People Organize to Protest G8, Present Alternative Economic View

by Gary Berg-Cross

May 18, 2012 10:00 am to 2:00 pm
Community Room, C. Burr Artz Public Library
110 E. Patrick Street, Frederick, Maryland

The “Occupy G8 Summit for the People” is an alternative to the G8 that will have speakers (see agenda below) discuss the effect of concentrated wealth on global public policy, the effects of wealth inequality on peoples’ well-being and alternative economic structures that would close the wealth divide and create a more democratic, sustainable economy. The Summit will include time for hearing the voices of the 99% who will be in attendance. The public and the press are invited.

This summit will discuss how to:

• Build the international economy from the bottom up, not the top down.
• Highlight the wealth divide that undermines the foundation of the economy and corrupts political decision-making.
• Increase the minimum wage, end poverty and reduce debt to provide a stronger foundation on which to build a new sustainable economy.
• Institute a Robin Hood Tax on the purchase of stocks, bonds and derivatives.
• Build a new economy that is both economically and environmentally sustainable.
• Build wealth at the base by encouraging worker owned co-ops and other democratized economic institutions; and by turning corporate welfare into taxpayer investment where everyone profits from the investment by the commonwealth, not just the corporate owners.
• Recognize that we all share a common destiny and that even the wealthiest require the commonwealth in order to increase their riches.

Schedule

10:00 am – Welcome Margaret Flowers and Kevin Zeese, co-directors, ItsOurEconomy.US and organizers for October2011.org/OccupyWashington, DC

10:10 am – Global Wealth Inequality Sam Pizzigati, Too Much; Brooke Harper, Global Trade Watch; Jeremy Weyl, JubileeUSA

11:10 am – Creating a Global Economy Based on Sustainable Resources Brent Blackwelder, former executive director Friends of the Earth and Steady State; Ruth Caplan,Campaign for Global Water Watch and Alliance for Democracy; Alexis Baden-Mayer, Organic Consumers Association

12:10 pm – Break

12:20 pm –Building a New Economy from the Bottom Up Rob Kall, Editor of OpEd News and Bottom Up Radio Show; James Riker, University of Maryland and co-facilitator of 2010 G20 Civil Society Dialogue; Emily Kawano, Solidarity Economy Network and Center for Popular Economics; Lisa Stolarski, The National Cooperative Business Association

1:30 – Reception

Sponsored by OccupyFrederick, October2011.org/OccupyWashington,DC and ItsOurEconomy.us

Poor Reasoning Occupies some Minds

By Gary Berg-Cross

One of my conservative neighbors sent me an article called “Occupy PGA Tour”. It’s a critical article from the republic-mainstreet.blog knocking the Occuoy movement as selfish – see
http://republic-mainstreet.blogspot.com/2012/01/occupy-pga-tour-im-99er.html.
It struck me as a sad attempt at humor or at least an attempt to mock the occupy movement and cast a certain image of them. I found it full of misconceptions and false analogies. But these are perhaps representative of the type of assumptions that people have about the movement
and related topics sometimes argued by some bubble-centric, ideologically conservative thinkers.

The blog starts by placing regular golfers in a self deprecating, common man frame of the 99%:

It's say that "I" am a card carrying, lifetime member of golf's 99%.

I play golf, or something that looks like golf, but I will never make it to the professional level because I can't hit my ass with both hands!!

More humble commentary follows explaining why a person might be a poor golfer:

I have played the gamefor over 30 years, but I have not put in the practice time and training to bethe best, mostly because I am lazy and I do not have the skills to ever become
the best.

With this frame our blogcommentator as self identified as lazy and unskilled. Now the writer has a simple, sleazy slide to use atransitive inference to project this onto Occupy folk as people who are lazy and unskilled but use a concept of fairness to get an unearned prize:

However, after watching Occupy Wall Street for the last six months, I feel
that all duffers should be paid by successful professionals for trying.
It just isn’t fair that those players who have worked harder, have studied the
game, have better equipment and are stronger and more skilled should be able to
make all that money. My kids are bringing home third place soccer trophies that
are as big as my wife, and now it’s my turn to grab some gusto….

This strikes me as an utterly false characterization. Implied here is the Romney-expressed idea that occupy people are jealous and want to be paid like wall street people, but are unwilling to work for it, presumably like hard working wall street professionals. Here the hidden assumption is that wall streeters are as good at their job as Arnold Palmer and earn proportionately based purely on talent.
Well I’ve never seen an 18-hole competition to establish that. Was it wall street professional's wicked hook shot that sent the economy into a sand trap? If Arnold didn't perform well his salary would plunge, but not so now among the professional financial adviser class. Perhaps we can use that model for stock traders rather than golf duffers.

Clearly the implied analogy has some problems. Part of the problem of this mock analysis is that it is poor representation of sports and the sports area itself. Perhaps it would have been more faithful to reality if the author had used a basketball theme. We all want to earn like a b-ball pro, what’s stopping us? Well I wasn’t drafted for one thing. And you know the team owners are a bit to blame here…Not only for me, but you know they
have problems with the salaries of pro-player. Here free enterprise doesn’t seen the model being followed. A hard working super-star can’t get what the market will bare. Instead the owners need to regulate the market. Here are some examples of the "unfairness":

• Player’s salaries have stayed even with inflation. Essentially this means their pay has not been going up.
• Owners have been increasing their spending. Management’s operating costs (per their own numbers) have been going up at five times the levelof inflation (that’s a lot).'
• Even in the ideal case for the owners with the new CBA these problems will repeat themselves in 2020.
• The Owners are asking the players to take a pay hit to make up for bad management practices.
  

I sure hope that we don't have to bail out either those hard working b-ball team owners or those golf courses owners. I hope that the ticket and greens’ sale contributions help everyone keep up their monthly payments on those expensive properties.

The tortured blog comparison goes on to imply the occupiers want a free ride (as if this wasn't a good critique of people who live on their past gains no matter how they come to it):

I want the PGA to pay my green fees for life, buy me new equipment and give
me and my friends half the purses from all tournaments being played this year
and free booze at every 19th hole in the country.

Perhaps this is the fantasy of some duffers. It seems less a fair characterization of people working to change the current system. One might respond to this anonymous non-professional golfer with advice to keep playing the game and enjoy the recreation, but keep the day job.

Learning More about the 1848 Springtime of Nations in 2011

By Gary Berg-Cross

The Europe of 1848 was not a time and place that my high school history courses focused on. Only much later did I stumble on good histories of the populist, revolutionary period which erupted in Italy 1848 and spread to France and then more widely across the Europe of Prussia, Austria and the German Confederation only to be overturned and usher in 50 years of conservative rule. The most I knew was something of the America of the Gilded Age and oligarchic robber barons and plutocrats of the era.

Now one can read more readily about the speculative parallels between that revolutionary period and our world of 2011. For example, the years before 1848 were like the last few years. There were socio-economic stresses of rising commidity prices during generally depressed economic conditions that promoted widespread unemployment. Leading up to 1848 there was a general sense of repression, complaint about the system and a weakness in the established order. There was resentment against the governing classes, who seemed sheltered from the impacts of a system grinding to a halt.

More specifically there seem to be interesting parallels between the Arab Spring and The Revolutions of 1848. (Perhaps for common underlying reasons the Revolutions of 1848 are often called the "springtime of nations.”) A deeper parallel between the two is a common motivating drive - to change the existing political systems from central power regimes, as in Egypt, to more democratic and moderate systems. In 1848 Metternich’s 23-year-long repressive dictatorship in Austrian vanished. Later this spread to regimes in Italy, France, and the German states. Jonathan Steinberg, compares this starter scene to what we saw in Tunisian as President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali's fled from power like Meddernich. In each case a wave of revolutions spread across the region.

“In both cases, the crowds in the streets were glad to see the dictators go but unclear on the social and political orders that should replace them.” 1848 and 2011: Bismark and the Arab Spring. That unclarity about how to replace the old regimes is something we see being played out in the Middle East.

