MAYDAY! MAYDAY! It is obvious we are headed for disaster unless we change course drastically, and we don't have a lot of time. A project is being discussed internationally in the Occupy movement - Global Strike May 2012. What we are proposing is a continuous strike, a permanent withdrawal from the current system, a signal for all those who feel their work to be meaningless and unsatisfying, to switch to alternative means which are beneficial to the whole community, to support themselves and their families. In order to make this feasible this alternative system needs to be up and running by May 2012. Outrageous! Impossible! I agree with you. Nevertheless it has to happen if we are serious about moving from this morally bankrupt and physically damaging path we are on, to a sustainable system that puts people before profit. Join us on Take the Squares Network https://n-1.cc/pg/groups/1010883/15m-global-strike/. and please pass around to friends and colleagues.
From n-1:
Every day the trade unions, students, and retirees are more and more mobilized for transnational coordinated strikes against the budget cuts and financial dictatorships.
In Europe and the United States, millions of people are taking to the streets to defend public services and denounce the lack of democracy and austerity plans.
There were 1.000.000 in Athens on October 19 and other general strikes on November 10 and December 1. On the 28th/29th of July the people's assembly called for a massive general strike without the unions for the first time. The same occurred in Barcelona the 29 of September. Two months ago trade unions in Portugal called a small strike for the public sector, but on October 15, an assembly of 6000 people voted for general strike. The unions consequently changed their mind and decided to call for a general strike. There were student actions in the UK on November 9th and 23rd, including occupations in collaboration with OccupyLondon. A major public sector strike took place on 30.11.11. with 2.000.000 people taking the streets. This was supported by OccupyLondon and also by European unions outside of the border.
How can the global movement of peaceful revolutions collaborate and inspire this general indignation?
We opened the debate in the IX Squares Meeting where we spoke about our local situations (problems/forces) and shared our first ideas about concept, content, duration, date, logistic etc.
We concluded that general strikes should play a pivotal role in the transition to a new way of living, if we want to reform the institutions or build our own ones. We need the skilled qualified people to work on it. So we have to meet them in their institutions (schools, hospitals, factories…) within common actions, debates and flier-posting. Inviting them to join our working groups and alternative projects.
We can invite all the squares/assemblies to work on these alternatives, sharing knowledge on a global platform. We should link as many local projects, unions and workers with the aim to mobilize for transnational general strikes.
If we want to create a new world soon, we need to activate alternatives right now.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
A huge share of the nation's economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244.
Note: The 2007 data (the most current) doesn't reflect the impact of the housing market crash. In 2007, the bottom 60% of Americans had 65% of their net worth tied up in their homes. The top 1%, in contrast, had just 10%. The housing crisis has no doubt further swelled the share of total net worth held by the superrich.
Winners Take All
The superrich have grabbed the bulk of the past three decades' gains.
A Harvard business prof and a behavioral economist recently asked more than 5,000 Americans how they thought wealth is distributed in the United States. Most thought that it's more balanced than it actually is. Asked to choose their ideal distribution of wealth, 92% picked one that was even more equitable.
Productivity has surged, but income and wages have stagnated for most Americans. If the median household income had kept pace with the economy since 1970, it would now be nearly $92,000, not $50,000.
Senior EditorDave Gilson is a senior editor at Mother Jones.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
A speaker addresses the crowd at a "People's Caucus" event Tuesday, Dec. 27, 2011, in downtown Des Moines. (Andrea Melendez/The Register)
By PERRY BEEMAN and REGINA ZILBERMINTS / The Des Moines Register
Demonstrators will meet at 10 a.m. today in Des Moines to begin planning three days of protests, campaign office occupations, and acts of nonviolent civil disobedience.
About 250 protesters from at least 11 states turned out Tuesday night for the first event of Occupy Iowa's most aggressive attempt to influence the presidential campaign.
The protesters ramped up for demonstrations at the candidates' local headquarters and the offices of the Republican and Democratic parties. They were prepared to be arrested en masse, and they were fired up.
"I'm sick of it," said Lisa Bonar in her introduction to the People's Caucus, held by Occupy Des Moines. "I am sick of watching and worrying that there's nothing we can do to stop this downward slide."
Occupy Iowa is a loosely organized movement related to Occupy Wall Street, a nationwide movement to protest corporate greed and other elements of government and the economy.
Protesters are hopeful that the media spotlight on Iowa leading up to next week's caucuses will also provide an opportunity to draw attention to the movement's concerns.
Local organizers had hoped the People's Caucus would draw 500 to 1,500 protesters from across the country. While the caucus had a strong showing from Des Moines residents, turnout was not as good as hoped from other cities.
Some groups told organizers they would bring 10, 12 or even 25 members but only brought two, said David Goodner of Occupy Des Moines.
However, Goodner said the overall showing from the community is a highly positive sign.
The movement will expand "by strengthening the local connections and the local community," he said.
More protesters are expected to arrive as the weekend approaches, Goodner said.
On Tuesday, the stream of speakers at the caucus addressed varied topics: bank bailouts, homelessness, defense legislation, taxes and money in politics.
As the evening wore on, protesters split into groups based on which candidate dissatisfied them the most. People mingled among groups, and many changed alliances. Some bartered, agreeing to protest at offices drawing smaller crowds if people at those sites would join the larger demonstrations.
A little more than 100 of the people at the gathering indicated they would protest at the offices of presidential candidates. President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney each were targeted by 30 protesters; Ron Paul drew the next highest with 18.
There were plenty of complaints for each campaign.
For example, Des Moines resident Nathan Harrington fears Paul's plans would remove important social programs.
Two of Harrington's children are disabled. While waiting for Medicaid funding, one son had no insurance for 18 months. Medical bills eventually caused the family to give up their home, forcing the son to move into a group home.
"Ron Paul seems to think that's it's not the government's job to provide for the collective good and promote the disadvantaged," Harrington said.
Paul's campaign said the protesters misunderstand his positions. "Ron Paul is actually one of the most sympathetic to the poorest of society because he favors traditional government," campaign chairman Drew Ivers said. "It was traditional government that brought us to being the most wealthy nation in the world. When a nation is wealthy, even the poor prosper."
The People's Caucus was a decidedly low-tech operation. Messages were scrawled on homemade posters and chalkboards. Google maps gave way to a paper map with colored pins showing where protesters live.
Audience members shouted approval as speakers from Washington state, Missouri and California implored the government to support "green" construction, limit campaigns to public financing and support consensus building.
A baby slept in a stroller. A dog in a corner occasionally yelped. On stage, former Iowa state lawmaker Ed Fallon kept things moving as old standbys such as peace activist Frank Cordaro joined new faces from New York, Wisconsin, Colorado and Minnesota. Volunteers sold T-shirts.
"That's right!" many of the throng said as speaker after speaker made points about what they considered the fallacies of today's American government. A woman from Massachusetts preached the necessity of spending caps for campaigns. Another talked about foreclosures.
Many talked about the military and the role of money in politics.
Des Moines police officers, who expect to make arrests later this week, observed the proceedings.
Tuesday's event was the kickoff of a planned weeklong series of protests leading up to the Iowa caucuses.
Nathan Davis, 31, had arrived at 1 a.m. from Omaha in a car with three others. He said the group had come to Des Moines because it was a good opportunity to bring protesters from disparate cities together.
And he didn't pause when asked what he wanted to accomplish this week.
"Real change," Davis said. "I want to get people thinking, talking around their kitchen tables. Talking about their grievances and about the solutions."
Although he was in Des Moines for last week's protest in front of Obama's campaign office and was arrested during protests in Omaha, the Army National Guard member and veteran of Afghanistan said he couldn't get arrested again. His sergeant had been clear about that.
Before the evening sessions, people trained in nonviolent civil disobedience techniques and took other mini-classes.
Some showed off new red T-shirts from Des Moines' Raygun store, printed Tuesday, that read, "The Occupy Iowa Caucuses. Pulling the levers of power since 2011."
The Rev. Peter Dougherty, a Catholic priest from Michigan, came to the headquarters, rented for $1,500 for the week, to assist in the civil disobedience training and to participate in the protests.
Nonviolence has been a theme for Occupy Des Moines members, and organizers have stressed that the campaign office occupations today, Thursday and Friday should be peaceful as well.
Grant Rodgers and Matt Woolbright contributed to this story.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
This year saw working people around the world begin to stand up and fight back. Ten organizers share their most inspiring moments from the U.S.'s year of action.
December 26, 2011 |
Photo Credit: PR Watch
2011 will be remembered as the year the world woke up and began to fight back against a tiny minority that had held on to controlof money, of political powerfor far too long.
Time Magazine named "The Protester" its person of the year, but the story is much deeper than that. Here in the US, the year began with despondencya new class of Tea Party-supported legislators and governors were taking office around the country, and taking immediate steps to impose their anti-worker austerity agenda.
But the austerity class met resistancefirst in Wisconsin, where Gov. Scott Walker moved to take away workers' right to collective bargaining. The people in Wisconsin responded by occupying their Capitol building, kicking off a movement which spread through Ohio and Indiana, then seemed to subside before erupting in the fall with Occupy Wall Street.
But throughout the year, organizers were working around the country, fighting the power of Wall Street, big business, and the right-wing governors who do their bidding. We asked ten of them to talk about the moments that stood out for them this year, the moments that gave them hope. Some are moments you've heard of, some might have slipped past you. But all of them were signs of long-overdue change. 1. Melissa Ryan, New Media Director at New Organizing Institute Wisconsin Leads the Fight Back
"For Wisconsin I think the big moment was when the 14 Democratic State Senators left the state [to avoid a vote on Walker's collective bargaining bill]. I really think that's what triggered the energy around the recall of the Senators, really triggered the energy around the recall of Walker. It changed from people taking to the streets because they didn't know what to do to really having the energy to change something.
All these years when we've been begging Democrats to stand up, and here were 14 people who not only not caved but who put everything on the line to defend worker's rights. It's been a year of moments, really in Wisconsin, but that's something that still inspires me a year later.
To me that was the lightning rod for everything." 2. Nelini Stamp, Working Families Party/Occupy Wall Street
"On September 16th I was in a meeting for a couple of hours about how the progressive left can change the narrative from cuts to economic inequality. The next day, little did I realize while I was sleeping on cardboard at Liberty Plaza, the national narrative would change. Occupy Wall Street has changed the narrative for the millions all over the country who have been suffering for a very long time." 3. Karen Nussbaum, Executive Director, Working America New Hampshire's Win Against Anti-Union "Right-to-Work" legislation
"When Republicans took over state legislatures in 2010, we all worried that they'd quickly move to attack workers' rights. Fortunately, in New Hampshire, we were able to turn back one of those attacks.
