Why has Occupy succeeded more than any Socialist Party in the USA?

[R_P_A_S]

The question is simple. Why is the occupy movement more appealing and why has it been more successful on getting:

1. More Mainstream attention and coverage.
2. More people involved
3. More people active and aware.

Than let's say.. the PSL, Socialist Party of America, Socialist Appeal and or any other political party in the USA that claims to be socialist/communist?

I'm not saying either is better. I just want to know.. These parties have been around for a long time. However Occupy came and seems to be staying current and fresh with weekly national actions and demonstrations. That garner a lot more publicity than stuff done by the already established parties..

??

Let me just ADD.. Occupy is not doing anything new.. they aren't inventing the wheel here.. stuff they do these parties and the people before them have been doing similar things. I know this.. thanks

[GoddessCleoLover]

Occupy is a grassroots movement that encompasses a wide variety of people. OTOH American left grouplets and micro-parties tend to be so sectarian as to appeal only to their own followers.

[ProletariatPraetorian]

Occupy is a grassroots movement that encompasses a wide variety of people. OTOH American left grouplets and micro-parties tend to be so sectarian as to appeal only to their own followers.

Kind of like this "forum".

[Raúl Duke]

I guess in terms of initial media success...
Occupy has been larger, has taken a media-worthy action (Occupying Zucotti Park; later occupying many other parks in the US), etc.
PSL, SPA, etc are probably not as large as Occupy and haven't done anything like occupy a park, etc that would call media's attention.

But neither they nor the Socialist parties have yet succeeded in bringing much political change. However, the presence and appearance of Occupy did arguably succeed in bringing opposition to financial capital's extavegence (CEO bonuses, etc) and political control (corporate political contributions, etc) to the mainstream (or, in my opinion, the day light; dislike of the rich and the corporate corruption of politics has already been present among the population).


Kind of like this "forum." Don't expect this forum to become a "movement." No one else realistically expects it to; it's just a forum that appeals to a certain demographic (revolutionary leftists) like many other forums on the internet.

[gorillafuck]

Kind of like this "forum".this is a forum...

and probably because, as it's been said, media attention coupled with it being a grassroots political movement with a visible presence, as opposed to a political party started by a small group of activists to promote itself

[Martin Blank]

I wouldn't say that #Occupy has "succeeded" in any meaningful way ... yet. So far, the gains won by #Occupy are zero. In this respect, it is been just as "successful" as the rest of the self-described socialists and communists (perhaps even less, if we take into consideration some local actions that left groups have accomplished).

On the other hand, #Occupy has been more media-savvy than these groups, coming on to the public scene with catchy ideas and slogans, and cultivating a measure of creativity in its overall message. But that really shouldn't be surprising, since almost all of the self-described socialist and communist groups haven't really upgraded their media skills since the beginning of the 20th century.

[ProletariatPraetorian]

this is a forum...

and probably because, as it's been said, media attention coupled with it being a grassroots political movement with a visible presence, as opposed to a political party started by a small group of activists to promote itself

My response was pertaining to the last portion of his post.

[R_P_A_S]

I wouldn't say that #Occupy has "succeeded" in any meaningful way ... yet. So far, the gains won by #Occupy are zero. In this respect, it is been just as "successful" as the rest of the self-described socialists and communists (perhaps even less, if we take into consideration some local actions that left groups have accomplished).

On the other hand, #Occupy has been more media-savvy than these groups, coming on to the public scene with catchy ideas and slogans, and cultivating a measure of creativity in its overall message. But that really shouldn't be surprising, since almost all of the self-described socialist and communist groups haven't really upgraded their media skills since the beginning of the 20th century.

succeeded in getting MAIN STREAM MEDIA ATTENTION.. not in the struggle lol

[Martin Blank]

succeeded in getting MAIN STREAM MEDIA ATTENTION.. not in the struggle lol

Hence, the second part of my reply. :rolleyes:

[DaringMehring]

I wouldn't say that #Occupy has "succeeded" in any meaningful way ... yet. So far, the gains won by #Occupy are zero. In this respect, it is been just as "successful" as the rest of the self-described socialists and communists (perhaps even less, if we take into consideration some local actions that left groups have accomplished).

On the other hand, #Occupy has been more media-savvy than these groups, coming on to the public scene with catchy ideas and slogans, and cultivating a measure of creativity in its overall message. But that really shouldn't be surprising, since almost all of the self-described socialist and communist groups haven't really upgraded their media skills since the beginning of the 20th century.

Occupy has had success in drawing large numbers of people into active struggle.

They haven't won much; though their pressure helped win for the Longshoremen, and in Oakland they have prevented evictions (I'm sure there've been more wins in other places, that's just what springs to my mind). But getting masses of people out and active transforms their consciousness. For instance, I had friends who went to the mass marches of Occupy Oakland, and I think it changed their mind set about what was possible and how change can happen. Also, it makes people realize they aren't alone in thinking revolutionary things.

Why did Occupy do it and not some small socialist group? The main success came from the tactic of occupying, which no socialist group apparently has had the guts to do. Too afraid and also if it clearly traces back to one group, that can be used against it, and also that group can be sued etc. I doubt any socialist group wants to expose itself financially; they're all too afraid.

[Die Neue Zeit]

But that really shouldn't be surprising, since almost all of the self-described socialist and communist groups haven't really upgraded their media skills since the beginning of the 20th century.

But wait a minute, comrade! COMMUNISM IS NOT AN ADVERTISING OR OTHER MARKETING SCHEME! IT'S NOT SOMETHING FOR POSEURS! :lol:

THE FULL-TIME OCCUPANTS ARE POSEURS! :lol:

[The Douche]

Occupy has had success in drawing large numbers of people into active struggle.

They haven't won much; though their pressure helped win for the Longshoremen, and in Oakland they have prevented evictions (I'm sure there've been more wins in other places, that's just what springs to my mind). But getting masses of people out and active transforms their consciousness. For instance, I had friends who went to the mass marches of Occupy Oakland, and I think it changed their mind set about what was possible and how change can happen. Also, it makes people realize they aren't alone in thinking revolutionary things.

Why did Occupy do it and not some small socialist group? The main success came from the tactic of occupying, which no socialist group apparently has had the guts to do. Too afraid and also if it clearly traces back to one group, that can be used against it, and also that group can be sued etc. I doubt any socialist group wants to expose itself financially; they're all too afraid.

A few years ago there were a bunch of college occupations going on fueled by student anarchists. Various socialist organizations were opposing the occupation tactic as being to radical...

[Prometeo liberado]

The comparison's between whatever you feel as the achievements of Occupy as opposed to left parties are unfair IMO.Occupy didn't begin as a socialist movement, but rather as an unaffiliated response to the various issues. Rarely, if ever did Occupy call for the ownership of the means of production. Had they started out by stating this as a goal I doubt it would have lasted an hour. If in fact Occupy had that as part of their agenda but did not "market" it then thats just not truth in advertising is it? I feel that they got a by in the media for looking and sounding liberal(in its initial days). But any kind of effectiveness should be measured in the long term.

[Martin Blank]

Occupy has had success in drawing large numbers of people into active struggle.

Yes, but all movements that are on the upswing do that. The antiwar movement in the U.S. saw that kind of success in late 2002 and early 2003. I'm generally not impressed by "success" of this type; I'm more impressed if they can hold the numbers and/or continue to grow over the next year.


They haven't won much; though their pressure helped win for the Longshoremen, and in Oakland they have prevented evictions (I'm sure there've been more wins in other places, that's just what springs to my mind).

You can certainly credit #Occupy with an assist (like in hockey) in the fight between the ILWU and EGT in Longview, WA. However, I really think that the outcome was more of less predictable when the longshore workers raided the EGT port in the hundreds and squared off against the cops with baseball bats.

You can also point to #Occupy keeping people from being evicted in many places, not just Oakland. But, again, these are not actual gains. At best, they are holding their own and preventing a retreat. And that's all you can really expect from defensive action.


But getting masses of people out and active transforms their consciousness. For instance, I had friends who went to the mass marches of Occupy Oakland, and I think it changed their mind set about what was possible and how change can happen. Also, it makes people realize they aren't alone in thinking revolutionary things.

I agree that it's great this kind of rudimentary development of consciousness is happening. But this kind of development, in and of itself, can only go so far; the catalyst for leading to a fundamental transformation is not going to be found in general activism, but in the debate about political direction and guidance. (But you already know this, so....)


Why did Occupy do it and not some small socialist group? The main success came from the tactic of occupying, which no socialist group apparently has had the guts to do. Too afraid and also if it clearly traces back to one group, that can be used against it, and also that group can be sued etc. I doubt any socialist group wants to expose itself financially; they're all too afraid.

I would argue that they are still too afraid. I think back to the march in New York on the three-month anniversary of OWS, and how so many noticed that it was only when the union officials called their hijack rally that the self-described socialist and communist groups started crawling out of the woodwork. Before that, you barely (if ever!) saw them at the actual occupations. There were a few notable exceptions, like us, the ISO and FRSO-FB (IIRC), who were part of the physical occupations and regular participants in the GAs. For the most part, though, the self-described socialists and communists only appeared on the scene as a tail of the union officials in the larger marches and protests. (The anarchists, of course, had everyone beat on this score, since they were actually rather integral to the initial growth and success of #Occupy -- credit where credit is due.)

Honestly, any self-described socialist or communist group that rejects physical occupations because of a fear of financial exposure should just disband and go home permanently. But I have a sneaking suspicion that you're probably right in your speculation; they're probably worried about having a "negative cash flow problem" because they actually did something (gasp!) revolutionary. It might interfere with the salaries of their full-timers or something.

Where I am, the Party has been thrust into de facto leadership of the local #Occupy group (www.occupysaginaw.com). One of the first things we talked about in GA after this happened was organizing a physical occupation. None of us flinched at the prospect, so we'll see where things go from here.

Right now, though, our #Occupy group is sponsoring an International Women's Day march and rally that is focusing on the issue of rape and rape culture. The number of rapes that take place in Michigan is three times higher than the national average, and the average for Saginaw County is about double the per capita average in the state -- most of them happening in the city. However, arrests stemming from rape reports are the fifth-lowest in the country. Of the 263 reported rapes in Saginaw in 2010, only 11 people were arrested. You do the math.

And it is something of an open secret that some of the most violent serial rapists in Saginaw wear (or have worn) badges and guns. They are protected not only by the Police and Sheriff's Departments, but also by the county judges and prosecutors. The bosses' media -- print, radio and television -- refuses to report on rape allegations. The main hospitals have a habit of "losing" or "contaminating" rape kits. Any lawyer who tries to take on this misogynistic order usually gets run out of town on a rail. And victims who try to push the issue and pressure the prosecutor often get threatened with criminal charges themselves!

I figure that if we can survive any fallout from this IWD event, we'll be able to handle what comes our way during a physical occupation.

[bad ideas actualised by alcohol]

So, what exactly has occupy achieved?

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

The comparison's between whatever you feel as the achievements of Occupy as opposed to left parties are unfair IMO.Occupy didn't begin as a socialist movement, but rather as an unaffiliated response to the various issues. Rarely, if ever did Occupy call for the ownership of the means of production. Had they started out by stating this as a goal I doubt it would have lasted an hour.

Is this not exactly the point that the 'left-wing' misses?

Socialism isn't about a red flag, using 'Marxist' language and greasing up our sexual organs at the sight of Tankie memorabilia.

Socialism is about people rising up of their own accord, which is more-or-less what happened with occupy, even if it did have a large reformist element.

I'm amazed that people still decry Occupy as a bunch of hippy liberals, simply because they don't worship Marx, Engels and Lenin. It's crazy.

Socialism lives and breathes. Evidently, the 'Socialist' and 'Communist' parties do not, and thus really do little that could be genuinely termed Socialist.

[A Marxist Historian]

Is this not exactly the point that the 'left-wing' misses?

Socialism isn't about a red flag, using 'Marxist' language and greasing up our sexual organs at the sight of Tankie memorabilia.

Socialism is about people rising up of their own accord, which is more-or-less what happened with occupy, even if it did have a large reformist element.

I'm amazed that people still decry Occupy as a bunch of hippy liberals, simply because they don't worship Marx, Engels and Lenin. It's crazy.

Socialism lives and breathes. Evidently, the 'Socialist' and 'Communist' parties do not, and thus really do little that could be genuinely termed Socialist.

The porblem with Occupy isn't the language that it uses, or what totem poles it may worship. It's what it is all about.

It's supposed to be a movement of "the 99%." That's what occupy is all about. That means it's not a movement of the working class, and can't be a movement for socialism, as "the 99%" includes the petty and sometimes even not so petty bourgeoisie as well as the working class. So whenever anybody wants to try and bring in socialist ideas or a socialist program to Occupy, that gets rejected as it would "divide the 99%." And that's not some sort of bureaucratic crap, 'cuz fact is that it would.

And that's why it could gain popularity so easily. The basic program of Occupy, insofar as it has one, is to tax the rich, which is of course Obama's theme for the 2012 presidentials, and why trade union officials initially embraced Occupy with open arms, till it became clear they couldn't control it. And still are using Occupy language, as are the Democrats where Occupy still gets favorable poll ratings.

-M.H.-

[A Marxist Historian]

...

You can certainly credit #Occupy with an assist (like in hockey) in the fight between the ILWU and EGT in Longview, WA. However, I really think that the outcome was more of less predictable when the longshore workers raided the EGT port in the hundreds and squared off against the cops with baseball bats...

A pretty damn good assessment, good way of putting it. Of course, not surprising that I like that assessment, as it is almost identical to that of the Spartacists as to Longview (though not on other matters of course.



...
Where I am, the Party has been thrust into de facto leadership of the local #Occupy group (www.occupysaginaw.com (http://www.occupysaginaw.com)). One of the first things we talked about in GA after this happened was organizing a physical occupation. None of us flinched at the prospect, so we'll see where things go from here.

Right now, though, our #Occupy group is sponsoring an International Women's Day march and rally that is focusing on the issue of rape and rape culture. The number of rapes that take place in Michigan is three times higher than the national average, and the average for Saginaw County is about double the per capita average in the state -- most of them happening in the city. However, arrests stemming from rape reports are the fifth-lowest in the country. Of the 263 reported rapes in Saginaw in 2010, only 11 people were arrested. You do the math.

And it is something of an open secret that some of the most violent serial rapists in Saginaw wear (or have worn) badges and guns. They are protected not only by the Police and Sheriff's Departments, but also by the county judges and prosecutors. The bosses' media -- print, radio and television -- refuses to report on rape allegations. The main hospitals have a habit of "losing" or "contaminating" rape kits. Any lawyer who tries to take on this misogynistic order usually gets run out of town on a rail. And victims who try to push the issue and pressure the prosecutor often get threatened with criminal charges themselves!

I figure that if we can survive any fallout from this IWD event, we'll be able to handle what comes our way during a physical occupation.

Well, if your party is thrust into the leadership of Saginaw OWS, you now have a great opportunity to show what your group is made of.

What should you do? Well, first and foremost, you should get Saginaw OWS to come out explicitly and publicly for socialism. After all, if you oppose Wall Street, how can you really get rid of it? Only by expropriating it, which is only realistic in a context of moving from capitalism to socialism.

What should you do practically? Well, given the extreme devastation capitalism has visited on Michigan, especially in Detroit, I am sure a number of possibilities are obvious.

But the one you've selected, fighting against rape, I don't see how that can be anything other than a fight to clean up and purge the bourgeois state, purging the cops of the rapists among them etc.

The state is the enemy of the working people of Michigan, and will not be improved significantly by cleaning out the worst bad apples.

Occupying a plant that capitalists are planning to close down, throwing people out of work, is what might occur to me as an outsider. That is workable, of course, only if the workers at that plant really do see Saginaw OWS as their advocate, and only if done in collaboration with workers working there, and their union.

If something like that is not momentarily doable, I would think that socialist education of Occupy activists while waiting for the best opportunity to intervene with Occupy tactics into the class struggle would be the way to go.

-M.H.-

[ellipsis]

because horizontal organization is far superior a method. duh.

[ellipsis]

I wouldn't say that #Occupy has "succeeded" in any meaningful way

thousands of people engaging in political organizing and gaining in the streets experience isn't successful, at least in terms of short term goals?

I can hear what you are saying as well. Time will tell, but in the bay area, I have seen large numbers of people go from totally inexperienced to forming shield phalanxs and holding the line in spite of concussion grenades and tear gas. Unfortunately, the bay area occupy's are not representative of the broader movement.

Successful occupations of workplaces, public spaces, vacant buildings, etc. require people to be familiar and experienced in these tactics, occupy has started to build this familiarity.

PSL/ANSWER have been very involved with both Occupy SF, Oakland bringing mobile sound systems, sponsoring anti-war rallies, etc. I have gotten to know many party members because of the shared support of occupy and have had great conversations. Solid comrades for sure. I don't know whether Occupy has swelled interest and participation in PSLs meetings and events.

[ellipsis]

moved to OS: OWS.

[Prometeo liberado]

Is this not exactly the point that the 'left-wing' misses?

Socialism isn't about a red flag, using 'Marxist' language and greasing up our sexual organs at the sight of Tankie memorabilia.

Socialism is about people rising up of their own accord, which is more-or-less what happened with occupy, even if it did have a large reformist element.

I'm amazed that people still decry Occupy as a bunch of hippy liberals, simply because they don't worship Marx, Engels and Lenin. It's crazy.

Socialism lives and breathes. Evidently, the 'Socialist' and 'Communist' parties do not, and thus really do little that could be genuinely termed Socialist.

What in the hell are you talking about? The only point I am making is that to measure the "success" of Occupy as it pertains to socialist parties is at the very least unfair. How can anyone argue that the broad Occupy voice in this country was anything but vague or liberal/reformist in it's first days? From wikipedia:
Goals

Initially, journalists such as Shannon Bond for the Financial Times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Times) said that discerning unified goals for the movement was difficult. Speaking on October 7, Kalle Lasn of Adbusters said that in the early stages demands and leaders were the "mysterious part" that allowed the movement to grow, but he believed that in the coming weeks clear demands would begin to come out of the general assemblies that the movement holds daily.[64] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-63) Then, commenting on October 17, Adbusters said, "Across the globe the 99% are marching! You have inspired more than you know. People are digging into Act One of the long Spring", and went on to suggest, "Its now time to amp up the edgy theatrics [ tactical frivolity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_frivolity) ]...deviant pranks, subversive performances and playful détournements of all kinds".[65] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-RobinHood-64) By later October Adbusters had been trying to "rally it around a single, clear demand" for a Robin Hood tax (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Hood_tax), with a global march in support of the Robin Hood tax planned for October 29.[66] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-Obamasupports-65)[65] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-RobinHood-64) Naomi Wolf (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Wolf) has argued that the impression created by much of the media that the protestors do not have clear demands is false. Wolf argues they do have clear demands including a desire to end what they see as the corrupting effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_trail) of money on politics. [67] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-66) The New Yorker magazine stated that the claims of Lasn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalle_Lasn) and White (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micah_White) were specific: tighten banking-industry regulations, ban high-frequency trading, arrest all 'financial fraudsters' responsible for the 2008 crash, and form a Presidential commission to investigate and prosecute corruption in politics.[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-preoccupied-36) According to Bloomberg Businessweek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_Businessweek), protesters want more and better jobs, more equal distribution of income, bank reform, and a reduction of the influence of corporations on politics.[68] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-67) The movement has also been described as broadly anticapitalist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-capitalism).[69] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-68)[70] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-69)[71] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement#cite_note-70)



That didn't stop the PSL,SP, Workers Party and others from jumping on board and seeing the potential. As the days wore on, only then did the socialist voice begin to appear. Who is decrying Occupy as hippies? And because Marx and the rest are not worshiped? That's your argument? Find the evidence and then I'll listen.
The thread question was Why has Occupy succeeded over any Socialist Part in the USA? (http://www.revleft.com/vb/why-has-occupy-p2370828/index.html#post2370828)My take again is that it's an unfair comparison. I only hope that Occupy will be around long enough to be able to make a comparison. I'll be there to try and make that happen will you?

[Rafiq]

Occupy formed organically from dissatisfaction from different classes during the crisis while socialist parties are opportunists living in the past.

[Prometeo liberado]

Though no Socialist political party or or organization can or should lay claim to Occupy the latter certainly doesn't mind the infusion of personnel, equipment, organizational skills or lawyers from the former. Both a have benefited from the other in chartering new ground for the movement. Haters gotta hate apparently.

[Bostana]

Because they took action.

[Ele'ill]

It offered many different wildly diverse opportunities to get involved and there was always something going on almost every day. It stressed the idea to an extent that your opinion mattered.

[Os Cangaceiros]

With regards to OWS and the EGT conflict, OWS provided (it could be argued) a very valuable service in that case because the strikers were prevented by court injunction from further action following the raid they carried out. So OWS volunteered to gum up the works in place of them.

I think that GG's post was pretty much right, in regards to OWS vs established left parties. Established groups have had some success at grass-roots organizing, but that's usually been by piggy backing off struggles that were already in existence, such as the 2003 anti-war campaign. One of OWS's main weaknesses (it's formlessness) has also been a major strength, in that it's prevented left-wing dinosaurs from hijacking it via front groups or whatever (David Graeber has said that the WWP wanted to sink their talons into it since it's inception).

[Martin Blank]

A pretty damn good assessment, good way of putting it. Of course, not surprising that I like that assessment, as it is almost identical to that of the Spartacists as to Longview (though not on other matters of course).

Not sure whether this is a compliment or a criticism. :D

Just kidding. Glad you agree with the assessment.


Well, if your party is thrust into the leadership of Saginaw OWS, you now have a great opportunity to show what your group is made of.

We're all very aware of that here. We are doing everything we can, within principle, to make OS a kind of model.


What should you do? Well, first and foremost, you should get Saginaw OWS to come out explicitly and publicly for socialism. After all, if you oppose Wall Street, how can you really get rid of it? Only by expropriating it, which is only realistic in a context of moving from capitalism to socialism.

People involved in OS know where we stand on this issue. All of them have read our statements related to #Occupy, as well as our press. Some are regular listeners of the Martin Sayles Radio Show. We are having ongoing discussions and debates over whether OS should openly call for a workers' republic, and there is regular progress on this point.

The reason it's not something that can be done immediately is because we keep getting new people into our #Occupy group, so we have to almost regularly start over on the discussion when new people join in. The process has been one where, first, we win people to the importance of breaking with the capitalist parties (a pretty large feat, considering how dominant the Republican and Democratic parties are here) and, second, we win them to the perspective of fighting for a workers' republic.


What should you do practically? Well, given the extreme devastation capitalism has visited on Michigan, especially in Detroit, I am sure a number of possibilities are obvious.

But the one you've selected, fighting against rape, I don't see how that can be anything other than a fight to clean up and purge the bourgeois state, purging the cops of the rapists among them etc.

The state is the enemy of the working people of Michigan, and will not be improved significantly by cleaning out the worst bad apples.

It's not the only thing we're doing. The main focus of OS has been fighting the gentrification of the city and the implementation of the reactionary "cool cities" program -- a program that is bipartisan in character, and has consensus agreement among the ruling classes. Much like we've seen in Detroit (which has been a model for the "cool cities" concept), the exploiting classes are looking to push poor and working people out of the areas around the downtown, and into small neighborhoods and enclaves out of sight of the yuppie tourists and residents they want to attract to a redeveloped downtown area.

We've been very open and clear about the fact that this is not something that can be stopped by removing "bad apples" (indeed, the reason OS reorganized itself at the beginning of the year was because we all rejected the proposal of appealing to the local Democrats for "reform" of the gentrification plan), but demands fundamental, systemic change -- i.e., an end to capitalism. When we formulated our declaration, available on our website, we were fairly clear about where we stand:




We believe in systemic change. No single reform or set of reforms can fundamentally alter the fact that the 1 percent dominates our society — politically, economically, culturally and socially — and that they are enabled by their junior partners, armed agents, administrators and professional consultants. The systemic change we seek can only be brought into existence by the poor and working-class majority themselves.
We believe in democracy that works for the poor and working-class majority. In our current society, “democracy” is a commodity, bought by and sold to the highest bidder. Even the “rights” we’re told we have are dependent on how much one is willing to spend to exercise them. Real democracy is revolutionary; it is a democracy that is pushed to its extremes, where the vague “freedoms” become accessible to even the poorest person and “equal opportunity” becomes equality of opportunity. In fact, democracy is expanded and extended so much that the very concept is transformed from a form of rule to a daily practice.
We believe that the economy should not be exempt from the expansion of democracy. Today, the 1 percent, its junior partners and administrators have absolute control over the economy. Even the most “democratic-minded” of these people refuse to accept the expansion of democracy into their business. A genuinely democratic economy would mean those who work at these businesses would have a voice and vote both on the job and in the community.
We believe that an injury to one is an injury to all. The 1 percent and its enablers seek to keep poor and working people divided by gender, race, nationality, sexuality, age and ability, as well as making us resent and be ashamed of ourselves and one another for being poor and working people. It is one of most powerful tools they have to preserve and protect their wealth and power. The victory of the #Occupy movement is only possible by fighting these attempts to divide us and building a strong unity across all of these socially-constructed “dividing lines.”
We believe in building a society of generalized freedom, peace and sustainability. As long as the 1 percent and its enablers are in control of society, the overwhelming majority of society will continue to see its rights and freedoms stripped away, live under the threat of war and repression, and try to survive on a planet where everything from the water to the air to the food we eat is laced with harmful toxins and chemicals. Only when the poor and working-class majority of the 99 percent, and any allies it can win to its side along the way, is able to defeat and sweep out of power the 1 percent and its enablers, will the door open to the building of a new world.



It's not perfect, but it's a good start.

The perspective OS is bringing to the IWD event is in the same vein. It's not a case of "bad apples", but the entire system that is rotten. The cops, courts, lawyers, media, politicians, bosses -- all of them are a part of this system of effectively legalizing rape in Saginaw. This is not something that can be reformed out of existence; the entire system has to be swept away. On this last point, there is already a consensus agreement.


Occupying a plant that capitalists are planning to close down, throwing people out of work, is what might occur to me as an outsider. That is workable, of course, only if the workers at that plant really do see Saginaw OWS as their advocate, and only if done in collaboration with workers working there, and their union.

If something like that is not momentarily doable, I would think that socialist education of Occupy activists while waiting for the best opportunity to intervene with Occupy tactics into the class struggle would be the way to go.

There hasn't been any kind of plant closings going on around here in some time. The last time there was something of a scare about that, it ended up that a Chinese company, Nexteer, came in and bought the factory (the old Saginaw Steering Gear plant), keeping it open and keeping all the workers employed. Nevertheless, you don't need to tell us that we would need to look at organizing a plant occupation if they did announce a closure. We've been the ones advocating a workplace occupation movement be developed all the time on here.

In the meantime, we are continuing with our political discussions and winning the members of OS -- all of whom are working class -- to a communist perspective. It's not for nothing that the other #Occupy group in the area, which is dominated by supporters of the Democrats and Republicans (specifically, Ron Paul types), refer to us as "Occupy Communism". ;)

[Martin Blank]

because horizontal organization is far superior a method. duh.

I have to agree with this to a large extent, and I would venture to say that most members of the Workers Party agree, as well. In fact, given our experiences with #Occupy, there is already talk of changing our Party's structure to something more like that used in #Occupy at our Convention this fall.


thousands of people engaging in political organizing and gaining in the streets experience isn't successful, at least in terms of short term goals?

It's like I was telling DaringMehring: every movement has an initial swell of numbers, but it's whether or not those numbers can be held over time that really matters. It is in the latter part that you can really gauge success.


I can hear what you are saying as well. Time will tell, but in the bay area, I have seen large numbers of people go from totally inexperienced to forming shield phalanxs and holding the line in spite of concussion grenades and tear gas. Unfortunately, the bay area occupy's are not representative of the broader movement.

Successful occupations of workplaces, public spaces, vacant buildings, etc. require people to be familiar and experienced in these tactics, occupy has started to build this familiarity.

Agreed. I would say that OS looks much more to OO than to OWS when it comes to methods and perspective. Oakland is the kind of #Occupy we think of when we talk about the "Independent #Occupy Movement" (as opposed to the co-opted #Occupy groups).

[KurtFF8]

I guess in terms of initial media success...
Occupy has been larger, has taken a media-worthy action (Occupying Zucotti Park; later occupying many other parks in the US), etc.
PSL, SPA, etc are probably not as large as Occupy and haven't done anything like occupy a park, etc that would call media's attention

Actually "Bloombergville" was either started by, or had quite a bit of participation by Workers World Party. It was largely a failure, although could be seen as the immediate predecessor to OWS (it happened in the same year)



On the other hand, #Occupy has been more media-savvy than these groups, coming on to the public scene with catchy ideas and slogans, and cultivating a measure of creativity in its overall message. But that really shouldn't be surprising, since almost all of the self-described socialist and communist groups haven't really upgraded their media skills since the beginning of the 20th century.

Indeed, considering it was started by a magazine like Adbusters should be telling of their ability to work the media.

[Raúl Duke]

Actually "Bloombergville" was either started by, or had quite a bit of participation by Workers World Party. It was largely a failure

Point taken.

However, considering it's done by the WWP...I wonder what kind of rhetoric/slogans they used...hmmm.

I mean, usually, I imagine some of these socialist party to use terminology that just plainly "turns off" people.

I feel a lot of the initial success of Occupy has to do with the language and its slogans.

[KurtFF8]

I feel a lot of the initial success of Occupy has to do with the language and its slogans.

I think I agree with this to a large extent. The vagueness of the sloganeering in Occupy gave it that necessary room. But at the same time, I think that the pepper spraying of some white girls and the media backlash against that (and the bk bridge) had as much to do with if not more than the slogans OWS used.