Another parallel noted by some is the diversity of the types of revolutions that spread from a small start:

Though inspired very generally by the ideas of liberal nationalism and democracy, the mostly middle-class demonstrators of 1848 had, like their Arab contemporaries, very different goals in different countries. In Hungary, they demanded independence from Habsburg Austria. In what is now Germany, they aimed to unify the German-speaking peoples into a single state. In France, they wanted to overthrow the monarchy (again). In some countries, revolution led to pitched battles between different ethnic groups. Others were brought to a halt by outside intervention

While some analysis focused on the Arab Spring we now have the Occupy movement and one might see some of the parallels here too. In the 1848 citizen revolutions, as with the Arab Spring, the mobilization of power was far from the big centers of power, but they have now spread to centers of powers, such as Wall Street, in the West. Relatively conservative “regimes’ and oligarchies are now being challenged by citizen power. The complaints are somewhat similar and the forcefully reactions of establishment forces are also disappointingly familiar -perhaps because the changes needed might come at some cost to entrenched interests, traditionally influential groups, lobbies or their religious allies. In the Paris of 1847 citizen "banquet meetings” were held occasionally organized by 'liberal' interests. They subsequently spread widely across France, until authorities banned them. A broad range of citizen protested the crackdowns as limitations on the right of assembly. Moderates and intellectuals warned of the possible clash and the language and core ideas resonant still today. This was how Alexis de Tocqueville spoke the situation on January 29, 1848 to the French Chamber of Deputies warning them of the danger of over reaction and the need for reform and the possibility of a non-destructive way of doing it if the forces in charge act quickly and decisively:

• “Keep the laws as they are, if you wish. I think you would be very wrong to do so; but keep them. Keep the men, too, if it gives you any pleasure. I raise no objection so far as I am concerned. But, in God's name, change the spirit of the government; for, I repeat, that spirit will lead you to the abyss.”
• “Do you not feel -- what shall I say? -- as it were a gale of revolution in the air?...”
• “We are sleeping on a volcano... A wind of revolution blows, the storm is on the horizon” http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alexis_de_Tocqueville

De Tocqueville & the 1848 revolutionaries shared a model on which to base their fight with the establishment - the ideals of French Revolution such as the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, which the French National Assembly approved in 1789.

One humanist ideal expressed there is that:

"Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good."

This idea of equality remains powerful today as part of the Occupation movement along with populist human aspirations variously expressed as constitutional or liberal reform.

Back in 1848 warnings such as from de Tocqueville were not well heeded and the old regimes fell for a while. If the start of revolutionary activities in 1948 and 2011 look similar we might ask about how they progressed and ended up. People often ask about the motivations of a movement like Occupy Wall Street and what objectives it seeks. It may make sense to see the OWS movement as something that focuses a spotlight on issues and is useful to get conversations started about topics that may get fresh thinking on lingering problems and lead to change. Intellectual elites like George Lakoff are providing advice on how to get a message of change out. Matt Taibbi suggested a few possible demands for the Occupy Wall Street protestors to change the financial system such as breaking up monopolies, taxing "hedge fund gambling" and the like. OWS seems to me to be more diffuse than than the 1848 movements and better informed by history and events. While it shares similar grievances and seeks remedies outside of the existing power structure it has not spawned revolutionary groups seeking power. But a question that might be asked is what idea of progressing forward towards fairness and equality does the movement afford and what can be learned from the efforts that started in 1848?

Here one chilling lesson, and something for movement liberals to keep in mind, is the consequences of not following opportunities with wise, consolidated action . A simple lesson from the "springtime of nations" is that it is easier for movements to overthrow an existing power structure than build a new one. While liberal forces were able to seize a degree of power in 1848, they had no clear vision of how to govern. There were many visions, which resulted in clashes of ideas and the agendas of different revolutionary groups. The lack of agreement and consensus allowed relatively conservative forces to draw up plans, consolidate resources and to eventually retake power. Liberal “Republics” were never able to check the power of holdovers from the old regimes including control of military power. They were never productive enough to get buy in from the Bourgeoisie & what we might now call the 99%. Conservative interests, who were determined to restore the old order, did reach some consensus and get enough buy in to regain power. One thing they were willing to do was to modernize their management techniques to appeal to more strands of society as productive.

These anti-revolutionary forces also borrowed heavily from the revolutionary playbook. Aided by new technologies and railroads, they strengthened administration and modernized the bureaucracy. Pope Pius IX whipped up the fervor of the masses through the cult of the Blessed Virgin Mary, pilgrimages, and popular festivals to show where the public's loyalty truly rested. The 1840s had been years of poverty and unrest, but 1850¬-73 saw the first modern economic boom, and a long wave of prosperity followed. 1848 and 2011: Bismark and the Arab Spring

By 1852 conservatives could take advantage of the weaknesses of the new Republic forms of government and regained power, although is some cases there were now constitutions in effect that served to check conservative interests. By 1852 the revolutionary regimes were largely overturned and various forms of moderated conservative rule reestablished. My guess is that a core of the Occupy crowd has assimilated this message a bit and those who act on it have a chance of jumping towards the more progressive movement that succeeded to some degree at the end of the 19th century. We'll see. Something to keep in mind as we see events unfold in 2012.

