One of the great things about the 99% is that it's so inclusive, all individuals are truly welcome and can have their voices heard. But aside from the 1% there are a few other considerations for those who are thinking, and acting in radically democratic ways. For example, it's not cool to come to rallies and marches drunk, high, or in possession of recreational drugs or alcohol. It would be TOTALLY inappropriate to speak at a rally or use the peoples microphone for racist hate speech, MEL GIBSON! And of course it would be downright douche-y to endorse your company or product while addressing an occupy crowd. What has been a source of confusion and contention is the political activity of campaigners, or those who endorse a specific candidate and/or agenda and effectively represent that group and it's strategy. They do not come to the events and cyber hubs of the occupy movement as individuals, but as representatives of that group and/or agenda, often with the only goal of recruiting people to their more limited causes and remedies.
Of these groups one stands above them all in their concerted effort to corral the 99% into their ranks to adopt their agenda and strategy, and that group is made up of Ron Paul supporters who effectively campaign on his behalf. This may have had something to do with the deadline for GOP registration being October 14, of course the Paul campaign wants as many people registered GOP as possible so his odds of winning the Republican nomination increase. There's nothing new about this, and if there's anything "wrong" with it, it's that it's
business as usual politics. In fact, Ron Paul has for years been recruiting those on the left whom he can convince that his agenda is also their agenda, based on a few overlapping issues. Those issues are primarily the ongoing wars and military bases around the globe, abolishing corporate person-hood, and the goal to end the Federal Reserve banking
Money-opoly. And those ideas are already a BIG part of the 99% agenda, so of course anyone can come discuss those issues and bring any idea to the table. But why should those ideas be called Ron Pauls' ideas?
I have attempted to engage in dialog with many of the people who leave Ron Paul links on Occupy Facebook pages, or bring Ron Paul campaign signs to 99% events, and it always goes the same. They tell me that Ron Paul wants what I want, that he has been "fighting the good fight" for decades, and that he is all about "Freedom" and "Liberty." And when I try to tell them that I don't want everything Paul wants, and that I have different ideas about "Freedom" and "Liberty" they go into straw man mode, accusing me of advocating things I never even eluded to. As if I can only TOTALLY agree with Ron Paul, or TOTALLY disagree with him on each and every issue, you're with him or against him. But I believe the majority on the left simply see right through Ron Pauls' gratuitous rhetoric about war, the issue that made him popular on the left during the Bush years when we needed allies on the right to oppose war. And he makes a lot of sense when he talks about the crimes of our nation, not because he's so smart or such a great guy but simply because he's talking about it at all.
So he has some good ideas, so do I, and so do the 99%. So he can tell us that our wars and military policy are wrong, we knew that already no matter how refreshing it is to hear in a republican primary debate. So he has been a life long champion of the cause to end the Federal Reserve, no offense, but so have a lot of us and altogether none of us have achieved this goal thus far through the normal channels of "democracy." So you might think that Ron Paul and his supporters would be overwhelmed with joy knowing they have common goals with the 99%? But their greater goal is to elect Ron Paul for president, and they only see these common goals as opportunities to bring more voters into their fold. So when we talk to them the conversation always short circuits back to Ron Paul, and the strategy is limited to voting for him, a political dead end. Let's face it, Ron Paul will never be the president of the United States, just as Ralph Nader will never be the president, and I knew that when I voted for him. But Ron Paul supporters don't seem to know this, they actually think Paul could win the popular vote, if only the corrupt system would let him.
So their goal is for us to register as GOP voters, and vote for Ron Paul in the primaries. Then IF he wins the primary, vote for him for president, then IF he wins the presidency he will end the wars and end the Fed. Hooray! But wait, what else will he do? He won't bring us universal health care, he claims that's socialism and socialism doesn't work. He may or may not deal with Wall St. beyond breaking up the Fed, but he is 100% for "Free Market Capitalism" which is conservative code for "Unfettered capitalism" which could also be called "Ungoverned Capitalism". Why would you want to remove the rule of law from the market place, isn't that called anarchy? If we apply the "Unfettered" concept to criminal law it would be the law of the jungle, when we apply the same concept to the military we get martial law, why would we want such a savage economic system? I don't hear the wealthy saying we need to remove murder barriers, why remove trade barriers? Ron Paul supporters would dismiss us as mistaking capitalism for "corporatism", I think we know the difference. But they don't seem to understand the difference between "Free Trade" (an oxymoron) and "Fair Trade" a level playing field in which they might actually fail.
I don't need to tackle his whole agenda before I decide whether Ron Paul qualifies to "represent" me, and I know the difference between people joining the discussion as campaigners as oppose to individuals. We are all the 99% as individuals, not as representatives of groups, politicians, corporations, etc. This is not a "rule" and there is no "forcing" people one way or the other. But I know that if I brought my pop up tent and folding table and started selling my wares at an occupy event that I would not
be the 99%, I would be selfishly exploiting the opportunity for my short term economic gain. I don't want to see political canvassing, tabling, or campaigning in the occupy movement anymore than I want to see Fedex style product placement from corporations. I don't want to see political parties recruiting voters any more than I want to see the branches of the military recruiting soldiers among the discontent, despondent youth in the movement. I sincerely have no problem with Ron Paul or his supporters, but as a group, as a campaign, as a unified front with a singular goal, I'd rather they not try to co-opt this movement to their own ends. It's hard to discuss alternatives to our current system when people are trying to convince you to give it another shot.
We are all the 99% as individuals, so please check your Ron Paulitics at the door.
Here is an example of guidelines established for Occupy Wall St. forums, in this case the Global Revolution live stream chat, which has hosted one of the most vibrant and rapid interactions of any online forum:
"We are here for one purpose ...to support the OWS and new occupations..
we do not discuss politics...political candidates...religion...or any other isms..
this is because those topics...bring division and conflict ...and we will not be distracted
if you want to talk about money...or the fed..or the wars...or taxes.. there are other places to do that ..
we have been using these rules for 30 days now... and the make this a safe productive space..
we do not bash anyone...
no racsim...sexism...or any other bigetry is allowed..
HATE, VIOLENCE and ILLEGAL ACTS or DRUGS talk...will get you a perma ban ..
we ask for mutual respect and focus :)
we love and thank every one of you!
when we ban...it is not personal...it is just keeping things on track..
please only share related links...
no personal promotion is allowed...
there are fake donation sites...so be careful :)
please dont spam... it makes it too fast.."
~Global Revolution live stream chat admins.
No comments:
Post a Comment