Political platform provided at Occupy your Capitol

[shage]

Lifted from another thread:

"The reason why McEneny spoke isn't because OA is reformist, it's because the person who put in the work to organize the speaker's event asked him to be there."

So anyone who is willing to "put in the work" is authorized to provide Occupy as a political platform for whomever they please?

I would like to know who organized the speaker's event. I would like to know why they think it was appropriate to provide a special platform for people who already have power, over the grassroots. They had these politicians speak first, and gave them unlimited time to speak. This speaks of a cynicism about what ordinary people have to say, and a mentality of being in league with established systems of power. This is the kind of thing I hope we will come together to oppose, and I would like to start by investigating this incident and bringing the procedure that allowed it to happen publicly into question.

We need to establish measures to be taken to prevent unilateral action on behalf of people who favor particular established political groups, and to prevent further priviliging of persons with established power in our space, which is mean to be equally empowering to all persons.

I strongly oppose what happened Saturday, not in that I want those politicians to be silenced, but in the attitude that was taken of treating them as a special spectacle. That is a retrograde attitude and does not reflect my hopes and intentions for occupy.


I have a proposed term for what happened Saturday: "Regressive Stack."
The attitude of putting already empowered people first and giving them longer to talk is the opposite of progressive stack and the spirit of this movement.

[denmarkvesey]

organize or own event stop bitching so annoying this whole board is like a shittier version of Phantasytour

[shage]

no, brother. this is my movement too. I don't need to organize my own event. This is my event as much as it is yours or anyone else's. And I will not be intimidated by your punctuation-free ranting, mocking, and swearing. Your attitude all over this board is wearing thin on many people.

Since you look down on everyone else who posts here with a different perspective, and present no positive view of your own besides mocking what you don't like, I have to wonder what great contribution you feel you are making to this movement that entitles you to look down on everyone else from a position of such smug superiority.

You seem to only be pleased with a poster when they are offering a handout you can grab. If the board is annoying you, kindly focus your energy somewhere else that you find more useful, and stop denigrating the space for others who are attempting to use it productively to share and work out ideas and issues.

[dylan]

Hey Shage, point taken. The person who put this together also did the October 15th event and most of the feedback from that event was great. They basically did the same event here. Two things I would like to balance with your criticisms though is that accepting volunteer's time and effort is similar to accepting donations in that we want to encourage it even if we end up with something we don't stand behind 100%. Also I think you can make the case that by having these people at the event it helps to defend the encampent against raids by the city. This is obviously a larger discussion but I thought I'd put these perspectives on the table.

I do certainly agree that there are voices out there that I would love to hear at future events that weren't represented here and where I am involved with planning in the future I'll try to do a better job with this. We put this together in <4 days and we did the best we could and overall I hope everyone had a great time.

[shage]

I don't mean to come down too hard on this. I simply want to keep this in the spirit of a grassroots movement and valuing everyone's voices and inclusiveness. The bottom line is that if we are going to have impact, we need to keep growing. There is much more poorly directed discontent out there and awareness that can be raised. If we bring in already known politicians, we are pigeonholing ourselves. I don't have any personal opinion for or against those particular politicians.

However, I feel if we have any strength, it is to be found in our own voices and stories. They are every bit as valid and that is our best hope for reaching out to more people in the capital region. They already hear the politicians and pundits all the time and are either attuned to dittoing them or tuning them out.

We can offer something different by

-placing our own real life stories at the forefront

-showing that we value everyone's voice equally. i would hope that the events mirror the spirit of a GA as much as possible, in not according special status to individuals. I realize this was not a GA, and there are no requirements that events conform to those same ideals. For the sake of perception though, I think we are best served by not giving the appearance of picking political sides or privileging certain voices.

By no means do i suggest I have the right to dictate that, I'm just telling you how I felt about it. If others had not spoken up to say they were opposed to this giving the appearance of being coopted, and organizing to prevent future instances of it, I am sure I would not have come and would have ceased investing my energies in this particular branch of the movement.

Most of the event was great, and I can tolerate a certain presence of politicians so long as they are kept low key, we are not giving official endorsements, and folks of all backgrounds are welcomed (so long as they are civil, unlike the guy with the cane...) We simply need to be more careful not to toe the line with appearing to give preference and special status. If a caucus formed that same day it's not an accident, it's not anyone's aim to put any individuals doing work at risk, it's simply that we want to make clear that we didn't feel that this represented our best interests, and that we want to have a voice in future decisions along these lines. In the long run these deals cut with politicians for their "protection" will only short circuit our potential impact. After all the government is on one point of view, just a mafia. We should oppose the idea that we need them for "protection." If we do that, we are just echoing the dependent, fear based system that is already in place, and that turns occupy simply into a ghettoized shadow of politics as usual. Rather than take a place at the bottom of the totem pole, why not be fearless and change the terms of the game? It is within reach. Reality can be renegotiated tomorrow or any day. Let's give as little ground to the ordinary ways of thinking as possible.