I make no excuse for opening

I make no excuse for opening my big mouth and posting long messages so many times on this thread. I happen to think it is an important issue that we have to discuss and discover where we agree and where we differ with ourselves and with those outside the party.I came across this post by a professional activist – yes, there are actually career activists out there – read his bio/resume at the end of the article. 14 Rules for Revolthttp://www.alternet.org/activism/155739/14_rules_for_revolt_–_or_what_i_learned_from_the_front_lines_of_the_1960s/?page=entire I don’t think i have read such a contradictory list. Italics is my emphasis Rule 10  “YOUR MISSION IS TO DESTABILIZE SOCIETY. Only in times of crisis will those with power relinquish some of it to forestall losing all of it. You need to create these crises. Since transformational reform cannot be achieved by working inside government, a mass movement must first destabilize the political and economic status quo. The demands made by that movement must be based on common sense, so average Americans can support them, but they must also be unattainable within the status quo. That’s what makes for a crisis.” Rules 7 and 8  “BE NICE TO DEMOCRATS. Democrats are not your allies or even your friends. But you need them. Like Republicans, they depend on big money for campaign contributions, so even if they take complete control of government, they will never enact transformational change on their own. But a popular movement can develop enough power to force elected Democrats to support reform. In the future, you will need elected Democrats to pass your reforms just as the civil rights movement needed them to pass the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts. DON’T GET SO UPSET ABOUT VOTING FOR DEMOCRATS. Hold your nose and do it. It’s necessary. Republican governments do far more damage than Democratic governments, both to people in poverty and to the rest of us. They spread false consciousness and make it more difficult for us to organize. Stop fussing about Democratic flaws. They are who they are. Real change will only be driven by citizen activism, not elections. So, when an opportunity comes along to put a Democrat into office instead of a Republican, take it, and then go back to movement building.” Hmmm. lets pause there and re-cap, we should make destabilizing demands that are impossible to implement so to create a crisis, then vote Democrat to pass those reforms which are supposed to be unattainable because a Republican administration will be more damaging if they were in power ie Republican extremism would destabilize and foster crises. Duh! Rules 3 and 4  DON’T BASH BIG GOVERNMENT. It’s a Republican trap. In the years after the sixties, conservatives made exaggerated complaints about government waste and inefficiency. These distortions undermined public confidence in Washinton, which then allowed the Republicans to dismantle government regulations on finance put in place after the Great Depression. That deregulation brought on the Great Recession of 2008. Remember, it is unchecked bureaucracy that is wasteful and inefficient, not government in and of itself.  GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE OUR TOOL, NOT THEIRS. Without stronger financial regulation than was previously in place, our standard of living will decline further. Americans now face the iron law of unregulated capitalism: the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Government is the only means by which working Americans can protect themselves on a capitalist playing field heavily tilted toward the wealthy, the only means by which the 1% can be forced to pay their fair share, the only way to break the power of the oil companies and create a clean energy future. So according to the above rules 3 and 4 we are to convince workers that the state is useful tool for workers for our protection and encourage them to vote Democrat and according to rules 5 and 6 below, because capitalism requires regulation since that is the fundamental problem, not capitalism, itself we are to let politicians formulate their policies and our role is simply one of over-seeing, not participation, simply a veto power over proposals.However Rule 4 is actually growing closer to our own position, that to enforce the will of the working class we require political power and the capture of control of the state by a socialist party. But if we go back to Rule 1 “Resist the temptation to institutionalize yourselves by becoming an organization or prematurely launching a political party.” and leave it to unspecified “Other progressive organizations are available to play this role.” – presumably the Democrats if we stick to rules 7 and 8. Once more it extols the subordination of  the movement to a passive role of protest fodder. Rules 5 and 6 UNREGULATED CAPITALISM IS THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM. A compelling vision of a progressive society will emerge in the course of the struggles still ahead. Meanwhile, you are stuck with market capitalism and you should focus on bringing its worst aspects under control. Occupy Wall Street helped put financial regulation at the center of political debate. Keep it there. If financial regulation remains a central demand of the 99%, you can keep your focus on extreme income differences and effectively isolate the 1%. BE THE OWNER, NOT THE REPAIRMAN. Apologists for the 1% will put you on the defensive by insisting that you tell them exactly how to regulate Wall Street or secure the healthcare system. Don’t respond. You own the national house. If they built it for you without beds for everyone or a kitchen big enough to feed all the people, they’ve got to come up with a plan to fix it. Your job is to approve the plan and supervise the construction, not draw up the blueprints. Not everybody may agree within the WSM but i think in every neighbourhood and every community, every factory and every work-place, at local regional national and international levels that blueprints will be drawn up and the question for all of us is how we do approve and supervise the plans and construction. That question is unaswered but i am sure as the article author does emphasis “Real change will only be driven by citizen activism, not elections.” in Rule 8  Yet his Rule 9 declares that ” Most progressive goals can only be achieved with the power of government (taxing the rich, neutralizing the oil companies, etc.), but these goals will not be achieved until rebellious activists force government to accept them.”  I think we can safely say that the only threat to governments which is treated seriously by them is not a million or more marching in protest (we have seen how those are ignored) but ultimately the result of the ballot-box vote at elections In his final Rule 14,  he recommends similar strategy as he was previously involved in , i am guessing,  “the congressional lobbying done by the Indochina Peace Campaign” And no doubt influenced by the field of his present occupation, no, not occupier, occupation – professional political consultancy for hire, Zimmerman & Markman, Inc. Am i being too dismissive of a well-intentioned activist. Or identifying elements within the Occupy Movement who seek to steer the Occupy Movements direction and whose ideas are contrary to our own but,  more importantly , would be detrimental to the future of the  Occupy Movement as a revolutionary organisation and as such deserves to be be criticised . My observations about this article may be viewed as jaundiced by some. Or my interpretation of the Occupy Movements content and potential maybe in error. If so, correct me if i am wrong. But lets keep talking about it.