Accommodation and Openness: Thoughts on Religion & Non-Belief Cooperation at the Occupy Movement

By Gary Berg-Cross

There are many voices that can be heard in the Occupy movement, but coverage sometimes simplifies it down to familiar categories often framed in false dichotomies. So it is described by Fox and right wing outlets in what seem like hot button labels such as anti-bank or anti-capitalism. Or it characterized as made up of (or controlled by) a new brand of amoral, dirty hippies. For good measure the label of atheist & secular humanist are smeared on with rigor by right wing outlets in an effort to get an emotional response from their base.

But clearly religious moments, and even events, have become part of many Occupy camps. Indeed, while a minority of what is shown, religious imagery have been common since the protests began. In New York, activist clergy carried an Old Testament-style golden calf in the shape of the Wall Street bull to decry the false idol of greed. In contrast fundamentalist & some establishment religious leaders are cautious about involvement and less visible. They seem uncomfortable with the focus on what they see as “liberal issues” and are natural allies of the powers that be. An example of this tool place in Atlanta on 10/25 when a mix of clergy stood behind Mayor Kasim Reed as he walked into Occupy Atlanta to hold a press conference. It was then not surprising that later these clergy were rebuffed when they tired to serve as intermediaries between the movement and the mayor.

What we think of as liberal and interfaith groups seem more comfortable with the movement and see it as a fight for social justice and participatory democracy. As a result these segments of the religious community have secured some role in various Occupy events and the movement itself has made room for them as part of acceptance of the 99%.

One example of this spirit was the Chicago group, Interfaith Worker Justice, publishing an interfaith prayer service guide for occupation protests nationwide. Another example is downtown Dewey Square in Boston with its fill of tents, tarps and cold weather garb. But early on organizers ensured that encampment provided room for what was called a "Sacred Space" tent. It was made clear that it accepts all faiths & spiritual traditions. That welcome was evidenced by the presence of a Buddha statue abutting a picture of Jesus, and a hand-lettered sign pointing toward Mecca. Boston reporters also noted a mix of chakras, "compassion meditation" and discussion of biblical passages.

Religion might not fit into the movement seamlessly everywhere, but back in NYC, activist Dan Sieradski has helped organize a Jewish Yom Kippur service arguing that the movement must find space for religious faith somewhere:

"We're a country full of religious people….Faith communities do need to be present and need to be welcomed in order for this to be an all-encompassing movement that embraces all sectors of society."

That all encompassing movement includes a mix of believers and non-believers and we need to avoide a superficial response, to the legitimate question, “Is Occupy largely is a predominantly secular, atheist or Humanist undertaking or is religious?” This seems hard to answer, and perhaps is too simple a formulation. Some self proclaimed atheists have written of involvement, but often in cooperation with “left-leaning”/progressive religious groups. Secular and progressive religious groups may be similar minds on some issues that OWS is stressing and tactical cooperation among many parts of the 99% may be needed to move society forward. Indeed the Occupy efforts seem to be energizing progressive, religious activism. This may allow for some convergence of secular and religious activism over humanistic values and ideals such as fairness. It is perhaps good that secularists and religions can get together focus on something larger than their movements and rally about common values. This raises some accommodationist issues, but what is clear is that there have been roaring responses when some commonality has been raised, such as when Cornell West gave a shout out to:

"the progressive agnostic and atheistic brothers and sisters"

To some this suggests that the movement might serve to point out “not just the gulf between haves and have-nots in modern America, but between the religious right and not-so-religious left.”

In earlier times some religious groups and their leaders like MLK have been at the forefront of progressive social movements. Ministers like MLK could raise the nation's conscience on some of the issues OWS represents – inequality, poverty and injustice, languishing civil and ending wars. Improved national conversations represent one target for such movements and greater social consciousness. But since the 70s the main activism has been on the fundamentalist side, whose right-wing political activism has, among other things, eroded the separation of state and church. More liberal religious denominations, like unions have lost membership, and now seem less a part of the national conversation.

The Occupy movement may be a vehicle to get a succinct, social justice message out. A chicken and egg factor is the forging of an alliance between interfaith groups, atheists and secularist humanists of like mind. It might be needed for the greater good, but would require accommodation on both sides. Religious groups might have to accept the pragmatics of having non-belivers as partners, whose moral values are as valid & acceptable as those from the faith community. The responsibility of nonbelievers towards religious believers, as expressed by John Shook, is to help the religious “accommodate themselves to the cold hard truths about naturalism and the firm political structures of secularism. “

This togetherness & accommodation idea may not play well with some religious groups nor with many new atheist/secularists, but it may be something nonbelievers may accept as part of a broader, humanist, evolutionary path for both.

Statues of Freedom and Movements of Freedom: Differing Images

by Gary Berg-Cross

This past Friday, Oct 29, 2011 the iconic Statue of Liberty, Auguste Bartholdi's great work, turned 125 years old. Lady Liberty is based on the Libertas, the Roman goddess symbolizing“ freedom”. The history of the building of the statue is quiet interesting in itself and lots of papers have dusted off histories to refresh our memories including that the Statue was 10 years late in arriving and the arm and torch lay in NY for almost that time waiting for the body to arrive. The snippet below is from the Brooklyn Eagle, which is used to deliver as a boy. (Brooklyn housed many immigrants who poured across the Brooklyn Bridge and flowed in masses around City Hall Park, where the inaugural ceremony was held.)

Bartholdi went to his Paris studio, where he started on the statue’s arm and torch in hopes of having the lady raise her lamp at the start of the American centennial celebration in Philadelphia in 1876. The statue missed the opening, but the arm and torch arrived in time to become a major attraction. Meanwhile, Bartholdi needed an engineer to design his statue’s “skeleton.” Though its copper skin was quite thin, it was clear Lady Liberty would eventually weigh tons. The artist took on railroad bridge designer Gustave Eiffel to build an iron framework. Eiffel arranged the framework so it could be easily taken apart to ship across the ocean.

As the statue neared completion in France, funds for its pedestal ran out. Publisher Joseph Pulitzer, himself a Hungarian immigrant, ran editorials in The World calling for help. The poor and middle class answered, and the $1 and $2 donations mounted. In all, Americans gave $350,000 for the pedestal. Among those who helped were New York artists who organized an exhibition in 1883 and auctioned manuscripts by Bret Harte, Mark Twain and other writers. A poet named Emma Lazarus was asked to contribute a sonnet, which is mounted on a bronze plaque on the statue. She wrote a poem titled “The New Colossus,”…

In NY harbor this October there was lots of celebrate and at Friday's ceremony some125 candidates from 40 different countries, took the oath of citizenship, although some other “immigrants” may have feared attending due to a “papers please” attitude abroad in the lands. One thing the main stream media celebrated was the new high-tech gear - added in the form of five webcams. These are located inside her torch. Four of the cameras now point towards Ellis Island, Governors Island, Liberty Island and the Freedom Tower respectively, while the fifth gives viewers a unique look at the torch itself.

Roman ideas of a free Republic were popular in the founder’s time and so Libertas has served a symbol for some time. It is good to be reminded of her in these time, but the addition of those extra camera does serve to remind us of a few lingering issues of freedom. One is made by Roberto Lovato in his “Of America” blog who noted the increasing surveillance of ordinary citizens and not just at stop lights:

“Much is being made in the media about the “live web cams” that are part of the high-tech makeover of the Statue. Less (or not) reported are the dozens of infrared surveillance cameras, vibration sensors, experimental facial recognition monitors, and other now ubiquitous electronic surveillance devices that capture the image of visitors and send them to databases of national security agencies. The profits from this kind of multi-million dollar makeover of Liberty go to corporations invested in redefining freedom.”

If Big Brother is watching, videos by protestors and observers play an important role in getting the actual experience of current Freedom efforts, like the Occupy movement, out to the citizenry. In the early days of Occupy Wall Street (in the newly named Liberty Park) videos suggested that mainstream, corporate media wasn’t isn’t telling a fair or complete story about its aims, process, ideas or even its general schedule which is available online as shown below:

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) Agenda Sunday, October 30

3:30pm Multi-Faith Service

5:00pm What Is Wrong With Capitalism? Occupy Wall Street Forum w Alex Callinicos

6:00pm Internet Working Group meeting

7:00pm General Assembly

People wonder about what participants are saying and you can read to your heart’s content at OWS article sites like http://occupywallst.org/article/urgent-winter-donation-needs/. But pictures can be more compelling than long arguments, even when cogent. Early on OWS protesters were able to capture detailed and often graphic jarring images of police tactics and even spot violence in what seemed to concerted effort to intimidate citizens who were exercising 1^st Amendment rights. Streaming media could show the attempts to speak out for rights by way of what seemed reasonable peaceful and lawful public demonstrations. This was the case in late Sept. when some 60 - 70 armed police officers surrounded the park in which 200 to 300 peaceful Occupy Wall St. protesters were encamped.

You can see some of these videos on truthtransmission.com, but not much appeared on mainstream media at the time. Things have changed a bit with tear gassing and mass arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge and now the war-like scenes from Oakland.

Such images seem to have advanced the movement which is more popular than the earlier Tea Party movement. But now it seems that there are some efforts to darken the citizen’s eye view of events by removing electrical power, confiscation media etc. We’ll have to see how this struggle over rights to protest and be heard plays out. It’s an open question whether Occupy Wall Street media team will be able to sustain their operation without things like confiscated generators. But for now sites like Global Revolution still bring you live streaming video coverage from independent journalists on the ground at Occupy and other nonviolent protests around the world. And of course you can see images of Lady Liberty, whose generators at least are working fine.

P.S. Some online sites have collected interesting parcels of Lady Liberty related images.

Lakoff’s Framing Advice to Occupy Wall Street (#OWS) - We love America & are here to fix it with your help

by Gary Berg-Cross

My past blogs have included references to George Lakoff’s idea on Frames - cognitive-metaphorical structures (such as geospatial words) routinely used to organize thought and interpret the world. So we conceptualize well-being as wealth, both of which plug into pre-existing notions that trigger emotional responses. It is easy then to see wealthy people as good, healthy folks.

I've also blogged on the Occupy movement and Oct2011. In a recent Truthout Op-Ed Lakoff provided advice (by request) on how the protester movement occupying Zuccotti Park near Wall Street can avoid being framed by others with differing political interests. Lakoff believes that framing is epistemic – it influences the methods we use to understand the world and our concept of truth. In combination with language it central to making clear says what the character of something like a movement is. A proper frame may help solve that criticism that others don't know what the movement’s ideas and objectives are. But to do this effectively we need some principles by which a movement can properly frame itself. I found that some of these principles suggestive of ways that Secular Humanists might employ frames (We are all Citizens of the World or We are part of nature) to help with a wider understanding of our values. Perhaps that will be a topic for another time.

In advice to OWS Lakoff first notes that in charting political & financial action frames often evoke competing moral systems. In short, a movement that seeks some political and financial system influence needs to understand politics as part of a moral dimension that is framed in its language. Political figures, as well as movements and their spokes people, tend to make policy statements/recommendations with implied or explicit claims about what is the right thing to do. Appeals to the benefits of Capitalist System or a Democratic System claim to do more good than harm and are thus moral statements. You can see this in the OWS movement's statements with an implied sense of the common good. The lead one is "Democracy Should Be About the 99 Percent". Others are aimed at progressive causes such as the idea that strong Wages & Unions Make a Strong America and related grievances - middle-class wages have not gone up significantly in 30 years and there is conservative/corporate pressure to lower them. In criticizing the top 1% an implied claim is that they are just in it for themselves and can get away with unfair gains it since they have power.

Implied in such things are values and principles fit the common sense claim that “Some moral principles or other lie behind every political policy agenda.” We might ask broadly what are they for the OWS folks and what are they for their “opponents” (just as we might for Secular Humanists and our opponents).

Broadly Lakoff sees “Two Competing Moral Framing Systems” each with political slants and differing idea of democracy. The bulk of American conservatives have a particular moral system that you see in the actions and mentality of Wall Street. Lakoff’s list of these includes:

1. The primacy of self-interest 0 yes they are in it for themselves but this is seen as moral

a. Of course financial folks want big bonuses – well all do.'

