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

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%!!!!!!

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.

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/

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.

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.

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: https://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!

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?

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 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.

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?

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?

@randallburns:
Bravo brother!

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.

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.

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.

Anyone here who thinks this action plan will fly effectively without the participation and active support of the NYC GA and a large majority of the other OWS solidarity groups in the country is kidding themselves... the election of delegates will be a complete joke without their participation, and the convention will have little or no legitimacy within the larger movement if we do not get them to sanction this plan and actively participate in the election of delegates. This is obvious, isn't it? If we agree on this one point, I submit that it follows that making a concerted and organized effort to lobby for the action plan within local OWS groups in cities all over the US should be our number one priority now.

I'm glad to see that others are taking it upon themselves to bring this project up with their local GA's, but it isn't enough that a few of us are doing this on an ad hoc basis - I think we need to open formal lines of communication with local OWS solidarity groups in cities all over the US, and encourage the establishment of liaison links between local groups within states, with the aim of creating state umbrella groups that are (hopefully) wired into the action plan for the convention in Philadelphia.

Right now we are a mishmash agglomeration of hundreds of local groups that are all working simultaneously on our own versions of a list of grievances to be redressed, with no process established to reconcile the differences between these hundreds of disparate lists once they are completed. My proposal, then, is that we form a new working group devoted to communication and liaison with individual OWS solidarity groups everywhere in the US. A second aspect, which could be linked to this committee or placed in the care of another new committee, would be to encourage all groups in every state to form umbrella groups that can help organize the election of delegates.

One further point: I suggest that we start making direct e mail contact with other members of this forum when we see people who are expressing ideas we are in sync with. I see no reason that we shouldn't form affinity groups within the larger community, brainstorm and collaborate on whatever initiative we choose, and report back to this forum and our own GA's with our proposals. I hate to say it, but we are very naive if we believe we can implicitly trust that any entity within this movement has not had its organizational structure infiltrated by agents of the corporate state. This may seem unduly paranoid to some, but the pattern has been well established for years now, and it would be quite extraordinary if an exception to this rule has been made for the OWS movement. My name is Stuart and my e mail address is oregonstu@yahoo.com

oregonstu wrote:Anyone here who thinks this action plan will fly effectively without the participation and active support of the NYC GA and a large majority of the other OWS solidarity groups in the country is kidding themselves... the election of delegates will be a complete joke without their participation, and the convention will have little or no legitimacy within the larger movement if we do not get them to sanction this plan and actively participate in the election of delegates. This is obvious, isn't it?

No. It's not obvious nor is it a reasonable conclusion.

OWS and the GAs do not represent the American People. At best, they represent a varying and unknown number of persons who meet in a public space and, from time-to-time, demonstrate. Right now we don't know they're anything but ephemeral. Thinking they're the basis of a lasting movement is unwarranted and might even be foolish.

oregonstu wrote:I'm glad to see that others are taking it upon themselves to bring this project up with their local GA's, but it isn't enough that a few of us are doing this on an ad hoc basis - I think we need to open formal lines of communication with local OWS solidarity groups in cities all over the US, and encourage the establishment of liaison links between local groups within states, with the aim of creating state umbrella groups that are (hopefully) wired into the action plan for the convention in Philadelphia.

Right now we are a mishmash agglomeration of hundreds of local groups that are all working simultaneously on our own versions of a list of grievances to be redressed, with no process established to reconcile the differences between these hundreds of disparate lists once they are completed. My proposal, then, is that we form a new working group devoted to communication and liaison with individual OWS solidarity groups everywhere in the US. A second aspect, which could be linked to this committee or placed in the care of another new committee, would be to encourage all groups in every state to form umbrella groups that can help organize the election of delegates

Do you have any idea of how many entities exist?

Molly Carmody wrote:

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.

Sounds like we are in good hands. Thanks for that! Would be happy to know where we stand on the issue at regular intervals.

Stuart is correct. Without support we will not get far at all. As Chris Wheeler pointed out, in probably a different thread, the Peoples Congress is working on exactly the same plan, and they have a much better name, not to mention a sister who's in with the NYCGA. And their elected delegation will be taking their focused statement at right about the same time, directly to Washington DC, where they will convene on the National Mall.

And Michael himself is still working on the same project as well, somewhere else?

We may want to reevaluate our goals.

My understanding is that Micheal has rejoined this group and we are merging with his efforts. I think he will start to direct people to this forum for working groups when the forum has been finished being redesigned.

I completely agree that we need the support of OWS and NYCGA. We have a liaison with the NYCGA and to me it sounds like things can be worked out there. We are the liaison to any GA we can make it to.

Doomer wrote:I completely agree that we need the support of OWS and NYCGA. We have a liaison with the NYCGA and to me it sounds like things can be worked out there. We are the liaison to any GA we can make it to.

The various occupations, because of their behavior, are fast becoming personae non gratae. Even if they survive as an idea, they will be alienated from most Americans. Being associated with them will not serve this effort well.

Joe Steel wrote:

Doomer wrote:I completely agree that we need the support of OWS and NYCGA. We have a liaison with the NYCGA and to me it sounds like things can be worked out there. We are the liaison to any GA we can make it to.

The various occupations, because of their behavior, are fast becoming personae non gratae. Even if they survive as an idea, they will be alienated from most Americans. Being associated with them will not serve this effort well.

I don't know if this is true. If they just left the occupies alone to die a slow death, it most likely would be. But if there is more action like out in Oakland, I think there are a lot of people that dislike seeing political protests suppressed more than they dislike the atmosphere being reported.

There was an article in the MSM today saying 43% to 27% people support OWS and 46% to 34% say it represents Americans' views. (I'd do a link but don't want to get in trouble for copyrights).

DJequalityNash wrote:Stuart is correct. Without support we will not get far at all. As Chris Wheeler pointed out, in probably a different thread, the Peoples Congress is working on exactly the same plan, and they have a much better name, not to mention a sister who's in with the NYCGA. And their elected delegation will be taking their focused statement at right about the same time, directly to Washington DC, where they will convene on the National Mall.

And Michael himself is still working on the same project as well, somewhere else?

We may want to reevaluate our goals.

If there is a People's Congress and this group, why wouldn't we merge together to work toward the same goal? Why work for an Assembly in Philly and a Congress in D.C. That is certainly not a united front. Personal agendas should be left at the door. This movement is about restoring democracy to the 99%, and it would make sense to merge two groups working on similar goals. I am so ready to pour my heart and soul into something concrete, instead of visiting every forum I signed up for to intellectualize, philosophize, and analyze!! In Solidarity, Betsy

I started a thread for the People's Congress in https://the99delegation.forumotion.com/t455-people-s-congress#2915. (If you can't see the link it's under WorkGroups/Community Outreach/Like-Minded Groups.

Please put up any information you have on the group. It may be a good idea to have someone reach out and liaison. Any volunteers?