New Hampshire's Republican-controlled state legislature passed so-called right-to-work legislation that would undermine the right to collectively bargain--but thanks to the efforts of people like our members, they did not override Gov. Lynch's veto of the bill. Working people won this vote despite underhanded tactics by state House leaders and big-money lobbying from out-of-state interests.
This wasn't just a victory for people who are in unions. Working America members, who don't have a union at work, wrote hundreds of letters to their state legislators asking them to uphold the veto and protect the freedom to have a union. As they did in Wisconsin and Ohio, working people in New Hampshireunion and non-union alikestood up in support of basic workers' rights.
We preserved good jobs with fair wages and benefits and struck a blow against the anti-worker agenda." 4. Olivia Leirer, New York Communities for ChangeSupermarket Workers in Brooklyn Win Union Contract
"NYCC organized low-wage immigrant workers at Master Foods (3008 Church Ave) in Flatbush. The workers are mostly from Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala and the West Indies.
Workers filed a lawsuit for back wages, won $300,000 in back wages and won paid vacation, sick days, raises, grievance procedures, funeral leave and a union contract with RWDSU (Retail, Wholesale, Department Store Union)/UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers) Local 338.
They used community, press, elected officials and lawsuits to win. It was the first of a broader campaign to organize low-wage workers in supermarkets, car washes and more, and represents a new model for organizing low wage immigrant workers. It goes outside the National Labor Relations Board and uses wage and hour lawsuits and protest to win the contract." 5. Eesha Pandit, reproductive justice advocate and blogger at Feministing and the Crunk Feminist Collective, Women of Color Organizers Defeat Toxic Anti-Choice Billboard Campaign
"In February when the horribly offensive and racist anti-abortion billboard went up in Soho, I was moved and inspired by the swift response of several groups of women of color organizers (Sistersong NY, Trust Black Women, The Women of Color Policy Network at NYU and many others) who got the billboard taken down in ONE DAY. It was a victory and a testament to the power of women's organizing. From the letter from NYU WOC Network:
'It is with great joy that I write to report that Lamar Outdoor Advertising has agreed to pull the billboard on 6th Ave and Watts depicting an African-American girl with the disturbing tagline "The most dangerous place for African Americans is in the Womb" TODAY.
Following a letter to Peter Costanza, Vice President and General Manager of LaMar Billboards, written by the Women of Color Policy Network, NYU Wagner, Mr. Costanza responded affirmatively that they would remove the billboard. I truly believe that our collective quick action, phone calls and letters to the company are directly responsible for their decision to pull the ad.'" 6. Rose Ann DeMoro, Executive Director, National Nurses United International Coalition Builds to Tax Wall Street
"We think it's one of the best years of our lives. What we saw was a movement born that was long overdue in this country to actually confront the power of Wall Street. What we've done, at NNU, is to forge international solidarity on the financial transaction tax and actually have been pretty vocal representatives of the US in the global fight for the financial transaction tax. We went to France, to confront the G-20 on the transaction tax. It's been an incredible experience.
We're very hopeful because of the global movement and the unified global vision of these groups to actually hold Wall Street and their counterparts in other countries accountable. From what I understand we had the first tent at Occupy Wall Streetthey said no tents, so we put up a First Aid station. That was born from our earlier workwe had a campaign in Wisconsin about Tax Wall Street, No Concessions for Workers.
We then did a protest on Wall Street in June, we had a couple of thousand people there, we protested at the Chamber of Commerce in Washington, DC, which Ralph Nader says was the first big protest at that place.
We feel like we've opened a door that won't be closed again, for our own organization, and in terms of having a different voice from America, a progressive voice, a voice that's very loud, very articulate, extremely vocal, the voice of the nurse, in terms of fighting against Wall Street and for a fairer, better world." 7. Matt Browner Hamlin, organizer with OccupyOurHomes.org, Victory for Veteran Facing Foreclosure in Atlanta. Brigitte Walker, a decorated veteran of the Iraq War pushed into medical retirement from the army after the shock from a mortar round crushed her spine, was able to negotiate a principal reduction on her mortgage from Chase Bank after Occupy Atlanta defended her home from foreclosure.
"The Occupy Our Homes victory in Atlanta this week with Brigitte Walker is incredibly inspiring and shows yet again that when people take the fight to the banks, the 99% can win. Banks just don't like their dirty business being put out in public and that's what Occupy Our Homes and the communities rallying around these housing activists are doing." 8. Roberto Lovato, Writer, Co-Founder of Presente.org International Movements Connect to One Another
"I think the most important victory for working people in the US and the world -- is the building out of the matrix of intersecting and increasingly interconnected movementsthe Arab Spring, the Indignados in Spain, ongoing Latin American mobilizations and the most recent, Occupy in the US, among others--transforming the global web of politics.
Thanks to the vision and continued mobilization of working peoples around the world, there's a new day on the planet, one that previews the millenial movements needed to literally 'save the planet' from the physical, economic and spiritual toxicity of "hope"-killing capitalism. Thanks to working people struggling around the world for clearing the air of barriers to real Hope." 9. Charles Monaco, Progressive States Network Ohio's Defeat of Anti-Union Legislation
"Exactly one year after the tea party takeover of Congress, and following months of sustained attacks on workers and the 99% in statehouses, voters in every corner of the nation sent a striking and direct message on Election Day 2011, rejecting the overreach of right-wing state legislatures and governors on a wide range of issues.
