I saw these four lines of text on the centerfold of the Sept/Oct 2011 issue of Adbusters magazine:
What is our one demand?
#OCCUPYWALLSTREET
SEPTEMBER 17TH.
BRING TENT.
What is our one demand?
As the quoted section below makes clear, Adbusters has put out a call for “20,000 people [to, on Sept. 17 of this year] flood into lower Manhattan…and occupy Wall Street for a few months.” And they put out this call without even having decided on “What is our one demand?” What??
QUOTE:
Tahrir succeeded in large part because the people of Egypt made a straightforward ultimatum – that Mubarak must go – over and over again until they won. Following this model, what is our equally uncomplicated demand?
The most exciting candidate that we've heard so far is one that gets at the core of why the American political establishment is currently unworthy of being called a democracy: we demand that Barack Obama ordain a Presidential Commission tasked with ending the influence money has over our representatives in Washington. It's time for DEMOCRACY NOT CORPORATOCRACY, we're doomed without it.
:UNQUOTE.
My critique of this quote:
Somehow, it doesn’t seem right to compare “Mubarak must go” with “ordain a Presidential Commission.” Egyptians were expressing their dissatisfaction by focusing on one particular person. We’re being encouraged to believe that one particular person (Barack Obama) should be looked upon as some savior by anointing a Presidential Commission.
This Commission, even if “ordained,” could not do what Adbusters is suggesting; it could not end “the influence money has over our representatives in Washington.” It could make recommendations or even draft legislation. But only our Congress (and President) could end “the influence money has” – not some Presidential Commission.
And Congress is not going to do any such thing, since it will be lobbied not to. So why is Adbusters calling on 20,000 people to “occupy Wall Street for a few months” in order to demand a Commission which cannot achieve the desired result? Not to mention: In the name of trying to identify one equally uncomplicated demand, we’re being asked to work within the system – when the system itself won’t allow that. Asking that we demand a Presidential Commission sounds as lacking in pizzazz as asking that we write our Congressmen and newspapers.
Yeah, like that’s going to work.
The basic problem boils down to Adbusters’ hope for one “uncomplicated demand.” The situation is too complicated for such a hope – especially if the idea is to pressure Obama into doing anything. And that whole bit about “Democracy, not Corporatocracy” is nonsense, since we can’t even agree on what democracy is or how to effect it. NOTE: The word “democracy” doesn’t appear even once in our Constitution.
Another quote from Adbusters:
QUOTE:
Source: http://www.adbusters.org/campaigns/occupywallstreet :The beauty of this new formula, and what makes this novel tactic exciting, is its pragmatic simplicity: we talk to each other in various physical gatherings and virtual people's assemblies … we zero in on what our one demand will be, a demand that awakens the imagination and, if achieved, would propel us toward the radical democracy of the future … and then we go out and seize a square of singular symbolic significance and put our asses on the line to make it happen.
On September 17, we want to see 20,000 people flood into lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades and occupy Wall Street for a few months. Once there, we shall incessantly repeat our one simple demand until Barack Obama capitulates.
for the wild,
Culture Jammers HQ
:UNQUOTE.
The word “we” is used above, but lacks clarity:
· “We zero in on what our one demand will be” – But who decides? Is this put to a vote? Who would be eligible to vote and how would voters be identified?
· “we go out and seize a square…put our asses on the line…” Will the staff, editors, and owners of Adbusters be there? Will they put their “asses on the line?”
The quote mentions setting up “peaceful barricades” and occupying “Wall Street for a few months.” However, the aforementioned centerfold shows a background image of protestors, surrounded by a cloud of tear gas, wearing gas masks (one guy even wielding a club). That’s “peaceful?” How does one set up a “peaceful barricade?” How does one peacefully occupy Wall Street for a few months?
Then there’s the matter of how the quoted material is signed: “for the wild,
Culture Jammers HQ.” Sounds to me like Adbusters is looking forward to a “wild,” rip-roaring good time confronting the cops. At your expense!
How will this actually play out?
Suppose 20,000 people were to descend on Wall Street on September 17, which is a Saturday by the way? I’ll go way out on a limb here and say the organizers did not even bother with the formality of obtaining a parade or demonstration permit for the 17th itself. They just want 20,000 people to show up to a part of town which will be deserted until Monday. Being deserted, the cops won’t have much trouble identifying the protestors and they won’t have to worry about innocent bystanders getting their heads busted open by billy clubs.
As the protestors gradually show up with their tents and their intentions being fairly obvious, the cops will tell them to move on. And will arrest them if they don’t. Now, here’s where it gets interesting: Even if no charges are ever filed, the authorities will have a lot of valuable names in their database. Names that will be shared with, among others, the Department of Homeland Security. The feds would love to identify people who are so dedicated to the cause, they would actually respond to this kind of call to action. I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t want my name on such a database. Could lead to harassment later on down the line.
In fact, I have to question which side Adbusters is really on, coming up with a boneheaded campaign like this?
So what to do?
People feel powerless these days – especially young people. So in the name of “do something, anything,” they might be tempted to do some rather foolish things. The good news, though, is desperate action is not (yet) required.
It’s absolutely necessary, though, for us to reach out and talk, so we can learn from and teach others. In addition to talking, there are practical measures we can take from the comfort of our own homes, without risking our physical safety or calling attention to ourselves – unwanted attention from the authorities. Some examples:
· Register to vote in the GOP primary with the specific goal of disrupting their proceedings by (for example) voting for their least popular candidate or the one least likely to win the nomination – or for Ron Paul.
· Be a wise consumer. This means, don’t buy heavily-advertised, brand-name products; delay buying that new car; patronize small businesses; cancel your print and cable TV subscriptions; don’t buy Christmas presents (buy, yes, but buy and give at a time of your choosing – off-season).
· Boycott the big banks – instead save and borrow from smaller, local institutions.
· Vote all incumbents out of office, even if you happen to like “your guy.” Even liberal Democrats should not be afraid that doing so could give the GOP the presidency and both houses of Congress. That would be the bitter pill we’d have to swallow to pave the way for independents to emerge.
· Don’t contribute any money to political campaigns – not even for “Change you can believe in.”
· Consider the unique method of establishing a third political party that I’ve described at http://ind4prez2012.blogspot.com/2010/09/zero-party-system-for-us-politics.html .
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“There are too many effective things we can do, instead of something as blatantly stupid as trying to seize Wall Street”
Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment