i didn't read LNP3.exe except inter alia but aren't they worried about what happens after it spreads? I mean, not that I agree with them, but I get the sense that, as Boots Riley said to Rolling Stone, they see all this energy and its wild and crazy. They want to harness it. For Riley, the wild and crazy thing is what makes it open to people who want to get involved:
""Some older organizers see this wild, out of control thing and think, 'We need to figure out a way to harness this.' But the wild, out-of-controlness is what makes people feel like they can jump on board."
Basically, they're afraid that it won't be focused and coordinated; less impact. They will engage in actions that aren't thought through enough, that will fail. They will sink into the background, no one paying attention anymore. As a consequence, they think, the movement will die - and of it's own accord - because, naturally, if you organize it and inject party discipline, it won't die.
Then there's the specific demands thing which I just don't get. But I think that is simply due to a completely different approach where the governmentis the object of take over. I think Carrol outlined this, no? His problem with anarchists is that they are opposed to, say, things like single payer health so the goal is to win them over and get them to see that it's important to struggle for such things.
So, the lack of demands thing isn't so much an issue of how to support and sustain growth, but lack of demands means that it probably won't grow into a mechanism for expanding the state as state-leaning socialists and welfare liberals would like?
I see this happening in the Demands working group. I asked someone why, if people block demands out of principled opposition to a demands approach, why they don't just walk away and form their own group. There's nothing stopping anyone from doing so. In fact, they are doing this all the time - other groups - splintering off and using OWS networking to build an autonomous effort. This is especially important, I'd think, if the demands people are right and a majority of folks want to see demands. If that's the case, then it would be trivially easy to get the party compared to, say, being someone in a suburb of Chicago with a brilliant idea and no social movement network to plug into. They have one now.
So, as Catron says, go out there and do it. Or plug into the groups that are doing it. I'm really not sure what the obsession is with OWS, why people feel they *must* shape it to their expectations when it's simple enough to use the network to build the organization you'd like to see. (Yeah, I know it's hard work to organize; but I'm talking about the movement network that was built during this uprisings. That makes life a whole lot easier in terms of organizing.)
<http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/doing-whats-right-not-whats-legal-boots-riley-on-occupy-oakland-20120130#ixzz1lsuZt7zU>http<http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/doing-whats-right-not-whats-legal-boots-riley-on-occupy-oakland-20120130#ixzz1lsuZt7zU>://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/doing-whats-right-not-whats-legal-boots-riley-on-occupy-oakland-20120130#ixzz1lsuZt7zU
>___________________________________
>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)