From:   Jon Good <therealjongood@gmail.com>
Sent time:   Wednesday, September 28, 2011 10:53:24 AM
To:   september17@googlegroups.com
Subject:   Re: [september17discuss] Re: Demands Discussion
 

What causes unify us?  What are actual things we all can agree are important? Things that we can do now.  These demands will be our first steps.  Does the sentiment (NOT THE WORDING)  of these things cause problems for anyone?  What else can we agree on that are like these? 

FIRST STEPS:

Get the influence of money out of politics

End military aggression abroad

Bring financial predators to justice




On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Chris _ <cunderscoreg@gmail.com> wrote:
I've said this multiple times, but I think our demand should be for a
True Peace Dividend. End the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and other
foreign theaters. Use the money that has already been appropriated for
these wars and direct it, instead, toward debt relief: mortgages,
student loans, cars, etc. This is, one, a specific demand, two,
theoretically do-able (if politically challenging), three, directly
helps the people for whom we are fighting and, four, will probably
have a great deal of popular support.

On Sep 26, 6:47 pm, jemcgl...@verizon.net wrote:
>  +1
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
> On 09/26/11,Amin Husain<amin.husain@gmail.com>wrote:All,
>
> I am sure I know many of you (e.g. Cesar, Isham, etc.) from Liberty Square.  I am on the facilitation working group and others.  I agree with all of you on the urgency of demands and/or vision/goals.  I think that process can run parallel with Principles of Solidarity.  I also think the Communique statement looks great as it has been revised (reserving judgment on the specific items mentioned, for the moment).  I note that there is a consensus that the issue of demands/vision/goals in the context (or not) of the communique is on the agenda and should be so this evening at 7pm.  If so, from the email exchanges, I think that is going to be a very difficult GA because of the competing approaches and understandings.  I am concerned we will not get far enough.  If I may respectfully suggest, in the interest of moving the discussion and its resolution along, that those who have proposed specific formulations here or at the GA to familiarize themselves with the competing proposal and try to be ready to make friendly amendment and get on board one or the other competing proposals, and have suggestions as point of compromise.  This may help a great deal.  Recognize that the GA, from experience, gets paralyzed if there are competing proposals to the body.  We are likely to end up going in circles, and that may cause great damage to the cause, because people that are sitting in new on the GA will not like what they see.  This is just a suggestion.  We are doing great, and we can figure this out.  I will say this.  Let us not panic or get frustrated about not having demands; let's work hard on formulating them as soon as possible.
>
>
>
> Amin

< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >