Skip to main content

View Diary: An Open Letter to Occupy Boston (15 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  the struggle is about corporate control of every (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    evergreen2

    aspect of our public lives. Everything from public space to public policy to public debate has been taken over by corporate interests. We have nowhere to turn for mass assembly without it being controlled by corporate interests.

    Our laws have been crafted to support the owner class and therefore, they have eroded our right to assembly to suit them.

    To see how public discourse is so twisted, just look at the Republican debates and how things regarding OWS are reported.

    We need forums where we can talk about the issues we have. We need to do this in person and not online. It is very powerful to meet in person and find ways to sort through decisions and issues.

    Yes, we can assemble daily. But, we know that if we leave a space, they will make sure it is used for other things. We know that without housing people to make sure that there is a constant presence, it will lose it's vitality.

    This is exactly what the powers that be want: for the movement to lose it's public presence and vitality.

    This is not just about first amendment purity, it's about having the time and space to gather meaningfully. The whole idea that citizens can hostilely take over their own public space is absurd. We didn't invade and shut down the entire city of Boston. We decided that it was in the public interest to use a spec of the public space available for a public purpose. That it is being framed as anything hostile is not only offensive, it highlights the perspective of the powers that be.

    When money is out of campaigns, when financial fraud is prosecuted, when people are allowed to keep their homes, when we stop funding wars, when we stop militarizing our police, when we stop oppressing entire classes of people with our prison industrial complex, when we actually reform our health care system, when we limit how much media any person or group can own, when we establish journalistic standards which must be met to qualify as news, and on and on and on, then we can afford to not hold a public space where the 99% can hold discourse and persistently protest is out of the oppressive hands of the 1%.

    Please remember to Witness Revolution. It means so much to them that we pay attention.

    by UnaSpenser on Thu Dec 08, 2011 at 10:41:37 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  I was having a similar conversation (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Phoenix Woman

      this morning with a man in his 70s who is a former newspaper reporter. I was reporting back to him about the impending raid and expressing my desire for some lofty civil disobedience actions. Our conversation went something like this:

      Me: We need highly visible actions that are obviously and directly related to our values and our grievances.

      Him: Why can't you, instead of insisting on that squalid camp in the middle of everything, have a nice big protest in someplace big like the Common or Franklin Park?

      Me: Because you can't see most of the Common from any of the adjoining streets and Franklin Park is in what a lot of people consider a no-man's-land .

      Him: Hell, the media could bring their helicopters and  video you!

      Exactly the point! They could, or they could not.  They could do just about anything they wanted in terms of the amount, the spin and the accuracy of reporting. That is one of our primary grievances and exactly why we should not participate by their rules.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site