There's a video from the OccupyDC on Washington Post. Telling moment: the head of media tech ops says live streaming is important for telling their own story. Else, the media will put it into a box, like "the left"; he clarifies, it is not a leftist movement.
Oh, and "head" is in quotation marks, because there is no leadership.
I'm fine with a new generation of hippies, etc, who want to live off the political grid or something. Have fun, really. But I'm not interested in living that way. I'd prefer to have a movement that targets structures--states, etc--to make them fairer, even if that is by force (of law).
christian
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 21, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Chris Maisano wrote:
>
> > So the anarchist types who have been running the show behind the scenes
> and actively disrupting the meetings of the working group crafting the jobs
> for all demand (so much for leaderlessness and self-organization) have
> finally unveiled their Liberty Square Blueprint - and it is utter rubbish.
> Not a single word about the tens of millions of unemployed and
> underemployed, the tens of millions without health insurance, and the tens
> of millions in poverty. Instead, we read about bartering, urban farming, and
> charities. Amazing.
> >
> > Here's the link:
> http://www.freenetworkmovement.org/commons/index.php?title=Liberty_Square_Blueprint
> >
> > The only good thing about this is that its obvious limitations could
> create an opening for socialists to contend for a greater degree of
> political and ideological influence within the movement and raise demands
> that might actually resonate with a broadly-based constituency.
>
> Holy shit, that's awful. Among many things, they seem poisoned by the
> belief that open source software can save the world. (Apparently their
> open-source software doesn't have a spell checker, unless they think there's
> something revolutionary about spelling it "Correlary."
>
> The wish list - which they weirdly refer to as bullet point visions - is
> incredibly vague. How do we "Empower marginalized people to express
> themselves, build community, and engage systemic/cultural discrimination"?
> Who are the "we" that grant "them" this power?
>
> The economic planks:
>
> > • Create an economy in harmony with nature - by
> > • Researching, developing and implementing economic models
> that pursue thriving, abundant and prosperous outcomes for humanity and life
> - growing beyond the dichotomy of unsustainable and sustainable development.
> These economic models must be based on sound ethical assumptions and
> observed individual and market behavior through behavioral economics and
> econometrics
> > • Implementing and improving community currencies, barter,
> sharing, and trade systems Building the support and precedence for local and
> large scale production of renewable energy and food resources
> > • Eliminating financial/resource speculation that supports
> the current economy at the expense of future generations
> > • Learning from and empowering indigenous people in the
> transition to an economy in harmony with nature - as we
> > • Make NYC a pioneer of urban farming, renewable
> energy, grass roots urban/rural exchange, quantitative economic policy and
> indigenous leadership
>
> are close to meaningless. Who are the "we" that would eliminate
> speculation, and how? Presumably not state bodies, so who then? What the
> fuck kind of econometrics do they have in mind? Vector autoregressions will
> set us free? Community currencies and barter are ludicrous - evidently they
> never consulted Graeber on the nonexistence of barter societies.
>
> Did "Ketchup" have anything to do with this?
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>