Meeting 2 - 10/27/11

Introduction
The meeting began with introductions around the room, and we assigned meeting roles for facilitator, note taker, time keeper, vibe watcher, and blog summary writer. These roles will be assigned on a weekly basis. An improvised agenda was loosely agreed upon, but it was agreed that we would spend time at the end of each meeting to define the next week’s agenda.

Education
Discussion focused on how we could best educate ourselves, including both methodological and conceptual suggestions. The method that seemed to catch on was to start from what we were familiar with: learning in a classroom-type setting where an expert, or a few experts, present on a subject, followed by a group discussion, and supplemented with suggested reading material before and/or after. This led to a discussion on how exactly we would choose topics for presentation. We reached a consensus to create an open-ended curriculum (Occupy 101) of topics we find are essential for occupiers to know and spread to the community. There was much overlap with previous discussion on subjects for education goals (see Part 1 of previous meeting), but some new additions included the importance of understanding the US law making process, and the differences between a republic and a democracy. A rough outline for the curriculum was compiled, and will be refined before it is presented at the next meeting. It is suggested that presenters consider including descriptive, diagnostic, and prescriptive aspects whenever they are appropriate. Also, as part of our method, we will make efforts to apply what we learn through local legislation. In essence we will have created the time-honored academic combination of a “lecture” session, and a “lab” session.

Conceptually, we expanded on the nature of absolutism, and how we have a tendency to come to conclusions in isolation. Because many minds are always better than one, it is important to form conclusions as a group. It is likely that we have all spent much time thinking about these subjects independently or in like minded groups, so it is important that we remember to bring our REASONS for the conclusions to the discussion, rather than the pre-formed, individual conclusions themselves. Though it may not be efficient to sit through presentations on material we feel we already know well, it is imperative that experts be present for the discussion, not just for the benefit of others, but also to participate in those discussions with open minds, to hear other perspectives, and for all of us to allow ourselves to reform conclusions in light of the contributions from the community.

Goals
A brief, but fruitful brainstorming session covered the following suggestions: Form a mission statement, improve our use of consensus process, communicate with other occupy groups (discuss failures and successes, share expertise), write individual letters to the press in support of OWS, each member should invite five friends to get involved in the occupation, create opportunities for public speaking at rallies, rally at offices of representatives or any other social offenders, rewrite the constitution, maintain a publicly visible presence, and address corporate activity locally. Again, this was just a brainstorm, not a list of approved actions.

Next Agenda
The agenda for next week will include introductory material (20mins), presentations from Ben and Jedediah on corporate personhood (20mins), an update from Eric on the status of the national convention for OWS (10mins), a combined presentation from Gary and James on the Occupy 101 curriculum and the OWS-NYC Declaration (20mins), and further discussion on wider community education goals (10mins).

General Note: The meeting was notable for facilitating opportunities for everyone to speak and for the group to explicitly reach consensus on proposals. Much of the meeting was devoted to learning and attempting to follow the formal rules of consensus decision making. This continues to be a learning curve.