuts demands. It goes past that for more radical, structural, pro-labour reform.


So you need a transitional program, as the only solution is socialism, and just calling for Socialism Now doesn't exactly cut it either for a mass movement.

As some left chatterboxes say skeptically, capitalism is more dynamic than many doomsayers think it is.

[A Marxist Historian]

Um, that reeks of economism. The "programs of most unions" are neither the classical Marxist minimum program (political DOTP plus economic reforms) nor the orthodox Marxist minimum program (which still retains a lot of "politico-political" demands).

Have you not been reading in greater detail the polemics in the Weekly Worker, comrade? Or my Chapters 5 and 6 commentary on why both minimum programs are necessary today?

I don't follow the polemics in the Weekly Worker. If I wish to participate in left wing gossip sessions there are better venues for that, this being one of them. I do plan to read the lengthy material you sent me--as soon as I have the time. And I do appreciate you sending me the material.

Union programs for strikes do reek of economism, and rightly and inevitably so. That is the right place for economism. Is there a place now for a minimum program for a workers political party? I believe there was in the past, before the age of imperialism as the highest and final stage of capitalism, but not now.


Both minimum programs are directly related not so much to "the development of capitalist production" or whatever, but to the political development of proletarian demographic majorities and proletarian demographic minorities.

I should think that the Russian Revolution demonstrated once and for all that a proletarian demographic majority is not necessary for a proletarian revolution. Indeed why should it? Bourgeois revolutions certainly didn't require a bourgeois demographic majority.

Nowadays, on a world scale, the proletarian population percentage is indeed higher than it has ever been. But in the main industrial centers such as England and America, it has been declining, and there is no reason to expect this declination to reverse.

And meanwhile in the Third World, where the proletarian population percentage is rising, the lumpenproletarian population percentage is rising even more rapidly, a trend one can expect to accelerate. So waiting Kautsky style for a proletarian majority in India or wherever could be an eternal wait there too.

Capitalism is rotten ripe for revolution in economic terms, and is never going to get any riper. So this is not the time for a minimum program.




If you recall what I've wrote, the orthodox Marxist minimum program does not include anti-cuts demands. It goes past that for more radical, structural, pro-labour reform.

Yes it did, because the possibility of pro-labour reform with a continuation of capitalism was real in the 1890s. In the following decade you had the "progressive era," and not just in the US, with progressive reforms in the USA and social welfare measures in England, Germany, etc. Funded of course ultimately by colonial superexploitation.

A "minimum program" would make sense if you are expecting another "progressive era," with world capitalism cleaning up its messes, ending global warming etc. etc. If you think that, however, you are dreaming.



As some left chatterboxes say skeptically, capitalism is more dynamic than many doomsayers think it is.

Oh, capitalism can always survive somehow or other, but only by increasing the exploitation of the working class and plunging human society further and further back.

A program for "radical structural pro-labour reforms" these days is just a pipe dream. Either capitalism gets overthrown, or things just get worse and worse for the exploited. Serious reform cannot be implemented under capitalism nowadays not because capitalists are evil people, but because the capitalist system has degraded to the point that they are economically impossible.

Even the most liberal Keynesians are saying that the only way to avoid a European crash is through austerity measures. Within the confines of capitalism they would be right, except that these austerity measures are turning out to be just another route to economic collapse.

-M.H.-

[Binh]

I don't see articles written by you, comrade. :confused:

Click the link I posted. They are all written by me.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Ah, sorry about that. I wonder why you gave the impression that you were merely reposting articles from other newspapers.

I'll start reading. :cool: