Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by lmnop on Thu Oct 20, 2011 4:15 pm

Actually, Ken, I have been banned from voting in the polls on this forum. And the first time I tried to join the group my request was denied. It was only after the second try that I was accepted. Others might not be persistent.

"OWS" stands for Occupy Wallstreet. If you want to Occupy the Internet, maybe call it that instead?

In my understanding, "occupy" means a physical occupation.

Also, of course you would have to bring it to a GA to get approval and everyone on this forum would be welcome to participate in that GA. You can also tweet into the GA.

My main point being, if you are going to be part of the movement, and use the name of a specific branch of that movement, be careful that you are actually representing the voice of that branch of the movement. OWS is located in NYC. Occupy DC is in DC, Occupy Oakland is in Oakland and so on.

If you are from all over, then Occupy the Internet seems like the most accurate. Of course, y'all would have to decide that.

Just have integrity in being what you say you are, is my main point. Are you occupying Wallstreet? Physically?
If not, why are you called OWS? think about it.


lmnop

Posts : 20
Join date : 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by kefranklin on Thu Oct 20, 2011 5:19 pm

Lots of things, all at once. Firstly

>>Actually, Ken, I have been banned from voting in the polls on this forum. And the first time I tried to join the group my request was denied. It was only after the second try that I was accepted. Others might not be persistent.<<

If you are talking to me, my name is Kathleen. I'm not insulted, I'm just not sure if you are talking to me or Ken who is a member here, but not me and I don't think involved in this discussion.

Secondly I don't think anyone has been 'banned' from the polls. I realize the computer spit that word out at you, but if you were banned you wouldn't be here. And you wouldn't have gotten in a second time. We grew SO FAST there were technical glitches. To my knowledge, no one has been banned.

Yes, it would be a shame if we lost anyone over a glitch. We do want committed people who don't give up on the first obstacle.


>>"OWS" stands for Occupy Wallstreet. If you want to Occupy the Internet, maybe call it that instead?<<

The media derided the movement because if there were 100 people in the plaza it stood for 95-100 different things. I reject your premise that you own it, define it and are the law on it. Moving on.


>>Also, of course you would have to bring it to a GA to get approval and everyone on this forum would be welcome to participate in that GA. You can also tweet into the GA.<<

The inference here is WE ARE IN CHARGE. A premise also rejected by, well, the world.


>>My main point being, if you are going to be part of the movement, and use the name of a specific branch of that movement, be careful that you are actually representing the voice of that branch of the movement. OWS is located in NYC. Occupy DC is in DC, Occupy Oakland is in Oakland and so on.<<

Partly true, partly not. Occupy DC, for instance, is an easy nomer for organizing DC based groups. However I don't think they would check with you before leaving the border. Again you posit WE ARE IN CHARGE, again I respond ONLY OF YOURSELVES.


>>Just have integrity in being what you say you are, is my main point. Are you occupying Wallstreet? Physically?
If not, why are you called OWS? think about it. <<

Do you represent America and her interests or your own? Think about it. You would rather see this fail then share well, anything. And that speaks volumes.

As for more on the why call it OWS, that was in my other post.

kefranklin

Posts : 86
Join date : 2011-10-18
Location : VA2

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by BradB on Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:33 pm

you know I was justs reading some of the posts here; https://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration/

and I was thinking that the petition should not be called "Declaration" in any way... NYCGA already has a "Declaration" right ?
so that does look like co-opting in a way ... right? change the name it will help ... Wink


also, I have spent quite a bit of time reading through and commenting on OccupyWallSt forum...

I think I understand NYCGA pretty well and I am in solidarity with them... take things slowly in terms getting answers from them... if you rush them you will likely get a no.... understand this... the whole concept about this movement is communication, education, and building contituency... that can only be done slowly... right now we might have 20% of the people, the goal is 99% right... that takes time... prove your solidarity .... and all will fall into place... relax.. just keep in contact... and learn from them... and be part of them .... be in solidarity... right?... they imo REALLY REALLY REALLY know what they are doing... Wink

BradB

Posts : 85
Join date : 2011-10-19
Location : Wash DC

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by lmnop on Fri Oct 21, 2011 5:01 am

Hey Katherine, have you ever been to a general assembly? It's the core of this movement. If you haven't, I recommend it, it's kind of amazing to see democracy in action.

I am currently able to post on the forum, but every time I try to vote in the poll I get rejected.

You seem to be missing my point altogether. You seem to be set in your mind of what you "think". Your argument doesn't really seem to take in the point I am trying to make here.

Shall I state it again? This is getting rather tedious.

The only reason I am saying anything at all is because this working group, which by the way is not going to be an official working group of the occupy wallstreet or ows or the nycga for much longer, is using the name of an actual living breathing general assembly which currently meets every night at Liberty Park, NYC. A general assembly that this groups moderators constantly malign at the same time as using the name prominently all over their literature. Hypocritical?

The general assembly of NYC of which this group claims to be speaking for, which it absolutely is not speaking for requires a consensus from the new york city general assembly to be part of it.
You are all welcome to be whatever you want to be, but the people in the general assembly of nyc the occupation of wallstreet, located at Liberty Park, on Broadway and Liberty in lower Manhattan about a block away from ground zero, who have been sleeping on the cold cement and getting arrested and pepper sprayed etc, for a month now, Have worked long and hard on this consensus process.

It has resulted in some basic agreements come about by consensus on what it means to be a working group and how to work within this part of the global movement. Namely this NYC part of the Global movement. If this working group, the demands working group or the 99% working group wants to participate in direct democracy in Liberty park with us, then they, ie you or some representatives from this group are required to report back to the general assembly what they are working on in their working group.

I dont know how to spell it out more clearly than that. Surely you can understand why, if the group you are so attached to defending, without really knowing what is going on, apparently, is going to persist in claiming that they are part of the NYCGA, then they damn well be showing their face in NYC at the god blessed general assembly that is meeting there every damn night in the freezing damn cold hashing out every word of every agreed upon declaration. If you think it's easy to get 200 or 300 people to consent on one proposal which everyone cheers spontaneously upon hearing but then doesn't actually consent to, (happened last night on a non co optation declaration/ proposal) How in the hell you think this group is going to reach consensus on this huge document that you are all so feverishly working on without any input to speak of from the actual group you claim to be representing.

My message is simple, really. Stop claiming to represent NYCGA. You do not. This is a totally separate group with a very different agenda. God bless your mission, happy trails, good luck, blessings all around. Change your name and merry on your way with your delegates and executive committees. Just stop claiming to be speaking for an actual body of people, who are working hard to agree on what we stand for as it is without a bunch of people who are not even physically present claiming to be speaking for us. Do you Grok me, sister? Are you catching my drift yet? Comprehende?? Capiche?

It's fine, do what you want, you're autonomous beings. But you are absolutely not part of NYCGA if you dont come here in person and read your 99% declaration, take notes from the people present if it doesnt pass consensus and go back to the drawing board. This is an interactive body, this is what it is and it aint an internet chat room or forum.

If you dont want your hard work to be decided on by other people, than quit calling your shit nycga. Call it something else and do whatever you want to do. You are pretending to be part of something that you have never even been to and the person who formed this group has been to ONCE. And now refuses to go back because he claims some sort of conspiracy erased his damn report from the damn minutes on the same day that there were thousands of people marching all over our city and everything was freaking crazy and so someone lost track of the five minutes of the 3 hour ga where he announced he had formed a working group. I personally was trying to save a kid who was od-ing that night, but that is an entirely different story.

If you only knew what you were talking about. Then you would really know what you are talking about.


peace out.

lmnop

Posts : 20
Join date : 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by idenr on Fri Oct 21, 2011 8:57 am

i am not clear about how things are supposed to work between working groups and the nycga. there is a user group on the nycga.net site that is titled The 99 Declaration. There is a Demands group. A Media group. A People's New Economic Charter group etc. This implies some kind of okayness at least with this group by at a minimum the people running the nycga.net web.

So can anyone tell me how the relationship functions between nycga and working groups? Are there some working groups whose existence and official connection have been consensed and others that haven't been consensed? Does it matter?

idenr

Posts : 21
Join date : 2011-10-18
Age : 54
Location : PA-06

http://www.idenrosenthal.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by Guest on Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:25 pm

For what it's worth: The vast majority of people don't really know what exactly is going on with the whole Occupy movement, so for them it's easier to refer to the entire revolution as "Occupy Wall Street" doings. I know that the actual OWS people haven't "approved" of the Declaration as part of their movement, but for better or worse, that IS how people are addressing us. We, and OWS itself, should probably just drop the bickering as to who is doing what.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by lmnop on Fri Oct 21, 2011 6:21 pm

No, sir, I am not confused in the least. I see very clearly what is going on here.

And you, sir, are you the same person, Admin? You are wrong as well. Elected delegates are only ONE way to go.
I believe you are simply being impatient, meaning "you" as in this group, with the process you claim to find brilliant.
Why not trust the process and instead of jumping ahead of it without group consensus, join in the discussion. Many people have already explained ad nauseum on the nycga.cc site why and how on so many levels this plan is flawed.

If you live in Michigan, great, start a general assembly if there is not one already. Work with a group. Get consensus every step of the way. Jumping from local to national before things are done gestating is like ripping a fetus out of a Mother's belly and expecting that baby to thrive. It will die and your premature and unthought out plan will also die without more heads working together on it. Instead of blinding yourself by assuming that our critiques are coming from a territorial or elitist place, why not actually engage in discourse about the very real reasons we are opposed to this plan.

If you really do respect the GA format, if you really do find it incredibly brilliant, than utilize it.

I'm done. I feel I have spoken my piece. I will be at the GA on Sunday, as I am every night. I will be continuing to inform people about this wedge you guys are trying to drive through a very beautiful and hopeful movement.

The urgency to come up with demands is driven by a media based on ADD. We don't have to feed into that.
The media is already showing plenty of intelligent debate based on this movement. I dont have all the answers, no single person does. That's the beauty of it, we are figuring it out together, daily.

If we do trademark a logo, and I hope we do, it will be to protect our movement from being co opted and destroyed by seemingly well intentioned but ill informed people such as yourself. It is not a corporate move. It would be like the union seal of approval. Otherwise, how will people know what is real and what is memorex

There has to be some way to validate that people are speaking for a consensus process and not over riding that with their own agenda, which is, quite frankly what is happening here.

Please don't destroy this movement in it's infancy because you thought you knew better than hundreds of people working hard to give birth to something, the first real chance this country has had in a long time to save ourselves from complete destruction by a government bought and sold on wallstreet.

thanks, as always, for listening. Really listen, please, alot is depending on this.

lmnop

Posts : 20
Join date : 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

NYC GA on Sunday night

Post by Guest on Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:03 pm

I am appearing before the NYC General Assembly on Sunday. I appeared on 10-15 and told the about this working group and invited them to join. Michael P

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by Guest on Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:34 am

kefranklin wrote:I agree that the NYGA is the NYGA, just like the Wisconsin GA would be the WIGA.

To have us toil, we offer it up and then THEY vote? So we have no vote? That might be democratic amongst the NYers present but that isn't democratic overall.


There needs to be national coordination. It's here. There's a lot going on in NY. They have their hands full being NY. If they are a movement unto themselves, I hope they do great things.

If they are part of the national OWS sentiment, then there needs to be a clearinghouse and it evolved into here. I imagine if we tried to do it, it would never have worked, but there was no intent. Movements are living, evolving things. It brought us to today.

There was a need - a void - to have a place where everyone, regardless of geography can meet, help, talk, think and vote. It's here and it will be at the Convention.

It's important to note that ANYONE is welcome here, to my knowledge no one has been heckled or poorly treated and the process is transparent and democratic.

That is what anyone would want.

To re-invent this, just so NYGA could say they did it. Well, that's ego. We are on their side. If they aren't with us, so be it. It's the land of freedom.

I agree.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Occupy Wall Street, The Internet?

Post by vze2363v on Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:17 am

I am someone who would like to be a part of this, but is absolutely stumped over why we are even having this discussion.

In YahooGroups, someone specifically investigated how this group came to be. Someone from the Internet Group of the actual Occupy Wall Street community in NYC who's name started with a D (I don't have time to go back through all that mess to find it but you are welcome to) formed the working groups on the internet under Occupy Wall Street NYC and this group (The 99% Declaration Working Group) was formed under that umbrella. Michael took that idea and ran with it.

As I suggested on the NYC site, if NYC's intention was to CONTROL the rest of the Occupy movements in the United States, they should not have created the NYC site and asked people to volunteer their time and hard work for groups without the caveat that any ideas or creations must first be authorized by the OWS NYC GA. Volunteering for groups usually means work is going to be done.

Michael made the point somewhere (YahooGroups or here, I can't remember but you are welcome to look it up) indicating:

  1. Work was done on this declaration (that everyone in NYC is so upset about).
  2. He went to the NYC GA and handed out some copies so people would have it as a REFERENCE DOCUMENT when he got up to stand before the NYC GA.
  3. It was voted down by the NYC GA.
  4. Someone from the media got a hold of the original proposition when it was handed out and published it, which became the fracturing point between NYC and everyone else who does believe in it.

I am a little more than concerned that NYC believes it has the right to determine the future for the other 49 states in this country. I DON'T have a problem with them looking at Michael's document and saying they don't want to endorse it -or- have anything to do with it. I have a problem with them saying because they don't want to endorse it no other Occupy movement in the United States has the right to support it. This is what is being portrayed in this thread, that all other Occupy movements DO NOT have the right to support a document that we feel supports our desired outcome. Is that really the way you want to represent OWS NYC? Is that the reputation you want them to have?

I am in the process of trying to hook up with my closest registered group which is 30 minutes away from my house. I have a LOT of physical challenges, am in a hideous amount of pain that I can't take medication for and I'm not sure I'm going to be able to make it back home with the amount of gas left in my tank, but I'm going to do it anyhow. I would hate to have to carry the message that OWS NYC has put strict regulations on what Occupy movements can or cannot read - that's too much like burning books. My Occupy movement might have their own declaration they feel strongly about. At least this forum gives them an OPPORTUNITY to be a part of the declaration discussion and add in things that are close to their hearts.

This forum that has been created is the most efficient gathering place I have found out of all the other NYC provided sites on the internet (WordPress is NOT cutting it). The fact that someone is willing to create a conference call to include all the other Occupy movements is not only necessary, but the first time someone has actually CARED enough to include all the other Occupy movements in the discussion.

As far as Occupy the Internet, this cannot be done. The OWS NYC has already taken that group (See Facebook). I, for one, desire a working Occupy the Internet group (not owned by OWS NYC) to allow people such as myself to have a voice, that would be listed on the Occupy Together web site. Unfortunately, all the Occupy the Internet/Online twitter accounts, URLs and Facebook accounts have been taken and are being used for several random things that don't reflect a specific body of users.

There are too many good resources in this forum, too many incredibly talented and smart people who want to see actual change occur. We don't want to have to go through another 4 years of the political status quo, which is probably going to turn into another GOP 4 year reign since Wall Street has put all candidates on notice that they will withdraw all campaign funds of anyone who shows favor to the Occupy Wall Street Movement or any of their ideals. I would hate to think this movement mimics the very 1% we are revolting against, but this is the impression I'm getting from the people representing OWS NYC in this forum.




vze2363v

Posts : 14
Join date : 2011-10-19
Location : FL-9

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by padel on Sat Oct 22, 2011 5:54 am

I think NYCGA/OWS has articulated their self perceived purpose, and it is really substantially different from what I believe the 99% Declaration (and the national convention) represents. There is a relationship between the efforts, there are parallels. But the objectives are really quite different.

NYCGA/OWS is a demonstration. It is a demonstration against things that participants in the 99% Declaration sympathize with (hopefully, otherwise why would someone participate in the 99%D?). A demonstration, like a civil disobedience movement, has a definable purpose. It is to demonstrate the passion that the people feel. The success of a demonstration is measured by how many people participate, and how long they submit themselves to their self imposed hardships. The success of a demonstration may be measured by the amount of press coverage it gets, but that is directly proportional to the number of people and the self inflicted misery.

Analogies between NYCGA/OWS and events associated with the Arab Spring are greatly exaggerated for the purposes of generating viewer interest and publication sales statistics. The folks in Liberty Square are not remotely in the same boat that the Egyptians in Tahrir Square were in. Or the Libyans, or the Syrians. The end result of the NYCGA/OWS will not resemble the outcome of the Arab Spring episodes. I emphasize this only to make the point that NYCGA/OWS and the OWS actions in other cities have more in common with the Million Man march, the DC Vietnam protests, and the Rally to Restore Sanity than with any modern or historical revolutionary movement. The media doesnt want to admit that because then it wouldnt be as news worthy.

The 99% Declaration and National Convention is not a revolutionary movement. The French had a revolution. It was characterized by the Terror and the Guillotine. The changes that might be brought about by the 99% Declaration and National Convention will not resemble the changes wrought by the French revolution or the American Revolution. Won't happen. This may dissapoint some people, but a mature perusal of the affair will reveal the deeper truth of the matter.

The 99% Declaration and National Convention is a political movement. It's objective is social change, via political action. As evidence I will point to the Declaration, which is a platform, and the convention, which is, well, a convention to select representatives to go to congress or the white house.

This is the real distinction between the 99% Declaration/National Convention, and NYCGA/OWS. They have expressed quite clearly that they want to send a message, not pick candidates for congress or the white house.

As such, participants here should really feel no urge to be accepted by NYCGA/OWS. In reality, if 99% achieves anything, then NYCGA/OWS will be knocking on our door, asking to come in out of the rain. A time will come when it may be appropriate to take the declaration to NYCGA. It is pointless at this time to hope that the General Assembly will adopt the 99% Declaration/national convention as one of their working groups, or that they will adopt a statement of purpose generated by an effort such as this one. The media is salivating for the moment NYCGA/OWS adopts a list of demands, because that will be the moment that real action in the street starts. Demands must be associated with threats. NYCGA/OWS cannot threaten the Wall Street institution by rallying people in the streets of Manhattan. They can only threaten the New York City community. This is also a distinguishing point between NYCGA/OWS and 99% Declaration. We would be wasting our time and hurting our chances of accomplishing anything should we alienate the New York City community (which we should remember consists of a lot of "not large business" job creators in addition to residents at all levels of the socio-economic spectrum).

If we wish to be taken seriously at some point in the future when we have the outline of a declaration, it will be in our best interest to focus on preparing a declaration, and organizing a convention, rather than trying to get recognition from NYCGA.

We share an important philosophy with NYCGA/OWS. WE ARE THE 99%. NYCGA/OWS consists of 99%ers who happen to be camping out in a park in NYC. Our scope is NATIONWIDE (thank you zz top). I recommend that no further effort or angst be expended towards obtaining recognition from NYCGA/OWS. It is thinking in the wrong direction. If we develop a declaration that they feel they can subscribe to, they will formally adopt or endorse it according to their own schedule. If we develop a declaration they dont want to formally subscribe to, we will not have failed, and nothing will be lost. If we dont develop a declaration at all, there will be no point in organizing a convention. So, lets get serious. Lets prepare a declaration that represents the 99%!!!!!!

padel

Posts : 13
Join date : 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by lmnop on Sat Oct 22, 2011 1:00 pm

yes, please do divest your selves completely with ows and nycga if you can't respect and uphold the consensus model we have for decision making. That means remove your working group from the nycga.cc website and stop making any mention of occupy wallstreet in your online presence.

when you are completely detached from any associations, then and only then will you no longer co opting the movement's energy without relaying the message agreed upon through consensus by the nycga

If your group had any real integrity at all, that is what you would do.

lmnop

Posts : 20
Join date : 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by BradB on Sat Oct 22, 2011 4:14 pm

latest post from the group administrator (Stanley Ford) of the group "The 99 Declaration" on the nycga site, as appointed by the nycga site administrators...

Stanley Ford posted an update in the group The 99 Declaration

"Everyone please, take pause. This is a working group nothing has been decided. This started out as a simple idea, like all great things before it. And it’s author did address the GA on Oct. 15th. We are asking that he be allowed to address the GA again this Sunday. At this point NOTHING has been decided but we encourage all to debate the Declaration and it’s Amendments as a working group. Many National GA’s are on board with forming a Second Constitutional Convention and we need to address the means by which we can have a National General Assembly."

https://www.nycga.net/members/stormkrow/

BradB

Posts : 85
Join date : 2011-10-19
Location : Wash DC

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by Guest on Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:18 pm

lmnop wrote:yes, please do divest your selves completely with ows and nycga if you can't respect and uphold the consensus model we have for decision making. That means remove your working group from the nycga.cc website and stop making any mention of occupy wallstreet in your online presence.

when you are completely detached from any associations, then and only then will you no longer co opting the movement's energy without relaying the message agreed upon through consensus by the nycga

If your group had any real integrity at all, that is what you would do.

Oh give up. We aren't you, you aren't us. We all want change. I am happy to disassociate with the NYCGA if you represent them. Why you, lmnop, have chosen to take such a challenging and negative attitude toward a different approach to a mutual goal is beyond me. We have removed all mention of OWS and NYCGA from both the original website and the original document. If media continues to make mistaken impressions, we can only inform them, not stop them.

Please remember that we do not exist to alienate NYCGA. We do not exist to "co-opt" NYCGA. We exist to create change.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Has the NYCGA been approved by the 99%?

Post by giogo on Sun Oct 23, 2011 1:55 am

lmnop wrote:yes, please do divest your selves completely with ows and nycga if you can't respect and uphold the consensus model we have for decision making. That means remove your working group from the nycga.cc website and stop making any mention of occupy wallstreet in your online presence.

when you are completely detached from any associations, then and only then will you no longer co opting the movement's energy without relaying the message agreed upon through consensus by the nycga

If your group had any real integrity at all, that is what you would do.

To apply the same logic:
"NYCGA should divest themselves completely with the 99% if they can't respect and uphold the model that the 99% have for decision making: electoral, representative democracy (not consensus)."

But obviously this is just sily... nobody has property over the words (be it occupy wall street or 99%) and ultimately what matters is the substance and the effectiveness of what we are trying to make. And, IMO, this effort of declaration and delegation is the best thing so far coming out of OWS: it is national, it has a real effort of achieving representation and effecitve proosals and strategies of implementing them. The folks at the GA should be all about this if they really care about achieving something concrete.

giogo

Posts : 101
Join date : 2011-10-20
Location : WA-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by metamind on Sun Oct 23, 2011 8:34 am

davidscameracraft wrote:Simply put. We have a new website. nycga.net with a forum. The internet working group spent many hours putting this site together so everyone has a voice. All groups have access.

Why is this group not on the consensus web site?

I have sat down with the internet working group. I have sat down with media and PR. For many hours to understand, vote through consensus and plan as a group our next steps. Please join with the nyc general assembly and move this very valuable discussion and direct action to the consensus website.

David

I'm a bit confused. There are so many groups and so many sites. Where should I go to let other people know who I am and what my interests are so we can "come together?" I'm in Vermont and have no way to NYC or any city for that matter. I'd like to help.

