A conversation needs to be had.

I was just sitting down to write one last update for the website homepage (before ceasing to continue taking on this task) and honestly I don't know what to write.

Considering all that has happened in the past week, I don't see how I can not mention the fact of the encampment and the ticketing and arrests. But I don't know how I can write about them either when the feelings surrounding the issue have been so intense and so many people are opposed to the occupation.

We still have the 12-6 occupation on our Google Group calendar. We still have a sign-up, now defunct, to come Occupy on the website. The Facebook page obviously has much more up-to-date info but it's totally inconsistent in its messaging with what the website is presenting. At this point it seems both a sticky situation and also ridiculous to write a homepage update that tries to get the general reader updated on the happenings. And I don't want to be the one to do it, considering the wrath that I might become the target of if I take that initiative. I think I'm not the only one who has been involved with Communications who feels hesitant to communicate anything given the dynamic that has arisen in our group. This dynamic needs to be dealt with openly and honestly and, in my opinion, as soon as possible.

I think we have a serious problem here of the left hand not knowing (or in some cases vehemently opposing) what the right is doing. For instance, two flyers were handed out today at the GA that apparently have different information about location and activities of what's happening this Sat.

Honestly, I feel like Events/Outreach is just running with its own ideas of what we're doing each week and not coordinating with DA at all, much less the rest of the group. I will say one more time: I think seeking out speakers each week is kind of silly and contrary to what we're doing.

Here's my personal opinion about this Sat's events, take it or leave it:

Asking people to buy ANYTHING, whether it's a corporate commodity or a locally-sold one, is contrary to what I believe Occupy to be. The truth is that we live in a global economy where human slavery is built into the pure fact of monetary exchange and the idea of personal purity or cultural capitalism where buying "local" or "green" is in vogue is, to me, reprehensible--it only obscures the hard, real fact that no consumer can absolve themselves of the sin of consuming in the first place. I'd rather people own up to that fact--to the impossibility of purity in an age of global empire--than pretend that they're somehow holier than thou if they buy a bunch of fair trade crap on Pearl St. To me, in some ways it's actually worse to try to present yourself as side-stepping the system by buying local crap than it is to buy crap from Wal-Mart--because it's dishonest. Given this perspective, right now I feel very disinterested in participating in Saturday's events, much less promoting them.

So, what am I getting at?

We need to have a big, group conversation about the camping issue where stuff gets resolved and there's a lot of hugging, forgiving, and catharsis, or we formally split off into the two factions that have subtly formed, because otherwise this dysfunctional nature of (not) working together is just going to get worse. I propose we have this conversation next week when many folks are back from Thanksgiving holiday travels.

Secondly, we need to clarify how we coordinate as a group. Are "themes" for events/actions, etc. planned through Unity (which currently does not have a broad base of participants) or what? At the DA meeting today, we had lots of ideas for direct actions that I don't think we could possibly coordinate with what Events/Outreach has planned in terms of keeping with "themes" for each week and the idea of crafting our complex, civil disobedience actions to coordinate with when a random speaker is available to speak seems ludicrous to me. I think it should be the other way around. We take the offense and figure out what we want to do, then figure out who could plug into it (speaker or otherwise) to make it effective.

So, how can we work together better so that everyone feels motivated to want to promote and participate in our actions and events?

With love and a low tolerance for bullshit,

Fiore

We have an occupation. IMO we have way too many groups. We need three things - People willing to Occupy, we have that. People willing to supply the Occupation, we have that. And people willing to plan, coordinate and carry out direct actions against the power structure oppressing us. Which is the Boulder PD, Boulder City Council and Boulder County Commissioners Office. Of course there are other issues like fraking we need direct actions to oppose as well. .

I do not want to listen to some semi-celebrity oozing with white upper middle class privilege telling me to "buy local" when the local police are locking up our members for "suspicion of camping." Perhaps we should be marching through the streets shutting down Boulder rather than encouraging people to buy from the local merchants who fund the Boulder PD and city council. .

I don't know if there is a way to bring the two opposing sides together. Maybe those who want to occupy and help support that should do that, and those that want to buy local and lead rallies in Boulder should do that. Regarding rallies I think our time is better spent going to Denver and marching on Saturdays rather than doing it in Boulder. JMO.

Chris

Another thing about the speakers; by having speakers who are not part of our group come in and telling us how to think, we are replicating the institutions of the 1%. Occupy is based on horizontal organization, not hierarchical.

Yes! Every person that I speak with has a different intention for Occupy Boulder. It is a Movement with tremendous potential. Somehow, all those intentions need to get plugged in. The number of people who are just spectating is certainly detrimental. Maybe they are spectating because they don't feel plugged in? I wish we could figure out how to motivate them.

