Who wants to do what?

I don't have much time to reply, I think anything short of a total redesign of our government will fail. Using history only as a guide we need to really look at what makes people tick and what type of government is the best now in these modern times.

For the most part we all have been lied to and sold a bunch of crap when it comes to the history of this country. For all I know we are a corporate entity, a wholly owned subsidiary of England, but who knows what the real story is? If you look at how this government behaves I would say we are an Authoritarian Fascist Democratic Republic The Powers That Be just fail to mention the first two.

So I say scrap it all and build something from scratch that honors humanity and protects the environment without depriving anyone. Doing away with outdated dogmatic notions of founding fathers and original intent of the constitution because it's all opinionated bullshit anyway. Anything less then complete interdependence and peaceful coexistence without false dichotomies and irrelevant labels would be a continued failure of our species.

Seth

I once knew someone, long ago, who had written A Declaration of Interdependence.

sethrosen, I agree that scraping what we have and starting fresh would be the best idea. That would take a lot of support. Not sure if we can muster enough support but it certainly should be put on the table as a discussion item.

I think it would be very hard to present a third party alternative - it would very likely lose. I propose that there should be an active focus on all the congressional and senate seats that will be up for voting in 2012. The Tea Party did this and were successful. It is important that before that there is a manifesto to which the OWS backed representatives would adhere and agree to, otherwise it will be difficult to function as a bloc if they are wildly successful and are elected.

I am not very optimistic honestly - it will take a lot of selflessness and sacrifice to overcome the odds of beating the system.

I joined this because I would like for this government to return to the ideals set up during its foundation. I suspect many of us are looking for similar things. "In order to form a more perfect union." But, I am very uncomfortable with placing labels on myself. I am human and an American with an uncompromising loyalty to the truth and the right everyone has for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." I believe many roads can lead to the preservation of those rights. My loyalty is towards any road that is effective in practice. Theories are for philosophers and good conversations with friends.

I'm interested in a national general assembly. A list of grievances has been done, by both the general assembly of OWS and the 99% Declaration group. I would suggest the assembly create key demands and explain why these are necessary to change the system. IMHO, the whole point of the Occupy movement is to create a worldwide teach-in, where we can discuss, educate, and refine our approach.

Thank you all for voting in the poll and expressing your concerns.

I'll give the poll a few more days and then try to include the new suggestions and rewrite some options to accommodate everyone.

Thus far I have only sent personal invitations to 150 of our members. I have to do this one at a time so it will take some time to get more votes.

On the next round I will eliminate the "other" write in option so we can get a better view of the remaining options.

The constitution promises freedom, but it doesn't mention anything about the economy, except that we will pay our bills. A democracy is a political system, the Free Market is an economic system. They are not the same, and there was never a promise from our founding fathers promising a Free Market System. I think they did that because they've seen in the past that those with the most money take control and manipulate, so they offer a vote to every citizen, and not just the land owners. It seems our economic and political systems have gotten mixed up. 94% of the politicians who spend the most money end up winning.

As for individuals, yes, do what you want, just don't hurt anyone else. Don't kill other people, don't hit them or rape them. Don't steal from them or belittle their reputations. All these things hurt other people. As long as you're not doing those, then you should be good.

You shouldn't have to worry about the law, or about your neighbors pushing bills banning your actions because they don't coincide with your own actions. If you're against gay marriage, then don't marry someone who's the same sex as you. If you're against abortion, don't get one. If you're against drugs, don't do drugs. If you don't believe Islam is the proper religion for you, then don't worship Allah. It's very simple, just let adults live their lives the way they want to, as long as they don't push it on you.

I voted for support group, but in all honesty, everything but "third party" I could agree with.

Personally I don't care if you're anarcho-capitalist (free market libertarian), anarcho-syndicalist (libertarian socialist), socialist, Marxist, Nazi, any point in between, or a guy that thinks all of our national decisions should be made with a magic 8-ball.

The underlying problem right now is that all of us, regardless of political stripe HAVE NO VOICE unless someone on this board is a bank CEO. Any wedge you can find serves no one except those at the top.

A third party won't solve anything, because win or lose, you're back to 2 big tent parties instead of an accurate reflection of what the people actually want.

If you want the country to go for X principals, fine, create an open party proportional representation list and find out who else agrees with you. Smash all barriers to voting for anyone that has a right to franchise.

aliendancer:
There's a long history of (generally) economic left libertarianism, it became especially prevalent after WW2 with the fall of fascism. Right-libs aren't fascists of course, but seeing how corporatism could destroy a state and gain enormous power made people flinch. (like we're seeing here now) The only thing libertarians of any stripe have in common is the idea that the burden of proof is always on the authority to explain why it should have power. The same reasons a left-libertarian would be for a national healthcare system is the same reason another libertarian (left or right) could be against abortion. The end result is to maximize liberty and debt slavery or removing a child's chance to live is seen as an attack on the victims by someone else's power.

I always thought an interesting way to describe corporations was Chomsky's: "An unaccountable private tyranny."

If you're interested in different stripes of libertarianism I suggest looking outside the US, where the Cold War created a unique stripe that conflated economic issues with social issues. The highly socialized Nordic models are a good place to start as they enjoy great economic and social liberties.

The bulk of the groundwork for either stripe comes from John Stuart Mills "On Liberty". It's definitely worth a read, but keep in mind he wrote it in the 1800s, a lot has changed since then. Even his own thoughts changed in his time regarding some things. He was also one of the first feminists He had no concept of a corporation in its current sense, he was for inheritance tax, he had no concept of health care, let alone a national healthcare system. So when you read him keep in mind that while some of his ideas are timeless, like any philosopher, other elements of his writings are firmly entrenched in their time and have no place in a modern society.

Others have picked up his torch to deal with current questions, but the main yardstick by which anything is measured is what he called the "harm principal"

If your Google Fu is decent you should end up with more searching than you probably want on the subject

I voted for support group as well, because I believe that we need this type of foundation before anything else can occur. This will become an assembly just through its mere existence. If we choose to further that goal into some other organization, such as an election of delegates, meeting at an actual location, thats fine. I think the fact that Occupy is a physical meeting of people and minds is what gives it such merit. You will probably need both. Finally, the outcome of all of this must be demands that the people lay at the door of our government. What they choose to do with it determines our next move. Some sort of political party may be the last option.

But first things first.

-Paul

SHORT TERM(present-early summer 2012):

I want to formulate a Petiton of a few specific Grievances, and Corresponding Solutions, that I can sell to my "Occupy NOLA 504" GA and, the 70% of the Electorate(active voters){and maybe a few "Libertarians"jk, AL}, that I feel could support a few reasonable, fairly applied Reforms that would at the very least, level the economic playing field, and DIRECTLY ADDRESS the Issue of Growing Disparity.Then I'd like for Me and as many American Citizens as possible to Hand Deliver, said Petition to OUR Gov't for Immediate Redress!!!

And, Or if a NGA is feasible or necessary, I'm down for that, but I am absolutely convinced it would have to integrate with the live "Occupations" to really get the support necessary to pull-off..

I'm already registered for a minority Party, and I like their platform, so if a third Party were the goal, I'd rather work to get the existing Minority Parties together..at least wherever it's possible.

As far as the support group option goes, I'm fine with that as an additional purpose, I'm kinda busy trying to figure out/visualize the best way to integrate they 3-4 communities involved with this(live-in occupiers, supporters/non-tent occupiers but actively involved in local GAs, the Homeless/non-movement occupiers, and the online communtities, so as to achieve, as much positive change, for the most Americans possible...Some fascinating dynamics for the social science hobbiests like myself..

Long Term: we'll have to see how this short term thing works out to know what to do next, but I'm confident that we'll have plenty to do...If we can get some momentum, skies the limit!!

I voted "other". I think that we have an excellent Declaration and grievances already, which just needs a few clarifications, & typos fixed, and a little tweaking here and there. So, I suggest we:

A) Put the finishing touches on the existing Declaration and Grievances

B) Put together a formal petition demanding that Congress hold a national referendum on the two most popular (and most fundamental) of our demands:

(1) Constitutional amendment to rescind corporate personhood,

(2) Constitutional amendment to rescind equating of money and free      speech,

C) Begin printing out copies of the petition to circulate for signatures.

D) Begin process of setting up basics needed for launching of a new independent party and identifying possible candidates for each seat we need to win.

The two-pronged strategy in this is to gather as many signatures as possible in order to impress on Congress the enormous popularity of our demands, in order to force Congress to hold a referendum, or risk losing the votes of a huge block of voters (all those who sign the petition).

Additional motivation for Congress to hold the referendum would be for us to declare that if they do not hold the referendum, we will formally launch our new party and run candidates against every legislator who does not support and vote to enact our demands.

Nice work simplee, I like that.

Simplee writes:

B) Put together a formal petition demanding that Congress hold a national referendum on the two most popular (and most fundamental) of our demands:

(1) Constitutional amendment to rescind corporate personhood,

(2) Constitutional amendment to rescind equating of money and free speech,

These are valid issues, but even if they were implemented, they would ultimately change nothing, because the way that the financiers have taken over the world is by controlling the once sovereign currencies and credit of nations.

As Mayer Amschel Rothschild said, "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws."

The federal government and the states must own their own banks, i.e., we need a network of publicly owned banks.

Eliminating corporate personhood would be a good second choice.

I had to go with other because I feel a NA is not the right model for organizing. A People's Congress is a better organizing model because it 1.) Implies that the current congress is irrelevant, and 2.) it implies that the Congress should only represent People, and 3.) that We the People can do a better job than Congress at legislating solutions. Doing a Peoples Congress is something the nation can "relate" to. An "Assembly" will be a more complicated sell.

I would put the emphasis on solutions, not so much the grievances. We do not need to complain, we all know the problems. It would be much more inspirational to focus of the solutions we agree upon, and more constructive.

