I'm sorry that I haven't participated in this discussion earlier, but I've certainly been reading all of your opinions.
I support the idea of a disclaimer that establishes that the views shared in particular videos are not necessarily representative of everyone in the movement. This would allow us to maximize the reach of this video, which in all other respects is beautiful, well made, features important statements and stories of occupation participants and deserves to be watched by as many supporters of this movement as possible.
Lets amplify the different voices and perspectives on this occupation, and let viewers draw their own conclusions.
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Martyna Starosta <firstname.lastname@example.org>
This is Martyna. Iva and I made the video WE THE PEOPLE HAVE FOUND OUR
which is beig discussed in this email.
I am glad that the video provoked such a rich discussion in which
people bring in very different points of view.
And, I strongly believe that this wide range of conflicting
perspectives should be represented on the main website.
There has been a lot of talk about creating a movement that is as
inclusive as possible.
It was also said that "our" relationship with the NYPD is complex, and
that "we" are fighting for them too.
Personally, I didn't join the OWS movement to fight for the pensions
of the NYPD, on the contrary, I joined it to fight a whole system of
which converges in the prison industrial-complex (Cornel West brought
this aspect up too).
There are different opinions within OWS about positioning ourselves
toward individual NYPD officers.
Mine is that the "working class officers" have also options, they can,
for instance, collectively decide to stop arresting people, go on
strike, find another job etc.
And I feel that OWS is risking to loose a lot of people who share my
perspective - if it tries to converge the multiplicity of voices into
one "all inclusive" entity.
It is interesting that the whole discussion sparked around the
representation of the police.
Filtering out the voices which are the most "representative," and
silencing other, seems like "self-policing" to me.
I believe that mixed tactics form the strength of the movement.
Our video is not sexist, racist, antisemtic - This would be against
the principles of solidarity which were declared by OWS.
It gives voice to the anger against the NYPD which forms part of a
larger system of oppression.
To me, this anger is legitimate for obvious reasons - even though it's
not "contextualized" within the video.
There's is already enough diversity in the general coverage of OWS -
and I agree with the person who said that
the different voices will balance each other our in an organic way -
if we allow them to be heard.
WE THE PEOPLE HAVE FOUND OUR VOICE - doesn't imply that we speak with
but that we create a political space in which conflicting opinions
encounter each other.
I suggest, to post the video with a short comment saying:
"This video articulates a particular point of view which is not
representative for the whole movement."
(You can also include more specific objections)
What are your thoughts?
On Oct 11, 12:15 pm, Marisa Holmes <marisahol...@gmail.com
> Hi everyone!
> The filmmakers who brought us Nobody can predict the moment of Revolution
> have made a longer film, and they'd like to post it on the nycga and
> occupywallstreet websites.
> Can we make this happen?
> It's posted here:http://vimeo.com/30241489