Why A Leaderless movement was required

A leaderless movement can only go so far. This is not a theory based on history or politics, it is a situation based upon the very nature of human beings and all individuals.

A society which governs and makes rules for only each individual, basing such rules on itself, is a society that never gets far in life. This can be seen in the wild when comparing animals who choose to go at it alone, and pack animals who thrive in groups.

Humans are pack animals. While perfectly capable of survival alone, we are all instinctively better at everything we do when couples with others. Be it the sense of competition, the sense of others pushing us, or the sense of others simply supporting us - things are just done more efficiently and at a higher standard when done in a group.

That is why a leaderless movement will not do much to accomplish anything. You can not start swimming in the ocean and hope to get to your destination with no scope or realization of how to get there. A leader provides a pinpoint scope to a generalized ideal that people can gather behind. A leader provides a single focal point that people can follow, regardless of the other differences that push them apart.

A leaderless movement will not go anywhere because it is all about each individual, and when it comes time to make changes and agreements, each individual is not going to agree on everything and thus the movement will indeed collapse. You will find this to be the case throughout history, that eventually, whether started as leaderless or not, eventually a leadership entity will form. The only question is if the people will choose a leader that continues to let them down, or someone who is immune to the corrupting force of the power given to them.

And yes... some people are immune to corruption. They just are not generally the ones that get picked.

Originally posted by Mcupobob
reply to post by XPLodER

 

Hey man, not disagreeing just calling them as how I see them.

i must apologise to you,
i am sorry
i am a bit "pent up" at the moment and that is no excuse to be rude,
you are free to disagree

thank you for reminding me of the process



xploder

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by XPLodER

 

Just look at successful protesting,to see what can be done,with strong leadership...................

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi . 2 October 1869 – 30 January 1948) was the per-eminent political and ideological leader of India during the Indian independence movement. A pioneer of satyagraha, or resistance to tyranny through mass civil disobedience—a philosophy firmly founded upon ahimsa, or total nonviolence—Gandhi led India to independence and inspired movements for civil rights and freedom across the world.Gandhi is often referred to as Mahatma or "Great Soul," an honorific first applied to him by Rabindranath Tagore). In India, he is also called Bapu and officially honored as the Father of the Nation. His birthday, 2 October, is commemorated in India as Gandhi Jayanti, a national holiday, and worldwide as the International Day of Non-Violence.

LINK

Martin Luther King, Jr. (January 15, 1929 – April 4, 1968) was an American clergyman, activist, and prominent leader in the African-American Civil Rights Movement. He is best known for being an iconic figure in the advancement of civil rights in the United States and around the world, using nonviolent methods following the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi. King has become a national icon in the history of modern American liberalism.

LINK

There are many more.............................


Just imagine what these leaders could have accomplished,if they led OWS.

Having leadership isnt bad at all. And I dare say,would be good for OWS.

thank you for the inspiring post star to you,

and i agree when it is best to do so OWS should debate an choose a leader,
but be warned that any leader would be attacked if they cannot be bought

initially this is why there is no leader, to give every person involved a chance to stand up and lead.
and how can you corrupt a leaderless movement?
truth is when the people feel ready they will ask who they choose to lead to do so.


i like the example of gandi
non violent
like OWS

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


Its no problem, I came off as an ass sometimes.

Originally posted by gwydionblack
A leaderless movement can only go so far. This is not a theory based on history or politics, it is a situation based upon the very nature of human beings and all individuals.

very correct

A society which governs and makes rules for only each individual, basing such rules on itself, is a society that never gets far in life. This can be seen in the wild when comparing animals who choose to go at it alone, and pack animals who thrive in groups.

in my opinion the best way to craft laws for a comunity is to live and exist in that comunity WHILE debating whats best for that comunity and craft laws for all. the politicians are to far removed from the comunities they are supposed to serve.

Humans are pack animals. While perfectly capable of survival alone, we are all instinctively better at everything we do when couples with others. Be it the sense of competition, the sense of others pushing us, or the sense of others simply supporting us - things are just done more efficiently and at a higher standard when done in a group.

i couldnt agree more star to you

That is why a leaderless movement will not do much to accomplish anything. You can not start swimming in the ocean and hope to get to your destination with no scope or realization of how to get there. A leader provides a pinpoint scope to a generalized ideal that people can gather behind. A leader provides a single focal point that people can follow, regardless of the other differences that push them apart.

IMHO it is still to early to chanpion a leader, the people involved are driving this and when they are orginized and ready they will adress the leadership issue, but the fact there is no leader at the moment is crutial to empowering people to do more for each other first

A leaderless movement will not go anywhere because it is all about each individual, and when it comes time to make changes and agreements, each individual is not going to agree on everything and thus the movement will indeed collapse. You will find this to be the case throughout history, that eventually, whether started as leaderless or not, eventually a leadership entity will form. The only question is if the people will choose a leader that continues to let them down, or someone who is immune to the corrupting force of the power given to them.

And yes... some people are immune to corruption. They just are not generally the ones that get picked.

which is why to have a leader at first is devicive, a strong leader steps forward when asked in a time of great need because they have been asked, NOT because they seek power

you are very wise thank you
xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


That is your response?

You are correct in one thing, you have heavily implied that you are an idiot.

Try coming up with something that debates the topic, not how many sites I participate in.

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by XPLodER

 

So the fix to a good, albeit, broken system is a system flawed by design?

Only makes sense when I follow my screen name

.

think about it like this,
average people dont have time or expertise or the large sums of money to lobbie congress (see buy bills)
but the corperations can spend vast sums to craft and pass legislation,
when people use the existing system but pressure THEIR bills to pass,
they get to see clearly who is working for the people,
and who blocked the bill and is in favour of the corps

use the existing system in a novel way

people who are living under the conditions they wish to redress, make bills to make life better for everyone

and pressure the politicians to pass the bills or face voter backlash

investigate and expose insider trading around those that fail to pass the peoples bills
to apply presure to explain trades and timing of bills

use the current system its not broken, but those who are in the system are


and please dont call names

xploder

As much as I agree with leader less movements it is limited by the size of the population/s. What would work locally will fail on a national/global stage IMO.

Could I suggest a compromise. Any leader has a short time limit. Is under constant public scrutiny. (they do it to us so what's good for the goose). Above all with leadership comes a restriction. Leaders are unpaid and any money sent their way goes immediately to the public purse.

One further thing I would like considered. Any decision must be passed by a panel of youngsters also unpaid.

All you need now is to address our love affair with violence and massive armies.

reply to post by XPLodER


Now explain this all again and how that won't be possible in a leaderless movement.

If anything a leaderless movement will be even more prone, as a corporation (or person) will find it easier to persuade many average Joe's with very little money.

If you don't want to be called out as an idiot, don't make idiotic assumptions, specifically me being a paid for poster.

I could only dream to get paid to post.

reply to post by peck420


Nice one. The money is in the post. (SHHH keep this between me and you)

Originally posted by colin42
As much as I agree with leader less movements it is limited by the size of the population/s. What would work locally will fail on a national/global stage IMO.

in the same breath, what acually works in a comunity like OWS at the small scale is co operation,
and self orginization. with all men and woman equal each with a voice and each with a vote decide what to petition the federal govenemnt with.
then with the concensus of the larger comunity what works in the comunity scale can influence what happens at the federal level.

Could I suggest a compromise. Any leader has a short time limit. Is under constant public scrutiny. (they do it to us so what's good for the goose). Above all with leadership comes a restriction. Leaders are unpaid and any money sent their way goes immediately to the public purse.

short term limits corrption i love that long term sell outs are a big problem in world politics.
it is possable to force reporting on all "personal" expendate including gifts, lodgings, food and any "freebee" that could be used instead of monsy or stock tips.

for every elected govenment official in their capasity they must report all exchanges and keep "all" receipts and be audited daily with results published online every night by a member of the comunity that they represent.

One further thing I would like considered. Any decision must be passed by a panel of youngsters also unpaid.

random ballot or civics duty?

All you need now is to address our love affair with violence and massive armies.

the people in their silence are giving comlisit consent to these wars,

the power of a president is in the faith of the people he serves,
if there was no other discusion among the people, the govenment would have little mandate to adress any thing else.

make it popular culture that the elightend internet generation will end the wars through co-operation and unity of message.

in the future people who are making bad decitions on purpose for the benifit of the few will be shunned from society. when these people enter a shop every stops and remains perfectly silent and still, no eye contact ect

only when the few that make decitions realise they are living in our comunities and our interaction or non interaction can show non consent.

imagine being a scare monger general trying to take a country to war,
he feels powerful in front of his troops,

but in a town that falls slient and motionless and no interaction with the town is possable he will truly feel shunned.

this is the true power of the interent, if the majority of people decide to they could orginize the most powerful protest ever, one that follows the war monger wear ever they go.

if approched or talked to be polite and short and blunt

it sounds like the tactic of a child to not talk to or interact with a person who has done bad
but no one can stand this passive pieceful protest for long.

end the wars

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


The reason I suggested a panel of youth is
a) it is their futures at stake
b) we empower the young instead making them powerless as we do now.

Wars are started by the old and the young die in them. Armies consist of the young being lead by the old so teach the kids war is a career with no future. Empower them to make the right choice. They dont join.

Surely the ethos of the OWS movement.

If the old want to rage war let them do the bleeding.

Originally posted by peck420
reply to post by XPLodER

 

Now explain this all again and how that won't be possible in a leaderless movement.

first i speak from MHO only

a movement must self orginize to be homogenius not on any one persons say so. after the point the movement has decided what the goals are they are then capable of being "leaderless" and still completing or acomplising the goals. the fact that in history a leaderless movement has always failed is to completly miss the internet and its effect on how movements and culture has changed. in this interenet age it is people driven, and the consensus of the comunity becomes the moral leader.

its what the comunity finds acceptable or not that drives the movement, ie the 99%

If anything a leaderless movement will be even more prone, as a corporation (or person) will find it easier to persuade many average Joe's with very little money.

no people already decide what they think is unaceptable and they shunn the people responcable on mass.
this is a powerful tool that also has never been seen before, this also requires no leader just "moral out rage"

it would be very difficult to stop a movement that goes viral because the comunities agree with the sentiment

this can happen in less than 24 hours on the internet and a little longer for the rest of the comunity.

the opinion and reaction of the people on the internet and on the streets is the leader.

do you understand?

xploder.

If you don't want to be called out as an idiot, don't make idiotic assumptions, specifically me being a paid for poster.

I could only dream to get paid to post.

i never acused you of being a paid poster,
i said it was unusual for one person to have so many accounts at so many blogs,
and awaited your responce to see if you over reacted.

i am not an idiot

i am xploder

reply to post by XPLodER


This is why the rate of millionaires to non millionaires in Congress has exponentially increased and this right here is the reason. This is why our nation is falling apart because civil service projects aren't profitable because they are nationalized.

End the era of greedy bastages in The Congress whose only concern is maintaining the flow of money into their coffers. This means all are corrupt to the core. This does not mean replace a Dem with a TP, GOP with a Dem, Dem with a GOP but evict them all. Send them all packing. Make them listen that way!

Notice and look into charities of Members of Congress and you'll be amazed.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


I agree but you are not given that choice are you. You can only choose from a shortlist they make up.

That is why the correct choice is to cut off the supply of money and the correct target was chosen. The banking elite.

reply to post by colin42


Apply for an absentee ballot and write in a third choice! The electronic one's really don't allow for third party voting, if they do we all vote for the "no namers" and send our message via that way as long as they do not have a D, R, I, TP next to their name.

Any group should be made like a hierarchy where one person controls the other people,
preferably with money through manipulative means. If OWS turns into a business
consortium then half the people opposing it will like it better, because it will resemble the
structure they believe in. How can anyone trust people who are not doing it for money?
You have got to be sick in the dick to do something for free these days, unless of course,
it will make you money in the near future, then, that's ok!

reply to post by mastahunta


Not going to happen because that person would be attacked, wounded, hospitalized and killed all to shut down the movement. IE, find and id a leader, move in to illegally detain the person, gag them and tie them up, beat them into submission. Find their wife at work and kid at school, kidnap and tie up both, run a live vid feed and have a big giant man standing over your wife while her clothes are ripped off her body and you are being beaten into conceding the group by being forced to broadcast a live feed condemning and slamming the movement all to make the abuse and torture stop.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

A leaked plan to spend $850,000 to id the leader of this leaderless movement in an effort to run them through the ringers to make them say, "Uncle, uncle". We have many heads, take out one and another rises in it's place, you cannot decapitate our collective head because our body will not wither away and die.

Not going to happen! Decentralization in this case has it's perks.