Political Affiliation and the Occupy Movement

Two posts were made on Facebook, that I think indicate a troublesome trend. One was in support of Ron Paul and another was in support of the Libertarian Party. My thoughts are this: In the spirit of collaboration, can we withhold promoting different political affiliations? If we start throwing support of different political candidates/parties into the mix, we will start isolating people. Let's be mindful that we are the 99%, and not we are the 99% who are now going to fracture on political ideologies.

I don't think we should support any political parties. Our movement should be completely non-partisan.

I think we should remain non-partisan. However, I also believe that in order to achieve our goals, we need to support specific bills and promote citizens' inititiatives that come up at local, state, and federal levels. The danger in not supporting specific political action is that we can march, organize, and protest until doomsday and never actually achieve anything positive.

I'm going to be frank. The visible Libertarian Party/Ron Paul/FairTax presence so far seems less like honest participation and more like recruiting/an attempt at co-opting. And that's fine; let them be tacky. I'm going to keep biting my tongue about what I really think about their politics because I'm certain there are honest libertarians and libertarian sympathizers in the crowd who are there to be a part of our coalition just the same as me. But any time I see someone try to cynically manipulate this into a Ron Paul rally, the temptation to expose factually What Ron Paul Really Thinks aside from Iraq/Afghanistan/Bailout/Drug War grows.

I agree with supporting concrete legislation, but it's easy enough to be strategic and non-partisan about that.

Aeropsia wrote:I don't think we should support any political parties. Our movement should be completely non-partisan.

In a nutshell! No playing sides, no pitting sides against each other. It's all about election reform and getting the money out of politics so anyone can have a voice.

If you haven't watched this guys videos check them out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE

I keep hearing this movement being called a revolution. Ask yourself, what has this movement done that truly is revolutionary? Rallies? If thats the criteria for a revolutionary movement then the Tea Party would be considered revolutionary. They got co-opt by the republican party almost from the get go, lets not let the dems (beware of MoveOn.org) do the same to this movement. Lets keep it non-partisan. As far as Ron Paul goes, well, anyone who seeks the power of President, Senator, or a seat in the Congress is already corrupt or just slightly narcissistic. Supporting certain bills and legislation has its place and citizen initiatives should have an even bigger priority, but lets be revolutionaries. Lets organize institutions outside of the government that truly meets the peoples needs. Lets abandon the idea that power (corporations) and the institutions of power (government) would relinquish its stranglehold on power by legislating itself. Thats illogical. This movement is inspiring, its motivating, and its full of revolutionary potential. The use of the General Assembly, amazing, a perfect example of working outside the government. Lets keep moving it forward and truly, truly, progressive in other facets of meeting peoples need. Things like food co-ops, permaculture in urban and sub-urban neighborhoods, free schools and work shops, really really free markets, free child and elderly care. Lets move the conversation from which legislative bills we should support or should oppose and who is who in which and what party to how can we fill this and that need for that and this purpose? How can we build sustainable, autonomous communities? We need new solutions instead of merely reforming the old, sold out, traded and lobbied ones. Lets take this spark and stoke the fires of revolution!

I think this is more a Renaissance, than a Revolution. We are NOT bashing or supporting the current candidates. Did anybody see the Ron Paul dude in the surgical mask? I was very amused today. There were so few (200-250) people today, the goofy, weird people opposing us really stood out!

nownow

pragmatically, I think that becoming a source of political pressure could be of benefit to everyone, but I agree with you basic point and find the grassroots community/social infrastructure part of this more interesting and inevitably more constructive than simply protesting.

We the people no longer believe we have representation in government, and we got off the couch and say it out loud in public.

We have been enslaved by debt, controlled by Goliath corporations, and we seek out like-minded people to organize our own public lobby, so that our voices are heard.

We woke up to find the American Dream had been hijacked, and we loudly and publicly voice our objections.

This is the beginning of a revolution. It doesn't have a perfect form, a unified, marketable look, a party leader or a corporate sponsor. It is a force to be heard, a steady drumbeat for change.

^ What he said!

PJax wrote:We the people no longer believe we have representation in government, and we got off the couch and say it out loud in public.

We have been enslaved by debt, controlled by Goliath corporations, and we seek out like-minded people to organize our own public lobby, so that our voices are heard.

We woke up to find the American Dream had been hijacked, and we loudly and publicly voice our objections.

