Photo by Coal Dubya

“Between the public sector and the private sector, we have wreaked untold havoc on the media environment.”

These aren’t the words of a progressive media advocate such as University of Illinois professor Robert McChesney or The Nation’s John Nichols, but of ex-FCC commissioner Michael Copps in January. In an interview on Democracy Now!, Copps attributes his claim to “the abdication of public interest responsibility by the FCC” over the last 30 years and their failure to enforce public interest guidelines and a stronger focus on news.

Here’s another example of how the FCC has failed in their responsibility to the public good: In 1995, the FCC forbade companies ownership of more than 40 stations. Clear Channel Communications now owns over 1,500. This rate of consolidation clearly shows no sign of slowing.

Photo from Occupy Confessions

The closing of news rooms and the number of reporters on the street instead of the beat goes on as the corporate state continues its relentless and undemocratic consolidation of America’s media landscape. Layoffs continue despite a number of companies like McClatchy posting a 21% profit margin, according to the book The Death and Life of American Journalism. McClatchy fired a third of their newsroom staff in 2008.

Rupert Murdoch. Photo: galleristny.com

“25 or 30 years ago, only 50 companies controlled more than half of what we see and hear every single day. Now, that 50 – which was alarming enough – has shrunk to six or even five,” says Johnathan Lawson, the co-founder of Reclaim the Media. Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp owns the top newspaper on three continents: The Wall Street Journal, The Sun, and The Australian. According to a 2008 GAO report, the company was operating over 150 subsidiaries in off-shore tax havens. How much of those subsidiary holdings could have gone to funding NPR, or towards community initiatives to help expand minority media in communities?

The assault on our airwaves first began in earnest in 1980, when “the FCC did away with public interest guidelines for broadcast television licenses, and the renewal period went from three to eight years,” according to Copps. Now all a broadcaster has to do is “mail in a postcard” and their license is renewed, because the FCC – against the very reason it was created – has watered down attempts to ensure that the public’s airwaves are by-and-large for the public good.

Former FCC Chairman Michael Powell

Michael Powell (son of former Secretary of State Colin Powell), who was the head of the FCC in 2003, attempted to eliminate 30 year-old rules that prohibited any television network from reaching more than 35% of the national population. These rules were, in part, created to prevent the homogenization of news and to ensure that there was an attempt at quality local coverage. Predictably, the broadcast industry spent $249 million attempting to convince the federal government to allow new rules which would expand that limit to 45% of the public. And they won.

Fast forward to 2006: the FCC passed rules “which allowed broadcast-newspaper cross-ownership in the top 20 markets,” as Katy Bachman wrote in AdWeek. “The last thing Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski [who became the FCC head in 2009] wants to talk about are the media ownership rules.”

A media system dominated by such a narrow coterie of owners has a direct impact on the quality of news presented to the public – affecting a diversity of viewpoints as well as the depth of coverage on issues such as corporate greed, poverty, corruption, racism, climate change and a host of other topics that an electorate needs to know in order to make educated decisions which directly affect their lives.

image from Gilad Atzmon

One major casualty of corporate domination of news is investigative journalism. Be it in print or in broadcast news, this time-intensive and not always profitable aspect of news is crucial to a healthy democracy. One need only look, for instance, at the media debacle of the Iraq War to see how the corporate state perverts information consumed by Americans. The first Gulf War was a huge boon for corporations like GE, which turned nightly news into “a media hardware show,” as Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! stated. GE had a significant stake in the production of parts for many of the weapons in the Persian Gulf war.

The shrinking of diverse views on war was evidenced by the firing of MSNBC host Phil Donahue in February of 2003. He approached the invasion from a critical perspective and maintained the highest rated show on that network. The killing off of diversity is also a perfect example of how corporate media perpetuates the concept of “just” wars to increase profits, as GE’s role in the Persian Gulf war and the reporting on that war and Operation Iraqi Freedom demonstrate.
image from TvNewsLies.org

Media consolidation also plays a profound role in how our society prioritizes values, from self-esteem to consumerism. “It gives them [corporate media] a great deal of influence over how our culture thinks about itself,” points out author and activist Anne Elizabeth Moore.

The deluge of advertising, for instance, which takes up a lot of broadcasting and radio, certainly has an impact on shopping habits as well as more serious issues like body-image.
Enter Occupy Wall Street. The movement has set its sights on corporations and the elite who continue without apology to commodify health care, public education, and other vital necessities, and has subsequently kicked issues like income inequality and corporate greed back into the national conversation. Some even argue that President Obama’s recent State of the Union speech carried a hint of the spirit of the movement, which isn’t surprising in an election year.

How would corporate media respond to civil disobedience in their lobbies? What would happen if a group of protesters went to a news station and demanded a revoking of that outlet’s license? This is what happened in the WLBT case, when civil rights activists challenged a racist broadcaster and ultimately forced a judge to pull the station’s license for not serving the public interest.

If the people are going to stand up to big banks and corporations for wrecking our economy and destroying our environment, the theft of our airwaves and newspapers must not be ignored.  As each occupation tackles issues local to their cities and towns – such as police brutality in minority communities – directly challenging broadcasters and newspapers through sit-ins or other creative tactics to cover issues that aren’t properly covered by major media could be a good start. But that would just be the beginning.

One Occupy Philadelphia protester sums it up best:

“It’s bullshit that our country’s main source of news is owned by a few large corporations that have a GLARING conflict of interest in providing us with accurate, honest information. They have an agenda both in downsizing news rooms as well as promoting certain political views.  It’s time for us to hold them to account and demand a true separation of corporation and government, both in the running of and in the reporting of.”

Dustin Slaughter is an activist, journalist, new media advocate, and photojournalist. He’s founder of The David and Goliath Project and a contributor to Demotix News.

The Super Bowl, being held today, has higher ratings than any other TV broadcasts. It is truly the quintessence of American “culture”. It is violent, flashy, showcase some sexy cheerleaders during breaks in the game and just like the Roman games has a lot more brawl than brain. In a nutshell, it is a representation of what most Americans would want to be but are not or would want to have but have not. Top football players are on multi-million dollar a year contracts and are huge celebrities. Unlike gladiators, who were expendable slaves, the media and the public adoration has given top athletes almost a god status. After all, they have what most Americans want: fortune and fame, and all the “trimmings” going with it. Even if a large proportion of Americans are barely scrapping by, they still want to be entertained by a bunch of extremely overpaid athletes which achievement in life consist of being big, fast and able to either throw or catch a ball.

This would not be such a problem if  the politics of distraction applied by US mainstream media wasn’t across the board and around the clock. But just like the fascination from the “gods like” football players of today’s super bowl hypnotizes Americans by making them “comfortably numbs”, the US election, getting furiously in gear with the GOP primaries, is part of the same circus. The circus of politics as a farce, as a distraction. I could write an article today and entitle it: Breaking news- Mitt Romney wins the GOP nomination. And even so I am not a gambling man, the odds of me losing this kind of bet would be minute. In this sort of  cynical, but realistic, perspective where one can predict American politics way ahead of the “game”, I could also easily lay out, way before November, something called: Breaking news-Obama get reelected for a 2nd term.

In our system which is neither a democracy nor a republic but rather a pluto-oligarchy, politics seem to be pre-ordained, as if going to the polls didn’t really matter that much. Intuitively and unfortunately, Americans have resigned themselves to the fact that their voices would not be heard, yet one more time. Some have managed to stay engaged with the Occupy movement despite a more or less complete blackout from mainstream media, but most would rather get their daily feeding of the talking points that they want to hear. Citizens, and it is not only in the United States, are confusing talking points and news, they are confusing politics with endless charades, and they have been played in such a way for decades. The Super Bowl is a giant circus just like American politics, but at least the outcome is slightly less predictable, and have far less consequences. May be one day, Americans will want more than just be entertained, either by athletes, celebrities or politicians, and instead they will want to get involved and do what needs to be done to take charge of their own destiny.

That devastating news will fuel Deborah’s undoing and ultimately prove her salvation. “Even Tough Girls Wear Tutus” chronicles her emotional downward spiral from angry adolescent to volatile drug addicted young criminal, and her triumphant recovery and reinvention as an advocate, speaker and writer.

During a chat last week, Deborah discussed the arduous, but cathartic writing process as well as her future hopes for her Non Profit, The UnPrison Project, that sends her all over the country speaking at women’s prisons and conferences.

Ironically, Deborah first fictionalized her story and shopped it as a novel. Remember this was some years back when all those phony memoirs fell off the shelves in the wake of the big James Frey fake memoir Oprah betrayal brouhaha. “Once they ( editors and agents) heard it was a true story, they kept saying it should be a memoir, but I didn’t want any part of that.”

So she put it away for a while. But our stories have a way of nagging at us, until they just spill out, no matter the anguish. ” It’s not like my story is ever far behind. I can relive the whole thing in a minute. But I wrote through a lot of wet pages,” she concedes. “I had to peel the real story out of the novel.”

And the real story is one of the most raw and riveting books I’ve read in recent memory. As a writer and a teacher and creativity coach who works with writers, I am blown away by Stein’s authentic voice; there’s nothing sentimental or apologetic about it. Here, give a listen to an excerpt from one of her presentations, and you’ll hear what I’m talking about.

It’s that unconditional love of her parents, as well as the education and opportunity to develop her creativity that save her. In case you were wondering, this is where the tutus in the title come in. As a young girl, Deborah is introduced to dance and loves it, but thinks a girl born in prison is unworthy of the elegant art. That’s one of the many heartbreaking revelations. Another is when, as an adult, she finally returns to tour Alderson and is ushered into the very cell where she spent her first year of life. Her visceral reaction stirs an emotional tsunami that took me by surprise in the middle of Starbucks ( that’s okay; it gave me a chance to share the book’s potency with a few fellow patrons). There’s also a beautiful reconciliation scene with her mother, so long in the coming, it will likely pull at your heart.

“Most of the women–whether they have any real education or not–are thirsty for change. They know they need it. They want to believe it’s possible,” Deborah says. “And I know having an education helped me change. It gave me a way to get out of my head, a new way to look at the world. I know it can do the same for so many others.”

And there are certainly many to help. The facts about women in prison are staggering. Women are the fastest growing population in U.S. prisons, with over 1 million serving time; that’s 1 % of the female population. 75% of these women are mothers, most with kids under 18. 2.3 million minor children, most under 10, have a parent behind bars. Between 4 and 7 % of women entering prison are pregnant. The majority of incarcerated women are sentenced for nonviolent drug offenses and over 85% are in drug and alcohol abuse programs.

I’m not passing out Get Out of Jail Free cards; so the hardliners who usually toss cyber tomatoes at me about now, can hold their fire. But there’s got to be a better way, folks. So many people languish in prison for excruciatingly long sentences, often for crimes largely against themselves. As a society we have to change this,. Somehow, some way. Even some red meat Republicans are starting to see the wisdom of sentencing and prison reform, even if that change of heart is propelled by the fiscal bottom line, it’s a start.

Speaking of starts, as part of the UnPrison Project, Deborah Jiang Stein would like to fund college scholarships for the daughters of prisoners at Alderson and eventually other prisons. “I want to give them and their children a way of reframing their world. the way I’ve reframed mine.”

Of course, you don’t have to have a prison story to be affected by this book. I think everyone can relate to the powerful grasp secrets can have on a person, the emotional lockdown they can slam on a vulnerable psyche. It’s the sharing of those secrets, whether to the world or just yourself, that is so liberating and transformative. That’s why writing can be therapeutic. And reading a book that gushes rage and regret in equal measure with reconciliation and hope can illuminate the strength and grace of the human spirit. “Even Tough Girls Wear Tutus” is one of those books.

Please follow Amy Beth Arkawy on Twitter.

Even though the revolution in Egypt is still at an uncertain, fluid stage, they’ve already made an irreversible geopolitical impact in the Middle-East, and beyond. If 9/11/2001 marked the start of a dark chapter in world history, 2/11/2011 may have been the beginning of a new era of positive global systemic changes challenging a worldwide unsustainable course of development.

Its progeny, the Occupy movement in America, is only four months old.  Taking root in the labor uprising in Madison, Wisconsin, the movement has spread across the country.  Occupy camps have sprung up one after the other, and, one after the other, have been struck down by the authorities.  The 99 percent are struggling to gain a foothold, but, so far, they’ve achieved little more than providing new slogans to be exploited by political campaigns and establishment activists.

Ben Ali in Tunisia, and Mubarak in Egypt, were pawns in the global game of transnational predatory capitalism. The fact that they were both toppled means that this imperialist world order can be challenged. Despite their different specifics, both revolutions were fueled by what are the universal desires of  every human beings: social justice, economic justice, freedom of speech, and the right to define our destiny through a  fair democratic process.

In America, there is a danger that this has been forgotten.  Compromise and co-option by establishment ‘activists’, and political operatives, have clouded the fundamental issues that drove people to leave the lives they knew and Occupy the nations public spaces.  The untamed fire that brought them to the squares has been domesticated and articulated in a voice not their own.  Their simple call for equality, and emancipation from the rule of the 1 percent – the global financial elite – has been turned into a convoluted diatribe encompassing the goals of every special interest wishing to ride the coattails of their momentum.

Abuse of power is not unique to countries dominated by charismatic figures, ‘strong-men’ dictators, or military regimes.  Even Western Democracies suffer from the same social and economic inequalities (America’s wealth inequality is far greater than Egypt’s), repression of dissent (the U.S. Patriot Act, Espionage Act, SOPA, PIPA, and ACTA), challenges to freedom of speech (the campaign against Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, and journalists covering Occupy), and the exploitation of the many for the profit of the few (austerity measures and loss of services to maintain the profits of global financiers).

The fundamental mechanisms that collect wealth in the hands of the few are universal to global capitalism.  Regardless of the outward appearance of any existing political system, the impact on the citizens of the planet, their livelihood, and their environment, is the same.

In North Africa and the Middle-East, the domino effect generated by the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt is already on its way.  Despite the new narrative coming from Washington, pushing its vassals states for superficial reforms to quell the uprising, it seems that the wave is too powerful to be stopped or even contained. Former Secretary of State Henri Kissinger once said that “power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.” This statement not only defines the psychology of men like Ben Ali, Mubarak, and Putin, it proves revealing of the global elite and their pursuit of empire.

Kissinger, who had his hands in US foreign policy for 40 years, was a so called ‘pragmatist.’  In other words, he was in favor of supporting autocrats as long as the interests of the empire were not challenged. Even until recently, a common school of thought in Washington was that “Arabs were not ready for democracy.” Not only are they ready, but Tunisians and Egyptians are giving us all a lesson in courage and  democracy in its ultimate form. The Arab world is defining its own history over issues that concern all of us, and the sheer emotion of it will ignore national borders.

The American Occupy movement is still struggling with unity between cities, and developing a clarity of the message it allowed to be diluted by others, to challenge the more important question of nationalism.  A society that has been long divided by prejudice, racism, and fear of ‘the other’ is having difficulty coordinating a unified voice that overcomes these historic barriers and joins the global chorus.

It is the Empire that has been established by global capitalism that is not ready for democracy in Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Syria, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain or America.  It’s the global capitalist empire that needs to maintain a strangle-hold on our global resources divided by region, just as it needs to maintain control of its industrial workforces and profitable consumer economies throughout the European Union and America.  Elements of democracy have been rationed at the minimum necessary to gain the cooperation of those under the control of the system.

When the greed of the elite supersedes the tolerance of the people, and the crumbs are spread too thin, the people rise up. This seems to be happening, but to what end?  What is the end game?

