[OccupyCU] Proposal for action: OccupyCU trip to the CTU rally! Saturday Sept. 15.

[pat.simpson at comcast.net]

Hello all.  Following up on Damian's email, I wanted to supply below info from ARISE Chicago which is organizing support work for the CTU.  If you cannot make the trip to Chicago, there are additional recommendations about how to help. 



Solidarity, 



Pat Simpson 



What You Can Do to Support Teachers: 

    • Each day of the strike, you can join teachers on the picket lines at every school from 6:30 to 10:30am. Click here for list sorted by school or by zip code . 
    • Volunteer at the Chicago Teachers Union Strike Solidarity Center at Teamsters Auditorium at 300 S. Ashland to make signs and banners, organize donations, help with sign distribution, sign-up to leaflet materials, help with banner drops, etc. Call Luke for details: 616-745-5134 or just show up. 
    • Join teachers and supporters to rally and march every day. Check out CTU’s Strike Central for daily action updates. 
    • Offer public prayers for and blessings of teachers in your house of worship and invite a teacher to speak. 
    • Pick up your CTU support signs at Teamsters Auditorium at 300 S. Ashland to put in your window or yard and distribute signs to coffee shops, work places, etc. For those driving by, pick-up on Van Buren, just west of Ashland, is possible without getting out of your car. 
    • Call Gus or Daisy at Primo’s Pizza at (312) 243-1052, a locally owned and teacher-friendly restaurant to make a donation by credit card so teachers and supporters at the Solidarity Center can have pizza, pasta, and salads delivered to them. Consider pooling donations with others and making just one phone call. Please try not call during peak hours of 11:45 to 1:15. Donations have already been called in from around the country! 
    • Call Mayor Emanuel at 312-744-330 or CPS CEO Brizard at 773-553-1500 to tell them that CPS students deserve smaller class sizes, more libraries and computers, and that the teachers deserve a fair contract. 
    • Wear red every day, even if you are not able to join the marches. 
    • Sign up to get the latest news: 
    • Facebook : www.facebook.com/ChicagoTeachersSolidarity 
    • Twitter: @CTSCampaign or @AriseChicago 
    • Website: ctscampaign.weebly.com 
    • CTU Strike Central 
    • Questions? Email: ChicagoTeachersSolidarity at gmail. com 
    • Text message updates: text @ctsc2012 to 23559 to receive strike and picket updates 


----- Original Message -----


From: "Luis Damián Reyes Rodríguez" <ldamian21 at gmail.com> 
To: "Colan Holmes" <colanholmes at gmail.com> 
Cc: "E. Wayne Johnson" <ewj at pigsqq.org>, "occupycu at lists.chambana.net" <occupyCU at lists.chambana.net> 
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 1:13:10 AM 
Subject: [OccupyCU] Proposal for action: OccupyCU trip to the CTU rally!        Saturday Sept. 15. 

Solidarity with Rachel. And with everyone who feels nauseated by the latest sexist rant, and the persistent offensive comments being made by very aggressive and toxic people. I think the majority of us believes that we can debate and disagree passionately within Occupy as long as we respect ourselves as comrades in struggle. But the sexist comment made this day is not comradely respectful at all. People have already said the essential points, far and wide in a very polite manner. I'm sorry, but I'll have to say it: E. Wayne Johnson, shut up and fuck off! 

Now, I have an action proposal for OccupyCU . I hope it is not too late to get stuff done: 
This weekend is close to 1 year since OWS started. And this weekend is also a decisive moment in the Chicago teachers strike. The CTU is calling all unions, social justice organizations and unaffiliated sympathetic citizens to join them and march through the streets of Chicago this Saturday at noon. 
I propose that OccupyCU movilizes all out in support! We should go and show Rahm "fucking1%" Emmanuel and his bi-partisan-corporate backers that bullying the teacher's union has been the worst idea they could have had in the whole history of their pathetic charter-school movement! 

The CTU is standing strong, because they know very well that this is much more than just wages, benefits or pensions: This is the moment to defy the plans of privatization of the whole educational system... Maybe Rahm thought that the CTU was an easy prey because it counts several thousands of women and people of color within their rank-and-file, people who have a lot to lose in a labor battle. But rank-and-file teachers knew better: this is no longer the feud of the 1%! They can no longer do as they please! Not without a fight back! 


Finally, just b y the way, to the people that keep spamming the occupy list-serv: if you want to debate any kind of controversial topic, call a General Assembly and make your point there. I'll attend... Unless you are not prepared to confront the reaction you provoke face to face? That's a risk that comes with the bundle. But, after all, there's little to be afraid of... OccupyCU developed some good, though perfectible, mechanisms to keep in check our passions, and I think we can guarantee your dignity and physical integrity. But if you are not willing to defend your point of view at a General Assembly, then please stop spamming everyone with multiple emails filled of your personal thoughts. Write a blog, get a TV or radio show, or whatever... but don't take over this email list! Please! (I really hope you've bothered to read until the end of this email...) 

With revolutionary love, 
Damián 

P.S.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yN7cRZP58k ! 


On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:13 PM, Colan Holmes < colanholmes at gmail.com > wrote: 


Hello, 

Discussions/Arguments like these tend to bring out the worst mood in me for reasons perhaps too complex to explain in an email, but I'm going to try to isolate some of the elements of that mood for the group and myself. 

1. I tend not to be a very vocal person. This is partly because I, at some point, noticed that most of the people who I encounter in our society (as it is) are more interested in conversing so that they can express something, rather than so that they can listen to the view of another. This is especially true of people who have social privilege. Oddly, one of the venues where this is most noticeable is in activist groups, and this was glaringly apparent in Occupy (certainly more so early on, it ebbs and flows, but this email list has been really bad for the last week or more). 

2. Through my involvement in activist groups, I've noticed divergent views on the idea of freedom/liberty, and that these different views often correspond to individuals' social privilege. Often, the loudest, most privileged members conceive of liberty as something that gives them the right to act as they please with little regard for the well-being of others. For them, socially (perhaps not politically/economically) freedom is the status quo, and their activism tends to be abstract. On the other hand, those who remain quiet, and who often lack social privilege, conceive of liberty as something that necessarily involves a transformation of society (and the individuals therein) such that privilege (social/individual) is minimized, as their experience often teaches them that freedom and equality are intertwined. 

My frequent use of the word "often" in the last paragraph is intentional -- please don't think I'm saying that privileged=loud="free-for-all liberty" and those lacking privilege=quiet="equal liberty" are iron-clad equations, always applicable. 

3. Finally, while I am cynical of the notion that the path to a liberated society can be traversed via an organization that adopts both libertarian and egalitarian principles in the immediate, believing that such organizations tend to crumble under the weight of the dominant notion of liberty, such organizations (in which I include Occupy) sometimes do offer respite from our unequal, un-free society. I have enjoyed those times. 

But I'm tired. I'm often tired. And if anyone would like to private-message me about a more stable social "safe-space" I'd greatly appreciate it. 

Autonomy, 
Chandler 



  


On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Rachel Storm < rachelstrm at gmail.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>
Ingbert, Scott, Sarah, Brook--- 


Thank you for your words, your support. You're right. I don't want people to shut up--I want people to talk to each other, and frequently, but with the aim of reaching that deep meaningful, vulnerable place--the one that makes you feel uncomfortable, but stimulated. Ingbert, I hear you and I agree that checking each other is an act of care that we do for people we love and want to make community with---I want to organize here and so. My email wasn't just directed towards those who are dominating conversation, but all of us--myself included--to stay privy to our privilege.  


You're right. I was angry. I am angry. I think it's good to be angry and it isn't the critiques I've had trouble with. I think what Carl and others offer are good topics of conversation, good information. It's the way it's presented and the fast-forward towards debate that I find toxic.  


Anyway, for what it's worth, thank you. 


RS 




On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Ingbert Schmidt < ifloyd2 at gmail.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>
Thank you Scott!  


On a different vein, here's part of my perspective: 


Isn't Occupy supposed to be about us as individuals trying to conceptualize the kind of society we *want* to live in, and then work to try to create that society? 


My answer is yes. 


