It’s my contention that any revolutionary action, if it’s to succeed, must involve the right combination of theory and practice, for insofar as practice informs theory, the converse is also true.
Which isn’t to say one is a substitute for the other or vice versa – there is no substitute for putting one’s body on the line when moral force is the only force at people’s disposal against guns and brute force, let’s be clear about that! – nor is one necessarily preemptive of the other. In the best of all possible worlds, both should co-exist. Nor is it to say we can always tell what the right combination is. The exact dynamic of a movement is impossible to foretell, for all movements have a life all their own, their own life-expectancies and trajectories, many possible futures. All that’s being asserted right now, this relationship shouldn’t be ignored (if only for tactical reasons).
It might be presumptuous under the circumstances to argue on behalf of any value to be attached to leadership per se (a cadre or a vanguard are some of the more derogatory terms). Indeed, the very idea of leadership appears to run counter to the very idea of a true democratic process, the idea of direct participation and that of the General Assembly, of casting of lots, and I can’t help but totally concur. And yet . . .
When we look at the composition of the GAs across the many OWS sites, and if we’re indeed to take OWS at its own word as offering us a kind of pro forma, a boiler plate for reinstating true democratic practices and processes the world over, we get a different idea. We see that consensus, that most desirable end-product of the democratic process, is deemed attainable only within the confines of small groups, and moreover, that it’s built incrementally.
True, we’ve seen a proliferation of many such groups, each trying to do their bit and stay true to their task. The question of how these groups may or may not eventually coalesce and extend concentrically so as to make the consensus widespread needn’t concern us at this point, Suffice it to say, consensus can only be reached in small groups, where anyone and everyone has ample opportunity to speak as well as listen.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - troll
I find it rather ironic that one of my most vociferous opponents to forming a small group discussion project, and the main objection amounted to my insistence on a measure of “exclusivity,” had started deleting comments on his own community board platform as soon as some comments were deemed somewhat "less than constructive."
but for his Moonraven spam which was totally unrelated to the topic Alan Kurtz removed his own comments and was not excluded from the conversation...is the author lying here or simply unaware?
2 - Anarcissie
I was not aware that anyone opposed anyone else forming a small group discussion project, exclusive or not.
3 - troll
...that's simply how Rog interprets my reluctance to participate in this instance
4 - roger nowosielski
First off, let me state that via personal communication, Mr. Kurtz informed me that deleting his comments was by his own initiation, not the moderator's. So the author wasn't lying but was simply unaware of all the pertinent details. It wasn't, however, an unreasonable assumption to make in light of the remark by Mr. Eden in the body of the comments to the effect that the input from the participants ought to be "constructive."
Second, I do agree that no one really opposed the formation of the group along the lines I envisaged; but then again, neither Anarcissie nor Mr.Eden had really supported the project. In the former case, the objection was raised that reaching consensus online, with certain notable exceptions, was a rather futile enterprise; in the latter, the project didn't seem worthwhile enough in view of other, more important things on the burner (and I can't really disagree with another person's sense of priorities). Consequently, my use of language was more of an expression of frustration rather than reflective of the facts of the case, frustration in that the two persons whose input, views and opinions I continue to value fell short of being supportive.
On a happier note, Happy Thanksgiving, everybody. We should give thanks not for what America had become but for the young people who have demonstrated a will and determination to change it.
Our thoughts should be with them.
5 - El Bicho
considering how easily the pertinent details were discovered, why were they not investigated before the article was published?
6 - Anarcissie
'Opposition is true friendship.' -- William Blake
7 - roger nowosielski
Alright, Anarcissie, I won't argue with that.
8 - roger nowosielski
LB, it wasn't a matter of life and death. First, I'm not in everyday communication mode with Alan (it was he who brought my attention to the facts of the case). Second, you should know I don't shy from a little controversy now and then. And third, I wanted to get things off my chest.
I don't see any great harm having been done. Now everything's back to normal as far as I'm concerned. And I don't think the people affected will hold it against me as though I committed any cardinal sin. I'm certain they're bigger than that.
Just the way of human communications, which are never perfect.
9 - roger nowosielski
@6
But so is moral support ...
10 - roger nowosielski
Breaking news:
Some draw hope from rare German weakness.
Let's hope Europe doesn't follow the US lead by bestowing upon ECB (the European Central Bank) the same powers as we've done here. We certainly don't need another Fed.
If Europe is to fold on the economic front, let it do so of its own accord without any recourse to cosmetic alterations of window dressing, which amount to nothing but false hope. It's better to look the disaster straight in the face instead of laboring under the illusion.
Why prolong the agony?
