The dilemma OWS faces concerning next years elections

[hack89]

If they can't convince Obama or any other politician that they can influence next years election in a direct and meaningful way, then they will get nothing more than platitudes. Because every politician's world view right now is filtered through the lens of "will this help or hurt me get elected."

Everyone understands the root cause of OWS's anger - it is the honest anger of a society ignored by their ruling elite. The issue is that everyone has a different solution on how to fix those problems - that is what the election will be all about. The dilemma OWS faces is how do they influence those elections. How are their ideas and demands presented to the electorate and by whom. They fear being co-opted by the political parties - then just who do they intend to carry their message into the political arena? There will be an important election next November - just how does OWS plan to influence them?

[Vincardog]

1. The problem is that we have a " ruling elite " the process is corrupt and serves only the .001%. .

OWS is pointing out this problem. ITs' job is not to enable the process.

[hack89]

7. So how does OWS effect real change?

I don't see the method they intend to use to bring about change.

[Vincardog]

11. Do you believe that POLITICS is the ONLY mechanism for CHANGE?

[hack89]

13. Lets hear your viable alternative.

how should OWS proceed?

[Vincardog]

18. OWS should continue to grow until it can call a WORLD WIDE STRIKE. SHUT IT ALL DOWN.

[hack89]

25. And why do you assume OWS has that kind of support?

there are lots of cities and states where there is no occupy movement.

[Vincardog]

29. there are lots of cities and states where there is no occupy movement. YET. What part of Continue to

Grow don't you get? If the world is not ready to shake off the Economic Royalists yet; it will be in time

[hack89]

43. But they are not growing.

what is going to turn around their current slow down? There are many occupy sites that are quickly fading into oblivion. Occupy Providence in my home state is a perfect example. Totally irrelevant in a blue.state with a horrible economy

[Vincardog]

49. If they are totally irrelevant why are you so worried about their desired action??

[hack89]

51. Because I want them to be relevant. nt

[bhikkhu]

19. The GOP sweep of the mid-terms brought real change

...which is the example most relevant to the OP, I think.

on edit - the most immediate real change following that was the compromise that extended the bush tax cuts, which was unthinkable just a few months before. I know every thinks now that was all Obama - they forget the "GOP mandate" of the mid-terms...how a nation of people could decide to give a majority to asshats promising little but low taxes for the rich is beyond me, but I'd look at the next elections to see whether anything is going to change.

[firehorse]

44. They are successful just the way they are... leaderless and w no hiearchy

I'm really thinking those who post here wanting the movement to have leaders and pick politicians are right wing infiltrators.

The tea party picked 2 leaders. One got absorbed into the bigger republican base. The other wanted to stay a 3rd party. Once they created leaders and hierarchies it caused internal fracturing. If the OWS starts emulating failure methods of other movements or politics they are doomed.

It's successful the way it is, as every occupy movement springs up and brings awareness giving birth to more occupations. The organic method in the way it is currently operating is a brilliant success. They are the news now. They are whats going on. Politicians are reacting to them, the reactions by the police and mayors are bringing on more identification with the rest of the 99%.

Only a 1%er would want this movement to be contained with leaders.

[hack89]

50. How are you define success?

what change do you expect OWS to bring about?

[firehorse]

52. the silent majority are already talking, its a large growing movement, that makes it a success

I disagree in the premise of your post and how you frame it because its regressive. For instance even "change" is the meme from Obama's last election.

We tried that route of standing behind a guy who claimed to want big change, it didn't work. The voting system is corrupt, broken, every politician has a price to be bought and paid for. Congress is part of the 1%. Election fraud is rampant. Every politician has a cheap price.

What they are doing now is successful, the silent majority has woken up. Go down to an occupation. You will see "normal" people out there with signs, guys in suits, retired cops, nurses, elderly, moms. Each one of those people rattle their neighbors, friends and family out of their coma, spreading the message and internalizing.

The 99% are waking up. The movement can't be squashed. It's in the news, people are moving their money out of the big banks, the politicians are reacting like ping pong balls exposing how out of touch they are with the 99%, the mayors and the police are freaking out the masses. Its a success!

[hack89]

54. People at the occupy sites are a self selected minority

there is no indication that they enjoy widespread support when it comes to radically changing the system. Yes, many in America are angry - but most expect the President and Congress to fix it.

[firehorse]

57. The volunteer protestors are like congressmen, each representing thousands in 99%

I think if you went down there, you would get it.

You would experience the impact that for every sign you identify with, and then seeing that sign photographed thousands of times throughout the day, and knowing that sign's message will spread to hundreds of thousands of newspapers and monitors and facebook pages, you would realize that being down there has more and immediate impact in terms of quickly getting a message across to the higher ups -- than any bill in legislation.

If you actually went down you would realize that there are things going on even beyond the signs, you would experience the behind the scenes actions planned by college professors, nurses, retired cops, students, etc.

You would get a feeling of doing civic minded service that goes beyond the self, and its contagious.

If you actually go down and participate, it will change you, and that is where the change starts, from within, one person at a time, one voice at a time, one occupation at a time each growing and spreading.

[hack89]

63. I don't want to feel good

I rather continue what I am doing - working hard on election campaigns to get Democrats in local office. We have real problems to fix and a real election next year.

I don't want to feel good - I want tangible results that are good for me, my family and my community.

[rucky]

2. Politicians face the dilemma, not OWS.

They can't throw money or propaganda at the issues (maybe propaganda), so what are they going to do?

[hack89]

8. If OWS is not a viable threat to the politicians then the politicians have no dilemma

they will continue as they have been. Politicians don't care about unfocused anger, they care about votes. If OWS can't deliver votes then they are not a factor.

[firehorse]

45. exactly +1

[msongs]

3. OWS is not about influencing elections. a president with no leadership skills is irrelevant nt

[hack89]

6. So OSW is all about righteous unfocused anger and not political change?

or is that change to come about through some means other than elections?

[msongs]

23. OWS is not about endorsing the lies of a particular candidate who is being an opportunist

it would be a big mistake for OWS as an entity to endorse specific parties and candidates when it is obvious that candidates campaign as one person to get votes then govern as a totally different person after being elected.

[hack89]

26. So what are they about when it comes to elections?

sitting on the sidelines doing what? How do they influence the elections?

[sabrina 1]

40. They are about taking the money out of politics.

They will keep delivering the message that is the root cause of all of our other problems. As the movement grows, more people will understand that and will begin to start to look at which of the candidates they are being asked to support takes the most money, or any money, from Wall Street.

They do not have to get involved in party politics. Any candidate who is taking huge amounts of money from Wall Street is not going to be working for the people.

What could happen, now that this message is being delivered, is that a real Progressive eg, could take advantage of it. S/he could, without spending a lot of money, send the message out that her/his opponent takes x amount of money from Wall St. while s/he will not do so. Good progressives can make this a real issue of the campaign, Wall Street candidates can be challenged as to why they are taking this money.

People have to think for themselves. If they want Wall Street Candidates, then don't complain when they work for Wall Street, not for them.

Because until those Wall STreet candidates are removed from our system, nothing can even begin to change.

The focus on this now makes it more possible for people who in the past could not compete with the money from Wall street, to make it such a problem for Wall Street's choices, that they should now be on the defensive about it.

Good candidates, eg, could take out ads listing the donations of their opponents and telling the public 'I will not be taking money from Wall street and I challenge my opponent to make a pledge that s/he will not do so either.

The Democratic Party could back them up also. Meantime people will be hearing a lot about this problem from OWS. An opportunity is being created for those who don't take Wall Street money.

One thing OWS could do is take out ads themselves in major newspapers, challenging candidates to refuse Wall Street Money, without getting into the candidates or the parties.

[hack89]

68. So should all of us involved in political campaigns stop right now?

shall we withhold our support from all Democrat candidates? I enjoyed working for the Obama campaign last time - I was looking forward to doing it again.

[RoccoR5955]

4. What if they run their own candidate?

If they run their own candidates in congress, senate and the president, they could influence things even more than if they had a nod from any one party.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hack89]

10. That's what I want - they cannot ignore the political process.

because there is no other way to bring about change.

[Vincardog]

15. So you believe that politics is the only answer. Do you also believe that the existing political sys

system allows for any REAL change?

