A Snapshot of The Occupy Movement Discussion on Planet POV

I started this post as a comment and realized it was morphing into something too long for that, so, to Speaker’s Corner for me!

From Alternet:

American history is rich with examples of political occupations that left a lasting impact. Sometimes the 99% pushed progress forward, as with Rosa Park’s occupation of a bus seat that propelled the Montgomery Bus Boycott and ended with Alabama’s bus segregation being declared unconstitutional. Often the 1% of the time – slaveholders, robber barons and merchants of war – re-asserted control with new methods of domination such as after the Great Upheaval of 1877. But each event proved that true democracy lies in collective act of taking space public and private, while corporations and the state are just two arms of the same beast.

Of course, this movement is not ONLY about Occupying public space, but that is a very big part of the whole issue of inequality. It may be seen by some as a derailment of the Movement’s focus, but I think it is part of the whole agenda–in fact a primal one! If we can’t assemble, and if the press cannot cover it, there is no point in making ANY demands. The FIRST demand must be to protest at all! I don’t want that to be the end goal, but for God’s sake it it a vital one. Further, these police and localities are only giving the movement more publicity and highlight the outrageous infringements on our rights. The Occupiers can choose to disband for the winter and regroup, they can decide to keep moving around like whack-a-moles, as Killgore Trout suggests, or they may try to stay where they are. Whatever they do, they will decide by consensus, and they will not go away– whether that’s literal or figurative. Some of you may not be sure of this yet, and I understand that–just my opinion, and time will tell.

I don’t disagree with those who say that the OWS must evolve to make concrete demands and that whatever their demands, those must lead to the voting booth for any change at all to take place; that seems self-evident to me.

But this movement is what, TWO MONTHS old? I know– the fierce urgency of now, but that’s just not realistic unless a movement is an astro-turf phony one funded by the Kochs/ALEC and publicized by a major network and media conglomerate.

As we all agree, in this short period, OWS has almost completely changed the conversation and I say even the political dynamic. And it’s gotten a lot of press, despite the corporate MSM:

As the following post from Politico’s Ben Smith illustrates, OWS really has altered what the media talk about—the chart measures a Nexis search of print stories, web stories and broadcast transcripts that used the term “income inequality,” measured by week:

It runs from 91 instances in the week before the occupation started to almost 500 instances in the last week of October.

About this translating into voting for Dems, the OWS has already gained support from a plurality to a majority of the public, depending on which polls one follows. I believe that will translate into votes.

At a time when our trust in so many institutions and spokepeople is damaged, I understand why thus far the movement has chosen not to to align itself with any one group. What they HAVE done is give new energy to other groups, the unions being the largest. Should they work with the unions in the future? Perhaps–the unions overturned SB 5 and they have numbers and organization. I think that whatever form the movement takes, they have actually already done a lot for the union movement just by their existence.

Actually, I realize that we’ve had so many good discussions about this already that perhaps the best thing to do is to compile some of my favorite previous comments and at least keep them all in one place so that we can see some of the PlanetPOV’s ideas:

Bito wrote:

I am having a bit of a problem with comparisons between the OWS movement and the Civil Rights Movement (CRM) when considering both the organization and effectiveness.
The CRM didn’t start out in the 1950′s with a few people sitting around writing down all the rules, tactics and time frames, it was filled with many fits, starts, setbacks and progress over many years not the few months of OWS existence.
The same can be said of Unions and most social movements, both good and bad.

I certainty wasn’t around to offer my “insights” to the people that started the NACCP and Rosa Parks (1955), SCLC (1957 or SNCC (1960), nor was I around when Peter J. McGuire started the trade Unions nor the AFL or CIO were formed and I’m sure they didn’t have a written plan and timeline that was strictly followed, they evolved organically with input of members and due to circumstances. Nor were they monolithic from the very beginnings and yet we expect all the Occupy Movement and all the many sites to be just that and in a matter of just a few months.

People before my Great Grandfather’s, (who died with a scar from a rifle butt) generation fought for workers rights, income equality and social justice and people today are picking up the torch. Now will the Occupy movement stay viable through the winter, who knows, but it won’t depend on rules, edicts or timelines, it will depend on passion and dedication to/for social justice not just a piece of a park.

The only advise I could possibly give is “Keep your Eyes on the Prize.

Replies:

Cher says:

Oh! I had the same thoughts about the Civil Rights Movement, but failed to articulate that! As you point out, it evolved for over ten years.As you point out, it evolved for over ten years. And I know from the many accounts of those involved–as both leaders and followers and everyone in between– that they were not monolithic. There were different groups AT DIFFERENT TIMES with different strategies aimed at public education, legislative lobbying, and lawsuits. Later, they got involved in more direct action—primarily boycotts, sit-ins, Freedom Rides, marches and similar tactics that relied on mass mobilization, nonviolent resistance and civil disobedience.

They used their Churches and other local community centers for grassroots organizations to mobilize. Out of these groups emerged the eventual leaders–but that took YEARS.

And along the way, there were always African Americans like Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas and that cross-eyed Repub guy on Hardball, who had they been there would have advised a totally different path and could have said legitimately that they were just as entitled to offer their advice as any other African American. Same goes for the more militant black people. They each could have stated, in effect, “We’re the 99% too, so listen to MEEEEE!”

But you know what? At the beginning was the inarticulate but universal outcry for equality–without any specific demands. It is legitimate to simply state the things are unjust and that we won’t stand for it any longer. From that simple protest, other actions inevitably flow–whether its Civil Rights, or worker rights, or economic justice. Just. Justice.

I also am sure that to all those African Americans, their rights and lives were even more a matter of urgency than we feel now for our rights and economic equality–Their very lives were at stake.

But I personally want to clarify something, and I apologize in advance because it will be hard to explain. Having said what I said above does NOT mean I don’t think we all have a stake in what the OWS protesters are doing, nor do I mean that we should all just shut up and leave it to them. On the contrary.

What I object to is an attitude more than any particular ideas about how they should do things. The attitude that assumes any one of us has a monopoly on wisdom, or that just because we were involved in other protests–or even OWS–that they must listen to us. How about we listen to them for a change? It is certainly well-meaning, but I sometimes just wish we could hear ourselves: we can sound like old gasbags if we aren’t careful. And I am embarrassed for my generation when we do that. It just makes me cringe when I read advice for the protesters from many sources. (I feel the same way whenever I hear Tom Brokaw, BTW.)

But I really want to emphasize that it’s not an either/or thing; it’s not that we either go along with the program or stay un-involved. The Occupiers have a very good method for hearing everyone’s views. If we want to be heard, all we have to do is go to the local encampment for the General Assembly. You will be heard and your ideas will be voted upon. But they may not be accepted–that’s democracy. (If you want to read an actual GA assembly in action, I suggest you follow @joshuahol on Twitter. He live Tweeted the Oakland GA last night and it was contentious.)

Bito, you got me going there! Touched a nerve, and I didn’t mean to sound so strident. In the end, that’s just one person’s opinion anyway. I could be wrong.

funksands says:

For most people, 3 seconds is too long to wait for a web page to load. 5 minutes is too long to wait for something to eat. 20 minutes is too long to wait for your car’s oil to be changed.

Guess the natural evolution of a movement is going to frustrate some of these people.

Not that there is anyone like that here. I’m talking about other losers. 

Kalima says:

 I couldn’t agree more bito.

Last night I watched a live stream in Oakland for hours as OWS protesters got ready for the police to throw them out of the park. What I saw amazed me, and really made all all the talk of no organization here and everywhere else, null and void.

They knew what they were doing, kept in constant phone, text and Twitter contact with others, people had their backs, and they remained peaceful. After arresting about 20 Interfaith protesters still in the park, and dismantling the remaining tents, the police had no cause to attack them, and left.

What the protesters need more than pages long advice from people who are not physically taking part, is support from people in these cities, and supplies to keep them warm and fed during the next few winter months.

I saw people, young and old, peacefully protesting against all that is wrong in your country, where some say there is chaos and no purpose, I saw determination and enough organization to keep them together and a caring about anyone they met on the streets, protester or just citizen taking a stroll.

I think that there has been far too much emphasis placed on air time of the OWS protests to judge where they stand, when has your msm ever done the right thing. For them to continue their fight, they need the individual support of the people, not a few sound bites on your tv screen that will be forgotten by most when the next Lohan escapade hits the news cycle. If we keep talking about them, writing about them, and showing our support for them, they won’t fade away as some have suggested, they will only grow stronger. Word of mouth, word of the pen and undying support for the causes they represent, will keep them afloat. After what I witnessed during the 5 hour live streaming last night, these people are here to stay, and anyone who says that they have NO organiization, is wrong. Let them evolve in their own way, and continue to support what they are trying to do. Yesterday, people from all over the world were watching, their efforts are not in vain. Anyone who says they don’t have a message is wrong too, I heard their message last night, over and over again, they are doing it for all the 99 percenters, they are doing it for you. They are doing for the millions of people who don’t have a voice.

If I remember correctly, President Obama was elected because of the hard work of many small grassroot groups meeting in coffee shops and elsewhere, so nothing is impossible.

They need encouragement, not criticism. Pass it on.

• bito says:The people at the ‘encampments’ are not sitting around watching the latest “news” ans advice from the MSM, they know that they will be onto the “Oh, look a squirrel” report at any given moment, while the ‘real’ people are keeping in touch via Twitter, Websites, and other non-corporately owned media and their “if it bleeds, it leads” mentality or the advice from he talking heads and the ‘pudnuts’ that they have on their programs. To even hear the words “income inequality” or “social justice” is rare, but the authorities breaking up a site, is big news, a squirrel, rarely the cause of the movement.The original list of grievances were listed at the beginning of the OWS movement, but are they ever even mentioned or is people giving ‘advice’ or the latest police raid that is reported?

  Tokyo knows, msm seems to miss the point.

bito says:

Cher,
So many good points and I’ll try to address a few, in no order 

First off, I found nothing strident in your comment at all, nothing, they matched many of my thoughts and one including “listening” to this younger generation and their thoughts and plans of action. The best Doctors, RN’s, teachers and lawyers are the one’s that can listen as well as impart their knowledge. The worst one’s pass down their edicts.

Of course many of us supported civil rights, and still do, whether it was for, and is, AA’s, the AIM movement, the Chicano and Hispanic immigrant/farm worker movement, but I wasn’t out in the fields picking crops or living in the deplorable(still) conditions on the reservations. Nor did I sit at the lunch counters or ride on the freedom buses. I didn’t sit with the any of the leaders and tacticians and become involved in their decision making and I don’t they-the OWS movement- should accept everything I have to say. If we were so bloody great in the ‘50′s and ‘60′s we wouldn’t be in the situation we are now.

I have been involved in both Union and Democratic Party and have often been on various committees, now called “breakout groups”, and not once did ALL of our suggestions get accepted by the members, not once, and to expect it now from the OWS movement, from outside advice, now is ludicrous, IMHO.

As to your point on “African Americans like Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas and that cross-eyed Repub guy on Hardball” (now I will never remember his name), is one of the lowest of the lowest, they have reached their status on the “blood of their brothers” which I find unforgivable to forget that fact. When I spent my nights in the lock-ups, I always thought of my GG Father and my Father and what they did for workers rights and economic equality, not me.

BTW, I do have a “monopoly on wisdom” 

bito says:

k’es, I just think that we need to put some historical perspective to it, no? This movement is but in it’s infancy, but many aspects of it are quite old. It was started by many young people and it’s their to make it it viable or to show themselves as the latest short lived fad. One hit wonders or the ‘Rolling Stones.’
While I thought that the “Declaration ” by the GA in NYC was a bit long on their grievances, many could be boiled down to income and social disparity, they are grievances and the solutions need to come from our voting and our elected representatives, not from the OWS movement.
The viability, the future, of the movement belongs to them, not some document(s).
There have been many a book, paper and doctoral thesis written on social movements, but none of them can instill passion or dedication into an organic mass movement. It take people.