The big irreconcilable conflict that I see is between those who want to be an affront to the system and those who want to cooperate with the system. Both approaches are effective. Lauren had posted an article somewhere about the difference between actions where there is violence/civil disobedience vs those actions that have minimal confrontation. I recall that the violence/civil disobedience option was less effective. This is the aspect where we need some catharsis and reconciliation. If we split over this then I hope that we can have distinctly different names so that the public isn't confused.

Additionally, there are some who subscribe to a participatory democracy doctrine who take the horizontal/lateral concept to an extreme. Personally, I'm intrigued by it and I'd like to learn more about it. Currently, I'm just having trouble getting my mind around some of the things I'm hearing in our GA's. This one is managable.

Cliff

I think a big get together like Fiore suggested next week when we are done with holiday stuff would be good. I"m not sure if I can work with people who want to work within the existing capitalist framework. But I would like to discuss this with them and see if we can. If not, I think we should divide. If we can, we should get much more coordinated and know exactly what kind of group we are and how we go about things.

We sort of tried to resolve this last week, but I don't feel it really got resolved.

Chris

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do the damn group hug that Fiore is requesting. "We can never be divided!" There are differences between everyone that can be stronger together. And, it leaves people like me on the periphery (and the city officials) confused on who to support. Plus, it creates a lack of trust for people who want to give their talents and time to Occupy Boulder.

I am on board with the speakers, the education fact sheets, the actions, etc. I'm not so on board with the encampment but am willing to support it. I really think we need to continue to do things that involve the community in dialogue, education, and action. The speakers are part of this. The more we continue with all this, the greater the forward momentum.

Those who want to continue trying to camp should do so. Those who want to support them, do so. The rest do what they want to do.

I don't have to agree with everyone in order to work with them, support them, and get things done. If I strongly disagree, then I don't have to provide support. This stance does not have to cause a "rift." I can tolerate a certain amount of chaos and I don't have to be in control. Those who feel the need to control OB are in the wrong place at the wrong time.

And, just a reminder, the middle class are part of the 99%. Also, the speakers are not telling anyone what to think. Listen and think for yourself. Or not listen. Whatever.

There seems to be a lot of either/or thinking going on. Occupy is messy. Deal with it.


--Maggie

The ignorance of the last person's comment convinces me that Occupy Boulder is not for me. Occupy Boulder is not on board with Occupying a public space? Seriously, you are part of the problem not part of the solution. Liberal cowardice aids the 1%. I cannot work with inherently worthless pieces of shit like you. Fuck off and die.

I'm out.

OB is headed for obscurity if we prioritize conflict with police, and city and county councils.

Re what to put on website, how about information that will connect people to our movement? Our website is out of date, there are no minutes of GAs, which at a minimum must provide text of proposals that have passed consensus. i'm happy to update the minutes and anyone can call me 303 532 6780 after a GA to let me know what to type and i'll do it

The business of police brutality is widely known since it's fodder for the main stream press and our website could be progressively speaking to goals and community involvement rather than police behavior. A mom looking at our website could want to bring her children to an event so they could learn about topics out of the mainstream, experience direct democracy, and witness actions rather than seeing police kneeling on someone, which is a big turn off for most people.

The point is to bring the middle to our message, and give them actions to perform in support. It is time for creative, peaceful, educational, joyful actions to inspire and educate.

PLAYS WELL TOGETHER A+

I agree with Fiore sale pitches have no place in Occupy Tofu, votes, windchimes, condos whatever has no place in Occupy IMO.
The last GA I went to a political candidate disrupted a very nice session with telling us how we should vote Democrat and for him. All this with the help of the "facilitator"

I am also deeply saddened by the Lack of Solitary for the occupiers "campers". This is called Occupy for a reason. You are either helping the cause or you are part of the problem.

@chris451 I agree very much with what you are saying and I hope you do not leave just yet. There are a few people involved in this who make me think that this still has hope

I am going to try to stick with this a little more and see how it goes. I live out of town and can only make it to boulder a couple of times a week but look forward to meeting some more of you and trying to help make this occupation work.

If this does not work in Boulder I would like to remind you all that Denver has a real occupation and is only a short drive.

I was on site today(Boulder Occupy), The occupy is going well and growing slow but well with some good energy and great people who are working hard.

