From:   jemcgloin@verizon.net
Sent time:   Saturday, October 08, 2011 8:31:43 PM
To:   september17@googlegroups.com
Subject:   Re: Re: [september17discuss] Re: Occupy Wall Street Analytics
 

 I agree with most of this statement.  I would like to point out that the block was removed after a little negotiation. 

The writers of the Declaration were trying to say that the people that are Occupying Wall St are no longer divided, but some at the GA pointed out that the language could be interpreted as saying that the world was longer divided and that here was no oppression of diverse groups any more.  The wording was adjusted and the Declaration passed.  This is evidence that the voices of everyone are sought by the general assembly.

 
 
On 10/08/11, shaista husain<shaistahusain@gmail.com> wrote:
We need a Multicultural Diversity statement on the web. We are NOT all
white middle class men, never were to begin with, not even the
majority. CodePink has just criticized OWS for sexist policy too.

We are a diverse group of international participants/activists from
diverse backgrounds since the beginning, we still are, on the
ground--and now that we have grown, it is increasingly imerative that
we reflect the demographic nature of NYC, that we adapt to the influx
of new community members and become keen on all issues of
inclusiveness. There has been a sad lack of addressing issues of
representation in our LANGUAGE, as well as in our media dissemination.
The mainstream media has characterized as predominantly white, this is
due to the lack of democratic process in the GA as well as within each
working group-- who have ignored or simply dismissed this issue as a
core and active part of every working group (everyone, including the
people of color in these groups--)

By thinking People of Color can be segregated into PofC working group
can have its negative side---it can be a purely cynical response to
problems of inclusiveness, if we allow people of color to be contained
in an autonomous working group without involving each and every person
in the occupation and addressing the structure of the GA at large. I
am not interested in "delegates" of separate tribes who speak as
"expert native informers" on issues pertaining to a particular group's
identity--what a sad mockery. This kind of liberal de facto identity
politics is what failed in CUNY when "ethnic studies" was created and
then dismantled. Its a long history of separating ethnicities, or
struggles or inquiries, i am skeptical this can bring real lasting
transformation in social conditions. We need to include the whole
occupation. Decenter white privilege, deconstruct racism deconstruct
sexism and all kinds of dominant structures that play into creating
hierarchies--ground up.

I agree with Licophidion everything written below. I do appreciate the
need for PofC working group, to discuss and address these issues of
diversification--of course--but let's make sure we are NOT segregating
or tokenizing people of color into separate discursive bantustans.
This will backfire.

1. We need to make sure the democratic process on the ground allows
underrepresented groups to come to the fore. Already, this is part
of the process, every GA asks majority groups to speak last and allow
others who have not spoken to speak first. This is part of the process
needs to be disseminated widely, so everyone knows this is the policy
of how the GA operates. If WE need to implement further structural
changes and strategies that make sure this process is elaborated on
every level, within each working groups.

2. Address the lack of politics of representation in our website, in
our twitters in our media outlets. Actively campaign to reflect the
many diverse groups that are joining forces with this occupation. And
make sure our LANGUAGE reflects that.

3. People of Color blocked the Declaration document at the GA because
of its language erasing centuries of oppression and lumping unequal
issues together and had problems convincing the GA why. This is
serious issue. Documents and statements that represent the "official"
line of the GA, whatever it may be, must pay close attention to all
issues of diversity and participation. I can not stress this more. If
you erase issue of representations you have failed to be inclusive,
you assert a white invisible leadership, by virtue of leaving it
blank. Folks are pissed off about it and are relating their opinions
in NPR==and all over the media because there has not been enough
attention to this problem. It needs to be remedied by everyone.