2. There is Individual responsibility, but not broad social responsibility outside the core group. It’s OK if I can game the system to advantage

3. Hierarchical authority based on wealth or other forms of power.

a. A moral hierarchy of who is "deserving," defined by success within the system.

b. We in Wall Street are on top. You are just jealous.

And the highest principle is the

Rigid primacy of this particular moral/truth system itself, which goes beyond Wall Street and the economy to other arenas: family life, social life, religion, foreign policy and especially government.

Derived from these we have the idea of Conservative governance in their version "democracy" - a system of governance and elections that fits this model. Strong leaders who see decisions and moral judgement in system of black and white, devalue compromise which is seen as surrender etc.

The alternative view of democracy has a progressive with more of a social frame:

1. Democracy starts with citizens caring about one another and acting responsibly on that sense of care, taking responsibility both for oneself and for one's family, community, country, people in general and the planet.

2. The role of government is to protect and
empower all citizens equally via The Public: public infrastructure, laws and enforcement, health, education, scientific research, protection, public lands, transportation, resources, art and culture, trade policies, safety nets, and on and on.

3. Nobody makes it one their own.

a. As Elizabeth Warren said, if you got wealthy, you depended on The Public and you have a responsibility to contribute significantly to The Public so that others can benefit in the future.

b. Moreover, the wealthy depend on those who work and who deserve a fair return for their contribution to our national life. We’re in this together

4. Corporations exist to make life better for most people.

a. Their reason for existing is as public as it is private.

OK so we have 2 frame systems. What should the Occupy movement do? Lakoff suggests that OWS should take an approach to policy that follows from its own moral focus. Thus OWS should frame the following types of messages:

1. We Love America. We're Here to Fix It

That is OWS is a patriotic movement, based on a deep and abiding love of the Public, that is the country. This combats the idea that patriotism that just about the self-interests of individuals. There is a level of the Public Good.

“Do Americans care about other citizens, or mainly just about themselves? That's what love of America is about. I, therefore, think it is important to be positive, to be clear about loving America, seeing it in need of fixing and not just being willing to fix it, but being willing to take to the streets to fix it. A populist movement starts with the people seeing that they are all in the same boat and being ready to come together to fix the leaks.”

Publicize the Public

Get the word about The Public out. Democracy being about the 99 Percent is in this frame.

“nobody makes it purely on their own without The Public, that is, without public infrastructure, the justice system, health, education, scientific research, protections of all sorts, public lands, transportation, resources, art and culture, trade policies, safety nets ... That is a truth to be told day after day. It is an idea that must take hold in public discourse. It must go beyond what I and others have written about it and beyond what Elizabeth Warren has said in her famous video. The Public is not opposed to The Private. The Public is what makes The Private possible. And it is what makes freedom possible. Wall Street exists only through public support. It has a moral obligation to direct itself to public needs.

There is also a more practical political message to formulate based on the recent Tea Party experience. They:

“solidified the power of the conservative worldview via elections. OWS will have no long-term effect unless it, too, brings its moral focus to the 2012 elections. Insist on supporting candidates that have your overall moral views, no matter what the local issues are.”

The message is that money directs our politics and that is not for the common good. In a democracy, that must end to move towards the common good. A long tern solution is that we need publicly supported elections.

Proper framing will help us get there.

Occupying DC and Wall Street in October2011: Humanistic Conceptual Space

By Gary Berg-Cross

October 2011 is simultaneously the 10th anniversary of the invasion of Afghanistan & when the austere 2012 federal budget kicks in. For this and other reasons October 2011 promises to be an interesting time in DC with the October2011 meeting and the self proclaimed non-violent, peaceful solidarity event Occupy D.C. on the schedule and already in evidence on K street. The broad and gathering movement of “Occupy Wall Street,” was roughly inspired, if not modeled on, the successful and secular Tahrir Square protests.

Corporate media doesn't seem to know how to cover a democratic movement. One of the criticisms of it, such as reported early on by Ezra Klein is that protest's organizers are diffused with many different factions and efforts “to look up their demands online didn't yield much.” This picture of a movement without obvious leaders or an immediate checklist of demands, like "get out of Iraq now" was summed up in the title of a WaPo article "Occupy Wall Street protests gain steam but the movement's goals remain unclear."