This is the beginning of a revolution. It doesn't have a perfect form, a unified, marketable look, a party leader or a corporate sponsor. It is a force to be heard, a steady drumbeat for change.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. This is the beginning of revolution. And we should organize a body of people to pressure and lobby the government against the corporate state. But should that be all that we seek. Lets face it, America has never been a democratic nation and has never represented all the people. It's built on stolen land, it's built on the backs of slaves, its always been structured to serve the upper classes of society. So, why should we seek to further that legacy by merely reforming it? It has always been illegitiment. This is where we should be our starting point. Not the fact that we have no jobs, if we did would even be respected in the work place? Not that we're in-debt over our heads, didn't the majority of americans take loans to buy things they couldn't afford to begin with? Not that we can't afford to go to college so we can get better jobs to make more money to further our place in society, shouldn't education be in search of enlightenment and understanding? Why is it now that white middle-class America is finally waking up to the injustices of the this nation and the injustices around the world? Is it because we're finally truly feeling the effects of a classist/racist/sexist/homophobic all around bigot and materialistic culture and we're no longer the beneficiaries. I'm not opposed to this movement, and I'm glad that the majority of Americans are getting off the couch to say something about what is going on in our society and now globalized world. I just wish that the focus wouldn't be on participating in a mechanism that wasn't truly designed for all the people to participate in from the get go. Democracies still have a way of marginalizing minorities, no matter how you set up the voting system. Do you think indigenous tribes really truly have a voice to find true ratification of the injustices played out against them, or is that just water under the bridge? Autonomous communities are more sustainable, more inclusive, and more consensus based than any centralized democratic power could ever reform and reform and reform and amend and amend and amend itself to be. Why should our focus be on trying to get a seat at the table to beg for a bigger piece of the pie? Should we not instead manifest a new table to collectively feast upon? Instead of seeking to tax the rich and the corporations that accumulate so much wealth for them lets render their money worthless amongst us. Thats a revolution. We don't need to look marketable, we don't need leaders, we don't need politicians and hand outs. We need mutual aid, respect for a diversity, not only in people, but also in the tactics different people use. Lastly, remember this, austerity measures affect different demographics of society differently than those who are just now feeling the affects. Who are we to say how they should or shouldn't react and what political actions they should take? After all many people never were represented in the first place.

pushing for reform and cooperating with the state is not necessarily an ideal situation, it is a strategically sound one for this moment in time. this isn't about a tiny vanguard of radicals, it's about mobilizing the largest number of people possible for shared goals, many of whom are part of the state and who won't agree with you. the american public is on our side about many issues we're addressing, but they won't agree with you about the illegitimacy of the US. nor will a lot of the 99% already involved.

unfortunately in 2011, "diversity of tactics" is practically code for "black blocs doing dumb shit that brings state muscle down on the entire movement." it's how the state and mainstream media has marginalized every anti-war and anti-globalization demonstration of the past 10+ years. this isn't going to be co-opted by mainstream liberals or libertarians, and it doesn't belong to crimethinc either. chill out on the vanguardism and enjoy the ride. this is for the long haul.

^ I agree with the above. The second the majority of the movement starts advocating violence, I'm gone. However, a few posts on this forum are so extreme that I sometimes wonder if they aren't agent provocateurs and playing for the other side. If not, they certainly are giving them a ton of ammunition.

The reason the media, political organizations and some people are attempting to use and categorize OWS and Occupy Jacksonville as a political force is because they have mistaken us for the Tea Party.

The Tea Party put their faith in specific political candidates they believed would further their ideals, and fix the problem of government. We don’t have any faith in politicians or Wall Street or government, so any expectation that OWS will support a specific candidate or party would be a mistake.

We are about changing the symbiotic relationship between Wall Street and Government. The purpose of Government is to work for the good of the people. Our government has become the customer service department of Wall Street, and no political candidate or political party can change that. We have to change that.

How can we do that? I think it would be wise to watch out for anyone who says “leave it to me” or “I’m a professional” or “trust me, I will do it for you”, or “throw it all out”. We have to do this ourselves.

Our job now is to put our desire for change into some neat, concise demands with specific complaints and our own specific resolutions, that will give America back to the people.

My personal number one is to annul the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. If you got the handout "Points of Discussion for Occupy Jacksonville Adoption of Occupy Wall Street Demands", you can see it is number 2. OK. Let's do that.

We are doing what we are doing because of Government and all else involved. It has taken more than one party or president to get here. We want change. We cannot stand against something while promoting more of the same. NO ONE.. that is involved in any way with Government or what not right now can be considered on our side. We have been voting for years for those we thought where on our side, and we have still ended up here. We have to trust in ourselves. We can no longer believe or wait for ANY politician to come along and fix anything. The whole point is for us "the people"to make change.

