We MUST engage!

The reality is that there are only two ways to change a system.

That may sound like an oversimplification, but it really isn’t.  One can either work from within the system or from outside of the system.  From a political perspective, one can either work within the system, or one can work through violent overthrow.  Now, of course, there are multiple flavors of each of these.  Violent overthrow, for example, could come from outside invasion; it could come from home-grown rebellion, or some variation or combination thereof.

Let me be very, VERY clear.  I am not advocating , nor do I support, violent overthrow of the system.  I cannot say that the time will not come, but we are not there yet.  I still, perhaps foolishly, hold out hope to save and reclaim the system.  I still believe that the underpinnings of the system, despite all of its flaws, can be good and workable.  Let me be equally clear about that though.  At this point in American history, it is NOT good, workable, or sustainable.  That is what we have to work to fix!

The other way to change a system, though, is to work within the system.  To take advantage of its structure and its quirks.  To use the system against itself, so to speak.  To do that, one cannot simply continue to support the status quo. One cannot simply withdraw from the system either though.  To do that, allows the forces in play to win.  It allows them, in fact, to grow stronger.

Tune in.  Turn on.  Drop out.  Really?  How’d that work out?  Not so well, actually.  I mean, sure, for a small handful of people it worked out great, but for the larger number, for the society at large, things continued on. Is that what we want?  Do we want a handful of small groups to possibly form nice little communes somewhere?  A few farms that are self-sustaining until the outside world stumbles onto them and ruin them?  Tent cities somewhere that survive until the police or army of the larger society comes in and kicks us out of “their” parks?

Or, do we want to change the world?  Do we want to really impact the world around us?  Personally, I want to change the world for the better.  I want my son, my nieces, my cousins, my friends, and so on to have the world as it can be, not as it is.  Not as I fear it will be, if we do nothing.  I want to find the reset button and push it.  I want to keep all the progress we’ve made in so many ways and get rid of the detritus that has built up.  Flush it right out.  But, not throw the baby out with the bath water!!

So, how do we do that?  We do not do it by isolating ourselves from the rest of our society.  We do not do it by pretending the rest of society doesn’t exist.  Nor by ignoring our history.  We enjoy our computers.  We enjoy our smart phones.  Our cable.  Our satellites.  We want our solar power.  We want all our mp3 players and nifty gadgets.

To some extent OWS took inspiration from the so-called “Arab Spring”.  In those instances, the whole of society wasn’t thrown out.  The people did not withdraw from society.  Nor should we.  But, we do have to make major changes.  I am seeing a very disturbing trend though in that many of the vocal elements of the movement are advocating isolation.  They are advocating separation.  Advocating building parallel structures within society and withdrawing from the rest of society.  This will not achieve the goals that we want.  This will only result in killing the movement.  It will only result in building a larger chasm between the younger and the older elements of our movement.  It will only result in failure of the movement and the continuation of the path that we’ve been on which will lead to the collapse of our society.  Then, we all lose our toys and our security.  And, I suspect that there is an element within our movement that wants exactly that.  That there is a survivalist-anarchist element who thinks there is nothing worth saving in our society.  I disagree.  I think the vast majority of us disagree too.

Many of those outside of the Occupy movement have made light of the movement because of the heavy use of technology by Occupiers.  They have spread images showing us using these as though this were contrary to what we stand for.  Is it?  I don’t believe it is.  And, this is the message that I have answered to them.  We are not anti-capitalist.  We are anti-corruption.  We are opposed to the ridiculousness of a CEO making 1723 times what the average worker earns.  One reason we are opposed to this is that it is unsustainable.

This is a very broad movement, and none of us is really empowered to speak for the movement as a whole.  This is, to some, a strength.  To some, this is a hindrance.  I have long believed that true democracy simply does not work in groups larger than about 200 people.  It is paralyzing in groups larger than that.  It is for that very reason that our “founding fathers” established the representative republic that we have.  The ancient Greeks and many others throughout history have known this too.  What I only recently discovered is that there is, in fact, an academic theory in support of this.  It is called Dunbar‘s number.  In short and in with vast oversimplification, what Dunbar’s theory essentially says is that as the size of the population grows we spend more and more time working on the social cohesion of the group.  Eventually, we’re spending more time maintaining the integrity of the group than we are on achieving the group’s aims.

I still believe this, and, in fact, I think that if we look at OWS in NY we find that they have been forced to admit this too.  The implementation of “Spokes councils” is an implicit acknowledgement of this, despite any denials to the contrary.  I have already witnessed this at my own local Occupy.

Additionally, the primary reason that we as a species have been able to progress technologically to the point that we have is specialization.  Because we have settled and specialized so that one person or group, for example, can produce sufficient food to free another person or group from that duty so that the second person or group can pursue other activities, has allowed that second group to do other things.  Other things, like, oh, go to space?  Devise smart phones?  Sadly, also things like dream up useless and pointless wars.  Dream about taking their neighbor’s goods, and raping their neighbor’s daughters, or sons, too.

We really have to face the truth.  No amount of technology is going to solve this basic problem.  We cannot all stop to vote on every decision that has to be made, and if we are not all voting, then it isn’t a “true” democracy such as many in the Occupy movement want to demand.  That is just not realistic.  It is a beautiful dream.  But, we do not live in that reality.  Nor do we live in the world where all problems and issues will wait until 7pm to be decided so that we can all pause to go through the issues and make a decision.  Which leads us to an added complication.  One that is hugely important.

None of us, and I do mean NONE of us, has the time and resources to be adequately educated on each and every topic.  So, we must either be able to trust others to tell us quickly what we need to know and then jump to a conclusion, and vote, or we have to trust others to act on our behalf.

One of the many criticisms leveled against the consensus-based democracy is that of “groupthink”.  That is, many members want to be accepted by the “cool kids”, and so they either say nothing and wiggle their fingers at the appropriate time, or stand up just to say, “I just wanted to echo what _______ said.”  If someone has the audacity to actually challenge what the facilitators are saying, while still actively and stridently supporting the goals, that person is pushed aside as “not understanding”.  Again, I have seen this in my own local Occupy.  This too gets in the way of actual leaderless, participatory democracy.

Are you beginning to see why “true” democracy just doesn’t work in large numbers?

So, what is my point?  Quite simply, we really must work within the system.  We need to organize politically.  I have maintained all along that the Occupy movement is neither left nor right.  That it is about right versus wrong.  However, I do firmly and proudly proclaim that I am a liberal and that it is my belief that the right is simply lacking in understanding.  History has consistently shown that those who support the right side of the political spectrum cannot survive except by force and deceit.  If we are going to organize politically, we can do so both from the right and from the left.  We can organize on these principles and then we can begin to actually work together to deal with the rest.

The Occupy movement is about getting corruption out of the system.  Are we not primarily for the following?

1. Reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act immediately
2. End the fiction of Corporate personhood
3. Reinstate fair taxation across the socioeconomic spectrum by
   – closing tax loop holes, and
   – returning rates to pre-1980’s levels
4. Reign in lobbying from the Left and the Right
5. Campaign finance reform

We need candidates that will support these issues.  These specific issues.  We need them at all levels, but specifically we need them at the federal level.

Where are you?

The problem with Empower United

On 12/22, @99_film tweeted:

Is this what being co-opted looks like? http://dld.bz/a8Dfg WSJ reports on launch of Empower United, a social enterprise for the #99percent

Which lead me to investigate, Empower United (http://www.empowerunited.com/).  I started going through all of the promotional material on the site, then hit something that threw me, and stopped.  I sent an e-mail using their feedback link.  To my surprise, I got a response from Patrick Higgins, Co-Founder and Co-CEO of Empower United.  As a result, I finished going through the website, and I stand by my original decision.

I am not sure that I agree with Audrey Ewell & Aaron Aites assessment that it is an attempt to co-opt the movement.  I am, however, convinced that it is one of two things.  Either it is a group of wanna be 1%s who see an opportunity and are trying to co-opt on the OWS movement, or they are sincere, but do not really get it.

I was going through the plan, and it was all sounding pretty okay.  Take advantage of the system.  Use it against itself.  I’m not necessarily opposed to that in the short term.  Still pretty light on the details.  Basically, combining all of the various MyPoints, rewards, Groupon, LivingSocial, type deals out there into one mass plan.  A sort of massive S&H Green stamps organized for the benefit of “the 99%” (only with a stated goal of a starting point of 1,000,000 people).  They’re going to make it free for members and charge companies $50 per employee to join.  In other words, get companies to pay $50 per employee for access to market.  Then, I got to point 5.  And, I stopped.  Cold.

Wait!  What?  Capital One?  Bank of America?  The same Capital One that received $3.56 Billion in bail out funds?  The same Bank of America that received $20 Billion in bailout funds?  Insert screeching halt sound effects here!  uhm, no.  That’s when I hit the Feedback link and sent them some.  I said to them:

You had me intrigued, though admittedly skeptical. I was wondering and never did see the answer whether you would be taking a cut off the top, or if you would be taking an equal share or how that would work. But, I was following along to see how this was going to work.

You lost me at Services point 5. You want to get in bed with the likes of Bank of America? And you think this is the answer for the 99%? Have you been paying attention?

All of what I read sounded like a viable way to move forward. Take back the system from the “too big to fail’ group, which I am in favor of. But, you apparently think that the way to do that is to get in to bed with them?

