10/23 GA Breakout Group Reportbacks

Posted by & filed under .

NYCGA Assembly #36


Liberty Plaza, 7PM


Visions & Goals Breakout Group Reportbacks


36.2.2 Sara: Hi, I’m Sara. Our group had 2 concerns. One, we were confused about the vision vs demands. What is the purpose of this document? And who is its audience? Second, we were concerned about the language. It was difficult to understand. We felt overwhelmed. We want it to be focused, passionate, and easy to understand. On the process we wanted to have read the document beforehand. It is so wordy. It was difficult to understand and to reflect on in such a short time.

36.2.3 Craig: hi, this document is not accessible to everyone. Its written in language that is hard to understand….Point 2, too similar to point 1 and needs more specification. Point 3: too similar to 1 and 2. Point 4: we need to foster digital relationships.

36.2.4 Hannah: would like to see a document like this that takes as a starting point the idea of personal reasonability. That’s first. Second, our group expressed discomfort with the implication that technology can solve all of our problems. Third, our group is concerned about multiple documents with overlapping agendas. For example what is the relation with this document and the declarations? Is there a way to create a consolidated document? Also we are concerned with the overly academic tone of the document. Next, while as our group understands this is a shortened version of the document, we felt divorced from actions and specific visions, this can feel empty… Many other movements have run into the same barriers. Capitalism, market, the economy, we imagine these to be the focus of our movement.

36.2.5 Christian: to be simple we just had an additional vision to add. The vision would be the need to explicitly call out an end to patriarchal racist classism.

36.2.6 Boots: our group discussed ways to better develop the consensus based process just like break out groups like this. We also want simpler language. It’s getting cold. We also better consolidate online spaces and the public private spaces like the atrium and Trump Tower.

36.2.7 Larisa: we have specific points. 1: we wanted to clarify democracy vs consensus based… By striking democracy for decision making. 2: we wanted to add studying current and historical context to this point. 3: we like harmony, we don’t understand it though. 4: we want to separate emotional spaces to be above everything. For physical spaces we want to emphasis utilizing public spaces. For all FLO: these are redundant and need more workshoping.

36.2.8 Eric: our group looked at each point one by one to see if we agree overall with its message and tried to find issues or ways we could clarify each point. 1: we felt that the world and its occupations are looking to OSW as a president and are highly connection by the internet…2: we were not sure what harmony and nature meant. There were some concerns that it might mean a complete dedication to lack of industrialization and technology. 3: we agreed there should be no centralized financial system. We should also look to new forms of exchange… 6: we felt that we should decentralize control of media. Local ownership of media but not at expense of global connection. 7: need definition. 8: Historically blind. Needs definitions.

36.2.9 Dorje: 1: a nation wide gathering of bodies. Online forum like a wiki would be the most important. 3: most important was to promote the value of economic equality. 4: we should establish peace and green economy as subjects in new educations. Also to teach direct democracy. 5: we thought we definitely need to note this. But our leaders won’t let us do this. We need something like state power for our movement. Among the original points that we came up with was that we need to return land to wronged indigenous communities.

36.2.10 Patrick: overall points: some of these could be consolidated. 4th grade language only. Some were more policy, others were cultural principals. Policy was stronger… 1: more pragmatic. 2: how do we balance progress with responsible practices? We thought about disincentives when pass environmental… We wondered about 0 growth economy. 3: mixed. 4: not mixed and the focus would remain on education. 5 we like. 6: we liked. 7: real vague. 8: focus on nonviolence was better and clearer. Peace spread outward from the individual. 9: some is human nature and may not be eliminated. Force should be on eliminating it from government. The use of non-negative language would be better. Adding the idea of celebrating. 10: similar to 9, but the respect for…differences is useful to note. 11: added by us: electoral reform tied into a lot of points and should be noted.

36.2.11 Laura: 1: some voiced concern that this contradicts our … movement to decentralize power. We loved point 2. 6: some were concerned with the word “truth.” Should be replaced with the idea that media should represent a diversity of interpretations and we should have more media accountability. 7: we wondered who defined human rights. 8: we wondered about self-defense? Is this ok? How do we address violence from the state? 9: we should replace “past” with “past, present and future.” 10: confusion. Are we hoping to promote harmony btw existing value system or supersede them? Also this document does not address the problem of representation.

Comments are closed.