Happy New Year!!

An old year ends, a new one begins, and I feel compelled to say something... something... to mark the occasion. Well, here goes nothing.

2011 marked the beginnings of what could easily be the biggest era that labor, the working class, environmentalists and other liberally minded people have seen since the 1930's. Democracy got a jump start across the Middle East and Northern Africa, after a bizarre election the people of Wisconsin stood up for labor rights, and the year closed with the Occupy Movement taking to the streets, courthouses and statehouses across the country. Occupiers in SC stared down the governor (and won) and Occupiers on the West Coast shut down or disrupted ports in support of labor rights.

Yes, there were a lot of victories for the Left in 2011, far more than the right or the 1% thought could be achieved. This string of victories can continue in 2012, but only if it is remembered that you can't lose the "fire" and that change is a process. It took right-wing nuts 40 years to get the US to the point we are today, so the correction will not happen in one or two years, but the seeds can be planted, and if they are nurtured, America can become a country of the people again.

So in 2012 if you like what happened in the past year get involved! Join a protest...hell...start a protest, write letters to the editor, get involved with a political campaign, run for office if you don't like the choices start a blog, start a website, start an Internet radio show...Do Something!

2012 can only be as good as we make it...and I know some of the activists in SC so I know it can be REAL good.

A new year brings new enthusiasm, new opportunities, and a clean slate. Do your part to fill that slate before "the powers that be" have the opportunity.

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!

Stein for Prez 2012!!!

Occupy: On a Road to Ruin?

I am writing this post in a little different style than usual. I will ask questions and bring up concerns about the Occupy Movement, and will give my opinions and observations on these issues.

This post may anger some Occupy supporters, this is not my intent. I am attempting to look at these issues objectively, and encourage anyone with differing opinions to comment. It is my hope that this post, along with articles and videos of others, will spark debate and in the end make the Occupy Movement stronger.

Organization-

The Occupation Movement has taken great pains to establish itself as a leaderless, grassroots movement. There is no national group and except for loose associations nothing at the state level. This of course means no need for a "chain-of-command", nor individual or small group of leaders.

Local groups are the life blood of the Occupy Movement. Most of these groups are organized similar to the Occupy Wall Street group. Decisions are made in General Assemblies using consensus methods. These GA's allow for universal participation and gives everyone a voice in the process.

Opinion- By defining itself as a leaderless grassroots organization, Occupiers have disarmed opponents, critics, and even the government of their most valuable weapon. It is impossible to paint locals in a negative light due to decisions made by "higher authority", or engage in personal attacks on a local leader.

As with everything there are also negatives to the Occupy structure. With no national or state oversight, autonomous locals are in a position to do great harm to the movement as a whole. This is especially true with vandalism and violence. Being human animals, violence can erupt when someone is injured or the victim of violence, which is just nature. But when violence is anticipated, planned for, and sometimes initiated by a protest group, what do you think the police reaction will be? If Occupiers know that violence will result in a police "crack down" and will give police a precedent to use around the country to shut down Occupy, why make violent plans in the first place?

Vandalism is another form of violence in the sense that people can get hurt, and personal property is destroyed. Unbelievably some see vandalism as a legitimate form of protest. Most often they are anarchists or their supporters, and the property destroyed belongs to the very people they are "fighting for". Try telling a shop owner who just put every penny he/she had and could borrow, into the business that you just destroyed, that they should join you. The vandal just sent them into bankruptcy and now the shop owner, their family, friends, church, schools etc..  are supposed to have a positive opinion of  "your" movement? Just as an aside, it is impossible to distinguish these "protesters" from the "troubled teens" who just took some of mommies Ativan and is out having some fun.

The leaderless aspect also opens the door to several other problems. One of the more notable situations involved Michael Moore. Most Occupiers were glad to have his celebrity on board; however, they questioned some of his message and were upset by the media portraying him as having significant influence on the OWS group.