If so, then what are the qualities that we'd like to see practiced in a better society? 


I have many thoughts on this, but certainly one of them is people treating each other with respect. 


Have the discussions on this list been respectful? 


My answer is not really. 


Do we want people to feel comfortable posting what is important to them? 


My answer is yes. 


Can repeated, aggressive posting be intimidating to people and prevent them from feeling comfortable posting what is important to them? 


Yes. 


Is, therefore, the repeated aggressive posting of your particular positions with harsh critiques of anybody who might disagree an act of silencing people? 


Yes. 


Is, therefore, a response that attacks people for pointing out that a particular behavior is intimidating and silencing by claiming that this observation is an attempt at repressing the poster's ability to speak hypocritical? 


I would argue yes: If the poster isn't aware of how suppressing their mode of communication is, then the fact that they feel disrespected and silenced should make them more aware of when other people feel disrespected and silenced, and at the very least they should pay attention to the content of what the other posters might say. 


Is the act of silencing people disrespectful? 


Yes. 


Rachel was not calling on anybody to shut up. Rachel was annoyed by how some members of a group claiming to be progressive was engaging in the very kinds of behaviors and attitudes that reinforce some of the societal practices that others in the group are trying to address through participation in the group. So she called out this behavior. And what she was asking is for the people who are a part of the group to pay attention to all members of the group and how their behaviors are affecting them. In my understanding, this kind of activity constitutes respect. 


Rachel was annoyed when she wrote the email. It came across. As it should have. When you or a group you are a part of is being disrespected, I think it is perfectly fair to be annoyed. Hell, I'd be angry. 


I send annoyed emails all too often as some people on this list can attest. They often bother people. I have never been called a bitch, a shrew, an ass-hole or any male variant on this. Not once. Why? I suspect because I am a white male, and my emotion is often treated as "man'splainin". I.e., acceptable to white males, and intimidating to some other people. 


I have been checked by people. I should probably be checked more often. I try to check myself but I'm not very good at it. I sometimes don't respond very well to being checked. But I try. And the people who check me I feel are my friends. Usually, my best friends. No matter how annoyed they might be with me. Because I am by no means a perfect human being, and I don't see myself very well, so they help me stay in line. And put up with me despite the mistakes I often make. 


We can look at this "discussion" in any number of different ways. Here's mine: 


I want to be part of an activist community where participants fundamentally respect each other, and treat each other with respect. 


I would like people to try to be respectful by paying attention to their own actions as much as possible. I try to do this myself. I don't always succeed. 


I don't always know when I or other people are being disrespectful, so I assume that others may have this problem as well. 


Therefore, I welcome it when people point it out to me when I am being disrespectful, and I would like other people to welcome this as well so that we can all learn how to be respectful together. I have a lot to learn and can use all the help I can get. 


I don't have any patience for somebody who asks for respect but has no interest in giving it, or in trying to understand why another person might feel disrespected. 


Part of being respectful is understanding why a mailing list exists, why people participate, and being mindful of that in their posts. It is good to discuss this purpose if there is disagreement about it. It is not respectful to enforce your own perspective on the list. Agreements should be arrived at, preferably by the same consensus mechanisms adopted in meetings of the group. 


But most importantly, we should be trying to practice our conceptions of how society as a whole can be made better by practicing the very things we would like to have changed in society in the microcosms we are a part of, and the very groups devoted to making those changes should be the *first* place they are implemented. I don't believe in giving anybody a pass for intentional disrespect, but here? No excuses, period. Before we can be credible to others, we have to be changing ourselves. 


So, to everybody on the list: 


I want to be respectful of others. Please help me be that way. 


Ingbert 








On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Scott Kimball < scttkmbll at gmail.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>
While I normally try to stay out of listserv battles, as a white male I feel the responsibility to challenge other white males when they are so blatantly perpetuating patriarchy and/or white supremacy. In particular, I cannot believe the comments directed at Rachel, one of the hardest working organizers in our community. The two responses to Rachel thus far are examples of how the patriarchy permeates our society and this listserv. 

First Comment: 


<blockquote>


<blockquote>



"There is nothing revolutionary about conversations here. I can listen to white men man'splain in desperate pissing contests virtually anywhere--that's what patriarchy continues to afford me." 
  
Rachel, do you think that an individual's views can be reduced and/or dismissed on account of their age, race, and/or gender? 


</blockquote>

This is example of how men feel entitled to choose the parameters of "acceptable discussion". Whenever a woman or person of color brings up issues of race or gender, a reactionary white man responds with something like " What does this have to do with race/gender? You're the one bringing up race/gender, therefore you are the one who is racist/sexist".  


It is not a matter of reducing one to their race, age, gender, class, etc, its about acknowledging privilege and how that affects one's orientation towards others. The term "mansplaining" is used to describe the tendency of men to feel entitled to "tell it like it is" to others. In other words, men are somehow the subject matter experts on everything and need to tell you  "how the world really is" or "the truth" or whatever. The issue is not the content one's statement;  it is the presumption of authority . This tendency is exacerbated by whiteness, class privilege, and education level. I've met way too many white dudes from upper middle class backgrounds and graduate degrees who want to show everyone how smart and knowledgeable they are. 


This is not to say, however, that one is bound to act in such a way. It is a challenge to those with privilege to reflect upon that privilege, on how it permeates their life, and to think about how they, as privileged members of society, can be an ally to oppressed communities.  


David, I am not trying to argue that you act in such a way. However, your comment was a prompt for a response and this group needs some discussion about white and male privilege.  


Second comment: 



How does silly and childish compare with shrewish and bitchy on the value scale? 





This is such such a typical patriarchal response to a woman speaking up that it would be comical if it were not the case that this man actually lives in our community. Whenever a woman speaks up and challenges the men, she becomes "the bitch". It doesn't matter what she says.Her words are not heard. Only the challenge to male authority is heard.  Compare this to when a man speaks out. When a man speaks out, he is heard and his thoughts are acknowledged to be worthy of discussion. Men can "reason" together in groups. Women, however, are too emotional and, perhaps, too intellectually inferior to be worthy of discussion. And, again, if a woman brings up the claim that men are being patriarchal or misogynistic, she is berated for being divisive or deviating from the important discussion (you know, the one the men are having).  


I find the discussions on this listserv to be very mean spirited, and most importantly, disorganizing. This is not the mode of discourse folks should use who want to organize for economic and social justice. You cannot work towards building a mass movement if you can't stop being an asshole.  





On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Sarah Lazare < sarah.lazare at gmail.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>
Rachel, 

We've very much appreciated your comments on this thread. Thanks for your strong feminist voice and leadership. We've often found that it's the moments when we're trying the hardest and putting ourselves out there the most that we face the greatest attack. I hope everyone who's had the good luck to work with Rachel can find your own way of showing her your love and appreciation. Here's to building a culture of liberatory, respectful debate and discussion within our movements. 

In Solidarity, 
Sarah Lazare and Brook Celeste 



On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Rickman, Aimee N < arickman at illinois.edu > wrote: 

<blockquote>




Whoah. 












************** Apologies for any random question marks my system has weirdly added to this email ******************** 

From: occupycu-bounces at lists.chambana.net [ occupycu-bounces at lists.chambana.net ] on behalf of E. Wayne Johnson [ ewj at pigsqq.org ] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:58 PM 
To: Rachel Storm 
Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net ; David Green; occupycu at lists.chambana.net 
Subject: Re: [OccupyCU] [Peace-discuss] [sf-core] Another Guantánamo prisoner death highlights Democrats' hypocrisy 




How does silly and childish compare with shrewish and bitchy on the value scale? 


On 9/13/2012 3:08 AM, Rachel Storm wrote: 
<blockquote>
David, 


I sent this email to Occupy, not Peace Discuss and your question illustrates precisely what I seek to illuminate. Listservs are designed for the people on them. Not others and the assumption isn't that they will be forwarded willy nilly to folks off of the list. I expect that from people typically, but not from people I am trying to build movements with--we can do better. I'm not going to engage with you, when you seek no understanding and only want to ignite debate. It's silly and childish. 


Rachel 


On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:46 PM, David Green < davegreen84 at yahoo.com > wrote: 

<blockquote>




"There is nothing revolutionary about conversations here. I can listen to white men man'splain in desperate pissing contests virtually anywhere--that's what patriarchy continues to afford me." 
  
Rachel, do you think that an individual's views can be reduced and/or dismissed on account of their age, race, and/or gender? 
  
David Green 


<blockquote>




From: C. G. Estabrook < carl at newsfromneptune.com > 
To: Rachel Storm < rachelstrm at gmail.com > 
Cc: peace-discuss at anti-war.net ; " occupycu at lists.chambana.net " < occupyCU at lists.chambana.net > 
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:24 AM 
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [OccupyCU] [sf-core] Another Guantánamo prisoner death highlights Democrats' hypocrisy 



I thought the local Occupy group supported the efforts of AWARE against US war and racism abroad - even to participating in our demonstrations. 

That's why I posted to the "OccupyCU" list information about the ongoing scandal of Guantanamo, which is scanted in the corporate media (as is Manning's persecution, etc.).  

--CGE 

On Sep 12, 2012, at 12:16 AM, Rachel Storm < rachelstrm at gmail.com > wrote: 

> I must share this... 
> 
> I've been both terribly bored and fairly annoyed at how this Occupy listserv is being used. I am someone that cannot regularly attend Occupy meetings and for me, it's important to be able to stay connected, but what is Occupy here--in this communication space? What is worth occupying? There is nothing revolutionary about conversations here. I can listen to white men man'splain in desperate pissing contests virtually anywhere--that's what patriarchy continues to afford me. I'm tired of having to ask men in the movement to check their privilege. It shouldn't have to be asked-- I hear men in the movement say they want revolution, but I don't see willingness to do the work. We are failing to model what we seek. We need more imagination than this. We can do better. 
> 
>     • We can value dialogue over debate. Modeling that we're a community of people seeking understanding, rather than trying to get their word in edgewise. Those with privilege in the movement (men, white folks, etc.) can step back, make space, talk less/listen more. This isn't hard to do and makes a world of difference. (Just count the number of women, people of color, etc. actively engaged on these C-U activist lists or being listened to at meetings and you'll see how deep this problem is.) 
>     • We can "check each other" in an act of care. Knowing that we're not perfect, but we're trying and we have a responsibility to help one another grow where possible. We can tell those who are dominating conversation to step back, to ask for clarification, and to listen. 
>     • We can reject "occupation" as our language in solidarity with native peoples all over North America. We can privilege people of color and women's voices--knowing these voices ought to drive the movement that seeks decolonization and an end to marginalization. 
>     • We can spend more time imagining what we want, alternatives, and raging where it matters! 
> 
> 
> In the past month alone, I've witnessed a silencing conversation around the rape allegations facing Assange that signals to me--as a woman--that the same men that say they care about women in the movement are no where to be found when it comes time to stand up against violence against women. I've been to meetings where women's voices were rarely heard--and I know my sisters had plenty to say! 
> I am reminded of Adrienne Rich who cautioned a white-led feminist movement, "Without addressing the whiteness of white feminism, our movement will turn in on itself and collapse." 
> 
> There are other voices we need in this space. This local organizing will not last unless we turn our attention to these matters. 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_s3X0uW9Ec&feature=player_embedded 
> 
> love and rage, 
> 
> RS 


_______________________________________________ 
Peace-discuss mailing list 
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss 




</blockquote>

</blockquote>


_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss 
</blockquote>



_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 


</blockquote>


_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 


</blockquote>




-- 
Scott Kimball 
Project Organizer 
American Federation of Teachers 

Higher Education Project 

_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 


</blockquote>




-- 
========================================== 
Ingbert Schmidt 
http://ingbert.org/      ||     skype/twitter/etc.: spacesoon 

"Dream in a pragmatic way." 
-Aldous Huxley 

_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 


</blockquote>



_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 


</blockquote>


_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 


</blockquote>



-- 
Damián. 


_______________________________________________ 
OccupyCU mailing list 
OccupyCU at lists.chambana.net 
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/occupycu 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/occupycu/attachments/20120913/ece3141b/attachment.html>