From:   grimwomyn <grimwomyn@gmail.com>
Sent time:   Monday, October 10, 2011 9:44:39 PM
To:   september17@googlegroups.com
Subject:   Re: [september17discuss] Excellent essay on OWS: No Demand is Big Enough
 

twinkle

 

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:43 PM, rob hollander <lesrrd@gmail.com> wrote:

> Great idea, grim. Then OWS will be a source of reliable information for

> everyone regardless of ideology or political orientation. It lends

> legitimacy to the movement and focuses on the problems, which are

> indisputable, rather than on certain demands which may be disputed.

>

> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 3:47 PM, grimwomyn <grimwomyn@gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>> I would like to add for the tweeters, tumblrs, and other internet

>> promoters should be forwarding as much information about the issues we

>> face from sources outside the movement if possible... inequality.org

>> is an independent outfit that has a lot of info on their pages... and

>> the regular press... nytimes washington post, the like actually have

>> articles that talk about the wealth imbalance (or whatever you want to

>> put out there)

>>

>> Bring the conversation to actual issues and facts abt the foundations

>> of why we are all here.... focus the conversation on that and we

>> should be great.

>>

>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 3:38 PM, rob hollander <lesrrd@gmail.com> wrote:

>> > Whatever the reason for no demands, it has worked well. People across

>> > the

>> > nation understand the issues being addressed by OWS without being it

>> > spelled

>> > out to them. And since they themselves don't know enough to determine

>> > the

>> > best solution, there's nothing gained by telling them any one solution.

>> >

>> > The message is the imbalance in our governance. Whether that is cashed

>> > out

>> > as impossible idealism or level-headed pragmatic measures, the direction

>> > is

>> > clear and broad and principled.

>> >

>> > And it's not, as the Tea Party was, directed at a particular elected

>> > official, or created as a response to a particular elected official. In

>> > that

>> > sense, it is much, much larger than the Tea Party and much more

>> > principled.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:55 PM, gail zawacki <witsendnj@gmail.com>

>> > wrote:

>> >>

>> >> http://www.realitysandwich.com/occupy_wall_street_no_demand_big_enough

>> >> "Occupy Wall Street has been criticized for its lack of clear demands,

>> >> but

>> >> how do we issue demands, when what we really want is nothing less than

>> >> the

>> >> more beautiful world our hearts tell us is possible? No demand is big

>> >> enough. We could make lists of demands for new public policies: tax the

>> >> wealthy, raise the minimum wage, protect the environment, end the wars,

>> >> regulate the banks. While we know these are positive steps, they aren't

>> >> quite what motivated people to occupy Wall Street. What needs attention

>> >> is

>> >> something deeper: the power structures, ideologies, and institutions

>> >> that

>> >> prevented these steps from being taken years ago; indeed, that made

>> >> these

>> >> steps even necessary."

>> >

>> >

>> > --

>> > Rob Hollander

>> > Lower East Side Residents for Responsible Development

>> > http://savethelowereastside.blogspot.com/

>> > 622 E 11, #10

>> > NYC, 10009

>> > 212-228-6152

>> >

>> >

>

>

>

> --

> Rob Hollander

> Lower East Side Residents for Responsible Development

> http://savethelowereastside.blogspot.com/

> 622 E 11, #10

> NYC, 10009

> 212-228-6152

>

>

< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >