Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

[Legend]

I got asked what I think about OWS.

It's fantastic that these people are politically active and aren't plagued by a general apathy that is expected of most of the public, but how could I actually support the movement? It seems like a straggling throng of discontented people who seem to share a general frustration with monetary stuff.

I don't despise it though, they have a lot to justify their ire. I appreciate their frustrations, but it's too fragmented a movement with no unified momentum for me to really understand at this point.

 

[Emperor_Gestahl]

Wait, wasn't the isolated and repudiated bigoted signs at the TP rallies, concrete proof that they all were a bunch of knuckle dragging racists?

Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

 

[timhau]

Wrong. The Tunisian uprising wanted Ben Ali and his government - gone. Specifically, from the beginning. The Egyptian uprising wanted Hosni Mubarak and his government - gone. Specifically, from the beginning. The Libyan uprising wanted Moammar Ghadafi and his government - gone. Specifically, from the beginning. The Syrian uprising wants al-Assad and his government - gone. Specifically, from the beginning. Don't start getting into this historical revisionist crap in an attempt to justify keeping your pet cause ambiguous.

Well, you can always say that the OWS folks want big corporations gone, but that's not really true; they don't seem to be ready to boycott big corporations (and thus hit them where it really hurts -- the bottom line), so they want to keep the corporations supplying them with goods they want. That's analogous to Tunisians wanting to get rid of Ben Ali while keeping his policies intact.

If they really are the 99% they claim, they could lead a consumer boycott that really hurts.

 

[TheAntiV]

I was there last Saturday at OccupyLA. Check out what I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYZy9YrA6pI

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

ITT: Confirmation bias and red herrings

 

[Mobyseven]

Everyone is the press these days. I have a blog. YOU CANT HOLD ME BACK! Ahem...

Corporations are made up of the free assembly of people. If you remove the corporations freedoms you remove the freedoms of the individuals who own said corporation.

That's nonsense: those people are perfectly distinguishable from the corporation, and have exactly the same rights as everyone else.

Owning a corporation does not magically transform you into a corporation.

 

[Mobyseven]

What about it? According to those against the Citizens United ruling freedom of the press only applies to individuals, not corporate news media.

Please quote said people. I find this claim doubtful.

 

[Virus]

Not true. They are non-violent. They have been violently attacked by the police and have not retaliated with violence. Count your blessings.

Is that a threat?

 

[JihadJane]

Something tangible - finally. I think it stands a hell of a lot more chance of success than joining a drum circle.

Tangible like repetitive sneering gossip and smear?


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Yes indeed bad luck for the 99% of New Yorkers who aren't millionaire Wall Street bankers.

Indeed, those living in the financial capital of the world at a time of global financial breakdown may experience some minor discomfort and inconvenience.

Get used to it and be grateful that no one has set your neighborhood on fire, England/Egypt-style.

A fool is still a fool.

The feeling of power one gets from abusing someone is corrupt.

Please, do tell us what they are accomplishing.

Perhaps if you spent less time screaming you'd be able to find out yourself!

They have spawned an enormous and growing global political movement to challenge economic inequality and corruption. This movement's success or otherwise will be measured in years and decades, not weeks.

Volume 1: Henry David Thoreau
Volume 2: Mohandas Gandhi
Volume 3: Rosa Parks
Volume 4: Martin Luther King, Jr.

Please quote where any of these people said using the courts to challenge the system cannot be part of a campaign of civil disobedience.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Nice, content-free, mind-reading attempt!

Perhaps you could add some content to your comment so the reader can discern what you are talking about here!

Many commentators, including myself, predicted riots in the US this autumn. Be grateful that a successfully non-violent protest movement has arisen instead.

JPMorganChase paid back the TARP money. What don't you get about that?

I get that the TARP money represents only a fraction of the subsidies and bail-outs they received (most of which they haven't paid back and likely never will) and that they paid the TARP money back with taxpayers' money, money extracted from the economy for no one's benefit but their own, having used it for profiteering and expansion rather than for its intended purpose (to ease the credit crunch) , as explained in the article I posted ('No, The Big Banks Have Not "Paid Back" Government Bailouts and Subsidies') which you appear not to have read.


What don't you get about that?

They couldn't even get that right, Zuccotti Park isn't on Wall Street and there has been no occupation of the actual Wall Street, which by the way isn't where the headquarters of big banks the fools hate are located. ...

Why do you think that is?

Do you love Wall Street? If so why? What is their contribution to the wellbeing of the world? What does it produce?

... Epic fail.

That sounds like something a teenager would say.

I would like to know who specifically (by name) is in this "mafia" and what crimes they should be prosecuted for based on the the New York City criminal code, the New York State criminal code and/or the criminal code of the United States. Specific offenses by section number will be fine.

Wait and see - the campaign is just beginning. William K Black has already sent hundreds of financial fraudsters to prison. It's great that he is supporting OWS with his unique expertise in white collar crime.

In a previous comment you wrote:

...I don't know anyone who would dare walk near Zuccotti Park at night, despite the police presence there.

What are these people you know afraid will happen to them? Please be specific and honest.

 

[JihadJane]

Well, you can always say that the OWS folks want big corporations gone, but that's not really true; they don't seem to be ready to boycott big corporations (and thus hit them where it really hurts -- the bottom line), so they want to keep the corporations supplying them with goods they want. That's analogous to Tunisians wanting to get rid of Ben Ali while keeping his policies intact.

If they really are the 99% they claim, they could lead a consumer boycott that really hurts.

Why don't you, and others generously offering them advice in this thread, join them? You could make a valuable contribution.

 

[WildCat]

Please quote said people. I find this claim doubtful.

That the 1st Amendment does not apply to corporations isn't just one argument against the Citizens United decision, it's pretty much the only one I've ever heard.

Go ahead, find an argument against it that doesn't stem from the claim that corporations have no 1st Amendment rights. In fact, it's what the government lawyers argued at the oral arguments before the SCOTUS.

eta: “I think we need a constitutional amendment to make it clear, once and for all, that corporations do not have the same free-speech rights as individuals,” Kerry said during a Senate Rules Committee hearing. http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...ing-constitution-to-deal-with-scotus-decision

 

[WildCat]

Why don't you, and others generously offering them advice in this thread, join them? You could make a valuable contribution.

Maybe you could join them and do some moneyless shopping! I hear someone got a free $5,500 Mac laptop!

 

[Alt+F4]

Do you love Wall Street? If so why? What is their contribution to the wellbeing of the world? What does it produce?.

I think it's these protestors that love Wall Street. They don't want to occupy it and they for the most part support President Obama, who has so far received $16 million in Wall Street contributions.

It's raining in NYC today. A radio reporter asked a protestor if he was bothered by the rain, having to sleep on the ground and all. They guy said it was all good because there was lots of beer under the tarp.

Those Evil Wall Street Bankers are doomed!

As for crime:

Lured by cheap drugs and free food, creepy thugs have infiltrated the crowd of protesters camped out in Zuccotti Park for Occupy Wall Street, The Post has learned.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/it_nyc_lam_sterdam_bmE4vlV5aDUWhBRv9IbaiK#ixzz1bDFA79Vk​

 

[timhau]

It's raining in NYC today. A radio reporter asked a protestor if he was bothered by the rain, having to sleep on the ground and all. They guy said it was all good because there was lots of beer under the tarp.

Homebrew or corporation-brewed?

 

[WildCat]

It's raining in NYC today. A radio reporter asked a protestor if he was bothered by the rain, having to sleep on the ground and all. They guy said it was all good because there was lots of beer under the tarp.

Sounds like the tuition hike protest when I was in college, we were going to camp in the commons. In reality everyone just drank and got high in the tents, and went home to sleep.

 

[Ziggurat]

There are CTs and communists mixed in there too, it's a veritable smorgasbord for the confirmation bias of anyone who wants to dislike the protestors. Reminds me of Tea Party actually, except this time it's Fox News (and apparently a lot of you guys) obsessing over the crazies and the fringes.

Except that there's a major difference. Fringe elements attached to both sides, but defecating on a cop car isn't just a fringe belief, it's criminal action. This sort of criminal behavior may be a small minority of the OWS movement, but it didn't show up at the tea party protests. So why is it showing up here?

The tea party protests were law-abiding. The OWS movement is not.

 

[Neally]

They have spawned an enormous and growing global political movement to challenge economic inequality and corruption. This movement's success or otherwise will be measured in years and decades, not weeks.

"The Occupy Wall Street demonstrators, while all over the spectrum in their demands, have one thread in common (beyond their inconceivable level of ignorance): they hate capitalism, are spoiled by living in a prosperous society, and have a socialist/Marxist vision of utopia. " - http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/the_ows_dream.html

 

[Alt+F4]

Except that there's a major difference. Fringe elements attached to both sides, but defecating on a cop car isn't just a fringe belief, it's criminal action. This sort of criminal behavior may be a small minority of the OWS movement, but it didn't show up at the tea party protests. So why is it showing up here?

The tea party protests were law-abiding. The OWS movement is not.

1. You don't have to do anything.
2. You don't have to stand for anything.
3. Free food.
4. Free condoms.
5. Cheap drugs.
6. Weak law enforcement.

 

[Checkmite]

Who is going to disclaim them, the King of OWS? How are we to determine when they've been sufficiently "disclaimed"? You have no idea who does or doesn't disclaim anything, these "judgements" of yours are pure speculation. How many non-commie protesters have you asked their opinion about communists? How many non-truther protesters have you asked their opinion about truthers?

They should "get used to being judged" by people who possess far too little information to be making such judgements.

What do you mean, "who is going to disclaim them"? This is a movement, is it not? How can it be so that everyone agrees "in one voice" without need of a King of OWS that banks are evil and bad and that's okay, but as soon as anybody points at somebody and says "this loon's with you guys?" it's all a bunch of hem-hawing about not having standards being the point? Obviously somebody who goes to the protest waving a sign saying something like "banks keep our nation from collapsing", while his physical presence may be tolerated, is not going to be embraced and made to feel part of OWS. Right or wrong? So what's the difference? Why can't you point at a loon who defecates on a cop car and agree, "in one voice", that's not right, just like you agree about banks?

It's because even if it's not a majority there's still a significant number of people in your movement who feel it's perfectly acceptable, and you know that, and if the movement disclaimed that attitude, the "huge protest" would suddenly become smaller by an appreciable number. It's not "confirmation bias".

I don't even know where Wildcat was going with that. In what culture does getting robbed reflect poorly on you, ancient Sparta?

It's not the getting robbed that reflects poorly on the group.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

What about it? According to those against the Citizens United ruling freedom of the press only applies to individuals, not corporate news media.

Care to square this with legal bans on certain cigarette ads?

People are not concerned with corporate news media. If they were then Fox News would be off the air. As it is, pure propaganda masquerading as news is tolerated in this country in spite of the distorting effect on the election process.

It is the unlimited financial power of a corporation to directly influence elections that should and does concern more than half (aka the majority of) the people in this country.