Kalima says:

Yes, b’ito, it does take people, and I think the people are there. In a sense, they have nowhere else to be, have they?

In a sense, Michael Moore is right. Wall Street and the big banks had a huge share in creating this movement, because they’ve left so many of the people no other option. You can’t visit their headquarters and talk to anyone. There’s no one on the financial empire’s side who’s willing to negotiate. The Republicans have made it more than clear that they don’t care about these people.

So what other option do they have but to vote and be out there in the town square banging drums? I think they’ll be there until there is another option available to them. And the longer they’re ignored, the stronger they’ll grow.

The bankers may stand on the balcony, sipping champagne and laughing. But these people will still be there when they run out of champagne.
Chernynkaya says:

I got to thinking about the media coverage of the Occupy movement–that is, is it waning? It’s certainly not waning in the big media outlets here in Los Angeles and San Francisco, and whenever there are big confrontations with the police–e.g., Oakland and yesterday, Portland, OR.

From a cursory view of ALL newspapers across the country, I see stories about OWS in all the large newspapers.You can see the front pages of all newspapers at the Newseum site:
http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/

If you don’t see an OWS story on the front page, go to the newspaper’s website to see the full content. Of course, there are zillions of tiny, local papers which mainly report on hyper-local stuff, but from what I’ve seen, every major city has an OWS report.
KillgoreTrout says:

• KQuark says:
  I’m not trying to be negative about the movement. I mostly questioning the semantics.

  What if OWS does fizzle with these crackdowns which is a distinct possibility?

  I’ll stick my my phrasing. Right now it’s a movement whether its a revolution even a nascent one has yet to be determined.

  The only thing that’s come close to a revolution in my time is the Ronald Raygun greed is good revolution.

  Until the compass not just of some protesters but the whole country moves away from center right, one way or another, nothing has fundamentally changed yet or is in the foreseeable future in my POV.

The following were my comments to atdnext’s post:

atdnext, I could not agree more strongly about how vital it is to GOTV!!! And I also agree that the OWS movement (or the 99% movement, whichever one prefers) has already made incredible progress on many fronts. However, if I am understanding your post, I feel you set up a somewhat false choice: that the Movement is great, but it will not achieve anything further without voting. That is conflating two separate activities in my view, and they are not mutually exclusive.

The thing is, as I see it, the Occupiers have done as you say–”…look at how far the previously unchallenged dogma of inequality and austerity has fallen.”

They don’t have to explicitly demand that people vote to energize people to vote; their very presence and message makes the urgency of voting all the more apparent. They are the anti-” apathy laced diaspora.” I worry much more about that now than I did before the OWS started. I am not sure that it is necessary for the OWS movement to mobilize to elect the Dems —they already have just through their protests!

Does that mean that each individual Occupier is going to vote? Probably not, but they are doing a tremendous service in getting out the vote nonetheless. They are making the starkest distinction between the two Parties I can imagine, and are more effective at it than politicians, who often have to appeal to a wider electorate. As an example of what I mean, did you watch Nancy Pelosi on Jon Stewart recently? I love her! But she sounded so scripted and impossible to dislodge from her pol-speak. I wanted so much for her to spit out the truth in plain sentences, and with some passion–just the way the protester do. But she can’t; they can. That’s why I see a symbiotic relationship between the Democratic Party and OWS–they both need each other even while at this moment in time, each is understandably wary.

Further, as the article you linked to points out

“If things are going to shift, my take is that sustained organizing around issues and being a squeaky wheel has a shot. Organizing around candidates, parties, elections will not do it,” says Bill Dobbs, a member of Occupy’s press team and a longtime New York activist. “That means not ignoring electoral politics or the people in power but keeping them jumping. Staying at an arm’s length rather than discovering that kiss on the cheek from a politician quickly turns into a suffocating bear hug.”

As much as I want everyone working to re-elect the President and to keep the Senate and take the House, I see some savvy in that remark. OFA has a very good organization; so does the DCCC, and the DSCC. I see them being aided by the 99% movement. The strength of the Movement is not in Party organizing, or even in repeating Party talking points, but they can are complimentary.

I’d probably say more, but we’ve had so many wonderful discussions about this last night and today, that I’m a little spent. More later, if that’s OK. 

atdnext says:

agrippa says:

This is a long haul enterprise. I understand that some people want to get to policy: “What is to be done?” I think that there will be time for that. Right now, it is a matter of organization, discipline and endurance. And, building mass.

If you start talking policy now, you create infighting, factionalizing, attention seeking and power grabbing. Marxist organizations had that problem, and radical movements largely split into factions; and forgot the adversary. That does not mean that the question, “What is to be done?”, should not be posed. Just be aware of the risks.

OWS is nowhere near a critical mass that cannot be ignored.

choicelady says:

Hi agrippa – well no, policy will continue as it did before and after OWS. The issue is understanding that many of us have been fighting these battles via policy changes for YEARS. I don’t care if the OWS people do or do not get involved since it’s pretty clear they don’t care, but the rest of us do. Nothing new under the sun has come from OWS other than heightened awareness that some things such as a Constitutional Amendment to challenge Citizens United is imperative. At minimum we need to fight for more teeth in Dodd-Frank. We who DO policy always did – and now whether or not the OWS people like it or not, that IS where it must go.

The right to organize HAD to culminate in the Wagner Act or union rights and protections would still be idiosyncratic and not guaranteed.

Women’s suffrage HAD to end in the 19th Amendment or we’d still have some states denying us the right to vote.

The Civil Rights movement had to lead to the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act or we’d still be marching over the bridge in Selma.

Women’s reproductive rights had to end in Roe v Wade or you’d never have a consistent set of rights for women nationally. Then the murders had to end in FACE laws that protected physicians and others from being shot to death.

As a long-time veteran of street action everything you think you won with protests, encampments, marches, demonstrations – all of it can be gone with the stroke of a pen if you do NOT pin it down in law.

There is no need for there to be ONE policy issue. But there is a need for there to be core values – those started out great with the “We are the 99%” theme. It collapsed under the weight of focus on the encampments and their right to do what the homeless cannot – sleep outside in a public area. That made them the 1% of the 99%. And at least in two cities around here, the homeless got the boot from OWS – their rights mattered not at all to those who had homes of their own but chose to sleep rough and to defy the police.

We need to get back the “We are the 99%” mentality. We need that core value – laws and policies have to help the majority – but the specifics of whether you fight for affordable housing, lowering tuition at public universities, ending predatory lending, developing community and worker ownership of business – that can and must be diverse. You do NOT NEED NOR SHOULD YOU PURSUE consensus because among diverse people who do not know one another, consensus turns over power again to the 1% even if technically they are the 99%. No minority must ever again be able to thwart the majority. Not EVER.

Let people pursue what drives and motivates them so long as it has a broad based benefit. Worrying about consensus is the death knell to the creation of a movement. Trusting others to pursue their goals and ideas well is the lifeblood of commitment. That is all that is needed

KillgoreTrout says:

It would be fantastic if the OWS movement became a “99%” movement and spoke for all of us, right? Well, when have the 99% of us ever in history agreed in anything? That’s just a pipe-dream! I my view, the OWS/99% movement is doing just what it needs to do at this point: Cry out at the overarching injustice and inequality, and shine a spotlight on the repressive infringements on our rights to assemble and at the freedom of the press. It won’t stay at this stage though—protest begets protest and there will be more focused groups that spring form this.

{I apologize if I missed your comment or any other comment you thought was relevant—the thread is now moving fast. Please feel free to add any comments you think should be added. This is such a sloppy, fast post, I hope you’ll be tolerant!}