Here is my contact info. I prefer email or Skype.

email: steve@stevemoyer.us
phone: 802-488-5065
Skype: stevenkentmoyer
WWW: http://stevemoyer.us
Facebook: http://facebook.com/metamind

Relevant interests: Voluntary, personal economic systems See http://se.nodes.org and http://stevearchive.nodes.org for more info. Join my "Economic Solutions" group on FB:
http://es.nodes.org

Blessings!

metamind

Posts : 1
Join date : 2011-10-23
Age : 59
Location : Vermont

http://steve.nodes.org

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by idenr on Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:44 am

Ideally there should be a general assembly for you. Could you recruit for one? Advertise on craigslist and other places. It doesn't have to be a full time ga. I don't mean to tell you how to live. I'm just speaking about the model for this movement which is fundamentally local grassroots. Have you checked out occupytogether.org yet?

idenr

Posts : 21
Join date : 2011-10-18
Age : 54
Location : PA-06

http://www.idenrosenthal.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by Alex on Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:44 pm

Molly Carmody wrote:Frankly, I don't care if the NYC GA has approved this. Last time I checked there are Occupy protests around the world and the NYCGA doesn't have a monopoly on organization.

There are folks across the country (including myself) who live in small towns and want to be a part of the 99% but can only do so via the Internet at the time being. NYC is not the end-all, be-all of the 99% or Occupy movements.

Thank you Molly..... I can't tell you how relieved I am to read those words.....

Act local.... Think Global people.... NYC might have been first in the USA but they are not the origins of the movement.... And should certainly not be placed on any sort of pedestal as the 'Overlords' of the movement....

Alex

Posts : 13
Join date : 2011-10-23
Age : 59
Location : France

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by BrenW on Sun Oct 23, 2011 2:27 pm

Alex wrote:
Molly Carmody wrote:Frankly, I don't care if the NYC GA has approved this. Last time I checked there are Occupy protests around the world and the NYCGA doesn't have a monopoly on organization.

There are folks across the country (including myself) who live in small towns and want to be a part of the 99% but can only do so via the Internet at the time being. NYC is not the end-all, be-all of the 99% or Occupy movements.

Thank you Molly..... I can't tell you how relieved I am to read those words.....

Act local.... Think Global people.... NYC might have been first in the USA but they are not the origins of the movement.... And should certainly not be placed on any sort of pedestal as the 'Overlords' of the movement....

AGREED! I live in Lawton, Oklahoma. Do you think I give a flying flip if NYC GA approves of me? I'm gonna keep working regardless of how "legitimate" someone else thinks I am.

BrenW

Posts : 30
Join date : 2011-10-19
Location : OK-04 Lawton

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by randallburns on Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:05 pm

The story as I understand it:
an attorney defended some OWS folks pro bono and asked them what they wanted. He then wrote the 99declarations.

The attorney then started a yahoo group-which spun off this forum to provide a more stable working environment. The attorney was told by his boss not to publicly disclose his identity for business reasons(clients included some small banks)-and he then deleted the yahoo group. I have no real way of verifying the above.

The 99 declarations have taken on a life of their own. I've seen different versions floating around.

For some of us, going to local general assemblies is simply not an option. I've written about jobs issues for _years_ now. However, the nearest GA is 1.5 hours from my house, and I am the primary caretaker of my non-verbal autistic son-who simply doesn't do well in crowds and needs constant supervision i can trust.

This _is_ my conduit to OWS-for the time being. The 99 percent include a lot of folks for various reasons who are limited in their ability to participate in person. I did steal a few hours to got to Occupy Portland-but that was difficult time for me to get.

idenr wrote:I'm very happy to participate in this effort whether or not it is an official working group approved by consensus of the NYCGA. I see there is a 99 Declaration Group available on the official nycga.net groups web page which sort of implies there is a connection in some form. Maybe there is a principle such as "diversity of action"? within the core principles that says we don't need to be consensus approved to carry on. Just reading the Principles of Solidarity Working Draft on nycga.net that isn't there but I believe I read something referring to it when it was discussed at GA after the arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge during the Direct Action report back.

