[Campaignforrealdemocracy] Occupy LSX: What can be undone & how we may do it

[Mark Barrett]

Hi Justin

Before I forward this can you please check

"Their leaders tend to be right-wing Labour Party supporters, their members
are not radical left-wingers, if we do not speak to them in a way they can
understand and accept, then LSX has won. "

Did you mean 'then LSX has lost' ?

Also

*"I don't believe we should propose a new economic system* or some ready
made solution...
The third thing I propose is what our principles/demands could be: they
should be concrete and recognise that real power lies with the masses not
parliament nor the banks. Our demands should not repeat stagnant Leftist
rhetoric and *it should demand nothing less than a fundamental break with
the existing economic system* that has brought us to this point."

Can you clarify what you mean by this ? ( it seems contradictory)

Finally, just to let you know I will be working with others to put all this
into a constitutional UK context (your last para about new structures etc
and what that might look like so we can get a sense of where we might be
going that can appeal to the wider public, left and right as with activists
as you suggest.

Let me know your clarifications and I will forward  your mail asap to the
Occupy London people.

PS everyone there is a positive Daily Mail article on the protests today ,
which even mentions the primacy of the Assemblies :-)!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2047277/Thousands-plan-protest-camp-Londons-financial-centre-inspired-Occupy-Wall-Street-campaign.html?ito=feeds-newsxml


On 10 October 2011 09:23, Justin Baidoo-Hackman
<justin.baidoo at yahoo.co.uk>wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am a voluntary community organiser and software developer, I run a blog
> called the Multicultural Politic. You could label my politics as Libertarian
> Socialism. I will be at another meeting this evening so I am writing my
> points to you all to raise points about how the UK Occupy movements could
> organise itself.
>
> I believe that the global Occupy movements from the Icelandic and Arab
> Revolts to the Spanish Indignados to now Occupy Wall Street, are a necessary
> and timely series of events.
>
> I think the common thread throughout all these uprisings from below is the
> willingness of the people to resist in a largely non-violent way in order to
> bring about fundamental changes to their societies. I will now propose three
> things about how this collective could progress.
>
> I will state briefly these proposals for dissemination at a meeting, below
> that will be an expounding of them.
>
> 1. Build open, non-hierarchial democratic structures ala Climate Camp. Too
> much secrecy will kill support.
>
> 2. Resist sectarianism. Seek to gain support from beyond the usual suspects
> including the mainstream right-wing public. Involvement of the 3+ million
> strong Labour movement is essential.
>
> 3. Have concrete, realistic but imaginative demands. These are points of
> unity and organisation. "End Capitalism" is laudable but not concrete and is
> ambiguous about the agency that will achieve it. Do not legitimise the
> existing dictatorial power structures. A few examples of concrete demands
> are: "Stop all austerity measures like Welfare Reform" and "Enable real
> workplace democracy in RBS and other state owned/controlled banks and
> industries".
>
> Ok so here are my proposals in more detail.
>
> So what I propose first of all is that we are open, non-hierarchial and
> democratic, build structures of responsibility and accountability.
>
> Secrecy is a tactic that we should use sparingly and not as a cultural
> norm. We should assume that we are already under surveillance, what Mark
> (Stone) Kennedy showed that the infiltrators no longer always break
> movements now it is movements that break infiltrators with their honesty and
> commitment. The experience of climate camp is crucial, we can have
> democratic and non-hierarchial structures that are effective. We must
> however agree as organisers to stick and seek these principles and methods.
>
> My second proposal is that we must move beyond ideological sectarian
> ghettos and be actively seek to engage with ordinary people who hold
> right-wing views.
>
> We need to view this UK movement in the context of millions not hundreds or
> thousands. If Occupy LSX will resonate with millions then we need to be
> broad and open but not unprincipled and not without any ideological binding
> principles.
>
> The best and most concrete successes so far have been in Tunisia and Egypt,
> where change has been precluded by a militant trade union movement that has
> taken political and as well as industrial motivated strikes.
>
> I am an active trade unionist, I will seek to get my union branch, region
> and the Young Members committees that I am part of, to participate in this
> movement. However there needs to be structures that will accommodate them.
>
> This video has gone viral (100,000+ views) on the interwebs about a Wall
> Street Protester: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQow0Fhua1A&feature=share.
> It is essentially an anti-big state, anti-bailout argument, it resonates
> because a lot of the analysis is accurate but his solution (Vote Ron Paul)
> is abhorrent.
>
> However this guy judging by YouTube comments has probably brought a lot of
> right-wing libertarian grassroots support for Occupy Wall Street. Does that
> matter?
>
> I believe it does and is a positive step. I think if we rely on the
> factional largely Trotskyist dominated radical left then the Occupations are
> screwed, the direct action faction typified by Solidarity Fed and UKUncut
> (which is to the right) is too small also. The unions represent the
> organised workforce and the dominating ideas of ordinary people. Their
> leaders tend to be right-wing Labour Party supporters, their members are not
> radical left-wingers, if we do not speak to them in a way they can
> understand and accept, then LSX has won. I don't believe we should propose a
> new economic system or some ready made solution.
>
> The third thing I propose is what our principles/demands could be: they
> should be concrete and recognise that real power lies with the masses not
> parliament nor the banks. Our demands should not repeat stagnant Leftist
> rhetoric and it should demand nothing less than a fundamental break with the
> existing economic system that has brought us to this point. We need to be
> clear that this current system is the enemy though we can select individuals
> that are leading proponents. In fact we should somewhat but not totally
> personalise it to help communicate the problem with this system.
>
> A key demand is for an end of austerity and attacks on living standards. No
> more homelessness, etc. I guess some would call these "Transistional
> demands", I don't care about the labels but some if not all our demands
> should be "feasible" which means within the power of existing structures but
> they should lead towards their abolishment and replacement of these existing
> dictatorial/hierarchial power structures with new non-hierarchial/democratic
> ones.
>
> In relation to the 15th October I will publish more of my thoughts on this
> website: http://www.tmponline.org
>
> --
> Justin Baidoo
>
> Editor of TMP: http://www.tmponline.org
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/justinthelibsoc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Campaignforrealdemocracy mailing list
> Campaignforrealdemocracy at lists.aktivix.org
> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/campaignforrealdemocracy
>
>


-- 
Apathy is Dead !
http://www.flickr.com/photos/solarider/5254770064/#/photos/solarider/5254770064/lightbox/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/campaignforrealdemocracy/attachments/20111010/25508d4e/attachment-0001.htm>