From:   shaista husain <>
Sent time:   Thursday, October 20, 2011 10:22:58 PM
Subject:   Re: Re: [september17discuss] Proposal on the agenda for tonight's GA

jem, i think the consensus was not to throw it out, but to have time to work it out--people wanted to make edits, some people wanted to even add more, believe it or not, something about congress itself. how do you think that will happen if we just keep posting to ourselves fiifty times a day?

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:08 AM, <> wrote:
I personally think it is very important to strongly distinguish between between messages that have been okayed by the consensus of the general assembly and those that have not.  Otherwise there is no controlling what anyone, friendly or unfriendly, can say in the name the NYCGA and OWS.  There is no point in having a consensus process if it has no effect on what anyone does.  We are already a leaderless direct democracy.  Do we have to be completely without form.  Or can we impose some kind of rigor on this thing? 
On 10/20/11, Winter Siroco<> wrote:
Drew and Justine. I second Shaista in her request to have the document posted.  I was not present when more positive comments were raised at the GA, but I am told that there was general support. I noticed that the Principles of solidarity are already posted as working draft in the GA resources section, despite the continued work on the document and the posted version being a very early draft. We could actually have a dialog box to trigger public dialogue around the document, more feedback may help enhance the drafting of the document.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:34 PM, shaista husain <> wrote:
It was exciting to present it, despite the rather anti-climactic pouring rain, a very small GA and quite theatrical presentation..we almost didn't want to propose since it wasn't really representative of usual size of our GA..But in all seriousness, i don't think making such a proposal is at odds with the declaration of occupation or proposed principles of solidarity--perhaps it should be put up on the website for discussion--that itself sends a strong message--as a "proposal" a living document that needs to be amended...we begin a very necessary and valid discussion, whether it can be fully agreed upon or not, it should be disseminated broadly--giving strength to (self reflexive) democratic process.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM, David DeGraw <> wrote:
frankly, in my opinion, love that most things are NOT "ratified" bythe GA, but simply addressed within the GA, this way they can't fullypin any one statement on us (which drives them crazy), but people willstill have a sense of where our headis at. Presenting something to the GA and placing proposals onlinedefinitely helps us craft a better message for future, while making itknown we are working on various fronts and not asleep at the wheel.

in this regard, i look at OWS as the offline version of Anonymous.  youhave a mass of messages / proposals in play and if people support themessage, it will eventually emerge as a powerful force / direction. it's a very organic / natural process - survival of the fittest ideamodel.

On 10/20/2011 1:10 PM, shaista husain wrote:
I think folks needed time to discuss changes to thestatement--so as not to alienated people to the OWS... unless there isan urgency to have it done tonight...i think we should be careful notto rush things...

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 12:49 PM, <>wrote:
I would just get rid of the part on this proposal where it says"populism" since the populist just implys the 99%.  is it tonightsgenral assembly where we propose changes or last nights ?

-----Original Message-----
From: shaista husain <>
To: september17 <>
Sent: Thu, Oct 20, 2011 11:19 am
Subject: Re: Re: [september17discuss] Proposal on the agenda fortonight's GA

Gabriel, when Saddam was hung in the kangarootrial, did it make a difference--did the US leave Iraq? how aboutOsama--did the US leave afghanistan? Now rumor has it Qadafi is dead,will they stop bombing Libya and allow the real revolutionaries tostand up--instead of the fake "rebels" who were part of quadafi'scabinet--whom they are propping as the scavenge all the resources.Don't be naive. it might be a "good thing" qadafi is dead, but therewill always be a new bogeyman for US intervention that same oldhumanitarian missions to spread "democracy" what a farce!!!! dontbelieve the hype. the so called rebels went out killing africanworkers, dragging black people out of their home. It is a disgustingsituation in Libya. Please write to me and let me know when the UN NATOor US actually ever feed the poor or educate or school or provide anyhelp to anyone, except more war....killing and maiming...thanks love.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Gabriel Johnson&lt;; wrote:
Chile's doing good stuff too (I think - most of you guys are a lot moreplugged into this than I am), but that's still no reason to disregardGreece. Definitely, though, let's pay attention to the stuff going onin Africa and such (Qaddafi is dead, so that's a plus). Can we create acentralized source of updates or daily/weekly digests on similar thingsto the occupation (not necessarily affiliated with us) going onthroughout the world?