On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Lycophidion <lycophidion@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think the issue can be addressed technologically. There are
> several reasons for this. Mobile technology, in particular, tends to
> atomize and depersonalize individuals and individual communication. In
> a way, it pretends there is an even playing field, which socially
> doesn't exist. Moreover, if you are a white person, most of those with
> whom you engage will tend to be white, so in the aggregate, you won't
> really be increasing diversity. Having said that, yes, technology is
> an important tool and complement for building the movement, generally
> speaking.
>
> The conditions for overcoming this problem (the demographics of OWS)
> are created, in part, by the very growth of the movement, and its
> resonance with the aspirations and grievances of the most oppressed
> communities.
>
> But, only in part.
>
> As others have pointed out, the history of racism and white privilege
> in this country puts up enormous barriers to the diversification of
> the movement. There are real, deeply ingrained and socially
> institutionalized power relations viz white people and people of
> color, men and women, etc., in the most progressive of groups (even in
> personal relationships, friendships, marriages). Any approach that
> focuses simply on individual participation will not remedy this
> situation. People are empowered collectively. OWS itself is living
> testimony to that. So, I would argue that the only way we are going to
> diversify is through some sort of collective affirmative action,
> involving face-to-face community organizing and organizational
> outreach, led by People of Color. That, of course, is a crucial piece
> for the PoC Working Group.
>
> Let me be concrete and point to a good example. I teach intro biology
> at Medgar Evers College. My students are predominantly African
> American, Afro-Caribbean and South Asian, mostly women, mostly older
> working people. During my last two classes, I initiated discussion of
> OWS. A large number had never even heard of OWS... but, most students
> generally approved and identified with our goals. During break, a
> number of students returned to class with copies of the OWS Journal,
> which someone or ones had been distributing at the Franklin Ave.
> station. That led to further discussion. And, it turns out that a good
> number of these same students are DC 1707 and DC 37 members, which
> creates openings for outreach efforts by the Labor group.
>
> This is a piece of the puzzle. Another piece is proactive efforts by
> ALL working groups to actively recruit (rather than passively
> accepting) People of Color into their fold. At the same time, groups
> and OWS as a whole should proactively engage in what we used to call
> "leadership development," which involves creating comfort zones within
> each group, norms of operation that recognize existing power
> relations, purposefully promoting leadership skills and knowledge,
> standing back and encouraging initiatives, etc. All guided by the PoC
> committee.
>
> To its great credit, OWS has taken a number of steps along these
> lines. Much more needs to be done. Much is at stake.
>
> On Oct 8, 12:08 pm, grimwomyn <grimwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As long as the online media is mobile compatible we will be bringing in the
>> diverse community we want... just make sure that everything is mobile
>> compatible (which I think it is)
>> On Oct 8, 2011 11:37 AM, "Harrison Schultz" <schuh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Justine, can we please put this survey out every week?  Can we?  Can we???
>>
>> > H.
>>
>> > On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Harrison Schultz <schuh...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> >> My pleasure crew,
>>
>> >> My suspicion is that there are many reasons for non-white participation in
>> >> this movement, The internet has been far and a way the number one means of
>> >> spreading news of this campaign, the first thing to determine will be
>> >> non-white rates of internet usage, if these communities are not on the
>> >> internet than they may have missed the message almost entirely.  These
>> >> groups may not even consume as much overall media as caucasions.  The trick
>> >> will be determining which channels they are already paying attention to.
>> >>  Face to face outreach is may be most effective for the time being.
>>
>> >> I'll keep working on this,
>>
>> >> Harrison
>>
>> >> On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Justin Wedes <jwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> Thanks Harrison for this.
>>
>> >>> Could someone from the PoC working group join our community relations
>> >>> group to help working with a diverse group of local residents/businesses?
>> >>> I'm thinking specifically of the many Hispanic, African-American, Asian etc
>> >>> residents and business-owners in the area.
>>
>> >>> -Justin
>>
>> >>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> >>> On Oct 8, 2011, at 7:38 AM, grimwomyn <grimwo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> > I am a nonwhite person (Puerto Rican) who never fills out surveys that
>> >>> > ask me to specify my ethnicity. There are people in the world who
>> >>> > could give a crap abt reporting their race/ethnicity, or who deem it
>> >>> > something to pay attention to.
>>
>> >>> > I am here to make a change for everyone.
>>
>> >>> > As Michael Jackson sang in "Man in the Mirror"
>>
>> >>> > (ducking now from the many stones about to be thrown)
>>
>> >>> > On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 3:11 AM, Lycophidion <lycophid...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >> I'd like to thank sister Shaista for her comments and suggest two
>> >>> >> things. First, that the term "non-white people" might be offensive to
>> >>> >> folks: imagine defining people as the negative of the privileged
>> >>> >> group. Second, as implied by Shaista, the work of the PoC Working
>> >>> >> Group is crucial, but not enough. Their goals and efforts should
>> >>> >> infuse every working group, every committee, and OWS, as a whole. It
>> >>> >> is imperative that this young movement begin to reflect the
>> >>> >> demographics of NYC. It is imperative that the base and leadership of
>> >>> >> this struggle actively incorporate those who have most at stake in its
>> >>> >> outcome. That is the only way the Occupy movement is going to go
>> >>> >> forward and weather the storms that lie ahead.
>>
>> >>> >> On Oct 8, 1:58 am, shaista husain <shaistahus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>> THis is REALLY SAD empirical evidence of how estranged people of
>> >>> color
>> >>> >>> feel from this movement. Its heartbreaking and devastating.
>>
>> >>> >>> "The sample of non-white people in this sample is so small that I
>> >>> doubt
>> >>> >>> I'll get any worth while insight from it but I'll be sure to let
>> >>> >>> everyone know if I find anything.  Several respondents self-responded
>> >>> >>> with specific nationalities, which could be better way to think about
>> >>> >>> diversifying this movement.  In the mean time we absolutely should
>> >>> >>> make Micha's suggestion of a non-white media day(s) happen."
>>
>> >>> >>> Thanks for putting this at the end of your survey, just like
>> >>> >>> "colonization" is the last sentence of the declaration. Perhaps it is
>> >>> >>> because this is our main challenge, as a movement.
>> >>> >>> Mica's suggestion for non-white dominated media day is bogus--we
>> >>> >>> should make everyday non-white dominated media day, every day.
>> >>> >>> That means white people should actively speak about people of color
>> >>> >>> and minorities==should promote their cause in multicultural
>> >>> >>> inclusiveness in an actively conscious way.
>>
>> >>> >>> Today once again, sitting in the Education and Empowerment working
>> >>> >>> group--if it isn't white men dominating the meeting, then its men of
>> >>> >>> color, while the women of color bicker amongst themselves
>> >>> suspiciously
>> >>> >>> of each other for no reason except that we feel so alienated we just
>> >>> >>> try to learn the "process"
>> >>> >>> Its getting tiresome and ridiculous.
>>
>> >>> >>> Comrades, our outreach into labor and community of color has been
>> >>> >>> amazing, our diversity is a fact on the ground, but we must actively
>> >>> >>> decolonize our movement without tokenism, can white people speak
>> >>> about
>> >>> >>> communities of color directly and speak about diversity and
>> >>> >>> multiculturalism? Why does it have to be brown folks doing all the
>> >>> >>> work? Can you please allow women and women of color to speak up,
>> >>> >>> encourage them to speak, and take it one step further and make these
>> >>> >>> issues your own--i am speaking to the people who are NOT doing this
>> >>> >>> already consciously actively. This is what this occupation has to be
>> >>> >>> about. Not just polls and media hype, but real transformation. Here
>> >>> is
>> >>> >>> a quote by Robin Kelley from Freedom Dreams:
>>
>> >>> >>> "Without new visions, we don’t know what to build, only what to knock
>> >>> >>> down. We not only end up confused, rudderless, and cynical, but we
>> >>> >>> forget that making a revolution is not a series of clever maneuvers
>> >>> >>> and tactics, but a process that can and must transform us"
>> >>> >>> — Robin D.G. Kelley (Freedom Dreams: The Black Radical Imagination)
>>