It was at that point that I am walking away. If you decide you want to do these things without glomping onto the people who caused the crisis, but still saving the system, then count me in. Otherwise, I see you as part of problem, rather than any part of the solution.

Now, at this point, I honestly had no expectation that I would hear anything more from them.  I figured my Empower United experience was done.  I was surprised when I received the aforementioned response from Patrick Higgins.  His response, in full:

Dear Mr.  ████████,
We at Empower United appreciate your feedback regarding the vision of our company. I write to address some of the concerns you expressed in your email. First, all individuals that handle the day to day work at Empower United will be paid on salary. The salaries of all senior management will be strictly controlled by an outside auditor to make sure that no member of Empower United is in line for a “Golden Parachute”. I would ask you to review the section in our business plan titled Transparency for a full explanation.
Secondly, regarding your concern about the use of the co-branded credit and debit cards. In our business it will be imperative that we keep track of the transactions of our members so their accounts are properly credited. We anticipate difficulty in being able to follow cash transactions. In the early stages of this business it will be necessary to work with the credit card industry to accomplish this task. Please look at long term goal number 8 in the services section regarding Banking, but in the early stages we are going to have to rely on existing infrastructure.
Finally, I want to stress to you that this business model will give all U.S. consumers a seat at the table with all other corporations at no cost to the consumer.
Respectfully

Patrick B. Higgins

Co-Founder and Co-CEO
Empower United

We ARE the government!

One of many themes you are likely to encounter in my speech and writing is this:  There has been a successful war of words conducted by the ultra-right throughout the years.  It is a war to re-define the terms, and shape the focus of the argument in such a way as to distract from the actual issues.  It is a war of obfuscation.  It’s a war that all sides have been engaged in, but the right has been much more successful at it.  Guess they had a better marketing team.  Perhaps it gets back to the money issue.

 “We never thought we’d raise as much money as the right-wing money machine,” he said, “but we’re confident we’ll have enough to be a strong countervailing force.” – Harold Ickes, president of Priorities USA Action, which backs President Barack Obama ¹

But, again, I digress.  I admit to a tendency to do that.  Part of the reason is that all of these things are actually inter-related.  Getting back on track…

The topic du jour is not really the conservitard’s war, so much since they really just glommed onto an existing theme that had been ongoing for, perhaps, millennia.  Which is, that government is some separate, alien force.  That it is not US.  Despite Bill Clinton’s gaffe, and one I’m sure many other people have made, it was President Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address who put it so succinctly and clearly:

It is rather for us, the living, to stand here, we here be dedica-ted to the great task remaining before us — that, from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here, gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have died in vain; that the nation, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people by the people for the people, shall not perish from the earth. [emphasis added]

Perhaps this concept of government as alien began many moons ago with the divine right of monarchies.  Perhaps it started even earlier.  Truly the origins are lost in the mists of time, as they say.  However, it has become a very useful tool for those who want to use the big bad boogeyman of the government.  And, there is much to actually fear in governmental power.

However, what we have to remember is that the government is not separate.  It is US.  The government only has the power that we give it.  It can only rule through either consent or fear.  Even then, the only fear it can wield is the fear that will be enforced by those who are consenting to carry out it’s edicts.

Look at the so-called Arab Spring.  What do we see?  Thousands upon thousands of people saying, essentially, “We have had enough.  We will no longer consent, and we will no longer live with the fear.  Though you may kill us, we are free of you and your rule.”  And, that is the point.  The government is still US.  The soldiers and police pulling the guns are the people.  As those active in the Occupy Wall Street movement say, they are the 99%.  When the men and women behind the triggers decide, “I will not fire”, the power of the government is completely and irrevocably gone.  Because, again, and I stress this because it is A MOST IMPORTANT POINT, the government only has power so long as we the people give it power.

Without people, there is no state.  Without people, there is no government.  Period.

So, my friends, guess what? You are the government. My sister, in her time in the Air Force.  She was the government.  Her husband, is in the army.  He is the government.  My ex-wife working for the VA.  She is the government.   My father working for the county IT department.  He is the government.  My multiple friends who are working for government contractors. Even they are the government.  And, yes, you and I, as voters, even we, to a lesser extent ² , we too are the government.

By continuing this false distinction of talking about the government as some alien OTHER, we contribute to allowing the divide and conquer strategy to work. We have to stop it. It is part of the war of words that has been so successful!

WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT.

¹ – Granted, Mr. Ickes is actually referring to the current election cycle.  However, it has long been a reality that the right wing has been the party of “bigger business” and thus has had access to more money.  This particular quote was taken from Democratic Groups in Talks to Merge Fundraising article on Bloomberg.com

² – To a lesser extent because of a number of factors, but largely because of the influence of corruption and money on politics in America.  This is the primary thrust of what the Occupy movement is working against.