STARBUCKS WORKERS TAKE DIRECT ACTION

Union-Made Lattes

The Industrial Workers of the World ramps up its campaign to organize Starbucks

December 29, 2008 By Sam Stoker
Source: http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/20077

On Aug. 31, the light-rail train from Minneapolis to the Mall of America was boisterous. During the ride, several dozen Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) members - known as Wobblies - belted out the radical workers' anthem 'Solidarity Forever' in unison. The reason for their elation was because Erik Forman, 23, was returning to work as a Starbucks barista.

Forman, an IWW organizer, had been fired on July 10, his boss told him, for discussing with co-workers the disciplinary action that was taken against him after showing up late to work. But Forman believes the real reason was because of his outspoken advocacy for the Starbucks Workers Union (SWU) - which is part of the IWW - and says that his termination was an attempt by Starbucks, the world's largest coffee-shop chain, to bust a growing union movement among its employees.

Forman filed a complaint for illegal termination and anti-union malfeasance with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) a week later. In support, Starbucks' baristas throughout the Twin Cities signed a petition demanding Forman's reinstatement. After a series of work stoppages and protests, Starbucks settled the complaint on Aug. 31.

Under the terms of the settlement, the company did not admit guilt or that the IWW's actions influenced its decision to rehire Forman. But it did agree to reinstate him with back pay for missed time and to post signs in the shop for 60 days, informing workers that management would not interfere with attempts to organize.

More than half of Forman's shop is now in the IWW - and at the Mall of America the Wobblies were planning 'to drink some union-made lattes' in a sign of solidarity.

`We are the union' A handful of baristas started the SWU in a single Starbucks shop in New York City in May 2004.

'The union was sparked because workers had become fed up with low wages, unsecured scheduling, a prohibitive healthcare system and a lack of respect from managers,' says founding member Daniel Gross.

The SWU soon spread to Starbucks across the city, all while embracing the tenets of the IWW - particularly solidarity unionism. Unlike the prominent union model that uses a hierarchical power structure and focuses on bargaining with employers, solidarity unionism embraces direct democracy with members supporting one another directly.

'We are not part of a union,' says Gross. 'We are the union.'

Members of the SWU say Starbucks embarked on an anti- union campaign since its inception. They allege management threatened employees who expressed interest in the union, and spied on and interrogated employees about union activity. SWU says the most outspoken union advocates were fired.

Starbucks denies these charges. 'Such allegations are baseless,' says Starbucks spokesperson Tara Darrow. 'Starbucks strictly abides with laws and guidelines associated with labor law. We wouldn't do that because it is against the law.'

Yet Starbucks' settlement with the NLRB complaint on Forman's behalf was the third such settlement in three years. During that time, Starbucks has reinstated four employees after they filed complaints with the NLRB, and two cases remain open.

In New York, Gross is still awaiting the decision of an August 2007 hearing in which the NLRB filed 30 complaints against Starbucks for anti-union malfeasance, in addition to a complaint that he, Gross, was fired illegally. More recently, in Grand Rapids, Mich., the NLRB filed a complaint against Starbucks, charging that the company illegally fired barista Cole Dorsey for union activity.

According to Dorsey, the SWU began organizing in Grand Rapids in 2006. But baristas who were interested in joining the union became concerned that repercussions might be taken against them for organizing publicly.

'We were attempting to organize a union election, a tactic we thought could be effective here in Michigan, but we believe management found out,' says Dorsey.

Those baristas collectively decided that Dorsey - at least initially - should be the union's public face while others remained underground.

Dorsey was fired on June 6 during the union election campaign. Starbucks' Darrow says Dorsey - who had worked at Starbucks for two years and had won employee awards - was fired for being tardy after receiving a final warning. As in other cases, Starbucks denies allegations of union-busting activity.

'The backbone of my case is that I was fired for less than what other employees have done,' Dorsey says.

In a response to Dorsey's NLRB complaint, Starbucks' attorneys reiterated the official reason he was fired, and added that he was a 'salt,' suggesting that Dorsey had no interest in working at Starbucks and was there only to organize.

'I guess it is true in a sense because I am organizing people, but what they fail to understand is that I also depend on the income from my job, and they took that away from me,' Dorsey says. 'We never wanted this to be a contentious issue. We want a union so that we can improve workplace conditions. Starbucks has made the situation contentious.'

