substantive discussion

If any assembly, either the founding one in New York, or any of the ones set up since by occupations in other cities, thinks that having a national assembly is a bad idea, then they should state their reasons for opposing the idea. I would like to hear any substantive objections. So far I have seen one post that says that regional assemblies focused on direct action are a better idea, though no real reasons were given for why. Any other reasons for why a national assembly or a declaration is a bad idea?

Individuals can state their objections as well.

As I've said elsewhere, our working group should be working to communicate with all the assemblies in all the cities with occupations. If a majority don't like the idea of a national assembly and don't want to be involved in selecting delegates, then we will have to rethink the idea. I don't think we can pull off a national assembly or pass a declaration without broad support from those who see themselves as part of this emerging 99% movement.

robwrenn wrote:. I don't think we can pull off a national assembly or pass a declaration without broad support from those who see themselves as part of this emerging 99% movement.

So true.

As I've said elsewhere, our working group should be working to communicate with all the assemblies in all the cities with occupations. If a majority don't like the idea of a national assembly and don't want to be involved in selecting delegates, then we will have to rethink the idea. I don't think we can pull off a national assembly or pass a declaration without broad support from those who see themselves as part of this emerging 99% movement.[/quote]

Hey Rob... we are in complete agreement on this. Please have a look at the post above titled Unifying local OWS solidarity groups behind the 99% action plan and join the discussion there. There is a move to put a working group e mail list together to get this effort organized....