Scratch a hippie, sniff a fucking libertarian.
anyway, hard to say that any one model of mobilizing/organizing was what was going on in the sixties, at least not from the book I'm reading: Freedom is and Endless Meeting. (Reminds me that I had a reply to robert, but somehow deleted. Oh, and a thanks to Eric and Ravi. one reason why I'm behind in replying is that, yeah, exactly. I put stuff off that deserves a reply and never get back to it. Which is why I often just toss it off, type fast, never edit, hit send, and fuck it. Anyway: thanks!)
Still, the book is enlightening, especially in light of recent developments. You get a real sense of how, at least among the groups she studied, pragmatic the choices were.
What other kind of "organizing" would have worked among people who had very little political experience - such as early SNCCor the MFDP. These were people who didn't have educations, didn't know formal rules for meetings, didn't know who to make arguments, were often no match against the people who were comfortable speaking, etc.
Mobilizing in the sense of building consensus and focusing on process was a way of _creating_ leadership - of mobilizing people for citizenry, a citizenry they'd never been able to exercise before.
Mobilizing in the sense of building consensus and focusing on process taught people how to think through the issues they faced, find the language to describe what was going on. I mean, when you're talking about what "nonviolence" means - does it mean protecting yourself once attacked? can you carry a gun as a nonviolence advocate? what if the people with whom you work carry guns?
she also confirms my experience with consensus democracy versus others kinds of organizing.
If what you need is everyone to be on te same page, when you absolutely need solidarity because lives depend on it, because you can't afford for anyone to not do what was agreed to... then voting ain't gonna cut it.
anyway, good book. I think it's hard to really get what she is talking about if you've never been involved in building anything from the ground up, but it's worth a shot if you're interested in this stuff.
> From Doug's Report: "A guy in a Teamster jacket attracted some press
> attention (“so you’re not all hippies,” asked the reporter). Beyond,
> the
> news zipper reports that “Occupy Wall Street Movement Goes Worldwide.”
>
> The media don't have their formula yet and have been trying out old
> ploys, the "hippie" one being a favorite, but of course it isn't
> working. But they will, unfortunately, learn as they did in the '60s.
> I
> don't know what it will be, but one think is certain: It will bear
> little resemblance to the reality. I don't know how many on this list
> I've persuaded to read Morgan, but if you do, it will prepare you to
> some extent for the way in which activity will appear and disapperar
> from the news, and the strange forms it will take when it does appear.
> Clearly the internet will make communication _within_ the movement(s)
> less dependent on the media, but it will be up to participants to get
> the messages out to a wider public: the media won't do it. It's no use
> even spending any time or thought to how to get "good" publicity. It
> won't come.
>
> Those of us experienced in other ways of mobilizing ourselves and
> building on results are going to find the current movement
> continuously
> gratng 00 That was my experience today as I sat through a session of
> the
> Occuy ISU on the steps of the old courthouse in Bloomington, and I've
> worked out a provisional personal slogan to allow for that: I hope the
> Occupy Movement with its current "process" goes an awful lot longer
> than
> I want it to.
>
> Carrol
>
> P.S. Probably no one has noticed that a month or two ago the word
> "organize" disappeared from my vocabulary to be replaced by
> "mobilize."
> Marv in a post described his ideal "organizer," and in my response to
> that post I quoted that and said something like "that sounds about
> right." Then after I clicked the send button I began to think, and the
> more i thought the more I began to feel that we really did not want
> Mark's super Organizer; that in fact in so far as we were successful
> in
> the '60s it was through mobilization by groups, not by organizers.
> Organizers belong in the back room keeping the web site up to date.
> The
> better ones will of course emerge to work with others in mobilizing, a
> collective task that needs no superheroes except as part of that.
>
> ----
>
> On 10/15/2011 9:05 PM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>> Report, analysis, pix:
>>
>> http://lbo-news.com/2011/10/15/ows-takes-a-walk-uptown/
>> ___________________________________
>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)