… mostly positive, but with reservations. This afternoon I received the following in an email from the Democratic club in which I was an active participant in my days as a Democrat (and with which I still have friendly relations):
Announcement to our members —
At the October 23 Meeting the (Nearby) Democrats voted unanimously to endorse the principles of the Occupy Houston/Occupy Wall Street movement.
(Nearby) Democrats joins Democracy For Houston and stands in solidarity with Occupy Houston and the 99% in their struggle for fairness, justice, jobs and the restoration of power to the people:• The 1% who benefited the most must accept their responsibility and contribute their fair share.
• The financial barons who abused the law to enrich themselves at our expense should be held accountable at the bar of justice.
• Our elected representatives must work to protect and create American jobs, not work to protect the wealth of the richest 1%.
• There must be an end to the corruption of “corporate democracy” and we must return government power to “We the People!”
President, (Nearby) Democrats
I certainly can’t fault the content of the quote; it is an unreservedly supportive statement. My own reservation is this: is the OCCUPY movement more effective or less effective with the public support of one major political party but not the other? Certainly OCCUPY itself, as at least the NYC group has clearly demonstrated it understands, must not have any direct involvement with party politics. But this is a little different.
Personally I think Occupy Houston should simply politely not respond at all to any such statements of support, or at most politely acknowledge all support without naming any of it. What do you think?