11 - roger nowosielski
Typical NYPD double standard, Macy's Thanksgiving parade is OK, but the occupiers aren't allowed to have their fun.
After all, they're not supporting commercial interests and are unlikely to be doing any extensive Xmas shopping tomorrow.
12 - roger nowosielski
Press conference on the destruction of the OWS library.
13 - roger nowosielski
Occupy Thanksgiving, NY.
The people are being fed.
14 - roger nowosielski
Part two.
15 - roger nowosielski
Amy catches up with the New School Seminar:
highlights
16 - roger nowosielski
Drummers Scuffle
Excellent piece of street theater, and people are having fun.
17 - roger nowosielski
Smart strategy on the part of OWS -- expose US duplicity and double standard: condemning the Egyptian military for violent tactics while selling the Egyptian the tear gas to quash the people's rebellion.
demonstration in front of the Egyptian consulate, NYC.
18 - roger nowosielski
Why Blacks Aren't Embracing Occupy Wall Street."
A similar question could be raised with respect to the gays and women, with the same if not greater poignancy.
19 - Dr Dreadful
It's odd, because in just about every news photo and report I see about the Occupy protests, half the faces are black.
20 - roger nowosielski
I'm certain that's the case for Occupy Oakland; and yes, NYC too is a mixed bag.
But I don't think we see the kind of involvement which defined the civil rights struggle. Of course, the issue was far more clearly defined then, so perhaps one shouldn't use it as any kind of standard.
21 - roger nowosielski
Fascinating article from NYT about the genesis of OWS, dating back to 2007.
Invaluable, too, for a chuck-full of great links.
22 - Anarcissie
In regard to the presence of Black people at OWS and other protests, it is well to keep in mind that they have to expect to pay a much higher price in terms of police violence and juridical malfeasance than middle-class White people. Thus they have to pick their battles carefully with not-too-remote, concrete goals in mind. For example, those proposed by the Civil Rights movement (which, incidentally, not that many White people supported).
In any case, we can expect the Times and WaPo to exploit and expand any kind of difference or conflict among the lower orders. Divide et impera.
23 - GradyLeeHoward
Anarcissie (22): It is a matter of racism, but it is more a matter of class status that is considered before any disadvantaged person physically joins Occupy. Just as no one can "be" Anonymous without hardware/software access and a requisite level of expertise; the assurance of such tangibles as a bed and food and bail may be an incentive. Hurdles of social psychology put in place by the differential power dynamic also impact participation. (Exclusion causes withdrawal.) There is much more on this in the works of Steven Lukes and John Gaventa.
24 - roger nowosielski
@22
@22
Rather cynical view, Anarcissie -- not that I disagree with most of your points.
Apart from the Times editorial policy (which, granted, has a stake in the establishment), don't you think that at least some of the contributors may have considerable leeway? If the article I linked to is indeed just another example of Times propaganda, than I submit to you that it's as fine a work of art as Herr Goebbels has even produced.
You speak of the "divide and conquer" strategy, and I agree, but has has speaking the truth got to do with it? How is pointing out that many black churches are in the pockets of corporate donors, just as Vatican or our institutions of higher learning are, an example of "divide & conquer"? Does one have to be Cornel West or Martin Luther King Jr. to be free of the stain -- for you are painting with a broad brush -- and be able to see the commonality of purpose so as to transcend the racial and economic divide and speak to all the people with one voice? Someone has got to pick up the slack and mobilize the oppressed masses under the common banner (and for now, the French Revolution slogan will do). Who's gonna fill their shoes?
Indeed, Anarcissie, if matters are nearly as grim as you surmise, I don’t see much future for OWS, and I don’t mean anything like formation of a third party, only that humanity must rise together as one.
If not now, then when?
25 - roger nowosielski
Thanks for visiting, GradyLee, especially since my two longtime friends are either suffering from temporary amnesia or appear to have forsaken me. It's difficult to carry on a conversation with oneself.
Come to think of it, the antiwar movement, along with the counter-culture revolution of the sixties, were for the most part a unique product of a middle to upper-middle class educated and privileged white female & male. And Anarcissie's also spot on when she points out that the participation by whites in the civil rights struggle was limited to the usual suspects. So there definitely are old wounds and "I've told you so" type of mentality, I well recognize that.
Which is precisely why the voices by such as Dr. West or Tavis Smiley are invaluable. And those voices must be directed at their own people, not at OWS.
Of course, OWS didn't do itself great favor when, while infected no doubt by its revolutionary zeal, it shunned John Lewis at the Atlanta site.
Dunno much about John Lewis, but rather shortsighted, I'd say.