From:   jemcgloin@verizon.net
Sent time:   Sunday, October 16, 2011 12:41:30 PM
To:   september17@googlegroups.com
Subject:   Re: [september17discuss] Who's Citi? Our City!
 

Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC last night showed footage of a women being arrested outside of the bank because she was going inside to close her account.
 
 
On 10/16/11, acpollack2@juno.com<acpollack2@juno.com> wrote:
Yesterday 24 people were arrested at a Citbank in the Village SOLELY for trying to take their money out. I heard the story from an NLG legal observer, and it was confirmed by the media; see:
http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/occupy_wall_street/2011/10/16/2011-10-16_occupy_wall_st_protesters_take_on_nypd_at_times_sq.html
and
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/16/world/occupy-wall-street-protests-worldwide.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=citibank&st=cse
(The Times account includes lies from bank management about what happened.)
Obviously we have to defend the comrades arrested.
But this could also be an important turning point in the propaganda war against the banks.
Citi has said: "This is OUR money, not YOURS. WE decide what to do with it, and we have the armed force of the state to ensure that."
WE in response can say: "Fine. We went the route your ideology insists on, of consumer "choice." We encouraged people to put their money elsewhere (the Amalgamated or credit unions), and you called the NYPD on us.
"So we're moving on to the only realistic solution. We will take back our money, and see it used for socially productive purposes -- NOT by withdrawing it, but by building a movement to occupy the banks, and once occupied, to unify and nationalize them under democratic control, i.e. under the control of unions, of tenants' and homeowners' groups, etc., i.e. of the 99% who want to decide collectively where the money is invested. And we know that the result will be investment in childcare centers, not missiles; in schools, not warships; in parks, not nuclear plants or fracking facilities..."
Such an approach, I should add, is also important in countering the right-wing libertarian demagogy about ending the Fed or other reactionary nostrums, as well as the liberal utopian fantasy that Glass-Steagall (separating commercial from investment banks) or breaking them into smaller, still-private, banks, is either possible or desirable.
Andy
 
 
 
< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >