Occupy UC Davis protesters adopt resolution calling for break with Democratic Party

[Le Socialiste]

Interesting development - here's their statement:



We, the students of UC Davis, condemn the brutal police assault and pepper spraying of fellow students, who were peacefully protesting on November 18.


This attack is part of a nationwide—in fact global—crackdown on demonstrations against social inequality and the domination of politics by the rich. While the American government invokes “democratic rights” to justify wars abroad, it responds to social protests at home with riot police, tear gas and rubber bullets.



While Chancellor Linda Katehi is directly responsible for the police raid, she was enforcing a nationwide campaign orchestrated by the entire political establishment. Throughout the country, Democratic and Republican politicians—including the Brown and Obama administrations—are dismantling public education, cutting social services, and undermining all our basic social and democratic rights.

Some of the most brutal attacks on Occupy demonstrations have been carried out by Democratic Party mayors.



The way forward is clear: No support should be given to either of the two parties! The dictates of the banks and corporations can be countered only through the independent social and political struggle of the entire working class.



We call upon students and working people all over the world to support our struggle against budget cuts. Our fight is your fight! Right now, students and workers in Greece, England and Egypt are engaged in a common struggle.


The global protests that began in 2011 must be expanded to a mass movement of students and workers to defend our rights and finally put an end to the domination by the corporations and super-rich over political and economic life.


Not many Occupy groups seem to have done this, so this strikes me as significant. Despite OWS' decline (due to police/state crackdowns and bad weather) this is an instance in which an Occupy group has formally called for a split with the Democrats and active outreach/cooperation with the working-class.

Here's a link to the full article:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/dec2011/davi-d01.shtml

[Mather]

This is good news.

BTW, how many OWS groups currently have ties to the Democrats?

[Le Socialiste]

Not sure, but I did read an article that said the Democrats are looking for ways to integrate the movement into its 2012 reelection campaign. They're scouting for those who have become the movement's "leadership", offering them positions in the Democratic Party that involve activist-led campaigning and higher salaries. They're basically saying "We can give you a job."

So there is an effort to redirect OWS into the acceptable channels of dissent. So, while some Occupy groups aren't officially aligned with the party, there are attempts to steer them in that direction. Add to that the presence of liberal/progressive elements friendly towards the Democrats (albeit disappointed), and you have a tricky situation. That's why the revolutionary left needs to be present for the remainder of Occupy, we need to have some presence that can push back against those who would like to see the movement allied with the Democrats.

Edit - I found the article:

"Just say no to the Democratic Party"
http://socialistworker.org/blog/critical-reading/2011/11/22/just-say-no-democratic-party

[A Marxist Historian]

Interesting development - here's their statement:



Not many Occupy groups seem to have done this, so this strikes me as significant. Despite OWS' decline (due to police/state crackdowns and bad weather) this is an instance in which an Occupy group has formally called for a split with the Democrats and active outreach/cooperation with the working-class.

Here's a link to the full article:

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/dec2011/davi-d01.shtml

I was thrilled to read this, a great statement that sounded like a great development.

Until I realized that this was from the anti-union "scabskyites" of the WSWS. I do hope these students at UC Davis are not being lured into the grasp of this sinister, cultist, anti-union, anti-working-class organization.

-M.H.-

[Le Socialiste]

I was thrilled to read this, a great statement that sounded like a great development.

Until I realized that this was from the anti-union "scabskyites" of the WSWS. I do hope these students at UC Davis are not being lured into the grasp of this sinister, cultist, anti-union, anti-working-class organization.

-M.H.-

While I'm not a fan of their general policies, I do appreciate their website's articles which, by and large, are informative and well written. I don't know enough about their position on unions themselves, but I do agree with their assertion that the major unions operating today are little more than microcosms of capitalist-bourgeois order and hierarchy, serving no other purpose than to stifle worker-led movements with hollow promises of solidarity and opposition. The statement from Occupy Davis is still important in that it makes a firm break with the Democrats and those who would steer the movement away from an anti-capitalist, pro-worker platform (not that it has adopted such a platform).

[Lenina Rosenweg]

I was thrilled to read this, a great statement that sounded like a great development.

Until I realized that this was from the anti-union "scabskyites" of the WSWS. I do hope these students at UC Davis are not being lured into the grasp of this sinister, cultist, anti-union, anti-working-class organization.

-M.H.-

Why do you say this? I am not a member of the SEP myself but this seems like a great accomplishment. How specificaly are they anti-union? How are they sinister and/or "cultist"?The only criticism I would have of their World Socialist website, which is an invaluable resource, is their sometimes extreme sectarianism. Of course they are not the only ones who could be accused of this.

As far as the Dems coopting the Occupy movement, its interesting that their politicians in Congress use "Occupy" terminology, the "1%", etc. Nancy Pelosi herself is badly in need of a mike check, even a gentle reminder of the far from radical "60 Minutes" episode a few weeks ago.

Van Jones, a former lower level Obama flunky has attempted to become, or the media has attempted to make into, the "official" spokesman of the Occupy movement.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Van-Jones-and-Democratic-P-by-Kevin-Zeese-111123-88.html

The movement seems to be treating him correctly, that is ignoring him.

[A Marxist Historian]

While I'm not a fan of their general policies, I do appreciate their website's articles which, by and large, are informative and well written. I don't know enough about their position on unions themselves, but I do agree with their assertion that the major unions operating today are little more than microcosms of capitalist-bourgeois order and hierarchy, serving no other purpose than to stifle worker-led movements with hollow promises of solidarity and opposition. The statement from Occupy Davis is still important in that it makes a firm break with the Democrats and those who would steer the movement away from an anti-capitalist, pro-worker platform (not that it has adopted such a platform).

Yes, the statement from Occupy Davis is a fine and important statement. I really hope they wrote it themselves and that WSWS didn't write it for them.

WSWS is against unions because it is the Internet hobby of a non-union Detroit printing company headed by the leader, or more accurately the owner, of WSWS. Anybody working for his company who tried to unionize it would instantly be fired.

If you read the fine print in WSWS articles on union struggles, usually hidden in a wash of often very well written revolutionary rhetoric, you discover that they are anti-union and pro union busting.

-M.H.-

[Ocean Seal]

Isn't the SEP the organization that's run by the guy who owns the newspaper plant and forces his members to work for him? If so that does seem pretty low of them.

[A Marxist Historian]

Isn't the SEP the organization that's run by the guy who owns the newspaper plant and forces his members to work for him? If so that does seem pretty low of them.

In fairness, I don't think he forces them to work for him. Rather, it's a sweetheart deal, whereby they get jobs that ain't union scale, but better than being unemployed these days and living on food stamps. Especially in Detroit, which is where the company is located.

So the corruption is not confined to said owner, but spread around nicely through the organization.

The predecessors of WSWS got infamous for doing disgusting things for money, like photographing Iraqui political exiles in foreign countries in return for money from Saddam. (Piously condemned by the owner of WSWS/leader of the SEP when the whole thing exploded. He wasn't getting the money.) WSWS is the logical development of that, left wing journalism as a subsidized hobby enterprise of a capitalist.

-M.H.-

[Revy]

Isn't the SEP the organization that's run by the guy who owns the newspaper plant and forces his members to work for him? If so that does seem pretty low of them.

I doubt he "forces" them to work for him, that would be slavery.

But you are right, the leader of SEP owns a printing company.

[Mather]

Not sure, but I did read an article that said the Democrats are looking for ways to integrate the movement into its 2012 reelection campaign. They're scouting for those who have become the movement's "leadership", offering them positions in the Democratic Party that involve activist-led campaigning and higher salaries. They're basically saying "We can give you a job."

What has been the response so far amongst the 'leadership' to this recruitment campaign by the Democrats?


So there is an effort to redirect OWS into the acceptable channels of dissent. So, while some Occupy groups aren't officially aligned with the party, there are attempts to steer them in that direction.

How much of an opposition has developed within OWS to this attempt by the Democrats?


Add to that the presence of liberal/progressive elements friendly towards the Democrats (albeit disappointed), and you have a tricky situation.

I am always left gobsmacked at how US liberals keep going back to the Democrats time and time again, despite the near endless list of betrayals the Democrats have committed. The same can be said of the gay rights movement in the US, who moan at Democrats selling out only to back them come the next election.


That's why the revolutionary left needs to be present for the remainder of Occupy, we need to have some presence that can push back against those who would like to see the movement allied with the Democrats.

Absolutely.

Also, as there are many OWS camps across the US, do regional differences play a part in the politics of each OWS camp? For example are some OWS camps more revolutionary than others?

[RED DAVE]

This is a very fine development. I don't think that there is much of a chance of the Dems coopting the OWS movement. Individual "leaders" will certainly climb on board the garbage train, but any attempt to yoke the movement to Obama will fail.

Just watch out for those guys who "facilitate" all the meetings and run the websites.

RED DAVE

[Lenina Rosenweg]

In fairness, I don't think he forces them to work for him. Rather, it's a sweetheart deal, whereby they get jobs that ain't union scale, but better than being unemployed these days and living on food stamps. Especially in Detroit, which is where the company is located.

So the corruption is not confined to said owner, but spread around nicely through the organization.

The predecessors of WSWS got infamous for doing disgusting things for money, like photographing Iraqui political exiles in foreign countries in return for money from Saddam. (Piously condemned by the owner of WSWS/leader of the SEP when the whole thing exploded. He wasn't getting the money.) WSWS is the logical development of that, left wing journalism as a subsidized hobby enterprise of a capitalist.

-M.H.-

I am not a member of the SEP and I would have some disagreements with them. However these seem to be unfounded accusations against them. First they are not the same as the infamous Healeyites.They have vague connections w/Healey's tradition but as I understand the SEP are more "Lambertists". They seem to have fully come to terms with the crimes and treason of Dennis Healey.

(Dennis Healey btw was the British Trotskyist who led several highly cult like organisations, accepted funding from Qaddaffi and has been accused of pedophilia and other forms of sexual abuse. He is widely despised by Trotskyists today.) Connecting Mr Healey with the SEP would make about as much sense as connecting the modern SPUSA and the ISO with Max Schachtman's support of Richard Nixon.

Also, David North is the "CEO" of a publishing company. I see nothing sinister about this. The original SPUS during the time of Eugene Debs had many publishing firms and papers more or less connected to it. The German SPD had several hundred papers and supported a small publishing industry. The ISO today is based around their Haymarket Press.The term "CEO" is a designation of US corporate law, that's all.

As far as how Mehring Publishing is organized, who knows? Who cares? It may be possible he provides jobs for his friends and comrades. Nothing wrong with this at all.It may be the SEP is largely organized around Mehring. So? David North uses several different names. So do I.

I have disagreements with the SEP. I also have personal friends in the organization. I think we should concentrate on critiquing their theory and activist approach.There are things to critiue. I feel this would be far more productive than vague inimidations that they are some abusive sinister cult, with no hard evidence to back this up.

I was a Spart sympathizer. One of best friends, who got me interested in Trotsky, is a huge Spart sympathizer. With all due respect the Sparticist League themselves are not immune from accusations of cult dom and abusive leaders.

http://www.bolshevik.org/ETB/Rtj.html

[Le Socialiste]

What has been the response so far amongst the 'leadership' to this recruitment campaign by the Democrats?

I'm not entirely sure. I doubt we'll see any results until early next year, when the election campaigns start kicking off. From what I've heard and read though, there's plenty of those within the unofficial leadership who favor the Democrats and would like the opportunity to work with them.


How much of an opposition has developed within OWS to this attempt by the Democrats?

Well, there's been a significant number of participants who have stated their opposition to these attempts to co-opt the movement. Plenty of people have voiced their disgust with the two-party system, saying that it doesn't matter which party is in power - the corporate elites will continue to profit either way. Many see the situation for what it is, and will certainly resist any effort made to redirect OWS into "campaign activism", but I'm not sure how large this group is. It will vary depending on the location and region.


I am always left gobsmacked at how US liberals keep going back to the Democrats time and time again, despite the near endless list of betrayals the Democrats have committed. The same can be said of the gay rights movement in the US, who moan at Democrats selling out only to back them come the next election.

Most people see the Democratic Party as an institution they can infiltrate and/or sway. Time and again, history has seen numerous left and progressive movements attempt to sway the party to the 'left' by joining its ranks. This is one of the arguments being presented to the OWS 'leadership': you can get more done within the party than outside it. However, the result has always been the same - the withering away and collapse of these movements, coupled with another lurch to the right by the Democrat's political representatives. The Democratic Party is the graveyard of social movements, dashing the hopes and ideals of those hoping to reorient the party's line and focus.

Yet people mistake the few "worker-friendly" policies of the party's past to be emblematic of its commitment to progressive movements, leading many to rally behind its banner. Just look at Obama's presidential campaign: the man ran on a platform that appealed to the public, which included various policies such as universal healthcare, repealing "don't ask don't tell", and ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Democratic Party seized on what the people perceived it to be and worked to meet these expectations. They positioned themselves as the sole supporters of progressive principles, relying on their party's history to "prove" their case. People will continue coming to the Democrats so long as they see them as a party capable of change and susceptible to people's demands. For many, it's a matter of picking the lesser of two evils. They believe that, while the Democrats aren't ideal, they're better than the pro-business Republicans. :rolleyes:


Also, as there are many OWS camps across the US, do regional differences play a part in the politics of each OWS camp? For example are some OWS camps more revolutionary than others?

Of course. The Occupy movement in Oakland (and the wider Bay Area) has proven more radical than many of its counterparts. Certain states and regions are more given over to acts of militancy than others. While the level of militant activity is relatively low, the utilization of worker-oriented tactics (such as the general strike) has proven that room remains for a leftist perspective and voice inside the movement. The resolution adopted by UC Davis students to break with the Democrats and police in order to preserve the goals and demands of the movement is noteworthy in this respect. Their stated commitment to bringing the working-class into the movement signals that there is room for a more radical program.

[X5N]

Good. Progressives, socialists, and the like have nothing to gain from associating themselves with the at best centrist organ that is the Democratic Party.

[A Marxist Historian]

I am not a member of the SEP and I would have some disagreements with them. However these seem to be unfounded accusations against them. First they are not the same as the infamous Healeyites.They have vague connections w/Healey's tradition but as I understand the SEP are more "Lambertists". They seem to have fully come to terms with the crimes and treason of Dennis Healey.

(Dennis Healey btw was the British Trotskyist who led several highly cult like organisations, accepted funding from Qaddaffi and has been accused of pedophilia and other forms of sexual abuse. He is widely despised by Trotskyists today.) Connecting Mr Healey with the SEP would make about as much sense as connecting the modern SPUSA and the ISO with Max Schachtman's support of Richard Nixon.

That's Gerry not Dennis Healy. North and his ICFI have nothing whatsoever to do with the Lambertistes. North's ICFI hasn't even changed the name of the old Gerry Healy ICFI, which they regard themselves as the lineal continuators of. They continue to uphold the entire history of the ICFI under Healy, all 30 years of it, only rejecting a few of GH's more notorious embarrassments of the 1980s, notably the sex scandals. Including being on Healy's side vs. Lambert as to the split between them in 1971.

They have continued to uphold many of the less sane and more disgusting aspects of the heritage of Healyism, such as even to this day claiming that the Trotskyist movement in America was infiltrated and controlled by KGB agents. Despite the unanimous agreement of *everyone* else on the left that this was slanderous crap. There were public statements to that effect signed by just about every non-Healyite well known Trotskyist on planet earth, etc. etc.


Also, David North is the "CEO" of a publishing company. I see nothing sinister about this. The original SPUS during the time of Eugene Debs had many publishing firms and papers more or less connected to it. The German SPD had several hundred papers and supported a small publishing industry. The ISO today is based around their Haymarket Press.The term "CEO" is a designation of US corporate law, that's all.

As far as how Mehring Publishing is organized, who knows? Who cares? It may be possible he provides jobs for his friends and comrades. Nothing wrong with this at all.It may be the SEP is largely organized around Mehring. So? David North uses several different names. So do I.

Here we have a non-union printing company as the main financial support of an organization which says that unions are bad news and should be gotten rid of.

Basic rule of Marxism is that being determines consciousness. It obviously applies here.


I have disagreements with the SEP. I also have personal friends in the organization. I think we should concentrate on critiquing their theory and activist approach.There are things to critiue. I feel this would be far more productive than vague inimidations that they are some abusive sinister cult, with no hard evidence to back this up.

I was a Spart sympathizer. One of best friends, who got me interested in Trotsky, is a huge Spart sympathizer. With all due respect the Sparticist League themselves are not immune from accusations of cult dom and abusive leaders.

http://www.bolshevik.org/ETB/Rtj.html

Those accusations come from the notorious William Logan, the ultimate "Trotskyist" cult leader, who nearly drove a member of his Spartacist group in Australia to suicide back in the 1970s by demanding that she abort her pregnancy or be kicked out of the organization. Plus ordering around everybody in the organization as to who their sex partners should be, and changing them around regularly. Not to be taken seriously.

-M.H.-

[the last donut of the night]

ok so i know this is revleft and the general tendency is to start trolling each other on important threads, but i recommend a new one is started if people want to scream and yell about the WSWS. this is a really important document in the occupy struggle, how about we talk about that, shall we?

[Le Socialiste]

ok so i know this is revleft and the general tendency is to start trolling each other on important threads, but i recommend a new one is started if people want to scream and yell about the WSWS. this is a really important document in the occupy struggle, how about we talk about that, shall we?

Yes, let's stay on topic shall we?