We've been talking at each other for a long long time. We been talking to our congresscritters for a long long time. And sometimes it feels as if a vital sense of connection is never there.
People want the Occupy group to come up with a list of demands and grievances but they already want to chew on the "Declaration" the group put out and want it "shortened" or want it to include something or other.
The people in Liberty Square are talking to each other and they are using consensus to determine what they put out. And consensus is damn hard but richly rewarding. Consensus has been used in previous group actions although it is not in normal use. It isn't democracy as we practice it, it is a slightly more purified democracy. Everybody gets a voice, everybody gets heard, anybody can object or block an action. And anybody can propose an action and it will be discussed at length until all objections have been met or the action is tabled.
I don't think we are able to do that here on our keyboards. I don't think we are patient enough to try it. But if we did we might get a better feel for what the Liberty Square folks are having to do. And remember, they are having to shout out every word people say. So everybody has spouted the words and everybody gets a turn at having their words spouted out. I am guessing that there might be something profound happen hearing ones words shouted back to you. It might be that one hears oneself for the first time. And that would be getting close to the "Ah would the giftie gae us to (hear ourselves) as (others hear us).
So those of you who think we could do better than the Liberty Square folks at coming up with first, a Declaration and second, actions, and third, demands go for it. Heck it isn't like there isn't room to pick a corner of this waffle and start buttering and syruping it to your taste. The whole frickin' system from local to state to the Federal level is shattering to pieces as we watch. You can even take the economy or the IMF or real estate or jobs or the state of football even. Declare what's wrong, state what actions we (the public) can take to protest and what demands we should make that the powers that be should do and do immediately and what will be the consequences if they don't and/or reasons why they should heed our demand(s).
Heck we even have a constitution convention conversation going on:
And if you are curious about the "conconcon" you can check it out here videos from the conference not yet available.
And from FOK is an interview between David Schuster and October 2011 spokesman Kevin Zeese.
FOK interview with Kevin Zeese
And Kevin mentions a great number of things that he envisions October 2011 group will tackle. And says on his web site Oct2011 that there are discussions ongoing about all of these topics.
If we did do it here, what would it look like? I can envision something like this: I pick justice and my grievance is that justice in our society appears to be corrupt, it appears to be broken. I advocate actions protesting at the Supreme Court (or at least as close as we could get) and petitioning both the SCOTUS and the US Congress. The SCOTUS petition would demand that the justices follow the rules of integrity as found in the lower courts. It would demand that they recuse themselves when there is a conflict of interest because they are a. too close to the situation involved to make a fair decision (i.e. are close friends with people involved in the case), 2) the decision would affect their families finances. 3)if they or their family for 4 generations have received any monies from any party involved in the case before the court. and 4) that their decision not be made to benefit one party or the other. If the case comes out with one political party as the clear winner they have not done their jobs properly. I would petition the congress to impeach the 5 justices who are clearly following Koch Brothers initiatives and hobnob with them and even go to fundraisers. And write the law clearly stating that SCOTUS must follow guidelines insuring fairness and impartiality Lastly, I would demand that the SCOTUS reflect the highest integrity and the highest standards of fairness and impartiality. I would demand that the Senate and the White House expand the court to include much more diversity and include at least 1/2 of the court as female and include Asians and blacks and Hispanics as well as whites. If you were interested in this topic but had a different take, you could create your own set or acknowledge whatever part of mine you liked and add yours. If you find that this response on this item is not to your liking you could again object to all or part of it and give your reasons as to why.
If there was actually a healthy discussion going we could continue a topic in another diary until we reached some kind of consensus (and that would be all recs - any hrs or naysayers at that point would kill it unless we could overcome the objections of the naysayers. Just like the rethugs, naysayers can block the whole thing.
But bear in mind as http://www.dailykos.com/... points out
‘You’re creating a vision of the sort of society you want to have in miniature." And I think all of us want to be heard and to feel safe in being heard and to be supported in allowing ourselves to voice opinions and that means we need to give others the same courtesy.