Nowhere was that message voiced louder than in Ohio, where Senate Bill 5 a law signed by Gov. John Kasich in the spring that would have stripped law enforcement officers, firefighters, and other public employees of fundamental collective bargaining rights ended the year going down in flames. After consistent polling that saw the bill broadly unpopular with voters, a grassroots effort that gathered 1.3 million signatures to put it on the ballot, and a campaign that saw corporate interests flood the state with money in attempt to save it, the measure was decisively rejected by a 22-point margin and by majorities of voters in 82 of the state's 88 counties.
Even without a statewide electoral race on the ballot this year, a quarter million more Ohioans voted to repeal the bill than had voted for Gov. Kasich a year earlier a level of intensity that should worry any governor or lawmaker in any state considering more economically destructive attacks on workers in 2012." 10. Leo Gerard, President, United Steelworkers Occupy Wall Street
"A seminal event for all working people in 2011 was the birth of the Occupy Movement with the first encampment at Wall Street and those that followed across the country and around the world.
This protest of the economic and social injustice created by corporate greed and by the barons of finance diverted the focus of public dialogue from deficits to the needs of working, poor and marginalized people -- the 99 percenters.
Although some occupiers have been evicted and their encampments destroyed, the protesters are right when they say: no mayor or police force or 1 percenter can destroy an idea whose time has come."
Sarah Jaffe is an associate editor at AlterNet, a rabblerouser and frequent Twitterer. You can follow her at @seasonothebitch.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
The world has come a long way in a short time, going in a few generations from states mostly consisting of dictatorships and absolute monarchies to one of parliamentary democracies and representative mixed states. And at the heart of this transformation is a simple yet powerful truism: The more thoroughly democratic the society, the better its people of all classes and backgrounds fare. Furthermore, we know the reverse is not true at all - prosperity in the absence of democracy is unsustainable, and in fact usually creates highly rigid, stifling societies where human beings are treated poorly by the political order despite relative material abundance. What we find, then, is that democracy is not a simple Yes/No question of how a people is governed, but the degree to which the principle is applied in daily life - a fact brought into sharp focus by the innovations and lessons of the Occupy movement. In this series, I will be describing a framework for permeating American society with democracy, thereby bringing the corporate state to heel and strengthening democratic governance in the balance.
First, you might be interested in reviewing some of the preliminary brainstorming work I've already done on this subject - particularly that on the formation of General Assemblies as a fourth branch of government:
In summary, I argue that the only way to defeat oligarchy in this country is by replacing its stranglehold on our daily lives from the ground up, beginning with instituting first sub-municipal, then municipal, then state, then federal, and finally global General Assemblies - the business of which would all occur at the same local meetings - all checked and balanced by elected bodies, judiciaries, and appointed regulatory institutions. For example, the global General Assembly would not be a separate institution or even a separate meeting from the local - it would just be the parallel result of all the local ones voting on global issues in the same meetings in which they vote on local, county, state, federal, regional, or ad hoc issues. Ditto federal, state, county, and municipal GAs - they would all just be the parallel operation of the hyper-local meetings within their jurisdiction, keeping the numbers at each individual meeting manageable.
I've already painted some broad strokes on how this may be approached, but in this series I would like to pursue a more detailed exploration, so I've divided it into several parts where we can discuss ways to replace corporate authoritarianism with democracy. In Part 1, I offer some thoughts on ways to educate children in democratic values in the home (I don't have kids - I'm just thinking abstractly here), as well as practicing those values in loose social settings.
I. Born Free (LOL)
Since human evolution makes children so helpless and relatively undeveloped, it also structures their brains to be dependent on parents for behavioral cues (mimicry), relationship information (how people treat each other), and abstract facts (since parents are omnipotent and omniscient, whatever they say is true, even if not fully understood). Authoritarianism, unfortunately, is the easiest human state due to how our brains develop in childhood - submission to authority is not predicated on any rational basis in the mind of a child, but on an absolute instinctual relationship. When the energy of a society runs low due to prolonged stresses, it's very easy to collectively default back to childhood via religion, militarism, or other identity-group bigotry. So it's very important that the seeds of democratic consciousness be sown in childhood to avoid that kind of social back-sliding.
My first suggestion, then, would be to go easy on the structure while still providing plenty of safety and opportunities: Regimentation of a child's life provides false cues not only about how the world works, but about how it should work. People who grow up identifying the petty, imposed ordering of every detail of their lives with love and trust will want to recreate that environment in society generally, and that very easily leaves them open to militaristic, religious dominionist, or corporatist impulses. They may prefer the "benign" versions of these social settings if they're empathetic people, but they would still hold fundamentally authoritarian values. Of course, not all people respond the same to the same upbringing - they may fly in the other direction, growing up to have a neurotic loathing of order that makes it difficult for them to function in life, and ineffective politically.
The reason regimentation provides false cues is that, in a free society, people have to establish their own structure rather than simply adapting to what superiors impose on them. This is ultimately true even in a career that is strongly hierarchical and involves a lot of regimentation - the people who manage to climb to the top are usually the ones who can see beyond the maze laid out for them and cut their own path, and the key lesson of democratic values is that this doesn't have to imply ruthlessness. Seeing outside the box is the pursuit of a free mind, and can enable even the most moral of people to achieve amazing results (see: Gandhi). An authoritarian mind, by contrast, will tend to be mediocre even in their preferred environment, because they cannot transcend the flaws of their received wisdom.
So even if a child is going into a world full of authoritarianism, they are still better served learning to be free: It will make them powerful, and have great advantages over the slaves and slavemasters around them, trapped in their pointless, wasteful attempts to seek advantage through degradation of others. Now, that doesn't mean be an absentee parent, or only be involved when absolutely necessary - it is crucial that a parent be their child's solid ground that makes them feel safe, special, and loved wherever they go, even in adolescence when they have to pretend to feel otherwise in order to practice for the harshness of adult life.
But that sense of safety has to evolve from instinctive faith into personal trust based on experience; that feeling of being special has to evolve from infantile self-involvement to real knowledge of their own gifts and acceptance of their own limitations; and that love has to evolve beyond a bond of dependency and obedience into a connection between individuals - not some filial piety or fealty to an abstract institutional "Family" in the Old World sense. Children need to grow up learning to understand that their parents cared for them and protected them because they love them as individuals, not out of loyalty to some impersonal social obligation to raise offspring - the conservative view of "family."
The next suggestion would be that, when possible - and I realize there are limits to a parent's patience in dealing with inquisitive or oppositional children - have an answer for everything. Or even answer a question with a question to engage them in a very basic form of the Socratic method. Eventually you are going to give up and say "Because I said so" - I don't think there has ever been a parent on Earth who has failed to say some version of that, some time. But as much as your sanity can handle, it's better to engage their minds than appeal to their trust or, barring that, assert authority. Even if they're only asking "Why?" to make trouble, turning their question into an educational opportunity will both reward curiosity and discourage attempts to use the question as a weapon.
This is important because - again, as far as your sanity can handle - questions should not be framed as transgressive, so their natural inclination to use them as deliberate challenges should fail to yield the expected assertion of authority. Sometimes they may do this only in order to feel secure, because they need to hear authority asserted, but what minimal insecurity might be caused by the lack of the expected response would merely be educational rather than actually frightening to them. They should gradually learn the following in this way:
1. Questions are not bad.
2. Questions are not disruptive, even when they are intended to be.
3. Questions will not be punished by legitimate authority (parents are the archetype for governance).
4. Questions may be answered with questions.
5. Answers lead to more questions.
6. There is always something more to learn.
Next, wherever practical, involve them in decision-making. Obviously you would start out with innocuous, mundane choices like where to eat dinner for a weekend outing - minimal stakes, a few well-known options, and a choice that could be made on a regular schedule. This is the basis for the Consumerist level of freedom - the lowest and least empowered: The ability to react emotionally/viscerally on what is desired among a set of options provided by others, and freely express the desire. In younger years, they will feel entitled to have their desires met once expressed, and may throw tantrums if the family consensus is for another option. But they will slowly come to have a vague appreciation for the next level of freedom, The Voter - the offering of a visceral personal desire for group consideration, and acceptance of its decision. At some point, if they are capable of it (not all people are), they will internalize the previous lessons and begin to preempt group consensus by making suggestions designed to win - i.e., thinking ahead to balance their needs with those of the group. This is the third level of freedom, The Citizen.
Beyond The Citizen are levels most people never reach, or else only do so erratically - and in developmental terms, they mostly start in adolescence: Namely, going beyond the immediate choice to seek higher-level choices and expand the diversity of options for existing ones - The Pioneer level of freedom. The first incling of this is when a kid first says "Let's go somewhere new," expressing dissatisfaction with the existing slate of options, and a willingness to take a risk on the unknown. Originally this will probably only imply a difference of scenery - e.g., the same food with subtle differences, and a somewhat different ambiance. Eventually they'll want a totally different menu. Choosing restaurants is a trivial microcosm of the broader nature being invoked, because - when cultivated to a high degree - the Pioneer democratic mentality expands the richness and health of a democracy.
At the highest level, Creator, you set yourself the task of creating new options out of raw possibilities: In restaurant terms, it would be like opening your own place and serving some weird fusion menu. Children will rarely if ever behave on that level, although sparks of it might appear in guided tasks like art classes or science projects. In food terms, they might decide on a lark to raid the pantry and cook their own bizarre concoctions for the family, but usually not much is learned from such experiences - they may take away the fact that they like or dislike cooking, what ingredients they like or dislike, etc., but the broader lesson that they can make something new out of the world they inherit is not one that most people will ever understand.
Over time, more substantive decisions can be opened for debate and voting. If practical, you may ask for consensus on logistical issues like whether to drive, walk, or take a bus - even in areas of the country where pedestrianism and public transit are loathed, kids would still find it fun to ride somewhere in a different mode. Most of the time they would choose convenience just like adults, but as long as the option of alternatives is presented to them, there is always a chance they'll choose otherwise - or maybe they would find they prefer walking or the bus, and have that as their default. It may be educational to present these options even when there would be some negative logistical consequences, such as taking too much time - don't just nix the option because you know it's a stupid idea: Let them make a stupid choice and find out why it doesn't work well. Try it, and you may find that it's you who were laboring under misconceptions.
Older kids will try to bully or boss around the younger ones in a vote, which lends itself to another educational opportunity: Protecting the integrity of the vote - a mutual obligation of the strong to respect the autonomy of the weak, and the weak to assert themselves regardless of their desire to conform or fear of illegitimate reprisal. How to explain these concepts to a child is an exercise I leave to actual parents. If a member of your family is just incapable of asserting themselves, then it becomes the obligation of the stronger members of the family to be their advocate and propose something by proxy that they might like - e.g., asking an older brother what he thinks his younger brother would like (which also serves as a test of the empathy and honesty of the older brother) - although it shouldn't guarantee selection of that option by the group.