It's not Moore's fault. Media will invariably gravitate to a "known" person, or a controversial viewpoint to report a story. Keeping this in mind, you add the only guidelines are consensus based decisions, and the fact you have Socialists, Anarchists, Unionists, LGBT communities, Anti-War groups, Women's Rights groups, supporters of a Palestinian homeland etc... each with their own spin, each with their own priorities, and each with their own definition of what Occupy really is, the press can write any story, from any angle, and be correct is someone’s opinion.

When regional or national media seeks a big picture report they typically go to the leadership or designated spokesperson, in OWS these jobs do not exist. This gives reporters the entire spectrum of Occupy sub-groups to choose from to create a story that their advertisers will find appealing, or that fits their own bias.

Platform/Program-

After Occupy Wall Street began on September 17th, it was about two weeks when they distributed their first press release. This release put forward over twenty points/grievances they wanted to address and were aimed exclusively at corporations, including banks and financial institutions. These grievances covered topics ranging from Weapons of Mass Destruction to generic drugs, from torture to recalling faulty products.

The reader of these grievances will note they are generic statements, showing the obvious intent of attracting support across all political ideologies. It is not irrational to believe that members of all political parties could abide by, or live with, each of these general statements. But the devil is in the details, hence the question the OWS must face: What solutions are proposed, how will these proposals be put into action, and what issues may be added in the future?

Opinion- The answer to Occupy's platform or program of action is a difficult one:

Labor Unions should be seen as a natural ally; however in states such as SC, NC, or GA, such an alliance will alienate many within the 99%. The working-class of the south has a long history of indoctrination believing the lies corporations have spewed regarding Labor Unions. It will take years of education and change to see the south alter generations of ingrained belief.

Anti-War groups are another group found in most Occupy encampments, but most Occupiers and their supporters seem hesitant to include "anti-war" language officially into the movement. The reasons I have been given are that it might cause the loss of support from some Republicans who see the wars as necessary and possibly a deal breaker.

In order to bring an end to corporate discrimination toward the LGBT community, Occupy will have to support equality and equal rights for everybody, not just everybody who is straight. This is going to cost them the support of the far right, and even some moderates who consider the issue a deal-breaker.

Occupy brings up the death penalty, referring to it as murder. It is a good start, but this is an issue that the government must change within itself, the corporations participation is only that which the government allows. It is the judicial system, not the corporations that continues to send (sometimes innocent) men and women to the gallows. It should stop, Occupy should take a stand, and again will lose some right wingers in the process.

Occupy raises the concern that corporations 'block alternative forms of energy', and later mentions environmental concerns being tossed aside for profit. The only way to address both of these questions is for government to support/subsidize on the positive side, and regulate on the negative side. The solution will not be palatable to Republicans and there will be a loss of more support. Also, if the government actions get the right spin, a huge number of Americans will fight against these changes because it will cause some price increases, at least in the short term.

This is a small sample of the grievances, and as I pointed out taking a stand on the issues would cost Occupy supporters from right-leaning Democrats, to far-right Republicans, from Tea Party christians to Libertarians. One group I intentionally left out of the platform section are the Anarchists. The reason being there seems to be as many sub-groups as there are Anarchists. Those who I have known are free market/libertarian theorists, others I have read online range the spectrum all the way to Socialist/Communist theorists. Not being able to get a true definition, and one that won't change with the person giving it, I would say Occupy will gain or lose support of individual Anarchists according to the issue and the proposed solution.

The Future of the Occupy Movement?-

One reason I took up this topic is due to a video that made the rounds, 'The OWS will fail-Here's why'. The videographer made a few excellent points, but not enough to convince me that OWS would fail. After spending time on the subject I can't suggest doom, but there are some gloomy days ahead.

1- The lack of organization will cost them. There is no larger organization to support "sputtering" local groups, no clearinghouse for ideas, resources, speakers, etc... In other words a grassroots organization with no chance and no intention of filling out into a yard.