Superficial changes may be offered, such as what we saw when Ben Ali and Mubarak offered simple shuffling within their regimes, or the subsequent replacement of them as stewards of the status quo by their country’s generals.  In more sophisticated situations, like the pseudo-democracies of Europe and America, the citizens of a ‘democratic republic’ may be allowed to argue amongst themselves, and even vote, on how they will meet the financial demands of the global elite, or establish a sense of equality, among themselves.  Not a true equality mind you.  The elite are not factored into the equation.  Their status and profits remain fixed, as we have learned with the financial crash of 2007-2008.  Who will be taxed more and who will work longer, and harder, is the most that citizens are allowed to fight over.  And, if we’re loud enough, as the people in Egypt have learned, we may be offered a few more crumbs from the table.

Despite the enormous impact of what has been accomplished in Egypt, it is only the beginning.  A few wise individuals chose to remain in Tahrir square until a true, democratic, civilian government is established.  They faced pressure from the military, as well as from their fellow countrymen who were fooled by the removal of Mubarak.  The uprising has proven that the empire can be challenged, but real change will require prolonged commitment and great sacrifice. Only the appearance of change has been offered in the Middle-East, Europe, and America.  The strength of the movement must continue until the demands of the people are realized in full.

The motivation of this movement rises above petty nationalism.  The roots of the unrest go deeper than the specifics of a city, a district, a state, a region, a language, a religion or a culture.  The roots of this unrest can be found in the principles borne out of the age of enlightenment and continued in the current writings of Alain Badiou and Slavoj Zizek, among others.  The roots of this revolution are universal in principle and global in their impact.

The struggle throughout the Arab world is part and parcel with the anti-austerity struggle in Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, and America.  The global empire built on predatory capitalism has victimized the people of the world and relegated individuals to the status of serfs.  Regional exploitation has resulted in third world countries, banana republics, industrialized nations, and consumer societies… all neatly compartmentalized to service a global economy that increasingly benefits the few, the elite, the modern global nobility.

What we can learn from Egypt is that a single punch will not win this fight.  The empire has taken the this glancing blow and is shaking it off, smiling, firmly planted on its feet.  Loosing Mubarak doesn’t even qualify as a black eye.  Real change can only be accomplished with a full follow-through resulting in complete destabilization.  A protracted general strike and reclaiming of natural resources may be the only thing that can truly bring about a just, sustainable, world order.  And, a new world order will require a global effort.

A shared goal and alternative system must be established.  The force of the Egyptian people stopped the old guard in its tracks, but there was nothing prepared to replace it.  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides a framework of principles to organize a global movement around.  These are neither regional concerns nor issues that can be dealt with by regional remedies.  The principles enshrined in the declaration must be applied to all humans regardless of geography or current status in the global hierarchical empire.  A new system of government must be explored and an alternative, sustainable, non-exploitive, economic system must be implemented to realize these principles and ideals.  In order to ensure our own rights and freedoms, we must stand for the rights and freedoms of all.

Egypt’s struggle has just begun.  It is more than symbolic.  It has demonstrated the real potential for change.  It is the same struggle as in Greece, Ireland, Yemen, China, America, and Saudi Arabia, and suffers from the same barriers… the greatest barrier being self imposed through the lack of unity, combination, and cooperation.  It is the struggle of the many against the few.  It is the struggle of the expendable class against the global elite.  It is the struggle of those who strive for true universal equality and emancipation.

Will we finally reach across borders to lift each other up rather than exploit?  Will we finally achieve shared prosperity rather than fight for table-scraps while the elite hoard our resources and profit from our labor?  Will we join in a global struggle for universal equality?  Will we build a global movement that can provide the follow-through to Egypt’s glorious first punch?  Will the many finally triumph over the few?

When Occupations face the fury of State; when tear-gas and tasers are the answer to your petitions; when your choices are to fold or to fight, what will be the reason that you remember for coming in the first place?  Will you think of reforms to the existing establishment, like the ones offered the Egyptians?  Will you think of a new candidate to perform their role in a system that has been sold to the highest bidder?  Will you wish for ways to make your enslavement to this system more palatable at the continued cost to your brothers and sisters around the world?  Or, will you remember emancipation?

Emancipation.  Emancipation from an unjust, unequal, and unsustainable system.  Emancipation and equality, unconditionally, for you, and for all. Is this the goal you’ll remember?  Will you seek to end the 1% or beg them for a few more crumbs by throwing temper tantrums in parks.

Don’t be distracted by the myriad of issues that have been placed, like land-mines, in your way.  You are not there to solve all of societies ills.  You are there to reclaim your planet, and a truly democratic system, so that we can all, together, work at solving societies ills without the interference of a self-serving financial elite controlling our politics and keeping us divided.

Remember why you’re there.  Remember the 99 percent. Focus on the 1 percent.  Remember emancipation.  Take no substitute.  Settle for nothing less.

While the 99% have occupied Wall Street, Wall Street has occupied the Democratic Party.

The Occupation movement is currently struggling with the same challenges of any grass-roots, populous movement. Well-meaning activists that have been pursuing these and associated goals (in the case of ‘Occupy’ this would be a myriad of labor, economic justice, and social justice non-profits and PACs) for years have jumped in and implemented valuable resource supply chains as well as policy and process facilitation methods. The problem is, it tends to turn the grass-roots movement into a vehicle for their preconceived agenda, or simply a prop to help support their platform, while employing methods that were unsuccessful prior to the occupation movements inception.

The Democrat party wants to have its cake and eat it too.  While protecting Wall Street banksters from any real accountability for their crimes, and allowing them to continue ravaging the national and global economy to maintain their vulgar personal salaries and bonuses, they’re doing everything they can to claim the anti-Wall Street movement of the 99% as their own.  Obama, his administration, and the Democrat Party as a whole, have done nothing to address the issues and concerns voiced by the Occupation Movement yet they ask for a great deal of support in return, and go to great lengths to portray the Occupation protests as a Progressive movement. This has done nothing but foster a deep resentment among many occupiers who are already tired of an unresponsive system that takes much and offers little in return.

Representatives from labor have made overtures with the Occupy Movement to both assist in developing the movement and ensure its sustainability while trying to infect their own rank and file with the energy and commitment to action that permeates the movement.  Operatives for the Democrat party and various Political Action Committees, on the other hand, often move throughout the movement keeping their political connections and agendas a secret while they seek to manipulate the movement into a left-wing, or progressive, ‘TEA party’ in order to exploit the political capital of a movement that enjoys overwhelming public support.

Recent exposure of a Democratic Party operative and employee of NGP VAN – the engine behind the Democratic Party’s campaign machine – infiltrating Occupy DC and attempting to establish connections throughout the Occupy Movement nationally (particularly in large city occupations like Chicago, Boston, and Oakland) only highlights the need for the Occupy Movement to proceed with extreme caution.

While Occupiers are upset that the SEIU has already endorsed Barack Obama for a second term as President before there has been any effort by his administration to address the issues and demands presented by the Occupation Movement, there is far more resentment towards the Democrat operatives that are trying to usurp the movement on behalf of an establishment Party that has become the political arm of Goldman Sachs,Wall Street, and the global financial elite.

Unions are forced to maintain their pensions through investment in Wall Street.  It’s unfortunate, but true.  While it would be wonderful to see them pull the workers money out, the ones that would be impacted the most would be the retirees, and those approaching retirement, that rely on those pensions that they paid into all their lives for their continued survival. This puts Labor in a difficult position, but not quite as difficult as living in a park during the winter.  The rank and file must become educated, agitated, mobilized, and radicalized enough to make these choices for themselves.  Their union leadership cannot do it for them.  The rank and file is the union.  They must become engaged.  They must occupy their unions and start leading the leadership.

Politicians, on the other hand, are in a position to enact reforms to election financing, special interest bribery, and lobbyist influence, as well as impose regulations on Wall Street, banks, and corporations, that would protect all of us, unions included, from the continuous bloodletting of the 99%.

Within the Occupation Movement there is currently an internal struggle to wrest control of the policy, process, and implementation from those with compromised agendas and establish a truly democratic system that would allow the movement to discover its own voice, articulate its own goals, and execute its own strategies and actions.  This is not to the exclusion of professional activists.  They are often brilliant and committed people with a wealth of experience and networks that will be key to the sustainability of the movement and the eventual fruition of our goals.

The experience, organizing skills, networks, and resources of the labor movement are of vital importance to the Occupation Movement.  In return, the commitment to radical action, and willingness to drop everything and engage in the struggle for the emancipation of the 99%, is required by a labor movement that has suffered a massive decline since Ronald Reagan’s assault on Air Traffic controllers in the 80′s seemed to not only break its back, but its spirit as well.

Wall Street and the banks, corporations and the media outlets they own, as well as all the other institutions of the 1%, want this movement dead, and they’re willing to go to any lengths necessary in order to make that happen.

The Democrats are trying to usurp the movement for short term gain in an election year and simultaneously manipulate it on behalf of their ‘Big Finance’ benefactors so that it can be domesticated as a post-election pet, neutered, and put on a leash. This would, whether purposefully intended or not, bring about the very death sought by Wall Street, the banksters, and the 1% they service. The Republicans did this to the TEA party.  The Occupation Movement is not going to allow the same to happen to them.

Currently, the labor movement seems to be looking to the Occupation Movement to see what they can use, and rightfully so.  Labor has been fighting these battles for a long time.  But, despite their expertise and resources, they are currently lacking the fire, the populous rage, and the overwhelming public support of the Occupation Movement.  We need to figure this relationship out.  The Occupation won’t be usurped, and, if the rank and file and labor movement want to truly support the struggle, that support will have to go beyond simply providing tarps, generators, and other much appreciated supports, and start supporting the Occupation Movement with the painful choices of cutting all ties with certain financial institutions, and political parties, and stop endorsing the politicians that the Movement is protesting against… then shake off its lethargy and apathy, allow itself to be infected with the energy of the Occupation Movement, and join us in the streets rather than simply asking us to march along on yet another union march trying to capitalize on our momentum.

Despite my harsh language for the Democrats, the progressive political activists connected with the Occupation Movement are as much potential friends as labor, there is just a lot more work for them to do in order to establish a positive relationship.  As individuals they are, for the most part, committed and admirable people.  They just happen to work for an institution, an establishment, that has been corrupted.  Their heads and hearts may be in the right place, but until the Party they work for cuts its ties with the enemies of the 99% they are part of the problem, not the solution.

Regardless of these challenges the Occupation Movement will continue to grow.  We had 165 tents, and over 200 full time occupiers in DC’s McPherson Square alone at last count.  While the weather is going to be a challenge as daunting as trying to maintain the integrity of the Occupation Movement, these are challenges we are determined to overcome.  On the coldest of nights when wet snow is falling, and blankets are scarce, and heaters are non-existent – or in the midst of vociferous debates over anything from personality clashes to the core values and mission statement of the Occupation Movement, no one ever says they are going to pack up their tent and go home.

We’re here and we’re going to stay.  While everyone from the Progressives to the Far-Right are trying to find a way to take a chunk for themselves, we are galvanizing as a community and a movement.  When our friends decide to join with us rather than secretly occupy the Occupation in order to use us, or exploit us, they too may enjoy the same promise of success.

Editor’s Note: photographs and illustration by Liam Fox.

Republished with updates. Original post, November 20, 2011

Ali Savino was the initiator of Occupy DC’s Research and Policy Development Committee (RPD).  This committee is responsible for not only policy development within the Occupy community, but, through the Occupy 2.0 committee, a sub group of RPD, plays a key role in establishing the future direction of the movement.

Ms. Savino works for NGP VAN in Washington, DC.  Her Linkedin profile states that she works in ‘product design’ at the firm.  NGP VAN’s product is political campaigns.  Their web site boasts deep ties with the Democrat Party.  Their Clients Page states:

A Crisis of Ontology

The deadly disease of our global capitalist system is rather easy to understand from a philosophical standpoint. The crisis is ontological, a profound existential turmoil. Human beings are currently defined and valued  by what they have, not by what they are. The quantitative aspect of  our lives is in the forefront of all human interactions-either between groups or individuals within a group-while the qualitative aspect has been pushed aside, not even on the back burner of our collective consciousness, but literally into the trash of our social interactions. Usually, people are gauged by their assets, incomes, and cars they drive not by evaluating what contributions they make to the common good. We live in a world where a person is defined by quantity not quality, and it is probably our biggest systemic problem.

This is reflected by countless examples in the popular culture with expressions such as “show me the money”, “money talks” or the famous line in Brian De Palma’s “Scarface”: “First you get the money, than you get the power”. Poor kids, dreaming of a better future, are constantly bombarded by the spectacle of the “bling, the cool cribs, the fancy rides and the sexy babes” which are the trademarks of most Hip Hop music videos. Money is always center stage in this out of reach universe of  “players” which regardless of any tangible cultural meaning serve as heroes  and role models for the disenfranchised. It is the deadly equation of money= success + happiness + self respect =power. The same toxic component motivates some of the brightest and best educated young people in the United States to opt for a career on Wall Street instead of becoming doctors, engineers or scientists.

In our global society, only money gives a few people access to power which in return allows the very same people the possibility to accumulate even more wealth. A typical example of this vicious cycle is the constant revolving door between investment banks, such as Goldman Sachs and the highest jobs at the US Treasury Department. Top finance executives  with a taste for power- such as Hank Paulson or Larry Summers- under the premises of an interest in “public service”, work for governmental branches for a few years, then go back to their extremely lucrative jobs in finance, and so on.

Anxiety Rising: Occupy Versus Fear and Paradigm Paralysis

Some people are still living under the pretense that “things” in our broken global system will eventually fix themselves up spontaneously by some kind of miracle. Of course it will not happen, and this model  is, by essence, the definition of magical thinking. Recently, a Haitian woman, interviewed for the occasion of the second anniversary of  the earthquake, said that she was “putting her trust in god not in people” to rebuild Haiti from the horrific disaster. With a rising uncertainty and global anxiety building up like a pressure cooker, most people are scared and either try to escape reality by putting their heads in the sand or are convinced that the global system can be salvaged by making changes from within.

But, what they refuse to see is that following this model of a “business as usual” mentality impair their judgments and lock them into the box of paradigm paralysis. Even so most people feel that we have already entered an extraordinary period of global paradigm shift, the fear of the unknown makes them want to hang on to a system in advance state of decay. More people worldwide are getting aware of the fact that it is not a question of if the system will collapse but rather when.

The global Occupy movement has two functions in this process: firstly, to be the main catalyst for systemic change, secondly, as one of the architects setting up the foundations for a new global system where quality not quantity shall finally  prevail in human relationships. Turning what seems to be Utopian into a reality is the challenge, and it  is what this brave new world is all about. It is only a question of reaching a certain critical mass, and of  developing  the psychological ability to welcome the unknown, without fear, and to enter into uncharted territories.

Editor’s Note: All photographs by Magalie L’Abbe.

Before MKL launched the civil rights movement, America was,de facto, an Apartheid society, divided at its core. America was equal only officially, but in reality it was a  divided and unequal social system where African-Americans were, at large, second class citizens. The message of Martin Luther King and his leadership within the Civil Rights movement were, in essence, revolutionary. But MLK wanted this deep, and much needed, transformation of  the United States social structure to be strictly non-violent. MLK’s peaceful revolution of the 1960s changed America forever, allowing for example the election of a black President in 2008, but in many ways the achievements and gains which were made by the civil rights movement have been reversed. At large, African-Americans and Latinos are still getting the crumbs from the table. Even if it is more settled than before the time of MLK, American cities are still segregated by racial and socio-economic divides. If you are an  African-American man in America between the age of 18 to 30, the chance that you will or have been through the US penal system is, today, more than 30 percent. More than 62 percent of America’s juggernaut prison system’s population is either African-American or Latino.

