Messages

1

General Discussion / Co-generating Lifeboat Communities

« on: May 15, 2012, 06:35:18 pm »

I know this site's traffic is relatively small, but to those interested, We are Occupying.  A number of committed, previous occupiers of legislative plaza have reconn'd several sites and identified primarily one which is now an urban camp.  we are developing an organizational model (cooperative housing, food, and workshops) which we intend to propose to the land owners (a combination of two churches, a neighborhood association, and MDHA) in hopes that we can construct natural, non-toxic abodes, independence ecosystems to sustain us, and soon after ethical enterprises to sustain us in a capital-driven world (in addition, through which we hope to help cultivate a barter/gift economy).  We are seeking materials, and also folks interested in experimenting with sustainable, interactive, empowering, stimulating community activities.

We are interested in other sites; this is just close to the city center and available--however as a major draw for spectators it is not an ideal site: next to a railroad and some industry (nothing nasty though--a brewery, ceiling, medical supply and transportation facilities).

We are pursuing several grants, and would like to host a variety of workshops to train folks on DIY technology--natural building, bees, permaculture, comprehensive water and energy systems, fermentation, various arts, community-building.

Contact me if you are interested in helping.  We will be training and trading in edible landscaping, building, community building.  We need trainers, investors, students, collaborators.  We need braaaaaaains! We will begin announcing events and bees soon.

2

War Room / Re: Why the Occupy Movement takes no positions on issues....

« on: December 31, 2011, 12:37:09 am »

There is a compromise. 

We want an effective mechanism for the citizens to redress their grievances with the government. Since the government is the body sanctioned and endowed by the people, and thus responsible to us, we have the right to assemble with others who share the same concerns, and to debate others on the issue, then to take actions on them.  We want to empower individuals to act in their own best interests,  but we also don't want to harm the collective welfare.  Thus, we limit the power of that individual to only affect those who consent to it.  Thus, we have autonomy, as individuals, We should also hold group cooperation as the highest ideal.

The novelty (in a good way) of the concept of Occupy is that it is truly democratic.  And yes, as you said, to act as an umbrella to unite people working for various organizations, and simply to foment new groups and engage laypersons (because they know where to go for anything political).

What we need (and are working on) is a clear statement to the public that this movement also assumes free association.  Then we set out a challenge and invitation to every individual to step forth and represent themselves to the People's Assembly of Tennessee.  This may piss some people off, because they are then obligated to represent themselves to a central government, lest something passes which they disagree with--which, again, is why we emphasize free association.  The same way I may not agree with what my neighbor does, or other Americans or Tennesseans do, but respect their right to do so, I respect the right of other members of the assembly to act autonomously

We can also, if it is successful, build a process where the assemblies are divided up even further--that individual communities have their own assemblies, where they manage only the resources they build or are given, and only for those considered to be members.  For proposals to larger bodies, there might be a procedure to vote at every local level, or to pass it locally and then send it to the larger body, which meets less regularly, who votes to put it on the agenda.

3

War Room / Re: Should we improve our process?

« on: December 30, 2011, 11:48:36 pm »

As far as the setting of the discussion and the reliability of the decision-making process--I propose we keep our livestream reliable, with participation allowed from those logged into the chat (perhaps an online-rep speaker); possibly posting the agenda online beforehand, but being edit-able until GA begins?

We actually experimented (on the fly) with a new model of the process last night.  Traditionalists might be horrified, but we, after hosting announcements, initiated the "discussion" format, where anyone can put anything on the agenda, and we can stack a discussion of it (it just happened that way, because we chose to host all working groups in a lightly moderated collective conversation.  Many things were moderated fluidly--where discussions that became isolated or irrelevant were tabled/moved to the periphery.  I would very much like to elaborate and experiment more on this style--perhaps time limits on an individual's speech, certain criteria for taking votes, filtering, etc.

4

Occupy Nashville Chat / Re: Homeless and Occupying

« on: December 30, 2011, 09:33:12 pm »

Dixie, let's get this article out there!  It's great, I can stand behind it.  I think it's time we start using our collective voice to make some great statements.