1) Besides, IPs mean nothing these days - ask Mossad! ........
2) Ian - committees? Hmm, NSA comes to mind..........
3) Every attempt at organisation is inherently doomed to failure.
1) True
2) Committees? The idea is that those with responsibilities know they are accountable and those who have a grievance know where to turn if they want things done differently. Is the committee of the campaign the best place for this oversight to sit? Well given that it is made up of representatives choosen by all the recognised groups that attended the last AGM it seems to be as representative group as any
3) I think our history to date and various events like the recent parliament square and notting hill demos and the tours by DRG, WR and Cynthia demonstrate that collective organisation can deliver better results than a completely unstructured or disorganised approach. But organisation is inherently messy and problematic, agreed. That is why activists shouldn't wait or count on any central core or team or committee or collection of co-chairs to run things. The central campaign does a limited number of things like the campaign site and national tours/gatherings to the best of its ability but the focus should always be on grassroots activism and autonomy of local groups to do 'their own thing' without wanting or needing approval from any committee.
My intention was not to denigrate the abilities of those who come together to organise an event, more to point out that doing it more than once already starts to 'rigidify' said organisation and starts a hierarchy.
It becomes a focus, yes, but as we see so very often in real life, that focus is not necessarily of long term benefit to the original aims. (Greenpeace & Melchett?) It's easy enough to sow discord in a knitting circle, let alone a paradigm-shifting consciousness acting against an implacable and entrenched enemy in the highest stakes on the planet.
We're lucky(?) to live in a brief period when communications are so accessible - no-one need be singled out 'pour encourager les autres' - no-one need fall prey to ego or provocateur-driven divisiveness. Ether-fed 'spontaneous' groupings seem the most effective form of action just now. Eg, Greenspan's fright the other day in thinking his car might be overturned, literally and figuratively by the sudden arrival of protesters...
Most of our present knowledge has come from the offerings of individuals acting from their hearts, often in isolation. The numbers appear to be growing; the information seems to be spreading now almost of its own accord - perhaps this avalanche alone will overwhelm those poor spook-type souls with their fingers still stuck in the 'digital dyke'.
What was it - "Never underestimate the power of an informed citizenry" ? [;-/
In yer face 'happenings' in front of live TV cameras seem to be very effective in awakening those drugged by mass media...Two to hold the banner, one to film and cover for Tru/YouTube
"The options, they wuz few" and my take is that they are shrinking daily...for the oligarchy.
So when do we march on the Bank of England and the dreadfully Square Mile, Brian (PBUH)? ;-)
.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject:
The only way to do justice to groups of like-minded people is to be organised. If it's no threat why do the Far Right/MI6/Big Corporations etc. etc. spend so much time and money trying to disrupt orgnisations? Because effective organiastion is so very powerful.
As for modration being censorship... In order for this space to be somewhere new people, or serious campaigners, come to we simply have to keep offensive material such as porn and swearing off the site. If we don't care about that we're not doing our job as a campaign. When rows break out it is beholden to us to intervene to ensure some form of justice. If we don't do that we're never going to be part of the solution. We have no choice there.
When controversial stuff's going down we all decide for ourselves what to think - we will never stop that - but we have to keep the discussion based around real evidence and allow plenty of room for polite speculation.
When people (real or otherwise) get angry with each other everybody leaves that discussion so its relativly simple for shills to poison every decent new ground this site might break.
That's just not an acceptable state of affairs.
Thermate911 wrote:
1. Every attempt at organisation is inherently doomed to failure.
2. Any attempt at moderation is censorship.
3. Some of us are sufficiently intelligent to sort the nuggets from the DailyDros ourselves.
My experience with organised groups led me to post what I did. It seems that however effective (or otherwise) a group action is, once it is identified 'by those who do not share the same aims', it is wide open to 'disorganisation' and the power of the original aim is diminished.
Those who organise 'best' eventually climb to the top of the human heap - vis the Bush family - it's taken them 70 years and 3 generations to get where they are now. Has it been worth it? The networking? The expense in lives and materiel? The sheer determination? Plainly not.
Look at the French Revolution. It was not 'organisation' that started it (however it then proceeded), it was sheer, bloody desperation amongst a majority of the starving and oppressed.
Why go that eye-for-an-eye route again? Call a halt to deliberate organisation now (a pox on all their houses!) and we might just win out as a self-governing species made of self-governing individuals.
Sorry, my 'free for all' comment was not intended to be so inclusive that we would be bombarded and swamped by sins of the flesh merchants! ;-) Yet is this not itself a deliberate programming weapon in the arsenal of 'The Organisation'? If it was treated out in the open, perhaps derided and belittled by thoughtful posters, it would soon loose its power to attract. Same applies to all diversions on the road to self-realisation, IMO.
