|Sent time:||Friday, September 30, 2011 9:11:42 PM|
|Subject:||Re: Re: Re: [september17discuss] Re: can we try to come up with one demand?|
I have heard a lot of talk about the "lack of a demand" at #OWS. I like all the demands thus far, and I defend them fiercely to the fearful lefty critics. But they're right to point out that an ultimatum is implied with an "occupation." Otherwise, it's a demonstration, right?I'm not sure why having one demand / many reasons to rise up are mutually exclusive.This occupation could pick a winnable demand and use the spotlight moment to continue pushing for all the great things it is talking about. There will be more occupations, more demands, and more victories if the tale of Occupy Wall Street can create something solid. We won't get it all in one sitting, but we will get it all if we make a habit of drawing a line in the sand. I always thought that the "one demand" was the most brilliant part of the strategy.Just my $.02
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 7:29 AM, J.A. Myerson <email@example.com> wrote:
Yeah, it's as though MoJo has never been to a protest.
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 9:26 AM, grimwomyn <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
did you not see this article: http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/09/occupy-wall-street
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 9:21 AM, <email@example.com> wrote:
Clarify- what left groups? what exactly is feared?
---- Lauren <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> A lot of the traditional left is not taking us seriously because they
> expect exactly what Justine mentioned she feared.
> Also, regarding food, didn't we have an offer for a huge kitchen in
> the city? If we can get support from small farmers and support them
> back it would be a boon. Hell, if we could just take over and restore
> some abandoned building in Lower Manhattan as a home base it would be
> a boon (we could call it urban renewal, since it's exactly what it is
> and most of these abandoned buildings have been for long enough that
> often nobody is sure about "legal" ownership anyway).
> A platform based on only lofty electoral reform won't remove corporate
|< PREV||INDEX||SEARCH||NEXT >|