As the Occupation movement expands to new cities and gains membership, the debate over the principles that should be included in a defining statement of the purpose and objectives of the organization has also expanded. Unfortunately, the growing pains that occur when any such organizational structure is formed become part of the public perception of what the organization is, who its members are, why it exists, and what it wants to accomplish in practical terms. This debate amongst those that have shown support has been useful, at times chaotic, but part of a process that is necessary for this definition to occur. What all occupation movements tend to have in common by nature is the General Assembly, a decision-making body based on consensus and direct democracy. All who choose to participate in this process are welcome.
It should be noted that many organizations have shown support in different ways for the principles as defined by the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Theoretically, as the parent organization, Occupy Wall Street, and those that identify themselves with that name, should determine the principles and agenda of the spin-off groups that have formed based on the activism of those protesters. But something else has occurred. Each sub-group has established its own committees and organizational structures based on the involvement of the various groups and individuals who have chosen to participate in the local protests. There is nothing wrong with this process, yet it should be stated that the existing organizations that have chosen to support Occupy Los Angeles and the other sub-groups that formed after the Occupy Wall Street do not represent the local organizations who are still in the process of defining themselves and their relationship with the Occupy Wall Street organization.
One example is moveon.org's strong association with the movement, declaring it a part of their "American Dream" movement, which will all-too-predictably become a plug for some 2012 presidential candidate that has nothing to do with the movement (and in no way will be elected by consensus).
Another example is the participation of the various union members and representatives who have chosen to participate in local events and committee meetings. The principles of 99% are inclusive, not exclusive. While the participation of union members is welcome, the percentage of union members in the work force is relatively small, less than 20% of the population. For better or for worse, the number of unionized workers has declined over the years to the point of becoming what could be clearly defined as a "special interest" group that does not share the objectives or interests of the general population. The same goes for any pre-existing group that has already formulated its principles, its goals, its founding principles and its legislative agenda.
While the organizational structure of Occupy Los Angeles continues to crystalize, we ask that those groups refrain from misstatements or mischaracterizations regarding their relationship with Occupy Los Angeles or the parent organization.
The term "99%" is a means of isolating that one percent who have demonstrated irresponsible conduct, especially banking officials, that caused the various financial calamities that have plagued the nation since in the form of capital losses, foreclosures, and shrinking budgets for safety-net programs, education, and other essential servies. These are issues issues that effect all of us, so the process of arriving at an organizational structure will necessarily be a work in progress that may appear to be messy and disorganized. That is as it should be, at least for the period of time that is required for the process to occur; but in the meantime, no other organization or group has the authority to speak on behalf of Occupy Los Angeles. Thanks for your participation and your support.
18 Comments
Awesome
Submitted by ctizzie on
To whomever wrote the above: kudos!
And thanks.
Well said
Submitted by Fancy on
Thank you! See you tonight.
Contacted by Occupy SF - DON'T let the same happen in LA
Submitted by Sue Basko on
I am a lawyer. I was contacted by Occupy SF last night to help them as they were being evicted from their space. There is very little a lawyer can do to help if a group is intentionally not following the laws. A group that has even a few people not following the laws is going to be kicked out of a space pretty fast. That happens even with non-protests. Once the situation turns sour, there is no turning back, it usually only escalates.
Occupy LA is peaceful and law-abiding. People and groups not "for" that are derailing Occupy LA.
I made a blog post about the laws from the L.A. Municipal Code that apply in Los Angeles City Hall Park. This has been read by thousands of people. Everyone attending Occupy LA should read it and know it. If everyone follows the laws that apply, the chances of Occupy LA continuing to be welcome in the park are very good. Please read it. These are not my suggestions, these are the provisions in the L.A. Municipal Code.
Here is the link: http://suebasko.blogspot.com/2011/09/los-angeles-protests-legal-info.html
Sue Basko, Lawyer
OCCUPY PEACE - Legal Info on How to Hold a Peaceful Protest or Occupation
So no civil disobedience?
Submitted by OneVoiceOfMany on
So no civil disobedience?
Civil Disobedience
Submitted by jmd8800 on
I think civil disobedience is ongoing at the site right now... 24/7. One does not have to break a law to engage in civil disobedience.
"Since we don't know where we're going we have to stick together in case someone gets there." Ken Kesey
Does not compute
Submitted by Fallout2man on
Civil Disobedience: the active, professed refusal to obey certain laws, demands, and commands of a government, or of an occupying international power.
How can you disobey without disobeying?
pragmatism
Submitted by tony on
walking into the coloseum was obedience to the law....results------- Roman Empire 0, Christ 1
clearify
There was civil disobedience today and yesterday
Submitted by Lee on
Today many participants in Occupy LA joined many hundreds of other protesters with SEIU and ACCE, and marched by several banks in downtown LA, ending at a Bank of America branch, where 11 participants were arrested in peaceful civil disobedience when they refused to stop sitting in at the lobby, after seeking to cash a symbolic gigantic check.
Yesterday, ten protesters, including a minister and a woman who lost her home due to foreclosure, were arrested in a peaceful sit-in at the bank that took her house. At today's demonstration, she announced that her mortgage is now being reviewed.
Derailing occupy la? agent provocateurs? ineffective protest? I don't think so.
There's a big difference between organized civil disobedience by people who have trained for it and who have chosen it, versus people who engage in lawbreaking in a way that involves others who did not choose to risk arrest. It's important to make that distinction: on the one hand there's Gandhi and MLK Jr., and on the other there's sometimes a few idiots throwing stuff at the police, putting everybody else demonstrating peacefully in harm's way. Don't mix them up!
Leone
I think that the success of
Submitted by nobody on
I think that the success of ACCE's work should be seriously considered as a possible direction for Occupy LA to follow - to work with groups that organize the poor and working class. They have experience, and goals that are similar to, or identical to, the many formerly middle class people who are in Occupy all over the place.
The unions are a "special interest group" that represents people who earn anywhere from minimum wage to around $40 an hour. I hope you all think that's part of the 99%! More unions, not less. More workers organizations, not less. Jobs, and better jobs, not shittier jobs.
What LEE said - agree and disagree
Submitted by Sue Basko on
This quote from Lee's statement on this page is so true:
There's a big difference between organized civil disobedience by people who have trained for it and who have chosen it, versus people who engage in lawbreaking in a way that involves others who did not choose to risk arrest. It's important to make that distinction: on the one hand there's Gandhi and MLK Jr., and on the other there's sometimes a few idiots throwing stuff at the police, putting everybody else demonstrating peacefully in harm's way. Don't mix them up!
EXACTLY!
BUT AS TO THE NOTION OF THERE BEING "AGENTS PROVOCATEURS" - oh yes, there are! I have been involved in activist stuff for many years, and have learned the nuance of it all. There are absolutely agents provocateurs. There are also FBI agents / workers who pose as Agents Provocateurs. I DO NOT want to make anyone uneasy, but I was contacted by one just the other night. After all this time, I find them relatively easy to spot. Please do not think Los Angeles is going to have an "occupation" and that there are not going to be undercover law enforcement working it. That's not going to happen.
I wrote a blog post on here about Agents Provocateurs. It comes from years of experience. Read it and you will know what I am talking about. I have gotten strong thank-yous from people who read it. What I wrote is not going to make everyone happy - -because I tell the truth and lay it on the line, in simple, clear language. However, it is important for people to know these things, especially as they venture out as leaders of activism.
Sue Basko, Lawyer
OCCUPY PEACE - Legal Info on How to Hold a Peaceful Protest or Occupation
following closely
Submitted by invisibleipsum on
After reading this post, it puts me at ease to give credence to this movement. You can already see organizations trying to hi-jack this movement. I too am the 99%, no special interests, no organizations, just a regular joe doing his 9-5.
GP item one: pick a geographically symbolic location
Submitted by antiherder on
While supportive of the movement, City Hall clearly not the place to hold this protest. LA's economic powerhouse is land development by Steve Soboroff and the ilk who overspent, overbuilt and recouped losses off the fed. Or the entertainment industry, at least. Go find their playgrounds and protest there just as protesters found wall st. to be their symbolic site. Century City or Beverly Hills. The public spaces are just as large. Creative Artists Agency grassy space, anyone? LA City Hall? REALLY?!
Growing Pains Caution
Submitted by alhs06 on
Well put, this post should be required reading for all of OLA & OWS member's as well as supporting affiliation member who participate @ OLA & OWS rally's.
I realize that a person or group's core structure of values & belief's & the sollution's developed to correct the different impropriorties that adversly affect them, is a constant evolving process. However, & @ no fault to the OWS & OLA organization's, when these values & issues are of a high interest to parties outside of the organization, & no formal or difinitive respones are provided to their queries, it leaves us completely expossed to speculation, assumption's & labeling, as I witnessed on last night's, (10/06/11) 9:00PM edition of the "Kcal channel 9" news broadcast, in which the female Anchor described us as, & I quote, "The Democrat's version of the Tea Party", & another description on this morning KTLA channel 5 newscast as "The group has several different concern's with no clear direction". These comment's were made even after the street reporters were told by a few of our member's our founding beliefe regarding "The 99%" unfair financial restriction' & inequality as impossed upon us by the Greedy 1%..
I am afraid that the speculative classification's by our not so impartial news media will only get louder & stranger as we continue to withold a formal statement for our action's. This could dilute any future interviews with the media by spending half the air time disputing their speculation's.
But all the same, I'm Damn proud of our member's who have been interviewed & the respect they have brought to our movement through your responses, you guy's have been Awesome.
Very successful and peaceful VISIBILTY
Submitted by Corporal Thing A. on
Last evening in SLO. Mostly young people, but a few of us veterans of non-confrontational awareness raising. Marching...singing... smiling... It was not about ME, it IS about ALL of us. We kept repeating "YOU are the 99%".