Likewise, attempts to dictate the outcome through use of leverage - e.g., threats or bribery - should not be allowed, since it undermines the democratic process by making it a contest of power or wealth rather than of consensus. For instance, if one kid has a toy that he promises to let the other kid play with only if he agrees on the former's desired restaurant, that's bribery - that's use of wealth to dictate an election. Likewise, a bigger kid threatening to break the other's toys or hurt them would be poll intimidation. Either should result in disqualification from that day's decision. However, threatening to hold their breath unless they get their way is legitimate peaceful protest (assuming they're in good enough health that it's not dangerous), but shouldn't be allowed to determine the decision.
I have no idea how practical any of this advice is, if at all - I can only call it as I see it from memory and abstract consideration.
II. All for One and One for All
Even in adult social groups - in fact, especially among adults - there could stand to be a much greater emphasis on democratic values. There are two factors in small-group dynamics that need to be addressed, and they're basically the kernels of the problems we see on the larger scale: One, obviously, is the disproportionate domination of certain individual members over the group due either to having an Alpha personality or else just having a lot more resources than other members: Every non-democratic social format from monarchy to plutocracy is based on this ad hoc way in which small groups form and constitute. The other is the diffusiveness of the discontented - people's willingness to simply abandon groups they no longer feel represented by rather than being that representation in the group: This represents a kind of passive solipsism that is always running away, always conceding ground, and more malignantly, always putting the self over the group when the two are at odds. As opposed to the Alpha, we can call this the Omega personality.
Both forms of democracy-destroying personality are actuated by narcissism and disregard for other human beings - the main difference is in what they want from other people. The Alpha wants status and privilege within the group: They demand to be the Big Shot, the Cool Kid, the one whose favor is most sought and whose disfavor is most feared. The group and all its members are, to them, nothing more than a giant mirror for them to preen in front of - a piece of property that they prize, but not nearly as much as they prize its reflection on them. The Omega, by contrast, sees the group as hired help - an ad hoc conglomeration for convenience with no essential loyalties or obligations implied. They contribute the bare minimum needed for the group to remain convenient for them, abstain from functions they find inconvenient, and abandon it completely when it becomes personally unprofitable to remain even if they could benefit the group and whatever larger purpose it serves by doing so.
Basically, Alphas run with imperial armies, Omegas with bandit hordes. We can see the two pincers-like social forces eroding democracy in America in these two phenomena - the authoritarian narcissist, and the mercenary misanthrope. The fascist and the libertarian. The Bible-thumping preacher and the stock trader. The rest of the members of any group need to recognize how to harness these personality types for the benefit of the group's members rather than allowing itself to become a tool of some constituent's neurosis.
And because people are not all one way or another, we all would be wise to recognize the Alpha and Omega impulses in ourselves and fight them with a balanced recognition of the properly symbiotic relationship between individual and group. The Alpha sees the group as a singular, seamless object for them to possess and wield, and they have the most to gain from pushing the idea that The Group is some superior entity above its individual constituents - thus they can endlessly rationalize harming other members, since it's "for the good of the group," even if the result is that everyone who actually comprises the group but them is miserable.
This is akin to dictators who seize power claiming to be motivated by patriotism, or religious zealots who wreak havoc and horror claiming to be securing Paradise - they've adopted a quasi-schizophrenic frame of mind where the collective object has nothing whatsoever to do with their actions on the constituent elements. To this kind of person, annihilating every single molecule in your body should not necessarily mean they've killed you - by their perverse logic, they actually "saved" you from those molecules. It's the end result of dualism, and a fatal illusion when it rises to the level of social policy.
Meanwhile, the Omega sees the group as forage or carrion to pick at - some opportune source of whatever they're seeking, and into which they never put back more than they take. These are False Friends, sunshine patriots, and unreliable allies - quick to suspect the group of deception or falsehood, slow to forgive it when it disappoints them, their attitude is more that of a plantation slave overseer than a member of a team with common goals. A group, to them, is just a treacherous animal they're trying to yoke to their own ends, and they couldn't give less of a shit about its other members. An Omega may ham-handedly or incompetently try to impose their will on the group, only to be rebuffed or told to piss off by Alphas who see it as a personal challenge, at which point the former either retreats into sullen hostility (while still tagging along, if it remains convenient) or else leaves the group to find easier pickings elsewhere.
The problem with both is that they can't reconcile themselves to mutualism - everything has to be a one-sided relationship favoring them, or else they feel as though they're being somehow victimized. An Alpha who's not in charge will always have the nagging suspicion that the one above him/her isn't as worthy of it as they are, and the group is somehow less worthy of their leadership for failing to recognize it; an Omega who's not totally self-sufficient will always deeply resent others for the fact that they're forced to rely on them to some extent, and treat them bitterly when they fail to serve as well as the Omega would serve themselves. Take an Alpha far enough away from power, and they outright hate the group for failing to see their inherent superiority - i.e., they become an Omega. So we see how the Ouroboros of authoritarian power relationships closes upon itself.
For most people, the destructive social instinct is closer to Omega than Alpha - very few of us have any strong inclination to lead others, and we all tend at times to see the sociopolitical groups to which we belong (parties, cities, states, countries, etc.) as simply our servants rather than involving mutual relationships. Sometimes it's hard to see - and even harder to explain to someone else who doesn't see - that it simply isn't possible to have any kind of one-way relationship be sustainable. You can't keep demanding of a group, put back less than you take, and have that group continue to remain prosperous and effective. Conservatives don't understand this about the United States of America, and I think many progressives don't understand it about the Democratic Party - reward and punishment have nothing to do with it. You reap what you sow, and if all you sow are demands, all you'll reap is bitter disappointment.
Now, that said, "All for One and One for All" in this case means that every member of the group is for every other member, not for the abstract collective. This principle is identifiable in its most basic form on the level of the modern, love-defined family (as opposed to the Old World, institutional family) where care and loyalty are recognized as being ideally universal within the group rather than conditional or power-based. Similarly, in a small social group, there might be stronger emotional bonds between a subset, but the recognition that someone is part of a group should come with standard benefits and obligations that are universal to and from members. And it should be understood that both benefits and obligations are between the members, not between each member and some disembodied ideal of an institution.
What this means in practice is that abstract obligation to an institution - something that can easily lose its persuasiveness in the light of personal interest - should never take the place of obligations to each other in the networking sense. In other words, stop seeing groups as one thing, and instead see them for the webs they are. Your obligations as an American are to every other American, not to a flag, not to a name, and not to a piece of ground. Your obligations as a member of a bowling team isn't just to bowl the best you can, but to help coach each of the other members to bowl the best they can too. The same goes for your obligation as a Democrat, as a progressive, as a person who lives on the 400 block of Thusandsuch Street in So-and-So City, and whatever other group to which you belong either by choice or by random association. Unless you want to be treated like a tool, stop treating others like tools - and that includes groups of others.
Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country. --JFK
To this day, that quote continues to be misconstrued by both fascism-oriented conservatives and libertarians as harking to some abstract national state existing apart from its people, but from the context I would say that's not it at all: Kennedy was not telling people to sacrifice for a flag, or a name, or a piece of land, or even really an ideal like freedom - but for the reality of freedom in each of our lives: A mutual defense of rights, and mutual commitment to each other's prosperity. This statement is the triumph of true individualism, because it finally places it in the context in which it can survive and flourish, rather than the toxic moral, political, and social vacuum that libertarians prescribe.
So when you're with a group of friends, and they want to do something you don't - go with them anyway, because the group decided on it and you're part of it. Don't just flake off and do your own thing - make a conscious effort to be aware of, respect, and invest yourself into the group, even if no one else is that serious about it. In that case, then let it be you who makes it something solid - why not? Eventually, every group that means anything began with one person to whom it meant something. Let it be you who represents whatever it is you stand for in a group that otherwise doesn't represent you at all - why not? The worst they can do is throw you out, and then you can be done with the matter in good conscience - your duties are discharged, and they've done you a favor by proving themselves incompatible with you. Be the Change, and Change Ye Shall Have.
---
Later parts in this series will deal with the Workplace, Religion, and I'm sure many other areas ripe for democratization.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
03-01-2012, 08:37 AM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2012, 09:29 AM by Peter Lemkin.)
Many thousands is what I heard! Amazing they were even allowed to follow the official parade. The police were both in front and behind them in large numbers, but there were no incidents. Cindy Sheehan gave a great speech. Much longer versions can be found on the internet with the real sound and speeches afterwards.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Global Revolution TV Has Been Evicted From Their Brooklyn Production Space
Eviction notice via glassbeadcol on Twitter
Late in the night, word spread on Twitter that Global Revolution TV was being evicted from their Brooklyn production studio. Global Revolution has been a constant source for live video coverage of Occupy Wall Street events, both in NYC and across the country.
Global Revolution @GlobalRevLive
[ATTACH=CONFIG]3477[/ATTACH]
Global Revolution Studio's(Brooklyn)has been evicted by the #nypd. Forced to call in multiple departments to find legal reasons. #ows
3 Jan 12
The eviction notice seen above was later posted by @glassbeadcol on Twitter, and shows that the Department of Buildings has deemed the conditions in the building as being perilous to life. The text of the eviction notice is included below:
VACATE
DO NOT ENTER
The Department of Buildings has determined that conditions in this premises are imminently perilous to life.
This premises has been vacated and reentry is prohibited until such conditions have been eliminated to the satisfaction of the Department.
Violators of the Commissioner's Vacate Order are subject to arrest.
DATE: 01-02-12
ADDRESS: 13 Thames St
FLOOR: Entire first floor and cellar
By order of the Building Commissioner
The Buildings Information System shows that a previous partial vacate order has been served due to illegal use of the first floor of the building.
Video filmed shortly after the eviction via glassbeadian on Youtube
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
03-01-2012, 11:28 PM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2012, 09:49 AM by Peter Lemkin.)
CRUD REPORT January 3, 2012
Globalrevolution's OWS Livestream HQ in Bushwick is being evicted RIGHT NOW
We'll be updating this post as the story unfolds. Contact bill@superchief.tv for info
The Global Revolution collective have been covering Occupy Wall Street via live stream since the beginning. Originally based in Zuccotti Park, their base of operations have traveled as the Occupy movement's locations have changed. Most recently, their base of operations was established in Bushwick, Brooklyn at 15-1 Thames Street.
4:26PM Update: Those arrested have been taken to the 90th Precinct in Brooklyn located at Union St and Montrose Avenue.
4:11PM Update: A resident has confirmed 5 arrested, one of whom is Vlad of the livestream. He also claims that police damaged camera equipment upon entering the building Tuesday afternoon.
Last night around 8 PM police and fire marshals showed up, entered the space without a warrant and notified the residents that they would be evicted today. Today around 3 PM, 13-1 Thames, half of the split-residence first floor of the building was evicted and sealed. Police warned that they "may return" later today to evict 15-1, the Occupy HQ.
Residents are reporting to Superchief that they suspect the order to vacate is a targeted attack likely towards a Global Rev organizer Vlad, and his 4-month pregnant wife. They report that they were able to remove an 800 pound server containing their video archives and their important documents last night.
Police did not specifically issue an order to vacate last night. Rather, they are enforcing a year-old order to vacate which may or may not be selectively enforced now based on the Occupy presence in the space.
Residents of 13-1 are requesting people to come out and support them against eviction right now and tonight.
---------------------------------------------------
#GlobalRevEviction
Global Revolution HQ raided in Bushwick; 6 Arrested #GlobalRevEviction
January 3, 2012 Leave a Comment
"We can do all of this from laptops"Vlad Teichberg, GlobalRevolution.TV, after the #OccupyWallStreet and international live news protest channel was evicted from its NYC base
Global Revolution
@GlobalRevLive
At 2-3pm EST today, 6 arrests at GlobalRevolution.TV's NYC HQ. More info: twurl.nl/u8lu0w #GlobalRevEviction
4 Jan 12
UPDATES FROM GLOBAL REVOLUTION
The Global Revolution collective has been covering Occupy Wall Street via live stream since Day 1. Originally based in Zuccotti Park, Global Revolution's base of operations have relocated as the Occupy movement's locations have changed. Most recently, a base of operations was established in Bushwick, Brooklyn, at 13 Thames Street. On January 2nd, a notice was posted at the property stating that the production space is "imminently perilous to life," and adds, "Violators of the Commissioner's Vacate Order are subject to arrest." No one else in the building was evicted.
JAN 3RD, 9PM EST Six people in total were arrested at 13 Thames between 2-3pm on January 3rd and charged with Trespass, Obstructing Governmental Administration and Resisting Arrest. They are likely to remain in jail overnight.
THE DEVELOPING STORY
Democracy Now (Jan 3rd)
Global Revolution, Occupy Wall Street Live Streaming Source, Evicted from Brooklyn Production Studio
A prominent source for Occupy Wall Street's global outreach and live streaming was reportedly shut down by the New York City Police Department last night. Global Revolution, a website which has broadcast Occupy Wall Street coverage since the movement's inception in September, claims it received an eviction notice at its Brooklyn studios on Monday night. The notice states the production space is "imminently perilous to life," and adds, "Violators of the Commissioner's Vacate Order are subject to arrest."
The Atlantic (Jan 3rd)
Occupy Wall Street's Livestream Operators Arrested
Occupy Wall Street is in the middle of one of its day-long marches in New York Tuesday, protesting the National Defense Authorization Act, but for those following along on the Global Revolution livestream, the real action is happening in the broadcast studio itself. That's because police have apparently just raided the Brooklyn studio of Globalrevolution.tv and taken some of the project's key volunteers into custody.
The raid Tuesday follows a notice to vacate that police delivered to the Bushwick studio on Monday night. Victoria Sobel, a Global Revolution volunteer, said Vlad Teichberg and a guy named Spike, both of whom maintain the live feed aggregator, had been taken into custody by police, along with four or five others.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Occupy has a [now three-day-old] Social Media site of its own.....so one doesn't have to rely on Facebook et al. It can be found here http://occupii.org/
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
![[Image: inequality-page25_1.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-page25_1.png)
![[Image: inequality-page25_therichest280.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-page25_therichest280.png)
![[Image: inequality-p25_averagehouseholdincom.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-p25_averagehouseholdincom.png)
![[Image: inequality-page25_actualdistribwithlegend.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-page25_actualdistribwithlegend.png)
![[Image: inequality_mediannetworth_1.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality_mediannetworth_1.png)
[TABLE="width: 630"]![[Image: inequality-10richest_2.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-10richest_2.png)
![[Image: inequality_taxcuts_2.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality_taxcuts_2.png)
Congressional data from 2009. Family net worth data from 2007. Sources: Center for Responsive Politics; US Census; Edward Wolff, Bard College.![[Image: inequality-who%27swinning_3.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-who%27swinning_3.png)
![[Image: inequality-taxrate_3.png]](http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-taxrate_3.png)
![[Image: lossgain_0.jpg]](https://motherjones.com/files/images/lossgain_0.jpg)
![[Image: change-since-1979-600.gif]](https://motherjones.com/files/images/change-since-1979-600.gif)
![[Image: who_are_450_0.png]](https://motherjones.com/files/images/who_are_450_0.png)
![[Image: 400-top-taxpayers.png]](https://motherjones.com/files/images/400-top-taxpayers.png)
![[Image: dave80x95.jpg]](http://motherjones.com/files/imagecache/author-thumb-small/photo/dave80x95.jpg)
![[Image: des.m1227occupy005-450x286.jpg]](http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/des.m1227occupy005-450x286.jpg)
![[Image: storyimages_1297992078_memorialhigh.jpg_640x480_310x220]](http://images.alternet.org/images/managed/storyimages_1297992078_memorialhigh.jpg_640x480_310x220)
Photo Credit: PR Watch![[Image: spacer.gif]](http://images.alternet.org/images/site/spacer.gif)