As one who has suffered aplenty in the lower echelons of unfettered capitalist business operations, may I suggest that we not too easily allow ourselves to be insulted by our differing adamancies. It's common ground and consensus on strategy we need to be striving for, and quite probably all can benefit from being generously open-minded, yet prepared to persuade. I think there's a need for both the activist gestures which seek to communicate messaging and demonstrate resolve, and ideally with simultaneity, the practical tactics which can more directly effect change.
Regarding the banks, there is a lot of information available about investment practices and such, so it would behoove anyone wanting to both make a statement and to contribute to good works to research the options a bit.
Aryt
Group: http://groups.google.com/group/harvard-mit-occupy-boston/topics
- Occupy Harvard // Weds 11/9 // 7pm [1 Update]
- Bank Transfer [15 Updates]
Fenna Krienen <fen...@gmail.com> Nov 07 09:53PM -0500
*Occupy Harvard Rally and General Assembly*
**
*Rally, Wednesday, 7pm, Harvard Yard*****
*
*
On Wednesday at 7pm, students, professors, and workers from the greater
Boston community will descend on Harvard Yard *to ask that Harvard start
acting as a university for the 99%*. The ensuing rally, held in front of
the John Harvard statue, will highlight ways that Harvard has contributed
to yawning inequality both on and off campus. Professors will critique
Harvard-propagated economic models that brought us the great recession.
Students will expose Harvard-fueled land grabs in Tanzania. Custodians
will ask why Harvard pays them a mere $1 for every $180 paid to the execs
of the Harvard Management Company. We are standing in solidarity with the
Occupy movement to take back our universities, our economy, and our
democracy. ****
Nicholas Hayes <nic...@gmail.com> Nov 07 04:44AM -0800
Hey all,
Glad to see this conversation happening. I'm a Div School student and
one of the Protest Chaplains (Hannah Hofheinz, Marisa Egerstrom, Dave
Woessner are all friends). I'll cut to the chase: a few other Div
School students and I would like to organize a "Harvard Divestment
Day" on campus, to mobilize students to move their money out of BofA,
Citi, and other usual suspects en masse; likely focus on BofA since
they have a central H Sq location and are used by the most students. A
la "Bank Transfer Day" which happened on Sat, 11/5, but just at
Harvard (--alas, haven't seen much press; was there any action at
Harvard?) Current date set for Nov. 19 (Sat); have a team ready to get
to work on it, a Facebook group and URL about to go public, etc.
It makes sense to do this in conjunction with Occupy on campus. We'd
like to reach out to as many schools at Harvard as possible;
currently, most of our contacts are at the Div School, but we have a
few at HKS, GSAS, and the College. I also started a conversation at
MIT, in the hopes folks there might join. Would Occupy Harvard be game
to partner on this? Any specific individuals I should talk to? And
could we advertise over OH networks?
Final question: we've got someone ready to go on making a flier, and
would like to get them up by Weds, probably. She'd like to know who
made the poster for the Harvard-MIT student march back on Columbus
Day, and whether we could use that background; we thought it was
great!
Thanks!
Peace,
Nicholas
517.610.8007
Neal Meyer <neal...@gmail.com> Nov 07 09:09AM -0500
If anyone is interested in doing some reading on bank transfer day,
particularly from a critical perspective, I've attached a few articles.
They're easy enough to understand, and provide a sobering reminder that the
big banks don't much care what responsible consumers decide to do with
their money.
"Why the big banks aren't sweating Bank Transfer Day"
notes<http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/01/why-the-big-banks-arent-sweating-bank-transfer-day/>that
big banks don't really want small bank accounts anymore:
"And the big banks don’t particularly *want* all those retail-deposit funds
— they’re getting precious little interest on them, and they come with all
manner of expensive obligations to mail out statements and provide smiling
service at teller windows and generally do the whole customer-service
thing, which as we all know big banks are very bad at. Historically,
they’ve done what they have to do on that front because they’ve been able
to extract all manner of overdraft fees and interchange fees and the like,
but that fee income is shrinking now, thanks to Dodd-Frank, and the fact is
that millions of small bank accounts are actually unprofitable now for the
big banks, and those banks won’t shed many tears if those customers go off
to a credit union instead."
And here <http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Move_your_money.html>,
left-wing economist Doug Henwood notes that most small financial
institutions end up sending the money deposited with them off into the wide
financial world, and it ends back up in the hands of Chase Bank or funding
the gentrification of local neighborhoods and vicious private equity firms.
Alex Auriema <alex.h....@gmail.com> Nov 07 12:49PM -0500
Dear Neal,
There is a medieval fable that goes somethings like this:
Once upon a time there was a walled city that prospered on its own
resources. The city was enclosed by a moat of water and a large stone
fortification. Inside the city several hundred people lived their lives as
comfortably as the mid 12th century could afford. They farmed, prayed and
socialized within these confines. It was a feudal society by todays
standards, a king and queen of reasonable ilk, and a nobility that rarely
hesitated to spread their wealth. The cities people were for the most part
happy, and peaceful.
