[Peace-discuss] [sf-core] Notes on co-opting Occupy

[C. G. Estabrook]

I think the Obama people are counting on this to get re-elected, just  
as they counted on co-opting (and betraying) the anti-war movement to  
get elected in 2008.

In order not to acquiesce in the administration's murder and looting -  
its foreign wars and Wall St. bailouts - this president will have to  
be driven from office as Johnson and Nixon were.

His successor will take a lesson, or then be driven from office in  
turn (again like, Johnson and Nixon).

We're not looking for an autocratic revolution, but a popular one,  
which will move toward freedom and democracy. That can take place only  
if a mass of the population is implementing it, carrying it out and  
solving problems. They're not going to undertake that commitment,  
understandably, unless they have discovered for themselves that there  
are limits to reform.

A sensible revolutionary will try to push reform to the limits, for  
two good reasons. First, because the reforms can be valuable in  
themselves. People should have an eight-hour day rather than a twelve- 
hour day. And in general, we should want to act in accord with decent  
ethical values.

Secondly, on strategic grounds, you have to show that there are limits  
to reform. Perhaps sometimes the system will accommodate to needed  
reforms. If so, well and good. But if it won't, then new questions  
arise. Perhaps that is a moment when resistance is necessary, steps to  
overcome the barriers to justified changes. Perhaps the time has come  
to resort to coercive measures in defense of rights and justice, a  
form of self-defense. Unless the general population recognizes such  
measures to be a form of self-defense, they're not going to take part  
in them, at least they shouldn't.

If you get to a point where the existing institutions will not bend to  
the popular will, you have to eliminate the institutions, not form  
'sophisticated ... alliances' with them.

On May 4, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Mike Lehman wrote:

> I certainly do share y'alls dissatisfaction with venerable  
> institutions
> selling out those they represent...
>
> On the other hand, if we're trying to build a majority to overturn the
> present system, I'd strongly suggest a more sophisticated approach to
> building alliances. Those revolutions that focus on the need to purge
> our way to utopia in themselves often turn out to be not much of a
> revolution at all.
>
> Just saying.
> Mike Lehman
>
> On 5/3/2012 5:06 PM, David Johnson wrote:
>> Carl,
>>
>> Great E-mail !
>>
>> Yes, the UAW bureaucrats are very much involved in the 99 % Spring  
>> thing.
>> When I went to their pathetic training in Chicago in March, the  
>> head of the
>> UAW Northern Ilinois Region was there.
>> I saw the UAW logo on his polo shirt and  commented on it, and that  
>> is when
>> he introduced himself to me.
>> I know Greg Shotwell who Louis ( original e-mail subject author )  
>> refers to
>> and YES ! The UAW over the last 30-years has de-evolved into a  
>> corporate
>> collaborationist so called " union " from it's once proud militant  
>> heritage
>> and actions during the 1930's and 40's and even through the 70's.
>> I said from the begining of the Occupy Movement that rank and file  
>> Union
>> members need an Occupy Movement within the Unions as well,  
>> coordinated with
>> the general Occupy Movement.
>> Many liberals may feel uncomfortable about this topic, but they must
>> understand that although the neo-liberal capitalists are the  
>> primary enemy,
>> the majority of the Union bureaucracy ( with the grand exception of  
>> the
>> U.E. - United Electrical Workers ) are collaborators just as the  
>> French
>> Vichy " government " were collaborators with the nazis, and hence  
>> we need to
>> support not the collaborators, but instead the REAL Resistance and  
>> REAL
>> democracy !
>> If anyone doubts my statements I would be more than happy to give  
>> specific
>> examples about the UAW 's track record alone, not to mention other  
>> Union's
>> malfeasence against the democratic will and the best interests of  
>> their
>> members they are suppose to represent.
>>
>> David Johnson
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sf-core/
>
> <*> Your email settings:
>    Individual Email | Traditional
>
> <*> To change settings online go to:
>    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sf-core/join
>    (Yahoo! ID required)
>
> <*> To change settings via email:
>    sf-core-digest at yahoogroups.com
>    sf-core-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>    sf-core-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/