The group was instructeed to NOT argue with anyone. Engage, yes., with those that are curious. To those that have their minds in concrete, IGNORE THEM. All they do is waste time and energy. It is not our task to try to convert the incontrovertible.
The group and individuals were interviewed by multiple media sources. As a facilitator, I helped guide these brilliant young people to stay on message. To avoid labels. To NOT get pigeon-holed into common definitions.
We wre asked why we were against corporations. We answered that we were NOT against corporations, we just want them to be responsible and accountable...as all good citizens should be. We are not against profit, but we are against profit at the expense of others. We are not anti-capitalist, but we defy the type of GANGSTER CAPITALISM that steals and takes from all of us. We affirm that MONEY should be divested from the political process, as it ultimately corrupts the process . An extreme minority always has undo influence that is usually negative towards the welfare of the vast majoprity.
I was asked WHY was I, were WE protesting. I replied that I was NOT protesting ...we were ATTESTING ... ATTESTING CIVILIZATION, and declaring our mutual responsibilities toward each other. It is how we all are able to live together.
Plenty of 'teachable' moments. Good people coming up and sharing. The young pol/sci student with her two infant sons.
She knows.
The curious fellow that had been confused from corporate media, and found that we were NOT extreme radicals, anarchists, bolsheviks, or other nut-cases. The reporters that discovered that we were/are intelligent, reasoning, fun, able to LISTEN to others for THEIR ideas, respectful, ...and NOT like those few selected by a compromised media in New York to represent ALL of us.
And here's the main thrust: EVERYONE, yes EVERYONE knows ( even if they will not admit it ) that this nation has been screwed over by the totally irresponsible ( at best ) or decidedely criminal 1% ; and that CHANGE...positive CHANGE HAS to happen. The 99%, even if they are still in their homes with enough to eat and have adequate jobs ... they KNOW they are UNDER WATER on their property, whether mortgaged or not. Their retirement, so-called, is deferred. Their portfolio's ...those fortunate enough to have them, are LESS than they contributed.
They KNOW it. THEY are the 99%, but like most people that make an unfortunate decision or investment, they just can't admit it. Most of them, anyway. Some will be like criminals and decieve themselves and others by lying about it. Doesn't change a thing. Some just get angry with those of us that put the TRUTH inescapably in front of them. Many are cowards that fool themselves that they are comfortable, or acquiescent in their confusion and incapability. They are still 99%'ers.
Over 800 individual chapters in three weeks !
YOU ARE the 99% !
Corporal Thing A. 'Civilizationalist'
nuts
Submitted by nobody on
FYI, this anarchist nut case has donated or lent a lot of stuff to your cause. Thanks for insulting me and excluding me.
That's right..."Divide and Conquer"
Submitted by Corporal Thing A. on
Even if one does it on their own.
I have often wondered if 'anarchy' is just a different form of selfishness. Seems as plausible a reality as an objectivist utopia of Randian invention to me.
You are correct, though: A state or society without government or law ...OR Political and social disorder due to the lack of governmental control ...OR, Confusion, chaos, and disorder Are NONE of my causes.
Now, a 'Theory' that regards to absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal that proposes the co-operation and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principle mode of organised society , is an unrealistic pipe dream impossible in any collection of humans.
There is a reason why this movement is growing and spreading .
Corporal Thing A. 'Civilizationalist'
You're arguing against straw
Submitted by nobody on
You're arguing against straw men. I just said I was offended by your aspersions.
Anarchism's not about being without government or law; it's about opposing hierarchy and power. It's not about sowing chaos, but by preventing chaos without police force.
The occupation seems mostly anarchistic to me. They might not identify as anarchists, but they are using consensus decison making, which has been used by anarchists and pacifists for a century. They are populist and anti-elitist - again, all anarchists are like this.
The Occupy differs on economics. They differ on vegetarianism. They differ on having a hard-line leftist perspective. They differ on police. They differ on politicians.
Despite these differences, I support.
I disagree with this movement
Submitted by BRGuy21 on
Everyone who is a part of this movement thinks that they will be able to accomplish something, but last I heard no one knows what it is that they want to accomplish. A good and successful movement has clear goals that it wants to see met, but the Occupy movement does not have this. Therefore, it will fail. Also, the repercussions of this movement will be severe. We're talking a high possibility of a loss of jobs, an even worse economy, etc. Even if the movement was somehow successful, that success would not last long. It may last for a few years, but then we would end up either worse than we are or the same as we are now. Yes, things need to change in this country, but the changes need to come about in a better way. A way that has clear goals and where everyone regardless of wealth, job, race, gender, etc work together instead of accussing each other and fighting one another. Another thing, there is a lot of talk about anarchism on here, so I want to say this: Anarchism, while a noble thing, leads to Ocholocracy (Mob Rule) which ultimately leads to corruption, chaos, a lack of clear leadership, etc. It can even lead to a dictatorship, a police state, a kleptocracy, an oligarchy, etc. Therefore, Anarchism is bad.
Pages