This is why it came as a surprise when one day over the horizon the walled
city's watchman spotted an army approaching. It did not take long for the
army to grow and completely surround the walled city. When word got out the
townspeople panicked. It was clear that the were outnumbered at least 10
to 1 and their army was weak and under supplied.
Meanwhile the surrounding army's commander sat atop his horse in full armor
- coat of arms recently polished and glimmering in sunlight. The commander
was not aware that the town was under supplied or outnumbered - with the
large fortification he knew only that he could wait and was prepared to
battle the towns army on any terms.
The townspeople deliberated for hours. Every suggestion short of mass
suicide was considered. Frustration ensued, until a quiet proposal was put
forth by the queen to amass all the towns resources; its crops, livestock,
weaponry, even the blacksmiths tools, and dump them over the walls of the
city. The idea seemed preposterous, but the people agreed in desperation
and trust for their good queen.
So after hours of collecting, the city brought everything they subsisted on
to the edge of the fortification. In unison they dumped it all over the
edge of the wall. The scene was brilliant, and sad. Cows mooed and hissed,
chickens screeched as they fell the long distance to the ground outside.
The surrounding army watched in utter dismay. The commander and his high
ranking officials were all speechless. They thought, as if all sharing the
same brain: "How prosperous this town must be that they can afford to rid
of all this bounty" The commander saw his troops faces expressing the same
doubt in the whole operation.
The army collectively withdrew.
--
Alex Auriema
www.alexauriema.com
Neal Meyer <neal...@gmail.com> Nov 07 01:29PM -0500
0_o
I don't understand.
Shari Bence <shari...@gmail.com> Nov 07 01:35PM -0500
In a more pedestrian fable (and, given that I've been cast by some critical perspectives as a radicalized populist with little understanding of what the economic pathogens are, seems an appropriate gesture):
George Bailey was onto something with his little Building and Loan association that created an affordable housing project, low interest loans, and built a community that held back the proverbial Gates of Economic Hell, even if at the day's end it still deposited its equity in Potter's bank.
I think many simple folk understand the depth and breadth of the issues, however ill formed and roughly hewn, critical perspectives notwithstanding.
Transferring my bank account to a credit union will probably have as much effect as .....
putting a tent in Zucotti Park.
File under "Fables for the Twentyfirst century," or, "Don't Let An Entrenched Narrative Get The Better Of You."
On Nov 7, 2011, at 12:49 PM, Alex Auriema wrote:
Camille Morvan <mor...@fas.harvard.edu> Nov 07 01:37PM -0500
Hi All,
*Big banks* don't necessarily care about keeping us (although then why do
they always try to keep you when you leave??).
But what about the *small banks*? May be for them having our money is a
plus. It might give them more room for action and to invest in the local
community. Provided that they can handle the large number of new customers.
Neal Meyer <neal...@gmail.com> Nov 07 02:28PM -0500
Hi Camille,
That's why I sent out the second link as well. There is no guarantee that
the money you put in a small bank goes anywhere good either. The three
examples Henwood cites (a real estate firm which exploits poor tenants, a
wave of gentrification in New York City, and Chase Bank) are sobering.
There is nothing inherently virtuous about small banking institutions. Some
of them are run by nice people with smiles. Others by nice people with
smiles who can't pay their workers much and who send your deposits off to
fund despicable new investments.
I see very little difference between the small banking institution which *
might* use your money to fund some local community projects (which in
themselves are not necessarily great ventures - many of the worst bosses
run small businesses) and the charity ventures of most big banks and
businesses.
I just want to encourage some critical thinking about this whole Move Your
Money fad.
Neal
Alex Auriema <alex.h....@gmail.com> Nov 07 02:37PM -0500
How about critical action. There is no shortage of critical thinking.
--
Alex Auriema
www.alexauriema.com
Neal Meyer <neal...@gmail.com> Nov 07 02:53PM -0500
My point is that on this issue there *is* a shortage of critical thinking.
Moving your money is not a meaningful action.
Hannah Hofheinz <hlh...@mail.harvard.edu> Nov 07 02:54PM -0500
Hi all,
I can't help but jump in here.
Yes, critical action. And, yes to the power of bodies in motion. The goods that occur through a readjustment of actions (for instance, a large number of people switching banks) may or may not manifest in apparent ends. Indeed, critical thinking demands that we open ourselves up to recognizing the more complex interplays here. We need to see the ways in which these actions - such as moving our money - do dramatically effect and re-align our societal possibilities and imagination. They open up alternatives performatively, not necessarily consequentially (although this can happen and is a good thing when it does); this is the great power of these actions, not chains of visible or anticipatable cause and effect.
I hope you are having a good day!
~Hannah
On Nov 7, 2011, at 2:37 PM, Alex Auriema wrote:
> --
> Alex Auriema
> www.alexauriema.com
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Hannah Hofheinz | hhof...@mail.harvard.edu
Teaching Fellow Advisor | Harvard Divinity School
Departmental Teaching Fellow | The Study of Religion, Harvard University
Doctoral Candidate in Theology | Harvard Divinity School
Alex Auriema <alex.h....@gmail.com> Nov 07 02:58PM -0500
exactly!
--
Alex Auriema
www.alexauriema.com
Neal Meyer <neal...@gmail.com> Nov 07 03:13PM -0500
Last time I checked this whole occupy phenomenon was a protest against an
economic system which has left 16% of the labor force under- or unemployed,
denies healthcare to millions of families, is rapidly foreclosing and
stealing the homes of tenants and working-class homeowners, and saddles
students with enormous debt.
Frankly Hannah, I am insulted by your suggestion that the importance of
these protests lies in performatively opening imaginary alternatives. It
separates these social protests from the real material suffering of
millions during this crisis. If your point is really that these protests
and actions are the first step towards winning real material concessions
from "the 1%" to improve the lives of working-class people, then I will
forgive you. But I will point out that your strategy in that case is poorly
chosen - winning material concessions from the ruling class demands
strategy and actions which make sense. Performance and purposeless actions
do not serve that interest.
I am not having a good day because I am afraid that my generation is more
interested in pomo dilletantism than fighting, but thank you for wishing me
well.
Camille Morvan <mor...@fas.harvard.edu> Nov 07 03:38PM -0500
Neal, you said "My point is that on this issue there *is* a shortage of
critical thinking. Moving your money is not a meaningful action."
What alternative(s) do you have in mind?
Neal Meyer <neal...@gmail.com> Nov 07 03:52PM -0500
I think that this is something that a general assembly could really discuss
(if Ron Paul people weren't allowed to block discussion).
Certainly regulating the financial system is a start. I'm currently reading
through Doug Henwood's Wall Street if others are interested in this issue -
he has a lot of great points to make about the financial system in that
book and towards the end he offers some ideas for reform.
My broad point is that we should be looking in the long term to radical
political action in order to make meaningful economic changes - and that in
the short term our actions should be directed towards building the road to
left politics again, which means laying the ground work for a real
coalition of students, the blue-collar working class, and the white-collar
working class. Part of setting up this foundation for a new left politics
requires fostering critical thinking about economic problems and possible
solutions, putting aside superficial reforms which make no real changes and
only encourage spending time on consumer activism, and developing healthy
and constructive procedures for decision making which encourage
participation, are efficient, and do not infantilize participants.
Shari Bence <shari...@gmail.com> Nov 07 04:12PM -0500
There are a lot of narratives floating around the Occupy movement, as well its critics, many of them under the guise of "critical thinking."
The narratives of "bodies in motion" opposing the status quo, and, over time, creating change, is much older and more empowering than the narratives generated by economists (or statistics geeks) working under a skewed paradigm of knowledge, one I'd argue that helps drive the narratives that are currently running the status quo, and that are so deeply entrenched that few see beyond them. (Although that discussion is beyond this list.)
It's no accident that Gandhi's become a resurrected icon of empowerment against an oppressive economic system. It's a powerful story, one grounded in multiple traditions, as well as a successful strategy.
A march to make salt? How silly is that? I get the impression that the critical perspective articles sent previously, and spawning this conversation, would have urged that making salt wasn't enough to topple the empire, that Gandhi's approach was woefully misguided, naive, and :::: snicker, snicker:::: another form of populist ignorance.
It eventually liberated the nation. One movement among many, but they added up over time.
I find nothing dilettantish in such actions.
Unless, Neal, you want to argue that setting up tents (an equally silly idea, it seems to me), is too facile and self-serving for your tastes.
To be honest, I was insulted by your critical perspective articles, which seemed to me more of the same old skepticism that continually dogs social reform movement (not just the Occupation), and found them the very antithesis of much of what the Occupation emerged from, though that assumes I understand it, so excuse my hubris. I chose not to jump in, to avoid my usual overly acerbic reaction, but now I'm compelled given the many subtexts that have emerged, and to post my original reaction to your articles.
In short, your writer's said, "These folks are ignorant, simple minds and don't know what the fuck they are doing." In very nice prose, of course, buttressed in the language of intellectual authority, and with an appeal to history, which is about as dilettantish a bait as one can hope to take. I do find a peculiar irony in your offense, Neal.
That was my reading.
I'm having a fine day, all things considered.
Be well.
On Nov 7, 2011, at 3:13 PM, Neal Meyer wrote:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group harvard-mit-occupy-boston.
You can post via email.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an empty message.
For more options, visit this group.