Nonetheless - we would of course be better off to reach out to every GA all over everywhere to publicize our efforts and ask for their participation since what we are essentially asking for is for them to be the people who are part of a National General Assembly drawn from the whole country. Have I made a mistake in my assumptions?

randallburns

Posts : 398
Join date : 2011-10-18
Age : 57
Location : WA-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by aspiesmom on Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:53 pm

My understanding is that this is The 99% Delegation, separate from OWS yet likeminded, and that they are welcome to join us and we are welcome to join them, neither requiring prior approval from the other to exist and peacably assemble, and that we are entities under the same democratic principles of the US Constitution . Is that a fair statement?

aspiesmom

Posts : 33
Join date : 2011-10-21
Location : FL-24

http://www.youtube.com/user/aspieresearchmom

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by padel on Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:36 pm

@randallburns:
Bravo brother!

padel

Posts : 13
Join date : 2011-10-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by randallburns on Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:40 am

I haven't been to NYC. Now, what I saw in Portland reminded me a lot of the Rainbow family national gathering earlier this year in Skamania county Near my house. I think some groups like Food Not Bombs, that existed prior to WSJ are rather active there.

The thing is this is a all a quasi-spontaneous happening. We don't immediately _need_ recognition from anyone to do something constructive. Also our needs as an online group are different that groups physically camping out-as our our resources.

The philadelphia Occupation has officially said they want to see online general assemblies. Now, what would it mean for this to be just another web forum, to being something that occuptions might actually identify with?
well that is a good question.

What I'd personally like to see is us moving towards a better polling system on this site and better archiving and organization of whatever polls/announcements come out of the occupations, and creating a forum where the real range of opinion within the movement can be accurately represented. That goes beyond giving a voice to those of us that are inclined to type online. Right now, polls are largely the preserve of the rich and political powerful that get to determine what questions get asked and just how they are framed.

I see a lot of people that say they want to hear the voice of america but they aren't really asking the questions just yet. I think OWS really has a chance to move up from the current 47% of folks that identify with it in a positive way-and the next few weeks will determine if that happens.

randallburns

Posts : 398
Join date : 2011-10-18
Age : 57
Location : WA-03

Back to top Go down

This NYCGA issue : lack of goodwill, lots of ego

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:15 am

I have spent hours and hours on the yahoo forum (before it was killed by Michael or whoever) pushing for a diplomatic approach to this issue of "recognition". I formulated suggestions for Michael and others' attention in anticipation of their attendance of the Sunday NYCGA, which are now lost. Let me try to come back with a few points:

1) The NYCGA may not "own" the Occupy movement, or the "99%" phrasing, but they came up with it. Let us respect that. Why? Because this group/initiative largely owed its existence to the NYCGA. Is not it Michael's story that his motivation came from helping out a couple of demonstrators? So first things first, clear things with them before using their catchphrases or appearing as if we represented them (which is what Michael did, e.g. advertising on the google site a "motion to be adopted by the NYCA on the election of an executive committee").

Do not we think that breaking with the NYCGA would be a terrible mistake, while we seek to engage other GAs in this country?

2) We should emphasize to the NYCGA that our initiative was still in its infancy and that we very much welcome new members with sound ideas and an open mind. We should be ready to rethink certain of our ideas if they come up with bright and practical ways to achieve our objectives. They are not campers while we are thinkers - that some of us implied such a thing was not a great idea. Michael even told them apparently that because of winter coming they should trust us to take care of this until Spring.

3) We should seek to invite representatives/spokespeople from the NYCGA to come to our forum and address us, let us know what they expect from us.

4) We should establish at least recognition and ideally a regular formal liaison to let them know what we are doing and hear from them (do we want instead to break with them because they dont give us carte blanche to let us run such an important initiative?). We belong to the same movement - we are complementary ways to achieve massive change.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by Guest on Mon Oct 24, 2011 2:34 pm

georgesetal wrote:
4) We should establish at least recognition and ideally a regular formal liaison to let them know what we are doing and hear from them (do we want instead to break with them because they dont give us carte blanche to let us run such an important initiative?). We belong to the same movement - we are complementary ways to achieve massive change.
Stanley Ford is a member of both NYCGA and 99%D; he has offered to work as liaison between the two groups. I gather that he's trying to get us both to understand both sides' viewpoints. He's a patient, patient man and I give him kudos for trying. Hopefully we can get stuff ironed out.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Has this Working Group been approved by the GA in NYC?

Post by Sponsored content Today at 3:42 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum