From:   Amin Husain <>
Sent time:   Friday, September 30, 2011 8:52:25 AM
Subject:   Re: [september17discuss] Re: Demands Discussion

I am! Want to meet at 5 pm today?


On Sep 30, 2011, at 9:17 AM, Matthew Bralow <> wrote:


> silly question, but is there a dedicated working group for the

> guiding/principles / points of unity / declaration of occupation of

> nyc? when do you meet? who is point person i can contact? thanks in

> advance! matt


> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Cesar <> wrote:

>> Back to the drawing board.

>> I think we should try to focus in format (bulleted points, one sentence,

>> vision statement...?) and process (subgroups, online,paper boards...)

>> inorder to keep moving slowly but steadily forward. The content discussion

>> should continue in parallel.

>> I do not see any shorcut, but to decide each step of the process at the GA.

>> We may end up with a system that will allow the elaboration of complex

>> pronouncements by a process of collective thought. Let's brainstorm that.

>> Cesar


>> Sent from phone



>> On Sep 28, 2011, at 12:53 PM, Jon Good <> wrote:


>> 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?



>> 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 _ <> 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, wrote:

>>>> +1








>>>> On 09/26/11,Amin Husain<>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