In many ways, it seems that half a century later, the victories of MLK and the civil rights movement were short lived. With a public education system in shamble, the opportunities  for the poor and minorities to advance and better their lives are melting away like snow under a bright sun. In term of wealth and income inequality, the gap between the 1 percent and the 99 percent has increased many folds since the late 1960s, not decreased. MLK tried to give a voice to the oppressed, the people who were forgotten by the so called American dream. But today, the voiceless are still not heard and they are certainly not invited to have a seat at the same table than the powerful. Even so, the racial divide is more defuse, the class one is more extreme.

However, since the last few months of 2011, this sad state of affairs has taken a turn in the form of the birth of the US Occupy movement. Occupy draws a lot of its thematic and inspirations from the teaching of Dr. King. From the accent on non-violent protest, its oppositions to war and American imperialism, and especially its goal to redefine a society based on the principles of equality, fairness, sustainability and social justice. Martin Luther King knew all along that he had a target on his back, but the advantage of Occupy, in comparison with the civil rights movement, is that it is a horizontal movement with no clear define leadership. If MLK became a clear and easy mark  for the one opposed to social changes in 1968, a leaderless movement like Occupy is, on the other hand, impossible to kill. If a man can be killed, principles or ideas cannot.

Occupy movements across Canada achieved great public attention and worked as the trigger for a paradigm shift. It is the Canadian chapter of a much required global wake up call. Occupy Canada has, through all its chapters and camps, successfully shaken the foundations of our status quo.

Last night, a vast majority of participants referred to the first week of Occupy Toronto as the highlight of the whole movement. And, I agree, it was the introduction to a new way of understanding ourselves and our relations with other human beings.

The beginning of Occupy Canada marked a rediscovery of our sense of humanity, too long denied. Prior to October 15, we were used to understanding each through social roles. How many of us have held meaningful conversations with homeless people prior to Occupy? How many of us have deeply debated political and social issues with people we barely knew? Where else would we have been able to join a physical circle of discussions with people we have never met, discussions on issues of poverty, homelessness, drug addition, living standards?

Reflecting now, honestly, it was not Occupy as a reified community that have allowed us to create a new sense of community. It was, mainly, before Occupy, that individuals did not bother engaging at the same level with other human beings.  Thus, the lack of sense of community and outreach, the lack of sense of comradery between us, was not only systemic consequences brought about the 1%, it was you and I who just lack the courage to build these relationships on our own.

Occupy created the space, but, you and I created Occupy by being, and participating. There is no Occupy. Occupy is a brand. I do not mean this in a negative way. Not at all. I mean that the people are the force behind Occupy. You do not have to maintain a camp ground and tents to prove its existence.

The Occupy camps throughout the country, and even throughout the world, have already achieved a lot of public discussion. The word Occupy is still necessary to make the editorial agenda of the mainstream media. However, have we lost the understanding that it is not the idea of Occupy that drives people? Rather, it is the people, you and I, who drive the idea of Occupy forward.

There is much that needs to be openly and freely discussed about Occupy.

Here is what I consider shortcomings. Please do not ‘hate’ on these comments. I see them as true shortcomings that can be addressed and improved upon. These comments reflect my perspective within the context of a larger strategic social justice movement. I am not intent on ‘bashing’ Occupy, rather, I’m presenting a sober analysis based only from my own personal experiences.

1. Die hard Occupy organizers want to own Occupy, its Facebook page, twitter accounts, and sites. There is so much paranoia trying to own these accounts and limit access to the public, that actual participants are sometimes accused to be infiltrators or outright censored.

We could surely find a balance between public involvement and security. Media teams in Occupy have become the information authorities of everything that takes place throughout each movement. Women were physically attacked at the Occupy Toronto camp. Did their media team report on that as a method of ensuring issues of safety around camp?

Occupy Vancouver had some very nasty confrontations between members, some of whom have publicized alleged physical and death threats. Have you been to the original Occupy Vancouver Facebook page?  People who advocated against violent tactics were verbally crucified!  Has Occupy Vancouver media team ever reported on these  in order to create and facilitate a safe discussion on these internal divisions? No. Media teams act as the very  mainstream media outlets that we criticize by failing to be honest to the movement and themselves. There was a great deal of power reserved only for those who control the flow of information about Occupy camps. This needs to be addressed if Occupy is to be a truly transparent and honest movement.

But this is a movement of the people, not of organizers or media teams! People say “I am in the media team” as though the statement is supposed to attribute them with a particular sense of respect.  But, Occupy is an idea. And, as I mentioned, it is not the idea which drives people towards social justice, it is the people who believe in social justice that move the Occupy Movement forward.

2. There is lack of solidarity resulting from the above mentioned ownership of Occupy. It seems that not everyone can act on behalf of Occupy for social change. In a leaderless movement, with dysfunctional general assemblies, who is to decide who can carry on actions under the banner of Occupy? Who does the reputation of Occupy really belong to? Who are the organizers, and, who are the people in charge of protecting the reputation and credibility of Occupy? Is there a sense of hierarchy here? Is there no sense of hypocrisy?

3. General assemblies and the consensus model have proven not only ineffective but also hindrances to actual steps towards change. General assemblies could have materialized down the road.  They were not an essential component to our organization at first. There are a couple of factors relating to this:

• Meaningful democracy does not survive on voting alone. Look at our country now. A sustainable democracy requires an informed citizenry, not just voters. Democracy requires a politically and conceptually sophisticated citizenry engaged in the articulation of their own experiences within the context of social and political structures and relations.
• Votes in general assemblies, based on quick discussions on issues that people are not particularly familiar with, are  void of meaning… especially so when not all perspectives have equal weight, or the chance to be elaborated upon.
• The consensus model, at this point, is void of all potential solutions. Imagine having a general assembly of people who are aware of the issues that are immediately affecting our lives through  local, provincial, and federal policies. Identifying problem issues would not require constant voting and blocking.
• Not all participants, at any given general assembly, have the same social or political interests. I have proposed previously that, instead of holding general assemblies, it would have been more practical to organize based on issues that matter to people. For instance, holding general meetings on particular issues at particularly affected geographical areas: i.e. Neighbourhoods victimized by Rob Ford’s spending cuts.
• Also, as to the procedural aspects of the general assemblies, those I have participated in were too bureaucratic to be emancipating, let alone truly engaging.

4. Occupy groups desperately require a news/current events team rather than just a livestream media team. The focus so far seems to have been on promoting one’s movement through livestream as a reality show. Through this focus on the movement itself, Occupy Vancouver, and Occupy Toronto, have turned inwards on theeir own affairs alienating themselves from the important issues developing in thee world around them. News has been covered about what is happening at Occupy camps but seldom about the daily issues that arise… the daily issues that the public needs to be aware of.

The above has been our main focus. Occupy groups should be advocating for public engagement on current issues. This is why a group of us decided to start 404 System Error with a new focus and a new narrative. We are tired of ongoing verbal attacks and endless rants. We want to identity specific problems, and work on building strategic solutions, while advocating for new ways of making sense of important issues. We are not advocating for utopian solutions at the moment. We are working on building tools for participation leading to actions. Some of our proposals are narrow in scope, for we believe in the importance of thinking globally while acting locally.

We hope to work in collaboration with anyone who cares to identify social, economic, and political problems. We also wish to advocate more conceptualizations while applying all the human potential, creativity, and productive skills, to challenging the status quo and moving the Occupy movement forward.

Even in a country with no popular revolutionary tradition like the United States, some movements of the 60s were already pushing the envelop a lot further than the hippie agenda of “peace and love”. In the US, the two main more radical groups were the Black Panthers and the Weathermen of the Weather Underground. Both organizations were crushed and criminalized by a police apparatus which has never tolerated real dissent. Will those types of groups re-incarnate themselves in the big ideological tent that is the occupy movement? It is a pressing issue, but it is impossible to forecast. Occupy is not ideologically monolithic, it is so far a mosaic of personalities and ideologies. It combines neo-Anarchists, neo-Marxists, Libertarians and followers of non-violent protest doctrines defined by Gandhi and Martin Luther King. But can advocates of peaceful protest, neo-Anarchists and neo-Marxists work together to define common grounds, strategies and tactics? Or will such disparities be the kiss of death for Occupy?

While the adamant supporters of non-violent actions represent the essence of the movement and its ultimate goal to define a better global society, they might be a bit naive to think that the 1 percent- or more accurately the 0.01 percent-will just give up their wealth and power without a fight exercising, if needed, the most brutal form of repression. Power- either private or public- doesn’t care about ideology, moral or ethics. The ruling class, either in the United States, Syria, Egypt, France or Russia is only concerned about one thing: preserving their power at all cost. It is naive to think that Vladimir Putin is just going to walk away, just like it was naive to think that the al-Assad brothers in Syria would willingly give up their dictatorial grip of the country. The only rule and logic for the powerful is to stay in power. In other words, so few people have a lock on real management of global affairs that violent clashes seem to be unfortunately unavoidable to move the dial in the right direction.

However, it is unlikely to happen in the United States where the population has been beaten into submission for centuries, but it is a completely different story elsewhere. It is unfolding in the Middle-East where violence is on the agenda, some countries in Europe are also prime candidates for such radicalization. It is especially the case for the ones with a history of successful revolutions such as Russia and France.

The global Occupy movement is still in its infancy, and it is so far defining itself more by what it doesn’t want than by trying to establish development model alternatives “written in stone”. Even people who do not want to see the reality of a broken system crumbling in front of our eyes know intuitively that we have entered a period of massive shift. Something which can not be compared with any historical model, and for this reason defying most people understanding. Occupy is one of the engine behind this giant shift, and it is likely to mutate and evolve in the coming months or years. If the few controlling the global wealth and power would be willing to give it up to the 99 percent without a fight, than this revolution of our collective consciousness could be peaceful and bloodless. But it is, unfortunately, unlikely to be the case in our current world where wealth and power call the shots regardless of any rules or moral concerns.

Editor’s Note: All photographs by Empanada Paris.