tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4718120950252476804.post4481993031194773808..comments2023-12-28T09:21:30.579-05:00Comments on Adam Holland: Occupy Wall Street and the perils of the big tentAdam Hollandhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06245468599571473818noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4718120950252476804.post-56728866069386604072011-11-23T12:40:38.567-05:002011-11-23T12:40:38.567-05:00This is a great article. Agree with every word of ...This is a great article. Agree with every word of Adam's, as well as Joanne's comments.<br /><br />Clearly Occupy has no ability to physically kick out anyone who holds up a sign or gives an interview. <br /><br />The big problem is that they also have hobbled themselves even in their ability to make group statements about what fringe positions the movement officially rejects.<br /><br />The bane of the Occupy movement is its devotion to the 90% consensus rule. Only individual city General Assemblies can issue statements; there is no nationwide assembly. And most cities have a 90% consensus rule, where any statement issued as the voice of that assembly must get "twinkles up" votes from 90% of the people gathered there.<br /><br />We have enough trouble getting any policy through Congress with the 60% majority needed to break filibuster! Can you imagine what it would be like if no bill or resolution could be passed without a 90% majority? Yet that's the rule Occupy has chained themselves to.<br /><br />I don't see much chance of getting this to change, as much as many now regret it, due to a Catch-22 problem. Once that kind of rule is adopted in the first place, it's very hard to escape from because the sum of all the fringe elements is always going to exceed 10%. So a vote to ratchet down the consensus threshold will always fail.<br /><br />So we mainstream supporters may have to be resigned to continually countering the fringe on a case-by-case basis.Teri Pettithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09498912863887650851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4718120950252476804.post-17456778288806780372011-11-02T20:40:21.352-04:002011-11-02T20:40:21.352-04:00That's the problem with any movement that'...That's the problem with any movement that's such a big tent. Protests can become like county fairs in which every cause--no matter how marginal or crazy--can have a booth.<br /><br />In the video, the lady representing Occupy said that the issue of Ms. McAllister was a matter of freedom of speech. But this is a bit of a dodge. While freedom of speech should exist in the society as a whole, it doesn't mean that any specific movement should be indiscriminatory. The Occupy protests comprise--or are trying to comprise--a coherent movement with coherent goals. Making it clear that Ms. McAllister has no place in their movement would not abridge her freedom of speech, as Ms. McAllister could speak anywhere; it would just abridge her ability to use the movement as a cover. <br /> <br />Also, the Occupy rep has to understand that this well-known movement grants a certain de facto imprimatur to those causes it shelters under its big tent. <br /><br />I noticed that the Occupy rep said that she disapproved of "hate speech," but wouldn’t make a stand against the substance of Ms. McAllister’s statements, no matter how much the interviewer tried to goad her. That’s a little disturbing. It’s as if publicly disagreeing with the view that “the Jews own the Fed” would be considered too partisan and therefore unacceptable.<br /><br />By the way, I visited the demonstration in Zuccotti Park recently, and saw only one antisemitic sign, something against fighting against Iran for the sake of Israel. The rest of the signs were harmless enough and even spot on. There were, however, some inconsistencies. Next to signs saying we should have more services for the people were a few signs saying there should be no IRS and no Fed. Frankly, it's this sort of thing that can trivialize a movement in the eyes of many. I’ve read that the New York occupiers are holding discussions with the goal of coming up with a shared program. They have their work cut out for them. <br /><br />Two more points, about the video:<br />1. I wondered what David Duke was thinking when Ms. McAllister said "this is my country, too." I noticed he didn't respond to that statement.<br /><br />2. Ms. McAllister is anti-Zionist. So, if she wants to deport so many Jews (if not all of them), where does she want to deport them to? Er, Israel?Joannehttp://www.joanne-gerber.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4718120950252476804.post-83036731711024544182011-11-01T12:37:09.226-04:002011-11-01T12:37:09.226-04:00lot's of creeps are showing up at the Occupies...lot's of creeps are showing up at the Occupies; here's one of the better round-ups: http://ladylibertyslamp.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/infiltrators-of-the-occupy-movement/radicalarchiveshttp://www.radicalarchives.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4718120950252476804.post-23656652928520226972011-11-01T09:53:28.925-04:002011-11-01T09:53:28.925-04:00Glad you're coming back to the blog.
Also, t...Glad you're coming back to the blog. <br /><br />Also, the video was just something that I, as an African-American, couldn't watch, and probably won't. From what has already been said in many other blogs (Hurry Up Harry, HuffPo, etc.), massive lulz is being had by sociocons and religiocons alike at the expense of #Occupy, when the ideals of #Occupy are much, much more than the disgruntled and nascent would-be executors and footsoldiers of wanton violence against civilians. <br /><br />And then reading on another blog that she's received a ringing endorsement from the American Nazi Party simply because of mutual insane hangups. But I can't even begin to pretend to know what brought her to such a massive, wild-eyed persecution complex, particularly the sort of complex that makes her useful to white supremacists.Rayne Van-Dunemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04989783677878528917noreply@blogger.com