[WS:] I am pretty much with you on this. It was deservedly ridiculed by Monty Python http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html
However, to play a role of devil's advocate - "sectarianism" aka diversity can be a good thing in the first stage of a movement. It means that the movement attracts diverse groups and interests. Of course, to be successful, a movement must engage in "frame bridging" which basically means incorporating these various interests and "demands" into a single coherent frame that serves as guidance to further political action. So at this stage, "sectarianism" of OWS does not concern me that much - although in general it is a pretty annoying feature of left movements. I would be more concerned, however, if it persisted in, say, six months from now.
Wojtek
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Chuck Grimes <c123grimes at att.net> wrote:
> Why?
>
> --------
>
> Some apology is in order.
>
> However, reading through these explanations just pissed me off. This
> whatever it is, is quickly devolving into something resembling sectarian
> bullshit of yore. It's something I really have no interest in at all.
>
> Why, because I fight this kind of fight nearly everyday, as I propose and
> figure out actions and somebody from nowhere objects on the basis of this or
> that. It's been going on for six fucking months. Meanwhile nothing was
> getting done. Finally, Friday we had a meeting that got somewhere.
>
> Example. I researched a line of cleaning products that were hypoallergenic,
> or claimed to be because the scent-lady in the org, objected to what I used
> in the past. We are supposed to be all inclusive. I looked up a hospital
> line, and that was found wanting...
>
> In a long ago face to face confrontation over this issue, I told the woman,
> You bring in what you want me to use, and I will clean your chair. She
> turned around and left in a huff. She never came back. Much later I looked
> up what sectarian scent-people prefer. White distilled vingar. Fine bring it
> in and I'll use it.
>
> Political movements attract a certain kind of person who whether they know
> it or not are obstructionists by character. OWS has evidently collected
> quite a few. You'all better gain some handle on these people or you are
> doomed.
>
> BTW consensus is itself a demand, and is precisely the sort of tyranny that
> Bookchin was writing about
>
>
> CG
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>