I think it would be a good idea to post your opinions from an "I" perspective. The assumption that we all agree on one issue or another may not be correct.

I believe that if one wants to make change it requires political involvement. How do you propose the people change a Supreme Court decision, the highest court in the land?

I do agree that overturning Citizens United decision is a number 1 priority, with overturning voter suppression laws coming in a close second. But without voting for a Constitutional Convention, overturning Citizens United is next to impossible in the near future. I'm not sure which frightens me more, big money donations to pols or giving the radical right an opportunity to subvert the Constitution.

melittophily wrote:pushing for reform and cooperating with the state is not necessarily an ideal situation, it is a strategically sound one for this moment in time. this isn't about a tiny vanguard of radicals, it's about mobilizing the largest number of people possible for shared goals, many of whom are part of the state and who won't agree with you. the american public is on our side about many issues we're addressing, but they won't agree with you about the illegitimacy of the US. nor will a lot of the 99% already involved.

unfortunately in 2011, "diversity of tactics" is practically code for "black blocs doing dumb shit that brings state muscle down on the entire movement." it's how the state and mainstream media has marginalized every anti-war and anti-globalization demonstration of the past 10+ years. this isn't going to be co-opted by mainstream liberals or libertarians, and it doesn't belong to crimethinc either. chill out on the vanguardism and enjoy the ride. this is for the long haul.

I totally agree. The above post have been a lot more reassuring than a lot of the other discussions I've read on this site. I personally do feel that black blocs and other militant tactics have been too hasty in the past decade after the successful shut down of the WTO in seattle during the 1999 meetings, and as a tactic perhaps its has been beaten dead, but it has it uses as does non-violent tactics. I just wanted to voice some of my view points from within the 99%. Anybody who would like to discuss different view points are more than welcome to and I hope to join you all in the future to discuss them. As far as the rest of the 99% not agreeing with me about the the history of the United Snakes, well, thats part of the problem. Isn't it our job to help inform people about injustice so we can go further as a movement when the masses are mobilized. Forgive me if I'm sounding as if I'm promoting or vying for a vanguard, I have just as much distaste for vanguardist professional revolutionaries and protest rock star mentalities as any one should have. I just want people to consider more than what I've seen posted around on the internet involving this movement. Since I haven't been able to make it out to any rallies or GAs thus far, this is the only way I have to communicate certain view points. I'm not an agent provocateur. I would like for people within the movement to consider the fact that there might and most likely will come a time when we will have to physically defend ourselves and our communities from repression. And it is okay to fight back. Hypothetically lets say a group decides to march in the street, or lock down the highway, or sit-in a families home to prevent it from being foreclosed, or we move a homeless family into an empty house, or we take over an abandon building downtown to feed, house and aid battered womyn and children, or we take over an empty lot for a community garden but somebody wants to build an office on it, or we just camp in a public park to hold a 24/7 occupation, as is being done in other cities. Say we do these things for the good of our fellow humans and the city orders the police in to baton, mace and arrest us. How do we defend ourselves? Are the police protecting their fellow 99% or are they protecting the interest of the 1%? The excuse of "just doing my job" was thrown out at the Nuremberg trials. Just consider these things, please, then we can act accordingly. Strategically, yes, reform is sound as of now. But when its not enough, then what? Look at the reforms the environmental movement has pushed the past few decades. Have they been enough to stop environmental degradation? Is global warming no longer a threat? Is it really safe to eat fish out of the ST. Johns? As far the anti-war movement... where did it go after Obama got elected and why is the anti-war debate turned to how much money is being spent on multiple wars and not the innocent lives murdered by American soldiers? When playing by the rules is not enough then what? Until then, hell yeah lets enjoy the ride! These are truly exciting times. Lets keep pushing forward.

Right on. For what it's worth I agree with a lot of what you've said, I just question whether it's all pertinent at this point in time, and I think the possibility of backlash always needs to be on our minds.

I don't think there is any practical means of self-defense against state repression at this point. We need to take arrestability and physical vulnerability into account when planning direct action, keep the moral high ground if orders come down, and consider jail solidarity.

One thing that's unique about this from every other activist movement in recent times is the possibility of bringing more and more law enforcement onto our side. Active Military and Veterans are already participating and showing support, and Occupy Police is underway. http://www.occupypolice.org/

I hope you can make it out to a GA sometime soon, as I think you have a lot to offer, and these conversations are better in person for a number of reasons.

Yes, these conversations are much better in person because we can all hug it out at the end. I'm making a priority to make it out to the next one. Thanks for the link.