[hack89]

17. In the absence of a viable alternative from you - yes. nt

[jwirr]

41. For me politics at the moment is a holding pattern that allows us

to hold what we have until OWS has the time they need to get things like public financed elections into place. I do not believe that this can be done before the next election so I expect people to help hold this line. I am not for handing the whole ballgame back to the rethugs. They are all failures. My Democratic senators are trying to do the best they can and I want to get rid of craavack who was elected in 2010. The thing is I do not need OWS to endorse my candidates. I already know who I am going to vote for. I just want them to encourage people to vote.

[Telly Savalas]

70. Nothing changes until the rules change.

And the rules don't change until the people who make the rules are replaced, which is a political process.

If everyone who wants to make the world a better place believes that change can't happen through the ballot box and thus refuses to participate in the political process, then we're left with only the assholes choosing the people who get to make laws. That won't work.

And this isn't to say that folks should STFU and blindly follow whatever candidates are selected by the insiders of the Democratic Party in their precinct. Quite to the contrary, a radical overhaul is needed in the process that we as an electorate use to choose those who are supposed to represent us.

When voters show up at the poll on the first Tuesday of a November, they need to be confronted with a ballot that has the names of thoughtful and able people ready to represent their interests. And they need to be supplied with accurate information to support the decision they make in the voting booth. It's up to us to make this happen. If we can't find the public servants, muster the popular support, and maintain the level of organization for this, then how would we launch a meaningful effort to replace the system altogether? Such a revolution would require these same ingredients to be successful.

[mythology]

42. Is there anything to suggest that the OWS movement has

enough support to be able to run meaningful candidates at the federal level? It costs a lot of money and even the largest OWS protests don't generate the money for that.

I think they would be better off running in Democratic primaries at the local level and gain influence that way. For example, gaining control over a local school board or city council and working to create better situations at that level. For example, I recently heard about an approach in Norway where instead of buying school textbooks, the schools worked to purchase the rights to the textbook and turned it into an open source project to make the textbooks applicable across a wider range of student achievement levels.

To run as independent candidates in a three way first past the post election, you will often wind up with your least favored candidate winning. For example see what happened in Maine's gubernatorial election which resulted in the current idiot. In an ideal world, we'd have instant run-off or proportional representation, but we don't have either of those in most states.

[RoccoR5955]

48. What about Congressional and Senatorial elections?

They did it Vermont, and they got Bernie Sanders. This was a great accomplishment, and could happen all over the nation, if WE THE PEOPLE are active, and vote in our best interests.

[TheKentuckian]

9. What in the world makes you think that the election will be about how our problems will be fixed?

The meltdown is now years in the rearview and neither of the corrupt, captured, and distracting major parties has made any effort to even begin to fix any such thing.

I'll grant that Democrats have attempted to make efforts that allow one to suspend disbelief provided they pay surface attention or believe in trickle down Reaganomics but there is a systemic refusal to even admit much less work toward root causes.

Neither party is a useful conduit of OWS and both are committed to policies that are destructive to the needs of the 99%. Throwing in with an unreformed Democratic party is worse than doing nothing because it means the energy is wasted on a false flag mission.

[hack89]

12. How do you envision OWS changing the system?

there will be an election next year. If OWS ignores it, just what should they do to bring about change? What's the next step?

[MedleyMisty]

31. Continuing to get beaten in the streets is a good next step

That's how things go. The state uses excessive violence against peaceful protesters, apathetic uninformed people suddenly start giving a shit when they see women in their 80s being pepper sprayed and veterans being put in the hospital and people in wheel chairs being tear gassed and students who are sitting on the ground being pepper sprayed like they were roaches, more people start talking about the issues, and more people are inspired to join the protests.

So the protests grow and become more radicalized and militant, and the state uses even more violence to put them down.

Eventually people are forced to take sides, and those in authority with a conscience begin to defect. It's already happened in Oakland. Three members of Mayor Quan's administration resigned over the treatment of the occupiers. There are reports of cops crying as protesters in NYC sang the national anthem, and a former Philadelphia police captain was arrested in uniform. One of the protesters beaten and bloodied at Zucotti was a NYC city councilperson, and the city council was involved in the November 17th action.

As they said at one of the Oakland general assemblies I watched on livestream - "Revolutions happen when the police and military join the people."