Hiding anything allows the forces of darkness to work upon hidden fears and insecurities, rather than allowing each individual to work it out for themselves with all knowledge to hand - the only true education, IMO.
.
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject:
Have to disagree there.
Jacobins were a political movement organised from within the Illuminati and Grand Orient Lodges. I believe as a blood-revenge for the mass arrest of the Knights Templar 400 or so years before.
These people bear long, long grudges!
........Maximilien Robespierre entered the political arena shortly after the September Massacres, elected as first deputy for Paris to the National Convention in 1792. Robespierre was viewed as the quintessential political force of the Jacobin Movement, thrusting ever deeper the dagger of liberty within the despotism of the Monarchy. As a disciple of Rousseau, Robespierre's political views were rooted in Rousseau's notion of the social contract, which promoted "the rights of man" (Schama; 1989; 475), but his was a vision of collective rights, rather than the rights of each individual. Robespierre expressed this view in the December 1792 condemnation of Louis XVI to death for treason:"It is with regret that I pronounce, the fatal truth: Louis ought to perish rather than a hundred thousand virtuous citizens; Louis must die, that the country may live." (Britannica, 1911)
The ultimate political vehicle for the Jacobin movement was the Reign of Terror overseen by the Committee of Public Safety, who were given executive powers to purify and unify the Republic. The Committee instituted requisitioning, rationing, and conscription to consolidate new citizen armies. They instituted the Terror as a means of destroying those they perceived as enemies within: "Terror", said Robespierre, "is only justice that is prompt, severe and inflexible".....
DURING these dissensions and discontents, and this general fermentation of the public mind in Germany, political occurrences in France gave exercise and full scope for the operation of that spirit of revolt which had long growled in secret in the different comers of that great empire. The Cosmo-political and sceptical opinions and sentiments so much cultivated in all the Lodges of the Philalethes had by this time been openly professed by many of the sages of France, and artfully interwoven with their statistical œconomics. The many contests between the King and the Parliament of Paris about the registration of his edicts, had given occasion to much discussion, and had made the public familiarly acquainted with topics altogether unsuitable to the absolute monarchy of France.
This acquaintance with the natural expectations of the subject, and the expediency of a candid attention on the part of Government to these expectations, and a view of Legislation and Government founded on a very liberal interpretation of all these things, was prodigiously promoted by the rash interference of France in the dispute between Great Britain and her colonies. In this attempt to ruin Britain, even the court of France was obliged to preach the doctrines of Liberty, and to take its chance that Frenchmen would consent to be the only slaves. But their officers and soldiers who returned from America, imported the American principles, and in every company found hearers who listened with delight and regret to their fascinating tale of American independence. During the war, the Minister, who had too confidently pledged himself for the destruction of Britain, was obliged to allow the Parisians to amuse themselves with theatrical entertainments, where English law was represented as oppression, and every fretful extravagance of the Americans was applauded as a noble struggle for native freedom.--All wished for a taste of that liberty and equality which they were allowed to applaud on the stage; but as soon as they came from the theatre into the street, they found themselves under all their former restraints. The sweet charm had found its way into their hearts, and all the luxuries of France became as dull as common life does to a fond girl when she lays down her novel.
In this irritable state of mind a spark was sufficient for kindling a flame. To import this dangerous delicacy of American growth, France had expended many millions, and was drowned in debts. The mad prodigality of the Royal Family and the Court had drained the treasury, and forestalled every livre of the revenue. The edicts for new taxes and forced loans were most unwelcome and oppressive.
The Avocats au parlement had nothing to do with state-affairs, being very little more than barristers in the highest court of justice; and the highest claim of the Presidents of this court was to be a sort of humble counsellors to the King in common matters. It was a very strange inconsistency in that ingenious nation to permit such people to touch on those state-subjects; for, in fact, the King of France was an absolute Monarch, and the subjects were slaves. This is the result of all their painful research, notwithstanding that glimmerings of natural justice and of freedom are to be met with in their records. There could not be found in their history so much as a tolerable account of the manner of calling the nation together, to learn from the people how their chains would best please their fancy. But all this was against nature, and it was necessary that it should come to an end, the first time that the Monarch confessed that he could not do every thing unless they put the tools into his hands. As things were approaching gradually but rapidly to this condition, the impertinent interference (for so a Frenchman, subject of the Grand Monarch, must think it) of the advocates of the Parliament of Paris was popular in the highest degree; and it must be confessed, that in general it was patriotic, however inconsistent with the constitution....................
Thermate911 wrote:
Look at the French Revolution. It was not 'organisation' that started it (however it then proceeded), it was sheer, bloody desperation amongst a majority of the starving and oppressed.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
........
