Proposal to Adopt the Chicago Principles of Solidarity

[BenBurton]

Structure is good. Moving forward, perhaps DAC might create a working structure, with a short series of steps for planning.

1. Identify specific target/issue
2. Define the strategy, I.e. What is the desired effect of the action? To raise awareness, to educate individuals, to block or prohibit legislation or bad business practices, etc.
3. Choose tactic, I.e. march, rally, political theater, art installation, civil disobedience; in essence, choosing the tactic that is most likely to result in a successful outcome of the strategy.
And,
4. Couch the tactic in a Grand Vision (optional, but most likely to help sway public opinion in your favor, especially effective if you can make people a.) feel safe and un-threatened, and 2.) make them laugh.

After that, it's time, man-power, pizza and glue guns. Please remember, our little offshoots are out here, please consider us working and engaged resources for larger actions. Given some advance notice and idea the defined strategy and chosen tactic, we'd very much like to contribute.

I've tried to get people to see this as necessary for a number of projects, including passing the Chicago Principles. Basically every action of Occupy Chicago needs to go through this vetting to tie what we say and do to the mission. If you tie things to the mission and have a clear plan volunteers will show up.

I try to bring that outlook to everything I do with SM.

[marymcmahon@clear.net]

If we all tap our heels together three times it might happen. At least this is how I begin my day. Each day we get a bit closer. And I see most people involved here are dedicated to building channels for better coordination, we are all moving one grain of sand at a time. It's an amazing effort.

One thing I hope for is more clarity and a lessening of the defensive posture that colors and protracts the process.

[Ella Mae]

Mary,

I did see that it took some time to get your questions answered! I'm glad you are keeping the discourse going and yes, I do remember what it was like to read the forums and wonder how to be involved. And I have to say there's no substitute for face to face communication -- although I understand not everyone can do that. But you see that's part of the disconnect: the people who reply to you impatiently do so because these things are already being discussed in meetings and I think they feel they have to repeat themselves. And they are young.

I know you and many others objected to the office space but it is an excellent way to keep having these discussions. Not trying to convince anyone to go to meetings but I just want to point out there are many more meetings than the GAs. Also if available I can drive people to and from downtown or home if it's on the northside. All I'm saying is there are discussions happening in other places.

As far as the legalities, again, I don't agree, unless I'm missing something. As some have complained, we have no charter, we have no bylaws, we have nothing formal in writing. I should have copied your post because I can't see it to respond .... I'll have to post again.

On a personal note, reading long involved posts online hurts my eyes!!

OK, adding on: I thought i saw something about a 'loyalty oath' but don't recall what it's about. Can you link to it?

Again just want to point out this is not the only place for discussion. There is the dreaded Google groups, of course, which I find a mixed blessing..... there is also Facebook, twitter, and livestream. I find Twitter to be the best for more immediate information and they link to when the GA is livestreamed. In fact I have watched a lot of them, and can always watch later if I can't watch it live. I know, it would be nice if everything was here on the site, and I am glad more committee members are here. I know they are reminding people in Google groups to use the forums more. That's all I can say on this, except that I hope to have a job soon & won't have time for all this anyway!!

[Ella Mae]

Ella Mae

I agree, at this point, let's go forward, what are we doing. Doing, it's an action thing.

I'd like to offer up a quick suggestion since you sit on the DAC.

Structure is good. Moving forward, perhaps DAC might create a working structure, with a short series of steps for planning.

1. Identify specific target/issue
2. Define the strategy, I.e. What is the desired effect of the action? To raise awareness, to educate individuals, to block or prohibit legislation or bad business practices, etc.
3. Choose tactic, I.e. march, rally, political theater, art installation, civil disobedience; in essence, choosing the tactic that is most likely to result in a successful outcome of the strategy.
And,
4. Couch the tactic in a Grand Vision (optional, but most likely to help sway public opinion in your favor, especially effective if you can make people a.) feel safe and un-threatened, and 2.) make them laugh.

After that, it's time, man-power, pizza and glue guns. Please remember, our little offshoots are out here, please consider us working and engaged resources for larger actions. Given some advance notice and idea the defined strategy and chosen tactic, we'd very much like to contribute.

You make a lot of sense!!

Well I'm new on DAC and only one voice of many, but a lot of what you suggest is in the works. A LOT of working groups for different projects: there is the April 7 working group, People's Summit working group, NATO/G8 working group, and just starting, a May 1 working group, and yes, there is a Long Term Visions and Goals working group! Some of these, like April 7 (Chicago Spring) is already in planning, and others are only getting underway.