Check out the Occupy Twitter accounts for the branches of the military and the OccupyPolice twitter account. We already have a fair few of them on our side, and as the 1% escalates in their brutality more will jump the fence.

Revolution as an idea has gone fairly mainstream. Even back in Wisconsin, the farmers who came on their tractors to support the people who occupied the Capitol referred to it as the second American revolution on their Facebook page. And now on Twitter people use the hashtag #usrevolution, and discussions about what we want to do post revolution are commonplace. My favorite so far is an Anonymous member saying that after the revolution we will nationalize the telecoms and make internet access an inalienable human right. :)

So yeah. Occupy isn't interested in working within a sick and evil and corrupt system that is doing its best to kill off the planet.

[Vincardog]

14. Bingo "Throwing in with an unreformed Democratic party is worse than doing nothing because it means

the energy is wasted on a false flag mission." OWS does not have to come up with the solutions. Their job is to get enough people to recognize the PROBLEMS.

[roseBudd]

21. The problem is there are no easy fixes, this is literally a Humpty Dumpty FUBAR....

"all the king's horses and all the king's men, could not put Humpty back together again."

That being said letting the nihilists in the GOP and their economically illiterate Joe Sixpack voters have the steering wheel is suicide for the 99%

[roseBudd]

16. I disagree, the difference between FDR & Obama is FDR became POTUS 3 yrs into...

the Great Depression. FDR had a huge mandate from the people.

Who were starving. As bad as the Great Recession is, we have the social safety net that the mandate the Great Depression gave FDR, and subsequent Democrats to implement have blunted the effects of great economic upheaval.

Obama became POTUS mere months after the credit & liquidity crisis of Sept. 08 sent the global economy into a tailspin. The opposition came out swinging the day after the election. They are funded by the 1% and have spent decades developing and investing in their megaphone.

POTUS besides being commander in chief, is but a bully pulpit and a veto pen. There is no magic POTUS

OWS's biggest role is to be the mandate we failed to follow through with after we won a landslide election in 2008.

We must learn from our mistakes.

[hack89]

22. Politicians care about votes not mandates

in an age of low voter turn out, the only people that matter to politicians are those who actually vote. If OWS can't channel this "mandate" into votes then they are wasting their time. I want them to succeed - which means I am very frustrated by their unwillingness to engage in the political arena.

[roseBudd]

28. It just seems that way because the hard core activists are pleased with their hard coreness...

I am a supporter of my city's version of OWS but I disagree with their obsession with the tactic of getting arrested for being in an "urban park" that is a strip between two lanes right below the bedroom windows of urban apt dwellers. As a homeowner who lives among college students I get how annoying campers outside people's bedroom windows are.

I also get how the costs of the police overtime come off as a black mark against the occupiers focus on being where a sign clearly says no one is to be after 10PM.

I know I am not the only local supporter who finds the hard core activist's tactics to be somewhat silly.

Camping in a park is not occupying a lunch counter or refusing to give up a seat on a bus.

best thing i have read recently on OWS tactics

http://beyondthechoir.org/diary/117/the-tactic-of-occupation-the-movement-of-the-99

[fasttense]

20. The whole system may have to come down before

OWS is finished.

"It is the honest anger of a society ignored by their ruling elite."

Really is that the problem? Is the real problem the fact that we have a ruling elite? That elite is made up of the 1% or bought and sold by the 1%. A ruling elite is NOT a democracy. It is an oligarchy. How can 99% of the people participate in an oligarchy? They can't. OWS is bring attention to this oligarchy. It is going to have to come down before we have a real democracy again.

Voting or putting up a candidate that will be elected with mysterious voting machines with no accountability for their accuracy will not solve the problem.

Our government is corrupted to the core. Everyone can be bought off from Supreme Court justices to lowly state representatives. Wave enough money in front of their faces and they will do your bidding even if it is illegal. No one is held accountable for their crimes, not the torturer, not the war criminal, not the con artist, not the person who commits fraud for wealth, not the cop who abuses his power, not the businessman or CEO who steals their workers labor by under paying them, not the governor who ignores his citizens and shovels the wealth of a state to the Koch brothers. The whole system is a putrid, oozing sore. It is sick and disgusting.

It has to come down before it can be rebuilt.

[hack89]

24. Short of violent revolution, exactly how do you do that?

and do you really thing America is ready for such a revolution?

[roseBudd]

30. The world's largest economy being tore down would impact the entire globe...

Macroeconomics is not simple stuff

[MedleyMisty]

35. The 99% of the entire globe want capitalism to end

Change is always stressful. I think I'd rather take the stress of a global revolution against capitalism over the only other choice - the stress of human civilization falling apart under the pressure of the 1% and the planet becoming more and more inhabitable as they exploit and destroy it for profit.

[roseBudd]

55. no they don't, despite your assumption that starvation is no big woop

[MedleyMisty]

32. Why do pro status quo people always go straight to "violent revolution"?

Have you ever studied Gandhi or King? Do you know anything about nonviolent resistance?

[TheKentuckian]

61. Because when you have won the last flippable heart and mind and still face an intractable enemy

the strategies break down. Non- violence in the present circumstances can only be a means to an end, which is to accumulate support within the population. It will not topple the system alone, there are no better angels to appeal to that hold sway over the predator class. There is no one to shame them to and there is no way to shrink support to small enough of a number that they cannot take advantage of their technological, artillery, air, and naval power superiority.

Let's face it, they can depopulate with a rather free hand and still have enough pawns to play with. The 1% will maintain the allegiance of at least 20% (and likely more), they cannot be shamed into reasonableness and they will not relinquish their power, in the end it will have to be taken and they will be vicious and relentless in holding on to it.

[hack89]

65. You misunderstand - I reject violent change out of hand

I am looking for viable, non-violent methods to change America that OWS can use. I support the ballot box. MLK was also very much a supporter of the political process - he worked very hard lobbying politicians to support civil rights legislation. His supporters were mired in the minutia of politics - lobbying, voter drivers, canvassing, get out the vote efforts. If it was good enough for MLK, it should be good enough for OWS.

[fasttense]

33. I'm not sure how OWS envisions it but

following the pattern after the 1st RepubliCON Great Depression and the civil rights movement it will mean non-stop strikes, non-stop disruption of social and political events, constant marches, constant occupations of public areas, constant disruption in transportation and civic life.

You never hear about all the protests and strikes during the Great Depression. You think FDR acted because he intuitively knew the problems? He acted because of constant socialist revolts, striking union workers, bread line marches, and protesting, cheated veterans.

In another post I predicted a war starting in one of the austerity punished nations. The ingredients for a civil, followed by a world, war are there. 1. A once prosperous working class forced into poverty and degradation, destroying hope for the future, destroying dreams. 2. A barely surviving poorer class forced into abject poverty. 3. High unemployment for twenty somethings, so that young men and women have nothing to do.

What seemed to me that was missing (that Germany had before WWII, that led to the election of Hitler) was a large population of returning military veterans. But it just dawned on me what nation has all four of these things - The US.

No, I don't think the US is quite ready for a revolution yet. If our ruling elite actually make changes. If they do NOT go down the road to austerity like our neoliberal frenzied European brothers and sisters, then OWS may just fade away. But I really think our society will continue to cater to the 1% and OWS will increase their level of protests and activity. I give it a year, maybe after the 2012 elections, if nothing improves, there will be an escalation of protests, strikes and marches.

As John F. Kennedy famously said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." I take it a step further. Those who ignore peaceful protests guarantee violent revolutions. I do believe our current system is set up to ignore the current peaceful protests.

[hack89]

66. MLK and the civil rights movement were deep into the political process

MLK was very much a supporter of the political process - he worked very hard lobbying politicians to support civil rights legislation. His supporters were mired in the minutia of politics - lobbying, voter drives, canvassing, get out the vote efforts. If it was good enough for MLK, it should be good enough for OWS.

OWS should push real hard for increased turnout in the next election - they can't not participate and then turn around and protest the results.

[bvar22]

56. The Populist Reforms sweeping across Latin America...

...are nothing short of near bloodless revolutions.
They have successfully taken their countries back from the 1%.
They have given us the Blue Print for CHANGE.

