I'm in agreement with this sentiment.  We don't have to be restricted to working only in the molds of a society that got us to the state we're in now, we can look for ways to build something better.

By "drastic" I don't mean violence, to be clear, but the only answer might be opting out of the game at some point.

For example, and I recognize that it would take a MONUMENTAL effort to pull this off, but what if a very large number of homeowners simply stopped paying their mortgages at the same time?  Same with student loans?  Credit cards?  What are they going to do, re-possess half the country's homes?  Yup this would be hard to pull off, but it's more realistic than fixing the Democratic Party which is far too complicated of an animal.

How about if various labor camps orchestrated a multi-industry walkout on work?  They can't outsource all the jobs, some need to be done here.

On a cultural level, we could look for ways to strengthen local communities and local networks of citizens, because we're all divided and all over the place these days, cut off from our neighbors and isolated.  If we can find local ways to address many of our basic needs, we would need less from large corporations -- thus diminishing their power.

We could target individual companies within an industry for boycott, and take them down as a result.  Not saying we should do THIS specifically, but just for the sake of example ... supposed we got a large percentage of the population to move their BofA accounts to a local bank?  Or all switched away from one single cell phone carrier?  We could do significant and possibly fatal damage to these companies, who expect a certain level of stability in their income and wouldn't be able to adjust easily to a sudden and unexpected loss of a large percentage of its revenue.

I can't say that ANY of these things are the right thing to do -- clearly they would all need to be considered carefully, and evolved into sophisticated plans instead of just basic general ideas.  We would have to consider fallout, repercussions to the working class, and potential benefit, etc.  But my point is, with enough people there's a LOT more we can do than just vote.  We can do that too, but if we hit these plutocrats in the wallet, we'll get their attention.

It's All Bush's Fault.

(and just so you know, the entire country is growing tired of hearing this same, lame excuse).

So how exactly did Bush force the corporations = (banks) make loans to the masses that, oh by the way, could not afford the home loans they took out, which ULTIMATELY led to the housing crisis/bank crisis/ don't look too deeply into the actual problem or you will uncover 1: BARNEY FRANK, (the hero of all the demented Left).

Obama had veto-proof Democratic majorities, and we all see where that has got us, collectively.

The alternative? Don't vote, and the corporate fascists who are slowly taking everything from us will win. Voting is the only way to fight them. There is no other way. Your post was a great example of what I said before:  in the end, their aim is to make us throw up our hands and say what's the use.  That's their key to winning. Don't cooperate with them, fight them.  Read this story, which shows how the right wingers operate:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/201.....on-claims/

So realistically it would be nice to have goals before all this effort and emotion sputters away... Leadership is becoming/will become critical.

"

We propose a city wide general strike and we propose we invite all students to walk out of school. Instead of workers going to work and students going to school, the people will converge on downtown Oakland to shut down the city.

All banks and corporations should close down for the day or we will march on them.

While we are calling for a general strike, we are also calling for much more. People who organize out of their neighborhoods, schools, community organizations, affinity groups, workplaces and families are encouraged to self organize in a way that allows them to participate in shutting down the city in whatever manner they are comfortable with and capable of."

So what if they can pull it off. Then each city tries it communicate with ALL occupies and then plan and organize a Group shut down. ALL major cities.

But here's the problem… a lot of us DID vote.  A lot of us elected the guy who said all the right things about change.  That hasn't happened.

Since we changed the guard in the White House, those in the 1% have completely escaped criminal liability for their crimes.  We were told that we "have to look forward, can't look back" when we asked why the last administration was getting off the hook for war crimes.  Um yeah, go rob a bank and try that defense on the judge at your trial … "Um Your Honor, I know I robbed that bank, but we need to look forward, we can't afford to be looking backwards at the past."  Think it will get YOU off the hook?

Then there's Wall Street and the fraud that led to the 2008 disaster and the Great Recession.  Seen any bankers go to prison?  I can get arrested for stealing a candy bar from a convenience store, but even with the current president, financial payoffs were pursued instead of criminal liability.

And then they wonder why some of us have lost faith in a government that first and foremost represents the interests of the upper 1% above all others, and protects that 1% even against criminal liability when they do catastrophic damage on our lives.  And of course we're taxed to pay for that system that only represents us when it doesn't conflict with the interests of the elite?

Voting can make a difference on social issues like gay marriage or abortion or religion in school.  These are things that Wall Street doesn't give one hoot about.  But it doesn't really make the difference it should make when you're talking the big financial issues that Wall Street DOES care about.  The entire Republican Party is bought, and 2/3 of the Democratic Party is bought too.

So if voting is going to be part of the solution, then someone needs to figure out HOW it will be, given we'll have two candidates backed by Wall Street money at the end of the day.  And even if you get a few true believers like Warren in office, they won't be anywhere near the force needed to make the kinds of fundamental changes that this country needs made.

I'm not against voting … like I said, the social issues ARE up for grabs, and it DOES matter who gets onto the Supreme Court, etc, but this can't be seen as the answer to the problems outlined by the excellent OWS document linked elsewhere on this site that lists the corporate crimes at the core of this movement.

Hmmmmm.....  an actual adult thought shows up on the Forum board?

WOW!!!  All hope is lost now, as the adults seem to be taking over.

Could not have been said it better myself.  Parties (and make no mistake about it, this hippie gathering in Houston as well as ever other City in the US is nothing more than an excuse to have a party) ALWAYS come to an end.  Some end more respectable than others, but they ALL END AT SOME POINT!!!!!  And so far, your gathering has produced ????????????????????????????????? [save for the stench of urine and BO] ................. exactly what?

...The phony "voter fraud" laws they passed, the bombardment of the airwaves with right wing propaganda, the control of all the media by the corporations,..

Who exactly are "they"?  Oh yea, the duly elected Legislature, as elected by the people, especially those that took the time to VOTE.

The airwaves and the media are right wing???  HUH?!?!?!  Ever watched/read MSNBC, New York Times, ABC, NBC, Comedy Central, CBS, Washington Post, Boston Herald, Mother Jones, Houston Chronicle, CNN, Newsweek.....????  Should I continue?

But it doesnt have to go back to the way things were.  I, for one, would like to see a result(s) for everyone's efforts.

The Tea Party got people elected, whether you like those candidates or not, they are in office on the Tea Party's agenda.

So, I'd say that having some goals would be extremely positive for the movement. Unless civil disobedience is the goal, it will end eventually. And real leadership, whether by a collective or otherwise, will eventually be needed.

So I guess for me, what I'm trying to understand is if OWS will be a movement that is trying to enact specific changes through putting pressure in the right places, or if it rather turns out to be more of a cultural revolution, more successful in influencing the 99% and how they approach their lives and communities, rather than influencing the 1% ... which might be a really good thing too.

As for "focus" in and of itself, when you consider the very many harms that have stemmed from elite corporate rule, trying to "focus" it down to just a few topics seems like a trap.  It seems like a path towards endgame, when endgame might not be so simple when tackling a problem this long in the making and this complex.

I have no answers at the moment of course, there are good arguments from a whole bunch of different directions.  But these will definitely be the issues to watch in terms of the growth and development of the movement.

http://www.theglobalconversati.....log/?p=583

Without focus, this action could be for nothing.  That would be a shame.

Therese