On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 10:14 AM, shaista husain&lt;;wrote:
the greeks are the brown folks of europe--how about you take a slightlook further south--i adore all you well meaning leftists, but for amoment, my lovely comrades, stop hailing europe as the official"political" center--your geopolitical valorizing of all things europeangets on my nerves because this was the position of stalin and thecomintern, the most vulgar economics--that history and progress,understood in linear stages, with europe as most advanced, gave agencyof progressive change, assuming incorrectly, that progressive changecould only be in the hands of the working class of europe. from thatpoint on marxism is flawed and so too anarchism, of which i am asyndacalist. We have come a long way from that vulgar notion ofprogress and see clearly where that has led to--state absolutism...andvictory for capitalism. History has proven that revolution comes fromthe bottom up. I salute the european revolutionaries--soon theoccupations will spread to germany and rest of NATO superstarsdomestically, they will confront the troika... but do you realize whatis being waged further south in Tahrir--4000 dead maybe more--flesh andbones have sacrificed, children are at the forefront --syria, bahrain,palestine--(while we do not even demand that the USNATO get out of thewar in Libya..nor make any anti-war statements here in OWS against ourmilitary occupations) The life and death battle is in the South--theunions that have emerged in Tahrir are mighty strong, comrades, leadingthe way forward.
in solidarity,

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:21 AM, shaista husain&lt;;wrote:
Well, according to David Harvey, Jameson and Frankfurt school, who'vewritten in length on the condition of the 'post' as it relates tomodernity, industrialization, or 'late capitalism' --we are in acondition of time/space compression, within a mutant and schizophreniccultural production dictated by metanarratives that impose a "naturallaw" as if this is the absolute way things are, beyond reach. To acceptthat, and declare ourselves postpolitical, is to give in to Lyotard'send of history argument--victory of capitalism and victory of a cycleof recurring self referential eurocentric repetition. For us colonials,hell no, we have just begun to properly dismantle colonial itself.


On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:57 AM, &lt;;wrote:
So true, Shaista!
Now the GREEKS are political: they have actual leftist parties, some ofwhich were with the masses yesterday trying to occupy the (political)Parliament to stop the (political) austerity vote in hopes of leadingto a new (political) world.

Time for us to learn to speak Greek (and walk like an Egyptian)! 


---------- Original Message ----------
Subject: Re: Re: [september17discuss] Proposal on the agenda fortonight's GA
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 08:53:12 -0400

how can we be post political when we have yet to be political? We arein fact, compared to movements outside the U.S "prepolitical" in myhumble opinion.we have a lot to learn and catch up on.. so post meanswe have moved beyond something--i doubt it, if we want to move beyondsomething, let;s try to move beyond chauvinism.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:59 AM, &lt;; wrote:
We are very political.� Post-political sounds orwellian to me.

On 10/19/11, Justine&lt;;wrote:I like where you guys brought this statement. �I'll probably findsomewhere on the website to post this tonight and add in the term"post-political" which is a new term I came up with for describing thismovement that has so far received a great deal of consensus. �Thoughts?

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Jon Good &lt;;wrote:
After a long, raging consensus process on this listserv, the followingStatement of the General Assembly of People Occupying Wall Street willbe proposed at tonight's GA�

The Democratic and Republican parties do not represent the people,because they've been bought and corrupted by Wall Street, and theoccupation does not support their candidates.�In collusion with bothparties, only the top 1% has profited at the expense of everyone else.We have moved beyond false hopes, submission�to�eloquent speeches, andpopulist manipulation.�We rely on cooperation and solidarity to imagineand create the changes needed for a sustainable world.�From diversemulticultural, racial, ethnic, social, sexual and gender backgroundsand from�different walks of life, we have begun to unite on commonground�to oust�the global financial powers that have bought ourgovernments and�who�hold us hostage to their greed.