Improving working conditions In the past year, the SWU has grown more than it had in its first three years combined. The group says it has around 250 members nationally, with most congregated in Chicago, Grand Rapids, New York City and the Twin Cities.

SWU members say that the Twin Cities have the fastest growth rate nationwide, attributing much of the growth to the controversy stirred up by Forman's firing.

Forman says the union's local growth is only a step in a larger campaign to challenge Starbucks to improve worker conditions. With stores in 60 countries, Starbucks employs 150,000 people worldwide.

'The union needs to become international and it eventually needs to spread into all of the service industry,' Forman says.

A global movement against the corporation appears to be underway. Dorsey's termination coincided with the firing of Monica (who wouldn't reveal her last name because she fears being blacklisted by other employers), a Starbucks barista in Seville, Spain. Monica is a member of the Confederaci - n Nacional del Trabajo (CNT), the Spanish counterpart of the IWW.

Like Dorsey, Monica was also allegedly fired for union organizing. Their terminations sparked an international day of protest on July 5 at hundreds of Starbucks in cities across the world.

But, according to spokeswoman Darrow, Starbucks doesn't fear such organizing.

'As far as we are concerned, our [employees] have free choice [to unionize] at all times,' she says. 'We feel we have great communication back and forth with employees and we pride ourselves on providing a good workplace.'

Starbucks' pride in its 'good workplace' stems from the employee pay and benefit packages that the company often trumpets - benefits that include stock option programs and healthcare benefits that the company claims cover 65 percent of eligible employees. But the bottom line for the SWU is that a person simply cannot live a decent life as a Starbucks worker. The wages, which generally hover slightly above each state's minimum wage, are too low; the hours are unstable; and health insurance premiums and deductibles are prohibitive compared to earnings.

'There are many corporations like Starbucks that exploit workers, but few have succeeded like Starbucks in portraying itself as a socially conscious corporation,' Gross says.

While the most common response to such a situation is `Why don't you quit?' Forman says, 'The fact is there are not many industries a person can get into with no skills, and retail is one of them. The best thing people can do is organize.'

Back at the Mall of America The Wobblies' Aug. 31 party on the light-rail was cut short two train stops before the Mall of America, when police officers boarded the train and questioned the group. Police told them the Mall of America is private property and that no demonstrations or protests are allowed there.

The union members explained that they were simply joining their friend for his first day of work and assured the officers they were not there to demonstrate or disrupt shoppers. The officers let them pass.

But when the train arrived at the Mall of America, a line of police in riot gear blocked the doors to the platform. Among them were FBI agents. (Aug. 31 was also the day before the opening of the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, which may have explained the police presence.) A co-worker text-messaged Forman that management had been speaking with police in their shop. No one was allowed off the train and police threatened to arrest anyone who tried to exit.

'It's ridiculous,' Forman later says. 'Management, the police and the FBI are working together. They say they didn't want us demonstrating, but we assured them that was not our intent. I think it is clear, what they really fear is us organizing.'


Sam Stoker is a freelance reporter based in Chicago.

STANDING UP TO THE MADNESS, A SPEECH BY AMY GOODMAN

In April this editor had the pleasure of seeing Amy Goodman speak at Seattle's Green Festival. Promoting 'Standing Up to the Madness', her latest book co-authored by her brother David, Goodman told the stories of ordinary citizens that acted to profoundly change our society. The following clip provokes people to get involved in "standing up to the madness" and participating, instead of passively allowing the oligarchy to control our daily lives. - Editor



Source link: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QMfa-qhb0ug

ACTION ALERT: PLEDGE TO STOP U.S. INTERVENTION IN EL SALVADOR ELECTIONS

The Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador is calling upon US citizens to participate in protesting the unjust actions that the US government has taken against democracy in El Salvador. The pledge below is an opportunity for concerned citizens to participate in a grassroots response to the misguided and anti-democratic policies of US elected representatives regarding the upcoming elections in El Salvador. Please read the pledge below and visit the CISPES website - (CLICK HERE) to sign. -Editor



People’s Pledge to Defend Free & Fair Elections in El Salvador

Given that:

* The peoples of every nation have the right to political self-determination and autonomy.

* The U.S. government has a long history of outright manipulation of political, social & economic conditions in El Salvador to its own financial and political gain AND without concern for the wellbeing of the Salvadoran people.

* The U.S. government regularly channels funds—through United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)—to destabilize popularly supported leftist governments across the globe, and particularly in Latin America, where countries are humanely rebuilding their nations to generate prosperity for all and to escape the stranglehold of US hegemony.

* The U.S. government has consistently and systematically interfered in the Salvadoran electoral process since the end of the civil war in 1992, through a premeditated combination of lies, malicious manipulation and diplomatic threats. One example: before the 2004 Presidential election, members of the U.S. Congress threatened to deport Salvadoran immigrants and cut off money being sent home to families if the ruling right wing party were not re-elected.

* The President of El Salvador openly called for U.S intervention in the upcoming elections during his November 2007 visit to Washington, DC, in a public event where he received the 2007 “Freedom Award” from the International Republican Institute.

* The Bush Administration has already begun to intervene in the 2009 elections in El Salvador through federal harassment of CISPES—limiting the support that concerned people in the US can give for free and fair elections in El Salvador.

As such, it is our duty as conscientious people—imbued with our own political strength—to curtail this profound abuse of power and influence. We pledge to take decisive action in the event of any statement or action made by elected or appointed U.S. officials, including members of the United States Congress, State Department, foreign embassies, and the White House, that intend to control the outcome of the 2009 presidential, municipal or legislative elections in El Salvador.

By pledging, we place ourselves on “active alert,” poised to hold protest actions and to call on U.S. government officials as part of a direct, national response to U.S. intervention in the 2009 Salvadoran elections.

In the name of true justice and true democracy we will raise our voices and take action in defense of the Salvadoran people’s right to determine their own fate.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN

NAOMI KLEIN AND TOM HAYDEN ON ACTIVISM

This video describes the way that two important North American activists have struggled and succeeded in bringing about change in our society. As leading figures in various social movements, the two discuss pivotal moments in history that provoked them to take action, as well as the obstacles that face activists today. Activism is one of the fundamental building blocks of participatory democracy because there can be no participatory democracy without a well informed and politically active electorate. Naomi Klein and Tom Hayden leave viewers feeling hopeful for change through further participation by people who are inspired to act rather than retreat in to cynicism and apathy in the face of the monumental problems facing our society today. -Editor

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VIDEO

Source: http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?id=2800&utm_source=sep08&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=41_Naomi

Naomi Klein & Tom Hayden by Naomi Klein and Tom Hayden

This series, co-produced by The Nation magazine and Brave New Foundation, brings together inspiring activists from different movements and generations, to discuss their ideas, ideals, and approaches to changing the world.

Naomi Klein and Tom Hayden converse on This Brave Nation. bravenation.com
This Brave Nation :: Naomi Klein & Tom Hayden

Author, Activist and Former California State Senator Tom Hayden talks in depth with the author of No Logo and The Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein, about the state of the fourth branch of government: journalists.

Both Hayden and Klein became serious journalists in college, and it was during that time that both experienced their defining moment.

When Tom Hayden interviewed Dr. Martin Luther King Jr at the 1960 DNC in Los Angeles, he asked questions while imagining the headline, “Tom Hayden Interviews MLK,” but by the time he wrote the article he knew there were more important things in the world than personal glory.

Naomi Klein rebelled from her liberal, feminist mother until Mark Lepine gunned down fourteen women in what became known as the Montreal Massacre. It was then she realized people were dying for the beliefs her mother fought for, and that realization awakened the activist within her.
After both events, Hayden and Klein dedicated their lives to telling the truth about the world, and doing everything in their power to not use subjects like “they,” but use “we” instead. It is that distinction that defines their journalism to this day.

THE PARTY CRASHERS: DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN THE STREETS

In the context of the current Republican National Convention, the following article highlights the importance of direct action and peaceful protest where the system of governance lacks direct democracy. The U.S. system of representative democracy is such a system, and until that system is reformed to allow the political will of the people to be manifested through more directly democractic means, direct action in the streets will continue to be an essential means of allowing the voice of the people to be heard by their representatives. - Editor


The Party Crashers

By Michael Gould-Wartofsky
The Nation Magazine
August 19, 2008


Source: http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20080820143334877

At some point during the upcoming Republican National Convention, delegates will look out the windows of the Xcel Energy Center, or down from swank hotels and grand old after-parties, and there, past the security fences and the legions of taser-toting police and private security guards, they will see the other America spilling into the streets of St. Paul, Minnesota.

That is, if the Republicans even make it that far. From September 1-4, the RNC will be besieged by a panoply of protesters--including antiwar activists, Iraq War veterans, Hurricane Katrina survivors, immigrant workers, labor unionists, anarchists, environmentalists, feminists and queers. At the frontlines will be America's young dissidents who will walk out of class, lock down intersections and dance in the streets to "Funk the War."

The view from Denver at the Democratic National Convention at the end of August will look a little different. That's because in the age of Obama many of these same movements, so united against the RNC, are deeply conflicted over the Democrats and the party system itself--perhaps none more so than the youth movement. At issue, say organizers across the country, is not only their relationship to the Obama campaign and the presidential elections but the very meaning of democracy in 2008. Is true democracy possible inside the party system and on the campaign trail? Or is democracy to be found and made by the people in the streets outside? Will the two ever meet?

Not if the conventioneers have their way. Uncredentialed activists are to be fenced off and kept away from the Pepsi Center in Denver by parking lots the size of football fields. The protesters descending on the RNC will be cordoned off into designated "free speech zones," guarded by thousands of police officers to the tune of $50 million at this "National Special Security Event."

The streets will also be haunted by the ghosts of conventions past, from the cracking of skulls at the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago to the pre-emptive arrest and detention of nearly 2,000 protesters at the 2004 Republican convention in New York City. Like their predecessors outside those arenas, this year's dissidents have come to see the party conventions, advertised as the ultimate showcases of American democracy, as exhibits A and B of the nation's deficit of democracy instead. And they cast themselves in opposition, as the keepers of the flame.

"It really will be a collision of opposites," says Minneapolis activist Katrina Plotz when asked about the RNC, which she is organizing against with the Coalition to March on the RNC and Stop the War. "A scripted and sanitized spectacle for a homogenous group of wealthy elites inside the convention hall versus a thriving, organic movement of the masses outside."

Perhaps the starkest contrast will be between the plutocrats of the Grand Old Party and the Poor People's Economic Human Rights Campaign, a coalition led by poor and homeless families fighting for the right to housing, healthcare, education and a living wage. They will be camped in a "Bushville," a tent city evoking the Depression, and setting out on the March for Our Lives. "It's to say to the whole country, 'We are here,'" says Minneapolis native Rickey Brunner, who, at 16, has become a spokesperson for the group. "We plan to show that this is a crisis, this is something that needs to be looked at with a little more urgency.... We don't have enough housing. We don't have enough healthcare. And it's killing the people."

The RNC for many has become a symbol of everything the protesters believe is wrong with America. They are moved to action by all-too-familiar litany of injustices--the occupation of Iraq and beyond, class war and racism, sexism and homophobia, torture and repression, corporate power and the climate crisis, rising tuition and an economic bust that's hitting this generation hard. Yet what they have in common, beyond a penchant for ruckus and a loathing of the GOP, is a persistent belief in democracy from below, in the power of ordinary people to transform the conditions of life in this country and worldwide--a power they believe must be exercised in the street, not just in the voting booth.

"Democracy is not waiting to vote once every four years. Democracy is getting out in the streets," says Sgt. Matthis Chiroux, a 24-year-old member of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) who refused orders to deploy to Iraq this June and now plans to show up to the conventions with IVAW. "They [the politicians] are not gonna do it by themselves. We're gonna force their hand, because that is the nature of democracy."

The dissent at the Democratic National Convention--though less "mass" than at the RNC, especially after the recent withdrawal of some national organizers--is set to feature events like an open-air Festival of Democracy, a Restoring Democracy Parade and a base camp with free housing and medical care, organized by groups like Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the Alliance for Real Democracy, the Recreate '68 Alliance and the immigrant coalition the We Are America DNC Alliance.

Activists with these groups report getting the critical questions from their friends and peers about plans to protest Denver: "Especially now, with a candidate who talks a lot about hope and change, people talk about, 'Why do you need to protest?' " says Zoe Williams, a local organizer with Code Pink: Women for Peace and a spokesperson for the Alliance for Real Democracy. Her answer? "I think that we need to define what hope and change are. We need to decide what that means to us as a people."

Even among the activist crowd, there are those who hope the youth movement outside the convention will join with those inside to toast the "new era" they believe the Obama campaign represents--as well as hold Obama accountable and engage the hundreds of thousands of newly politicized young people who have joined in the campaign. "For people who are disenfranchised by the system, some of them for the first time are being motivated into politics," says Rachel Haut, a member of SDS and labor activist at Queens College who is working on the 100 Days Campaign, intended to pressure the next President during his first 100 days in office. "We want to create a broad progressive movement that can invite these newly politicized people in. And we want to create a campaign that can take that beyond the voting booth."

Organizers like Haut feel the stirrings of a new youth movement, newly mainstreamed. Some say it's about the power of the stories that are told on the campaign--and about what stories will be told at the conventions. Madeline Gardner, an activist from the Twin Cities who now organizes with the Energy Action Coalition, sees a political opening for movements like hers: "The story Obama tells, about how we're gonna change this world by regular people taking action," she says, "creates more space for social movement organizing in a way we haven't had since the '60s. I would like to see the conventions and the protests around them take full advantage of that opportunity."

That sentiment is shared by Joshua Kahn Russell, an organizer with the Rainforest Action Network in the Bay Area who feels that the youth movement should "use both conventions to put forward a narrative that we are starting a new chapter in American history.... Our job is to be part of that progressive wave and to pull it to the left as much as we can."

Still, many in the youth movement are riding on a different wave, and they do not want to be swallowed up by the one depicted in Obama's campaign logo--especially following what they see as his betrayals of the movement's values. Some of them are tired of being taken for granted, whether as young people or as people of color. "Because Obama's running, they think, 'We've got them, they're coming out, they're gonna support Obama no matter what,' " says Troy Nkrumah, a chair of the National Hip-Hop Political Convention in Las Vegas, which is convening this summer to forge a national agenda for the hip-hop generation. "Some of us aren't so sure that it's gonna make a difference."

Likewise, young people like Adam Jung, a farm boy from Missouri who is helping to organize the DNC tent city with Tent State University, are questioning whether Obama and the Democrats are ever going to represent them: "The Democrats, they count on and expect our votes. We're saying, 'If you're not representing me, I don't have to vote for you. You need to start listening to the youth [and] the 65 percent of the people in this country who want the war to end.' "

Most determined of all are the anarchists and anti-authoritarians, as many of the youth activists describe themselves, including two of the most active groups preparing to crash the conventions: the RNC Welcoming Committee and the Unconventional Action network. Unconventional Denver organizer Clayton Dewey acknowledges that "the candidacy of Obama is a reflection of the public's desire for something different." But as an anarchist, he explains, "we believe that despite the rhetoric Obama uses, genuine change will always come from the bottom up, and that means countering the system as a whole."

"An anti-authoritarian vibe is what's going on," says Carina Souflee, an activist with Anarchist People of Color and the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlán (MEChA) at the University of Texas-Austin, who was radicalized by the immigration protests and is planning to be in the streets at the RNC. "People have learned that a top-down approach to things doesn't work."

To young radicals like Souflee and Dewey, the question remains one of democracy, and to them, democracy has very little to do with the 2008 presidential elections. "What we have in common is a desire to break the spell that elections have over the US left," says a member of the RNC Welcoming Committee who goes by the pseudonym 'Ann O'Nymity.' "Our message is one of direct participation in democracy, bypassing corrupt politicians who don't represent us but instead further corporate interests."

Still, in the age of Obama, some in the youth movement are bypassing protests that directly confront the Democratic candidate and his party, opting instead to aim their dissent at the Republicans. "The RNC is a very easy target, because they are so visibly to blame for what's happening in this country," says Samantha Miller, who recently graduated UCLA and is now organizing members of DC SDS to bring the group's notorious Funk the War street parties to the RNC. "There's a whole lot more energy for the RNC than the DNC," she reports.

Thousands of youth from dozens of groups from across the country are coming together to blockade the Republican convention, using direct democracy not just as an end but as a means. Inspired by the Battle in Seattle and the global justice movement of the '90s, they are deploying a well-organized web of leaderless "affinity groups," "assemblies" and "spokescouncils."

Always the bete noire at a convention ("Anarchists Hot for Mayhem!" screamed a typical headline at the last RNC), this direct action wing of the youth movement has already sparked a media frenzy, along with an internal debate, over what tactics they will employ in the streets. Some activists are wary of the plans to blockade the convention. "I don't know what to make of shutting down the RNC," says Uruj Sheikh of New Jersey, who has worked with the War Resisters League and with the new SDS since its inception. "I'd like to see more of a consciousness raising thing. I don't want the left to be perceived as crazy."

Yet most activists in the Twin Cities agree that the likeliest scenario will be violence from those in blue, more than those in black: "We know that it is the police, not protesters or activists who will have the tasers, guns, rubber bullets, concussion grenades, chemical weapons, helicopters, the media spin machine and millions of dollars on their side," says the Welcoming Committee.

The same story can be heard over at the DNC protest headquarters. "We're just hoping that the Denver police don't recreate the violence that happened in Chicago [in '68]," says Glenn Spagnuolo of the Recreate '68 Alliance, "since they're the only ones capable of doing that."

The group's call to "Recreate '68" at the 2008 DNC has become a point of contention all its own, even among activists born decades after 1968 and bred amid a new world order. The collective memory of '68--not just of Chicago, but of the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy, of Black Power and women's liberation and youth revolts worldwide--persists among this generation. But while some in the youth movement may look back on '68 as a usable past, as a memory of mass democracy they can mobilize and learn from, few activists see it as a moment to recreate. "It provides inspiration and an example of what can be possible," says Arya Zahedi of New York City SDS. "But it can also prove a disservice. If we just 'recreate '68,' we will be destined to also recreate its problems."

Not everyone is counting on the conventions, the campaigns and the protests. Not Senia Barragan, who helped found the new SDS at Brown University and in Providence: "That culture of activist summit hopping, I'm not really into that. I do think it is important to show a resistance to both parties. I just think that there are different ways that people go about doing that. And I hope we don't lose steam over this election. We've got a long way to go."

Already youth organizers are looking beyond September, even beyond November 4, 2008, and January 20, 2009. They are looking to the long haul, to the work of movement building, rooted in their communities but linked in solidarity with a global movement. For, they say, the whole world is still watching. "Our task today," says NYC SDS's Zahedi, "is to get to work organizing where we are, at our campuses, workplaces, and in our communities, while at the same time building links with people struggling all around the world."

For many, this push begins by showing ordinary people, and especially young, newly politicized people, their own power beyond Election Day. "We really need to find a way to engage the people who are excited, and really do think that Obama's gonna change something," says DC SDS's Miller. "We have to do a lot of popular education to say that it isn't politicians who make real change, it's the movements that politicians have to follow."

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080901/gould-wartofsky

DIRECT ACTION FOR DIRECT DEMOCRACY

Direct Action for Direct Democracy: Shut Down the Republication National Convention

Author: Pittsburgh Organizing Group
Date Created 04 Jul 2008

Source: http://arkansas.indymedia.org/newswire/display/22388/index.php

Monday, September 1, will be a day of civil disobedience and direct action to shut down the opening of the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Minneapolis-Saint Paul. Pittsburgh Organizing Group (POG) will join these actions in opposition to a two-party system incapable of meeting basic human needs that is bankrupting and decimating our communities through a culture of war and fear.

The RNC Welcoming Committee (RNC-WC), a Minneapolis-Saint Paul-based group, has been publicly organizing to shut down the RNC through a three-tiered strategy of blockades. Dividing downtown St. Paul into seven sectors, the RNC-WC is asking groups to adopt an intersection or sector. POG has decided to coordinate blockades for Sector 1 and shut down the intersection at 7th and Wall St. We invite you to join us in Sector 1 on that day.

Why Shut Down the RNC?
Many rightfully point out that this convention is a spectacle since the result is already a certainty. This is a coronation, not a decision-making event which outsiders can influence. If we shut it down, they could always meet a week later in a secluded location. However, this is exactly why and what we're protesting.

The current system doesn't survive because of a decision made by a party or politician. It doesn't survive because parties calling themselves "The Republicans" or "The Democrats" say they represent the people. It survives because of corporate control of the means of mass communications that limit the scope of the political discourse. It survives because people give the system "legitimacy" through their participation (with activities such as voting) and refusal to demand more. It survives because it prevents the rise of-and has successfully delegitimized-alternative means of decision-making in the popular imagination. In the end, people have few choices on a limited set of questions that never get at the root of where power rests. This is not enough. Our goal isn't to push a more centrist or even a more liberal candidate. It isn't to strengthen government power in the hopes that can curtail corporate power. Nor is it putting into power a new brand of left-wing elites. Our aspirations are to change the fundamental structures of society to decentralize power and decision-making so all those impacted by a decision have a say in its outcome, to change the economic question from "what is profitable?" to "what is necessary, desirable, and sustainable?" and to expand the concept of liberty and the pursuit of happiness from simply "freedom from" to include "freedom to."

Conventions, elections, and debates are events that promote the false idea that people are freely participating and freely choosing who best represents them. They mask who has power and obscure the reasons why certain people have power. In this way, the RNC and DNC represent the idea that it is legitimate for John McCain and Barack Obama to be the only realistic choices to head a vast hierarchy ruling over the lives of hundreds of millions of people and affecting the lives of billions.

The positive result of shutting down the Republicans' convention, much like shutting down a trade agreement summit, does not primarily reside in the decisions that were delayed or the meeting that couldn't take place. It is in the loss of legitimacy the institution suffers as it becomes controversial and alternatives demonstrate popular support. It breaks a cycle of propaganda that has lulled people into believing "the way things are" is natural, desirable or inevitable. It reaches out to the half of the population that chooses not to participate in electoral politics to say, "There are people searching for something different and we need your voice." It reaches out to the other half that does participate to say, "We know why you vote. We know that who rules us can be life or death within this system. But we also know that our future rests in figuring out how to break out of the trap of accepting bad rulers for fear of getting worse rulers."

The change we can believe in lies in direct, participatory democracy, built on strong social movements that oppose interconnected oppressions and expand individual and collective freedom at the expense of the forces, government and corporate, curtailing it. We believe that in this desire for true freedom and true democracy, we have much in common with the people of Minneapolis and St. Paul and very little in common with the John McCains and Barack Obamas of the world.

POG's Role in the RNC-WC Strategy
Over the past year, the RNC Welcoming Committee has worked with people from all over the country to create a strategy for shutting down the RNC. The result was a three-tiered strategy of blockades, the division of St. Paul into seven sectors and a plan for blockading known as the "3S Strategy" (Swarm, Seize, Stay). With this in mind, the RNC-WC has called for groups to adopt sectors and to block intersections. POG has decided to adopt Sector 1 and organize a congestion blockade at 7th and Wall. As articulated by the RNC-WC, adopting doesn't mean POG is blocking all the intersections in our sector, nor are we assuming responsibility for recruiting and ensuring other groups do so, it simply means we're making ourselves available as a point of contact for groups interested in operating in Sector 1. In this way, we will provide an open avenue for participation, and help disseminate information and coordination.

We will announce a Sector 1 launching point, place and time later this summer. In conjunction with the RNC-WC, we will organize a Sector 1 spokescouncil meeting the weekend before the actions. On Sept. 1 participants will collectively swarm the sector, seize key intersections and hold them for as long as possible.

We hope this call will provide an inclusive way for others to participate in the action and help build the success of the mobilization. We see a public gathering point as important for groups to utilize for their planned actions and it provides an easy way for smaller groups and individuals to plug into the actions. Through clear articulation of our underlying motivations and goals we hope to dialogue with other groups and the general public about why and what we're protesting.

At the 7th and Wall congestion blockade, we will collectively resist any attempts to dislodge the blockade through our numbers and determination. Though we hope to avoid it, participants should understand this action has the risk of arrest and the possibility of police violence. In addition to the normal police arsenal of weapons, the Twin Cities have recently passed new protest laws restricting the rights to assemble. A chart of the new policies is available here.

We are working on how to facilitate an initial gathering point for groups operating in Sector 1 and will post updates on our website. Regardless of assembly restrictions it's important not to let other sectors down. Groups should be prepared for the possible necessity of reaching their intersection alone. Plan accordingly.

To Get Involved with Sector 1 "Direct Action for Direct Democracy":
If your affinity group or organization is interested in publicly endorsing this call, participating in the blockade of 7th and Wall, or blockading another intersection in Sector 1, contact us at rnc@organizepittsburgh.org to coordinate.

As we've already mentioned, not all the information is available yet. We will be releasing another call closer to the action. Check our website at www.organizepittsburgh.org/rnc to keep up with updates and get information on our plans and the situation in Sector 1.

For the official call to action and other info see www.rncwelcomingcommittee.org.