I am not in all these working groups. Just April 7 for now. Identifying a target is a tough one, because there's so many. This one is "Chicago Spring" so it's going to be a general kickoff .... a "we're still here". Many of the ideas you mentioned have been discussed (your #4 for example - we want Chicago Spring to be fun).

I will post what I can but I'm sure you understand specific tactics cannot be made public -- when they are determined. But put April 7 and May 1 on your calendar! The people's summit, I think, will be held at the same time as NATO/G8, but don't quote me.

We really could use more ideas and help and new people. I know not all are always welcoming of new people but if you are sitting in a circle in a facilitated committee meeting your voice would be heard. I'll try to keep up in the forums (for now, while unemployed) as much as I can. Are you interested in any specific working group? Do you have ideas for what the long term Vision should be? I think that's gonna get pushed back, with all the more immediate things happening, but it can't hurt to get THAT discussion going. Start a thread!

[mcsheffe]

I thought this group was inclusive and cliquish before.But after watching the GA on Friday Mike with your little hissy fit no wonder people don,t feel welcome.Well Mike how many meetings do you have to attend before you allow us to vote.And if we miss one or two because say we held down the fort at LaSalle and Jackson or went to a protest would we get a demerit .You really need to get over yourself and your principle the NATO G8 is going to be wake up call to Americas 1% no matter how your little Chicago Principles of Solidarity turns out

[spencerthayer]

Now that Occupy Chicago has decided they are not interested in agreeing to Chicago Principles I have a few questions....

1) How will Occupy Chicago organize with those affinity groups that are aware that acts of sabotage will be taking place?

2) How will Occupy Chicago determine where not to be to avoid acts of sabotage?

3) Will Occupy Chicago ignore warnings about acts of sabotage?

4) Will Occupy Chicago attempt to inform the police of any acts of sabotage that may be happening?

5) Will the Occupy Chicago security team attempt to stop acts of sabotage or vandalism if and when they occur?

6) Does Occupy Chicago have a plan to deal with the larger G8 community if they plan on actions that Occupy Chicago disagrees with?

And finally...

7) Will Occupy Chicago be condemning those groups that signed the Principles publicly if acts of sabotage occur?

Cordially in your face-
but still cordially,

Spencer "Thunderball" Thayer!

PS. Please watch this. http://vimeo.com/9705341

[Rojo]

Well, how would you have guaranteed this to begin with. I mean, Andy, you did say that there is no "centralized Activist Organization" so how would you have ultimately enforced these principles? Ooooooh, riiiiiiight, people were going to just do this themselves. Because you're not pushing a violent agenda at all. From day one Occupy has stated that we are about transparency, openness and NON-VIOLENCE. People like you, Andy have held the progressive movement back for the last ten years.

[Rojo]

And lately, I am hearing an awful lot about "diversity tactics". One thing I'm not hearing about, which was extremely effective with the Civil Rights Movement which so many people try to draw an affinity with, is VOTER REGISTRATION. Extremely effective. We are not in the Middle East. We have the right to participate in our government. When you stress the idea of not voting, what other options are left besides violence? THINK PEOPLE. It worked for MLK, Jr., Women's rights, etc. Otherwise you're just pawns of people who do not care about you and only see you as a means to their ends.

[phys431]

While this may be pointless at this time, there was an idea that precipitated recently in my mind. The basic question that created the idea was, what is it that drives one to violence?

If you're familiar with U2's Rattle and Hum, there's one track (Silver and Gold) where Bono goes on a monologue after the song about a man in a shantytown near Johannesburg (South Africa) who was ready to take up arms against his oppressors. The problem there was apartheid, but how much oppression here in America would it take for me to take up arms?

There are already militias that have formed and cases where people killed in the name of an oppressive government. For as good as I have life now, not everything is roses. But how much worse does it need to get before I am willing to stop being non-violent? Perhaps there are people who are already sufficiently broken, that is why they are willing and doing.

Considering myself in the other person's shoes made me wonder what it would take for me to become violent. Considering myself in the other person's shoes made me wonder what it would take to get me to be more peaceful. Could something be done to convince others to resist peacefully?

[mcsheffe]

I believe in nonviolence if nonviolence is the means you use against me and the people I am with.But from what I have seen across this nation of ours its not happening.Now if I am doing my thing and I see a cop beating the hell out of one of my fellow protesters I am not going to shout shame on you.I am going to help my brother or sister.I am a veteran and we always looked out for one another or you would known as a coward! You don,t have to do anything wrong unless assembly and free speech is against the law to have one of these uniformed goons to attack you.Can you say 1968 dem conv We are living in a hostile time you might want to leave your ideals at home.If all we did in the 60s and 70s was walk around with these principles of solidarity we probably would have lost another 57000 young and great american middle class men and women in VN. Ron