"The worst enemy of humanity is U.S. capitalism. That is what provokes uprisings like our own, a rebellion against a system, against a neoliberal model, which is the representation of a savage capitalism. If the entire world doesn't acknowledge this reality, that nation states are not providing even minimally for health, education and nourishment, then each day the most fundamental human rights are being violated."
----Bolivian Reform President Evo Morales

When the Working Class & The Poor realize WE have more in common with each other
than we have in common with the 1% and their puppets leading BOTH Political parties,
THEN we can have CHANGE.
OWS is doing an Outstanding Job of spreading THAT message.


The successful Populist reforms in Latin America give me HOPE for The World!
VIVA Democracy!
I hope we get some here soon!

[Vincardog]

27. I believe somebody is trying to force everyone else into a political box. SOmebody is not you Fast

[hack89]

47. I am a practical person - I look for practical solutions

so for me the logical question is "now what". If I don't hear a practical proposal I move on.

[shraby]

34. Maybe...just maybe they plan to influence the elections by

opening people's eyes to what is going on in the political/banking spectrum. Many people don't have a clue cause they are apolitical, or working too many hours to have time to see it, or don't care. Awareness is fully half the battle.
All the above do watch news on t.v. If they see the protestors being abused as they are, it might just set some light bulbs of enough to ask why and what is going on.

[Morning Dew]

37. +1

[hack89]

53. Half the country supports the police

or are you saying that all those repukes and tea baggers are not really that much different than you and me? Somehow I doubt that is the case - people that can support Bush and Cheney will not have any problem with a bunch of "hippies " being beaten.

[firehorse]

60. Are you saying that the 89 year old woman pepper sprayed is a "dirty hippy" that meme is archaic

You are quoting Newt Gingrich? Really? Lol.

Even republicans in the 80's and 90's thought Newt was a joke. He's an embarrassment to his party. Google his lies. His archaic 1960's jargon exposed how out of touch he is with the 99%.

Even if you watch non Faux Tee-Vee, its all about people losing their mc mansions to foreclosures and are having to rely on foodstamps to get through Thanksgiving. The fallen middle class and newly poor, are not buying into Newt's out dated cold war propaganda.

[hack89]

67. I am not quoting Newt

and you really think all those Tea Baggers give a rats ass about cops beating up OWS protesters? Where were they when Bush and Cheney were killing thousands of Iraqis?

[MilesColtrane]

36. "just how does OWS plan to influence them?"

I don't think OWS has a plan to directly influence the elections.

The plan seems to be that the protesting will generate a general zeitgeist that will sweep honest politicians into office and reform into the U.S. code.

[Telly Savalas]

71. As someone entrenched in the "change ultimately comes from the ballot box" camp

I'm totally down with that.

Change needs to come from the ballot box, but it won't come so long as radical rightwing ideas dominate the political dialogue.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. Non-participation in a corrupt system can be very influential.

The problem is for the politicians. They have to convince the people that participation is for their own good rather than for the good of the politicians and their masters.

[tcaudilllg]

39. Wrong

Forget Obama -- he becomes irrelevant as soon as his 2nd term begins. Focus on the congress, which is taken precinct by precinct. There is a rule taught in communication courses: the loudest, meanest voice prevails. Particularly in the Democratic Party. Get a group together and take your local monthly party meeting by storm -- yell and scream and make it clear that unless Dem pols support Occupy, the Republicans can count on victory in Nov.

That's right: we need to threaten an organized sabotage of the entire Democratic political position if we are to reclaim this party.

[Vincardog]

46. IF three OWS people showed up at my local "democratic party" function, they would be the majority

[tcaudilllg]

62. Then maybe you have some work to do.

Organize a group of Democrats and declare that YOU ARE the party. Then see what happens.

[Zorra]

58. We don't fear anything, because the essence of who we are

usually recognizes the forces of insincerity and deceitfulness instantly.

If something is not transparent, we bring it into the light, and examine it closely, in a place where there is no possible place for ego, hidden agendas, or bad intentions to hide.

How we influence the elections is not our concern.

We are a direct democratic movement.

If that does not help Democrats in the election, the fault lies within the Democratic party, not OWS.

[philly_bob]

59. Hack89 you don't get it.

I would just as soon see OWS ignore electoral politics until the Democratic conventions...

[hack89]

69. Why then? And what exactly should they do after the convention? nt

[SidDithers]

64. K&R. Good questions in this thread...nt

Sid