F*uck all the Internet drama, get on site. That is where the Occupy is.

chriz, I was the facilitator at the meeting you complained about and I very carefully told the GA that the candidate was there and asked for consent of the group to let him talk for two minutes and then for him to listen to the group for two minutes. NO ONE objected and there were a lot of sparkly fingers consenting. After the two minute segments I interupted and reminded people that the four minutes was all we consented to and the group made clear that they wanted to talk with the candidate and asked him questions and listen to his responses.
Unless there was a second GA at which a candidate spoke, I heard no objection and a lot of requests to extend the discussion. That is what democracy looks like.

@Alan R- I got up and left with a few other people. Next time I will object. At the introduction I thought the guy had some valuable stuff to say. Personally If I want to hear advertising I will find a TV(at least the ads are only 30sec).

Sorry to talk about this on the Internet. I will try to be more patience next time and object to all forms of political and commercial advertising that are taking up GA time.

See you on site.

Thanks Chriz,
I really believe that if we try, we can figure out a way to make decisions that are respectful of our differences of opinions while moving forward together on the more important things that we agree on. I think a General Assembly should do the same thing with a candidate for local political office who wants to speak as with a famous film maker from Michigan which is let the group decide. I would hope when Michael Moore showed up at Wall Street the GA was asked if
they wanted to give him time to talk and not just told.
The hard part of democracy (for me) is accepting that some times not only am I in the minority on issues and have to accept the decisions of the majority, but also sometimes the majority is even right in retrospect when I was outvoted. That is probably true for most of us.

Alan

""I really believe that if we try, we can figure out a way to make decisions that are respectful of our differences of opinions while moving forward together on the more important things that we agree on.""
--------------------

-^I agree 100% with this.

I do not agree that GA is a time for political sales pitches though. I think GA is a time for discussion on where things are going, what is needed and important issues Not what you should buy or who to vote for.

I don't care how famous or powerful someone is a GA circle is made up of equals and they should come to the circle have respect and act like a member of the circle(sit or stand with the other members in the circle) not an important speaker that is a leader or so famous they only stand at a podium and join the circle when it is their time to speak(sorry Micheal Moore or Dolly Patron if you can't sit with the circle I vote you speak after or before GA).
Now if consensus wants "famous" or "important" speakers at GA that feel they are above the rest, well have at it.

One problem I find with things managed by open circles is the age old problem of "10 chiefs to every Indian" basically many people want to talk important talk and manage things but not many want to do real work. I am starting to see some of this here in Boulder.
I support the Indians and the Chiefs seem quite worthless to me.

Thanks for this conversation Alan, it is giving me some good food for thought and I am going to really work on my communication skills at the GA circles.

Hi all,

This is just my ho from the little I have read on the site.

Occupy isn't about just one agenda, just one person, just one idea. We are a collection of all that we see wrong with our city, county, state, country, and world. We come together to change the world we live in and all around it we are doing it. We did not wake up in the same America we woke up in two months ago. It, because of us, has changed. We stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters world round. Why can't we stand in solidarity of one another locally?

From the little I have read, it seems OB is suffering from what our present government is suffering from; too many leaders and too little consensus. Too many people with personal agendas and leadership issues and too little give and take conversation. Our movement is still new and young and going though growing pains. Every cause is the same. We just happen to represent every cause, from fracking, to LGBTQq, to inequality, to the crooks on Wall Street, to the crooks in office, on and on and on and on. We need to unite under a common goal and work though the rest as we go along.

I worry that if OB splits it will split itself out of existence and exemplify how well divide and concur works and the Police, Government, Wall Street, Business won't be responsible for it this time.

We are united under just a few simple goals and should work together to achieve those goals. If we let petty/not-so-petty stuff get in the way then, yes the group will split and be the first to go under leaving Boulder, Colorado a very bad name. Which, would be a paradox given Boulder's reputation for being a very liberal community.

Voting is the tool by which we solve disputes. I, personally, don't, generally, mind losing if my voice is heard in the process. If we all strand firmly on our morals on everything all of the time and refuse to budge, then yes, nothing will get done except generate negative, bad karma, resentment, ect. Those WILL break the back of the OB movement and give the greater worldwide movement a black eye. We're not just here for ourselves but we stand in solidarity with allllll the others who are standing in solidarity with us, both, in and out of America's boarders.

Maybe I'm just talking OMA but, that is my opinion…
Know1

What happened to the middle?

www(dot)youtube.com/watch?v=VtBT2Em8Rsc

I see a lot of disconnect between our Boulder "Occupy" Committees, our GA's, and the actual encampment.

The Committees and GA's are doing a lot thinking and sorting of information--But--

One thing is clear. Speaking realistically, The GA's and the Committees are not an occupation, by the definition of the word or by the example of the larger movement. Nothing is being occupied and we are not being heard in any meaningful way.

The encampment, on the other hand, offers a place for people to physically meet and find solidarity with each-other, share ideas, spontaneously teach, learn, and make things happen, and to be seen and to engage the community. However, lack of up-to-date information, legal advise, and coordination make the encampment weak. Sometimes there is too much drinking or smoking, and too little activism and outreach. It is suffering from a lack of investment by the rest of "Occupy" Boulder. We need more leaders, more activists, and articulate speakers to back up all our brave, gritty brothers and sisters who are sleeping (or staying awake) out in the cold every all night every night, in order to create this space for democracy to happen.

I suggest that the rest of Occupy Boulder start getting out from behind your computer screens and come down to the encampment, even if you only stay for several hours at a time.

I suggest we work on making it inviting and informative for the many interested but uninformed passers-by.

I suggest we get some savvy middle class folk down here to hook up a communications/wi-fi tent, so all of those who simply can't leave their computers can coordinate with us and provide their help in whatever way they can. This way we can invite more of the community to become involved, because we can have the voices (and aid) of those who aren't able or willing to leave their full-time jobs (they may be supporting families).

I suggest we get tear up the red tape maze we've imagined-into-existence through our formalized decision making, and start doing what works with the spirit of change and, above all, solidarity.

Peace

Ever since the 24/7 occupation started, I've felt like I'm caught up in the middle of a whole lot of completely unnecessary drama. I've been pretty active from the start in the general assembly and working group structure; and not only is it important to me personally, but I also feel this structure can be an incredibly useful tool in the ongoing revolution. On the other hand, I've been supportive of the 24/7'ers; I slept at the encampment for two nights last week and received one of the first tickets, and I'd be staying overnight now if I wasn't so ridiculously busy with my school work (senior in engineering here, and finals are coming up).

I've had a number of conversations with both 'sides' of this debate/drama, and what has struck me the most is the amount of self-important, dogmatic bullcrap on both sides.

No one (individual or group) has a unique claim on the name "Occupy Boulder". No one can decide for all of us what it means to be part of Occupy Boulder. We must all be involved to the extent we are capable, and in the manner we are comfortable with.

That said, I'd like to make a personal appeal to the dogmatic individuals on both sides. As I said, both the formal organizing and the encampment are important to me, and both are also useful. If you can't see the usefulness of either of these ideas/actions, I encourage you to take a closer look.

The organizational structure has already made great strides in empowering people from a variety of backgrounds and beliefs to make decisions together. That is no small feat, and experiencing that decision-making process will be incredibly valuable to anyone who is serious about making this movement a successful one in the long term. We've also organized direct actions, and now we're planning to jump in with both feet on this point with the upcoming "week of action" Dec 10-17.

On the other hand, the 24/7 occupation connects us in a visible manner with the broader movement. It also provides a forum for spontaneous discussion on a wide variety of topics, which is in my mind essential. In addition, we're now truly testing Boulder's commitment to its own stated values, rather than simply talking about the possibility of maybe coordinating with the city. Finally, it provides the nucleus for a new "model community"; I've made it pretty clear that the vision of such that Daniel has articulated is pretty close to what I'd like to see.

So again, I challenge everyone who considers themselves a part of Occupy Boulder to much more seriously consider why people are doing things they don't find useful. I'll finish with a classic revolutionary quote from Benjamin Franklin at the signing of the Declaration of Independence: "We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately."

OB does have differences of opinions but what organization doesn't. I have not noticed the same organizational split that the Daily Camera has reported. I would say given the passions and diversity of OB participants, I would be surprised if there weren't internal strife within the organization and am impressed with our lack of internal strife.

It is important to note here that the Daily Camera is owned by Newsmedia Group, which is probably threatened by some of the views of OB. I would even venture to say that every employee of the Daily Camera doesn't subscribe to the policies or strategies of Newsmedia Group...is that a split...does that reflect a challenge of other national media conglomerates. Has there every been a reporter that reported on a story without permission of the Camera...does that make them rogue reporters.

I am very impressed with how members of OB has dealt with some of its internal differences. Everyone in OB seems to be understanding of the other's position without giving in. The members have come to a reconciliation that is healthy and very respectful. I want to personally thank everyone with their own ability to give, take and self reflect. I love you all. I hope we continue with the same cohesion and internal strength and not bite the hooks or our agitators.

I apologize if my post made it sound like I'm not pleased with the progress on this issue that has been made recently. I think we're definitely moving in the right direction, and it has renewed my commitment to the movement.

Peace,
Zach F.