2- Decision making at some point, will need to be addressed. Consensus building works well in smaller groups, but if Occupy grows or there is unification of several smaller groups, another system should be in place and in practice.

If Occupy eventually narrows its primary activities to one day protests, there will be a necessity for leadership and a spokesperson. I realize this suggestion will get a hostile reaction, but, if there is no longer a physical occupation it's naive to believe a representative number of people for every GA. It is also naive to believe a journalist is going to "track down" a spokesperson. Every group should have someone available to act for the group, speak for the group, and send announcements in support of the group. It is vital to stay ahead of the curve.

3- The video referenced at the start of this section cautioned Occupy to limit their platform to as few as three items, with one of those, being the somewhat divisive anti-war plank. I see Occupy's future begin with acceptance.

Occupy must embrace the fact their agenda is not only liberal, it is liberal left. Their primary supporters come from the left. To implement even the generic agenda published by OWS, there will have to be extensive government regulation and intervention. To think "conservatives", "tea party folks" or even moderate Republicans will accept, much less support, these measures is illogical.

If the Occupy Movement is to continue and succeed they must set their agenda, they must frame the discussion, they must internally distribute their talking points, they must take the initiative and the lead when joining actions with other groups, and they must be aggressive when negotiating with anyone.

4- From day one, the Occupy Movement began the fight to keep itself non-partisan, fearing takeover attempts by the Democratic Party and their allies. The Occupiers (depending on the local) excluded or frowned upon other political parties as well. With this, is Occupy making a fatal mistake?

The distance they put between themselves and the Democrats is a necessity; however, by discounting all electoral politics and reform measures they may bring, they have greatly limited their options. This attitude will resonate with the Anarchists and others who feel politics will only let us down again, the masses of America are waiting for proposed solutions, and steps to achieve them even if they are incremental.

There are two political parties which Occupy could align with and would not have to sacrifice principles, nor make concessions to, the Green Party and the Socialist Party. An alliance with one or both would provide Occupy with a political arm to seek reform while continuing direct action.

5- The Occupy Movement does face some opposition. The media, after the initial stories, largely ignore the local groups unless something "newsworthy" occurs, and generally this will portray Occupy in a negative light. But it is primarily opposition by omission. At the regional and national level it is generally better coverage from the Occupiers standpoint, but it does little good if local folks are not told that they too have an encampment they could visit or support.

Another opponent of Occupy is attrition. How long is someone willing to camp out in the cold, rain, ice and snow? When individuals cause a situation, or when a faction of people rebel against the majority of the group, how strong is the group that is left? When you have been protesting for months and have seen no tangible change, a large part of America are not aware you are still there, and even less can tell what your objectives are, how high can the groups morale be?

Finally the main opponent of Occupy, the government and their agents, the police. Ultimately their actions could be terminal for the Movement. Several encampments have been destroyed and others have cleared, while at the same time, numerous cities and states around the country are debating laws that limit the actions of an Occupy group, including where and for how long tents can be set up.

Police action, depending on the state or region, has been on occasion heavy handed and in some cases brutal. There is little doubt that as time marches on, nerves will become frayed and frustration will set in, and as that happens police crackdowns will begin in earnest. In this case confrontations will increase, and police methods will escalate meaning more confrontations etc...etc... As the threat of violence and/or arrest increases older people, people with youngsters, and people who can't afford arrest for whatever reason will curtail their participation. As the crowd thins, police tactics will become more aggressive, as there will be little risk of "collateral damage", and everyone on site will be seen as an arrest target.

Will the Occupy Movement Fail?

Sadly I believe it will fail as it exists today. It's participants and supporters seem to believe change can happen overnight, it doesn't. It took the right wing nuts 40 years to get us where we are today; Occupy has been going for about 4 months. No, there is a lot of work to do that will take dedication, action, perseverance, and most important the Will that comes from knowing your mission is just.