I also strongly encourage everyone to simply focus on solutions which make our democracy more representational. That is an organizing principal which everyone can agree on. Issues can be dealt with, and we can also write policy statements about many things, but until we dismantle the dysfunctional relationship between media, elections, corporate governance and policy-making, our democracy is in peril, people will be left out of the process. Making our government "Of, For, and By the People" should be our central goal. If we succeed at that, we can then let OUR government do it's job, which is to represent US!

in solidarity,
John

RayArrowood wrote:This poll is to determine how many of us want to do what. Our mission or missions so to speak. It is also a polling experiment. If you don't like the options presented, please check "other" and write in your suggestion in the discussion area. Then I will rewrite the poll and we will vote again.

Excellent post John. One solution I'd like to see in corporations is simply that they follow American laws. Follow American labor laws, and environmental laws, regardless of where in the world they have their operations setup.

Also, if our paid for government and Supreme Court decide that companies really are in fact, people, then they should pay their income taxes, just like people. What's the tax rate for a person making 15 billion a year?

The financiers that own the world's central, investment, and commercial banks, have leveraged their power over the money creation process to literally buy the world's governments, military and intelligence services, media, and the voting processes. Here's a recent article that shows the level of consolidation:

New Scientist article.

If we don't go after the root cause, which in the U.S. would be taking back control of our money by bringing the functions of the Fed under the control of the Congress, as stipulated in the Constitution, then all the good intentioned reforms that are listed here, in the OWS declaration of September 29th, and elsewhere, will be for naught.

The corporations get away with criminal activities because anyone who has the legal standing to stop them is in their pocket.

It is no easy task to determine where to start with this. Every President that has tried to return the money creation process to public oversight has been assassinated (Lincoln, Garfield, Kennedy), or in Jackson's case, the pistols failed.

My suggestion is that we look at demands that would take back control of our money (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvTDTL55K1U), eliminate corporate personhood, create verifiable voting, and have real debates covered by the media (PBS and NPR at a minimum). These steps would give us a fighting chance.

Wow! I'll do the best I can to include all the ideas expressed here when I rewrite the poll for the next vote.

It looks like I made a mistake putting "all the above" in the poll, but I wanted to see how many people had multiple interests.

I'll have to eliminate the all of the above question in the next vote, and ask people to indicate their first choice, so we know more precisely which options are most popular.

I am behind the 99%declaration.
I would be willing to join a third party, especially if we can absorb the Peace Party and so forth -- however that works, coming together.
I don't care about a national support group; based on what I have seen in the chaos I am not sure it would work in an online forum.
I like the idea of a National General Assembly, but I don't want to take away from OWS or MichaelP's efforts -- we either drop all this and come together or we will not make it through the fires.

I do agree with John's premise that we are best served by addressing the SOLUTIONS and mobilizing the 99%. The systemic issues in our present government ( corporate manipulation of all branches of government; stolen elections through ballot tampering, redistricting etc; corporate control of mainstream media and bad policy making throughout government) are the main reasons we have no voice and representation for all our issues to be addressed. The deck is stacked against us. I believe this message is what we've been hearing from OWS to Oakland and everywhere in between.

We all know the issues that are important to us and are shared by many others. What we haven't done yet is create a foundation upon which all those issues have a LEGITIMATE and resounding people-powered framework.

I think we have to build it. The People's Congress does have the foundation started that could be built on by all of us.

I also am unsure whether this group is aligned with or separate from the OWSGA. Seems it was aligned at one point. Could someone please clarify that status. If this is an outlying separate group I think we are spinning wheels if we won't or can't be inclusive, countrywide. This would help me understand how and what we're doing here.
Thanks

Like Chris, I would really like to know if we are aligned with the OWSGA. Do we have someone who is in direct touch with someone at the OWSGA who could answer that question? I think it is very important.

As far as I know there is no national OWSGA, they are all local GAs.

A National General Assembly is what the largest percentage of people in this forum want to form according to my poll.

RayArrowood wrote:As far as I know there is no national OWSGA, they are all local GAs.

A National General Assembly is what the largest percentage of people in this forum want to form according to my poll.

I guess what I am asking is, do we have anyone in touch with the original Occupy Wall Street in NYC? I sort of thought that all the other localities with Occupy movements would be in touch with the original OWSNYGA people, as would all the online groups like us, but it sounds like you are saying that we are not really in touch with anyone else in any GAs until each locality sends delegates to Philadelphia? I am astonished!

I would think that would be something we should do.... establish a network of contact people to link all the branches of the movement together in terms of communicating. Surely that would be easy, what with everyone having laptops and ipads and iphones and all that.... no?

I don't know how many local GAs are in touch with the NYC GA simplee. I know there are people in this group that have been in contact with the NYC GA, and probably still are. Brit said he was on good relations with NYC GA I believe.

We have members of local GAs in the forum, so I'm sure what's happening here is getting out to some of the GAs.

An outreach forum section was started here too, so I'm sure many people would like to work on networking the GAs.