|From:||shaista husain <email@example.com>|
|Sent time:||Friday, October 21, 2011 6:02:25 PM|
|Subject:||Re: Re: [september17discuss] To Adbusters and others - The People Won't be Co-opted (even by "allies")|
Do you think you are the comintern and none of us know what is the global movement about? We have to be passed down some party line? Micah, please--there are folks here much better than that.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 7:01 PM, <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
There is promise and danger in country wide or world wide communications and decision making. We all need to think clearly about the advantages and disadvantages of the options before us. There are many that think that all general assemblies should be local. There is a lot of power in that idea. There is also power in the possibility that we could pool our power. But we become more easily manipulated as we become more centralized. My opinion is not yet formed.It is possible that when the right message is invented by one of the GA's that it will be naturally taken up by a majority of the others, so that no centralized communications are necessary. Or it may be that the only way to really felx our muscle is to eventualy become one. Lets all keep open minds.Let's talk about this calmly so we can come to some kind of consensus.Also, I think that anyone can push any idea as long as it is stated that it is not from the movement.The occupy together link below, which puts out options for communications between GA's, also links to this by the way: http://generalassemblies.info/(As an aside, can't we call the Robin Hood tax something else. It lets our oponents say we are trying to steal from the rich. They are stealing from us. How about the Prince John Act, or the AL Capone Act?)On 10/21/11, Micah White<email@example.com> wrote:Hi Alexandre,
Adbusters was been very clear that #ROBINHOOD was "a proposal for the general assemblies of the Occupy movement." Our goal is to strengthen the Occupy movement by creating a model for how decisions are proposed to the movement -- namely, we are proposing that the proper way to do it is to ask the individual assemblies to decide for themselves. I notice that this model is now being followed by OccupyTogether and OccupyPhilly who have also put forward proposals to the movement:
Adbusters does have our own vision for how things should be done. And we have consistently stated our position since the beginning. The RobinHood tax idea is not new - it was something that was explicitly endorsed by the anti-globalizaiton movement. That is why we have proposed it to the Occupy movement, we think this radical idea can finally be achieved.
The Occupy movement is wonderful but it is not the end, it is the beginning. We are pushing for world revolution and we will continue to do so in the way that we think is best.
All of us are now entering Phase Two of the movement. No single GA is going to be the center of this movement, even the NYCGA is going to have to find its place. This is not going to play out in a way that any of us expects. So, let's keep the dialogue lines open and continue to be respectful. We are all going to be working together for many months to come.
As always, if you need to speak to me, or have concerns about the way Adbusters is acting, please email me and we can chat on the phone.
This is a revolutionary movement -- let's keep moving forward,
Adbusters / senior editor
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Alexandre Machado De Sant'Anna Carvalho <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Fellow occupiers:I am reading everywhere a move towards demands being pushed virtually and in the larger media. What was disturbing for me was a piece claiming a RobinHood Tax part of OWS.Even though i appreciate the role Adbusters and others have played in launching the meme of #occupywallst out there, i would like to remind them that this movement does not belong to them, does not belong to the NYCGA : this movement belongs to the people. And this means that ANY attempt to speak for the people is pernicious - no matter if you threw the meme out there or just joined. It is a matter of legitimacy. Each occupation, through its collective voice, speak (in theory) for its members. In parenthesis because we don't even have yet the capacity to make sure this happens in the first place. We are vulnerable as a political body and to use that vulnerability to push for your agenda is a fatal flaw that goes against everything we are doing.We are still building capacity to make sure all voices are heard and participate, and disturbs me to see some groups either infiltrating the NYCGA or virtually producing a list of rushed demands without any critical thinking about what this entails, saying "fuck you" to the people who are holding ground on this cold weather. Unacceptable.What destroys a leaderless movement is ego, either individual or organizational egos; so far a lot of ego's out there, either virtually or on the ground. Trying to mass maneuver people is NOT ok. If you insist on this, you are no better than the forces we are fighting against.The people won't be mass maneuvered to push your demands before we build a space where we can legitimately, discuss, deliberate, zero-in, build solidarity, and then march together at specific tactical positions to clog the machine and make power bend. We are building a broad-based movement here. In case you haven't noticed. Demands, as everything else in this movement, comes from the bottom-up, from the occupations up, where voices can be heard virtually and geographically, if you care to participate in the process.If other occupations have demands, good for them. But i sincerely doubt that we are ready as of yet to have a global demand such as a RobinHoodTax, for the mere fact we aren't even in full connection with all other sites, and for sure are not having a global conversation on this proposal.Co-option can come from the outside and from within, but the worst ones come from "allies" - from within. Speak WITH the people, and not FOR the people.Ale
--Alexandre M.S. Carvalho, M.D., MPH
|< PREV||INDEX||SEARCH||NEXT >|