With this meme circulating it was heartening to hear about a growing understanding of a broad sense of justice that is driving the movement. The mantra is "We are the 99% and are too big to fail." What some see as an incoherent collection of radicals and a lack of leadership others see as a sweet form of non-hierarchical group democracy. And some mission statements seem to emerging the “Occupy” movement around real health care reform, moratoriums on foreclosure, taxing the rich and changing wall street. It’s not to destroy the financial system, but a recognition of its failure of our traditional system to do the right thing to reform the system. It's more like a financial regime change idea – something the US administrations often talk about and was an underlying idea in Tahrir square. Ben Tripp put it this way in a HuffPo piece - What Are Your Demands?

“the demands all boil down to one thing: we don't want you running the world any more. You're bad at it. Your motives are evil. The future you imagine is a vision of hell.”

I like a positive and constructive message so it was encouraging and enlightening to read about 15 Core Issues that have been identified & articulated by the more hierarchical and traditionally political October2011 group steering committee. A meeting of the whole is taking place in DC now and I hope fleshing out these ideas.

October2011 took this as a time to “light the spark that sets off a true democratic, nonviolent transition to a world in which people are freed to create just and sustainable solutions.” To get a solutions conversation started, they list 15 issues that the Country Must Face. It’s a pretty interesting list for a Liberal Humanist and may get at the complex question of grievances and frustrations, so I reproduce the current list below

1. Corporatism– firmly establish that money is not speech, corporations are not people, only people have Constitutional rights, end corporate influence over the political process, protect people and the environment from damage by corporations.

2. Wars and Militarism – end wars and occupations, end private for-profit military contractors, reduce the national security state and end the weapons export industry. War crimes, crimes against humanity and crimes against peace must be addressed and those responsible held accountable under international law.

3. Human Rights – end exploitation of people in the US and abroad, end discrimination in all forms, equal civil rights and due process for all people.

4. Worker Rights and jobs – all working-age people have the right to safe, just, non-discriminatory and dignified working conditions, a sustainable living wage, paid leave and economic protection.

5. Government– all processes of the three branches of government should be accountable to international law, transparent and follow the rule of law, people have the right to participate in decisions which affect them.

6. Elections– all citizens 18 and older have the right to vote without barriers, all candidates have the right to be heard and to run and all votes should be counted.

7. Criminal justice and prisons –end private for-profit prisons, adopt evidence-based drug policy, prisoners have the right to humane and just conditions with a focus on rehabilitation and reintegration into society, abolish the death penalty.

8. Healthcare– create a national, universal and publicly financed comprehensive health system.

9. Education– all people have the right to a high quality, publicly-funded and broad education from pre-school through vocational training or university.

10. Housing– all people have the right to affordable and safe housing.

11. Environment – adopt policies which effectively create a carbon-free and radio-active free energy economy.

12. Finance and the economy – end policies which foster a wealth divide and move to a localized and democratic financial system, reform taxes so that they are progressive and provide goods, monetary gain and services for the people.

13. Media– airwaves and the internet are public goods, require that media be honest, accurate and accountable to the people.

14. Food and water – create systems that protect the land and water, create local and sustainable food networks and practices.

15. Transportation– provide affordable, clean and convenient public transportation and safe spaces for pedestrian and non-automobile travel.

Committees are forming for each of the 15 issues and interested parties can contact info@october2011.org about participating on them. The group further promises that each issue will be linked to a page which will explain more about the problem, the solutions and resources. More on this as it happens. For background information, you can read about their take on where the majority of people in America stand on the issues.

Starting on October 6, 2011, an Occupy-type People's Assembly event Stop the Machine/October2011 will assemble in Freedom Plaza, in Washington DC to" protest anti-militarism and other things." They plan to occupy the plaza and hold it "awhile". Meanwhile Occupy D.C. plans on being in McPherson Square and the K Street corridor. As WAPO noted since “Occupy DC's demonstration began in McPherson Square on Saturday morning, protesters have marched to the White House two blocks away and held signs on the square's K Street sidewalk. “ It should only take a little marching for the Occupy DC, the October2011 group and Stop the Machine-lead protests to meetup.

It may not to Tahrir Square but it should be interesting. In its first three weeks, the Occupy movement has added some voice to anti-corporate message and a voiced a democratic feeling of restoring some fairness to our society and the loves of ordinary people. Hopefully we’ll be hearing more about a coherent, humanistic vision for the country from a synthesis of these 2 activist group's thinking.