>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Justine <just...@occupywallst.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>> Great work, ty :)
>>
>> >>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Harrison Schultz <
>> >>> schuh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>> >>>>> Traffic to occupywallst.org continues to surge, our new high is
>> >>> just
>> >>> >>>>> over/under 400,000 visits in the last few days.  350,346 people
>> >>> >>>>> visited occupywallst.org that day, 1,890 of them answered a survey
>> >>> >>>>> that we put up on the site within the span of a few short hours.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> I can't post charts into the body of this message for some reason,
>> >>> but
>> >>> >>>>> as we would expect the overwhelming majority of the respondents are
>> >>> >>>>> white educated, earning little but employed full-time, left-leaning
>> >>> >>>>> straight guys who live in cities and describe themselves as
>> >>> >>>>> independents rather than democratic or republican...only 37
>> >>> >>>>> republicans filled out this survey unfortunately.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> These respondents overwhelmingly use the internet more than the
>> >>> T.V.
>> >>> >>>>> 74% are regularly using Youtube
>> >>> >>>>> 67% are on regularly using Facebook
>> >>> >>>>> 74% are not regularly using Reddit
>> >>> >>>>> 61% are not regularly using Twitter
>>
>> >>> >>>>> 85% are not watching Fox.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> 81% strongly support the Occupy Wall Street Protests.
>> >>> >>>>> 74% believe that the Occupy Wall Street Protests will create
>> >>> positive
>> >>> >>>>> and lasting social change.
>> >>> >>>>> 73% strongly believe that the protests will grow.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> Yet, a combined total of only 24% of these respondents have
>> >>> >>>>> participated in these protests, which suggests that in spite of the
>> >>> >>>>> homogeneity of the movement as it currently stands, there is much
>> >>> >>>>> opportunity to further increase our numbers on the ground from
>> >>> within
>> >>> >>>>> our current base of support.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> I've heard reports from Flux of campers from who watched the
>> >>> >>>>> livestream for so long that they wound up coming to Liberty.
>> >>> >>>>> Definitely the next best thing to being hear.  I also noticed that
>> >>> the
>> >>> >>>>> livestream.com/globalrevolution website showed up 4th on the 2nd
>> >>> page
>> >>> >>>>> of a search for "occupy wall street"  Fortunately optimization is
>> >>> our
>> >>> >>>>> Comrade Zach Notes specialty and he should be able and willing to
>> >>> help
>> >>> >>>>> us if someone from the media team can hook him up with access to
>> >>> the
>> >>> >>>>> site.  I've also added a question to the survey asking if they
>> >>> >>>>> regularly follow the protests on the livestream so we can track
>> >>> this
>> >>> >>>>> with subsequent surveys.  More cameras and streams couldn't hurt at
>> >>> >>>>> all either.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> The sample of non-white people in this sample is so small that I
>> >>> doubt
>> >>> >>>>> I'll get any worth while insight from it but I'll be sure to let
>> >>> >>>>> everyone know if I find anything.  Several respondents
>> >>> self-responded
>> >>> >>>>> with specific nationalities, which could be better way to think
>> >>> about
>> >>> >>>>> diversifying this movement.  In the mean time we absolutely should
>> >>> >>>>> make Micha's suggestion of a non-white media day(s) happen.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> Response patterns for female respondents were so nearly identical
>> >>> to
>> >>> >>>>> the male respondents that I won't bother to indicate them - however
>> >>> I
>> >>> >>>>> did notice that 52% of the female respondents listen to the radio
>> >>> as
>> >>> >>>>> opposed to 40% of male respondents, which could be a good way to
>> >>> start
>> >>> >>>>> trying to reach more women.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> The numbers on the ground from this week look excellent as well.
>> >>>  It
>> >>> >>>>> does look like there's a real hardcore group of roughly 200-300
>> >>> >>>>> holding it down.  There was 115% increase in the average number of
>> >>> >>>>> people counted in the camp each morning between Monday and Friday.
>> >>> >>>>> Let's see if the same trend happens next week or if it was just due
>> >>> to
>> >>> >>>>> nicer weather at the end of the week.
>>
>> >>> >>>>> Monday             10/3/2011      - 163
>> >>> >>>>> Tuesday             10/4/2011     - 240
>> >>> >>>>> Wednesday
>>
>> ...
>>
>> read more »
< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >