Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Public sentiment...

...turning toward OWS:

Poll: 43 percent agree with views of OWS

pieoccupy102511.gif


Forty-three percent of Americans agree with the views of the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll that found a widespread belief that money and wealth should be distributed more evenly in America.


Twenty-seven percent of Americans said they disagree with the movement, which began more than a month ago in lower Manhattan and has since spread across the country and around the world. Thirty percent said they were unsure.

tablemoneywealth102511.gif
 
Yeah, it's ironic that the Teabags are crying "Class Warfare" when it's not their socioeconomic class in question.
 
Last edited:
Very close to my thoughts.

A great read.

The real reason OWS terrifies conservatives

In politics, it’s tempting to turn matters of temperament into matters of principle. Having disliked the hippie-dippy mellow aggression of the ’60s, my first instinct was to dismiss the Occupy Wall Street movement as feckless left-wing tribalism—as unlikely to survive the winter’s first strong cold front as the black flies pestering my cows.


Conservative by nature, I dislike big cities, and tend to avoid crowds. Even in my 20s, I’d no more have joined the drug-addled migration to Woodstock than volunteered for sex-change surgery. We spent that week in Dublin, visiting Jonathan Swift’s tomb—the 18th century Irish satirist who took a dim view of human nature.

...

Except during times of grave national danger—the Great Depression, for example—it’s pretty much remained a dream. Taibbi’s point, however, is that the ongoing economic crisis created by Wall Street greed and recklessness makes it possible that a new movement taking aim at incestuous political and financial corruption in Washington might have a chance.


Breaking up “too-big-to-fail” banks like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, for example, might be an issue left and right could coalesce around. Just last week, Citigroup agreed to pay a $285 million settlement to the SEC to settle charges that it swindled mainly institutional investors like pension funds in a billion-dollar derivatives scam—deliberately creating junk securities based upon bad mortgages, then shorting them in the market.

I think that's what people don't get. Washington doesn't exist for the people. It exists only for the rich. To bail them out when they gamble with depositors money, raid pensions, ignore criminality destroy evidence of corruption (AND ADMIT IT) allow the gutting of deregulation, ignore the erosion of competition while mega corporations grow ever larger and banks become too big to fail so public money must bail them out.
 
Last edited:
You say that like it's a good thing. In fact, it's a quite notable weakness of the protests that they don't have any one issue that galvanizes them (and no, "we hate the rich" doesn't qualify). I have criticized the antiwar protestors in the 1960s and recently, but at least they had a recognizable objective.

Do you not believe that high inequality, and the need for it to be reduced, is an issue that the majority of OWS protestors would agree with?
 
March of the curtain twitchers:

Please read the thread. Laws broken include theft, assault, sexual assault, vandalism, weapons charges, defecation and urination in public, indecent exposure, child neglect and so on.
These parks, such as the ones in Portland, belong to all of us and we take care of them with our tax dollars but they do have rules which are in place to make it better for everybody such as not defecating and not spending the night in the park. The "99%" don't seem to care about the park rules that we came up with as a community (it wasn't big banks that made these rules)

Trespassing, vagrancy, littering, disturbing the peace, etc.

It's more than just that, it's sexual assault, regular assault, theft, drug dealing, and gang activity, all of which OWS admits is happening in Zuccotti Park. They refuse to throw these people out of the park or call the police when these things happen.

Sure, that too, but for my argument I decided to limit it to stuff that was actually intrinsic to the protests, not just a nasty (and predictable) side effect.

The NYPD should set up a shuttle bus service from Rikers's Island (huge NYC jail) to Zuccotti Park. It will be more effective than tear gas and rubber bullets at getting these people out of the park. After all, that guy out on bail for attempted murder who is sleeping in the tent next to you is part of the 99%!

Well done, Ziggurat, for offering that glimmer of rationality in the midst of the feeding frenzy (hilited)!


There you go. Guilt by association. So if we find a Republican who is a criminal that makes the Republican party... what?

The Glasgow rapists Virus is expectorating about weren’t even protestors but who cares about such minor details?!


I am neither rich nor on the right and I think OWS is useless and I want these people to get the hell out of my city.

It's not your city.

They are not being maligned and belittled for speaking out and seeking redress. They are being maligned and belittled because they couldn't care less about the harm they inflict on communities.

I have not heard even one single complaint against OWS having to do with free speech. No one wants to silence them, we just want them to move to an in door space, stop enabling criminals and stop defecating in our doorways. Is that too much to ask?

Nowadays, people who don’t like free speech don’t say it directly. They smear, complain about health and safety issues, fling **** and make stuff up, like you do.
 
Last edited:
I fully agree with your post, I just don't think OWS and their tactics of not making any demands or having a focus is going to be effective. Were they focusing on policy reforms or consumer education ( credit is not income, that sort of thing ) I'd sympathise with them, however this rag tag band of "the usual suspects" painting themselves as perpetual victims of capitalism just isn't cutting it.
Hear hear. I don't have the image on this computer, but it's a picture of the 99% with labels pointing out all the things they have that are made by the corporations they're protesting.

It's easy, these days, to shout so loud that you don't realize you're not actually saying anything.
 
Hear hear. I don't have the image on this computer, but it's a picture of the 99% with labels pointing out all the things they have that are made by the corporations they're protesting.

It's easy, these days, to shout so loud that you don't realize you're not actually saying anything.

That picture got discredited as rampant guesswork, and it's been pointed out several times that it's possible to oppose an economic system that allows massive inequality without opposing capitalism itself. For example, Germany manages to do alright with a gini coefficient of ~25, which certainly suggests the american gini coefficient of 47 isn't a requirement for a successful economy.
 
Do you not believe that high inequality, and the need for it to be reduced, is an issue that the majority of OWS protestors would agree with?
Broadly, yes, but it depends on the range. For example, if someone declared that the OWS iPhones, clothing, homes, and money, personally, was going to be redistributed to destitute people in third-world countries along with the corporations they're protesting against...
 
The Glasgow rapists Virus is expectorating about weren’t even protestors but who cares about such minor details?
I did not know that thank you.

Nowadays, people who don’t like free speech don’t say it directly. They smear, complain about health and safety issues, fling **** and make stuff up, like you do.
I keep pointing out that the protests of the 60s had crime and anti-social aspects. But THAT was different. No, THAT'S special pleading.
 
Broadly, yes, but it depends on the range. For example, if someone declared that the OWS iPhones, clothing, homes, and money, personally, was going to be redistributed to destitute people in third-world countries along with the corporations they're protesting against...

  • It's possible to protest against corporations without wanting those corporations to disappear (many just want changes in the way business is done).
  • While there are anarchists and people involved with OWS who would like an end to capitalism, not all do and I suspect most don't.
I really find such an argument disingenuous. By your logic the only valid protest would be by people who never consume any goods. BTW: It's possible to want goods that are currently produced by capitalism but want them produced by other means (state owned businesses).

Now, let's be crystal clear here, I'm a BIG fan of capitalism. I didn't take the username RandFan on a whim. I think capitalism has been the greatest engine for prosperity and human flourishing humankind has ever known. But I find your point silly and unproductive to the discussion. It's ad hominem.
 
Last edited:
Hear hear. I don't have the image on this computer, but it's a picture of the 99% with labels pointing out all the things they have that are made by the corporations they're protesting.

It's easy, these days, to shout so loud that you don't realize you're not actually saying anything.

isn't that a stupendous image ? I highly suspect it was created by Ad-busters, the initiators of the OWS movement as an educational tool to raise awareness and empower consumers to make the decision to consider buying locally produced goods from small independent merchants rather than supporting the megalithic corporations.

It's designed to stimulate inner reflection while at the cash register and meant to inspire questioning whether ( or not ) the consumer is making a ethical/moral purchasing decision. What do I mean ? Let's take p the purchasing of say, a t-shirt with a corporate logo on it and let's take The Gap as an example.

After viewing that annotated photograph a consumer might just come to the realisation that spending the extra money for a t-shirt that prominently displays a corporate logo might not be a wise idea. The consumer may reflect on the idea that they've been brainwashed by the corporate media and question whether GAP is a message they really want to communicate to the world.

The consumer may make the right decision in this case, put down that sweatshop made piece of corporate iconism, march out of the store empty handed and seek out a small local retailer selling fair trade goods.

I understand there's a fair amount of resistance to become conditioned to the manufactured need to openly display corporate logos and I'm rather dismayed to see that programed behaviour among my self appointed representatives, the occupy protesters.

Imagine, if you will, my dismay at our local occupy protesters failing to get ( or, horrors, actually ignoring ) this message. Last night when visiting the protesters in the middle of the night I happened to notice that one of the tents had the words The North Face proudly displayed across the top of the fly. This logo was so big, I'm sure you could pick it up on google earth.

Rousting the occupant of the tent I demanded to know why that logo was there demeaning the purity of the protest and all I got in response was a series of muttered profanities. I decided to raise my voice a little as the occupant was obviously reluctant to come to grips with the sin he was committing, some say I was shrieking, but, truth be known, sometimes my normally deep and authoritarian voice becomes somewhat shrill when I'm overwhelmed with passion.

After much "shrieking" I managed to not only raise the occupant but the entire camp as well. My new students were somewhat reluctant to receive my anti-corporate message as well as my suggestions that they make their occupy tents out of recycled materials. I decided a demonstration of the power of handmade goods over the mass produced corporate offal was needed.

Taking a cue from post #635 in this very thread, the one with the words,

ya gotta break a few eggs to make an omelet.

Aside: Did you ever notice how tents resemble eggs, how they're egg shaped and how they "hatch" occupants out of them in the morning ?

I decided it was time to break some eggs, to take a little "direct action" against the oppressive corporate presence that was polluting the entire scene. Reaching into my back pocket I produced a cleverly concealed, hand made using centuries of tradition, Japanese katana and proceeded to deface that corporate logo in what some say, a very "maniacal" manner. Passionate is the descriptor that I prefer.

So what do my students do ? They get on their corporate produced smartphones and call the very people they themselves are claiming to resist, the police. The fascist enforcers of the capitalist system.

Which is why I'm posting this from a mental health facility, being held here against my will but at least I'll be able to add survivor of the mental health industry to my resume.

Viva la Revolution !!!

:rolleyes:
 
I suppose I would be more amiable toward the occupy "movement" if they hadn't allowed Anonymous to so thoroughly infect it with their V for Vendetta fanboy culture. Last night over Twitter I heard a lot of people proclaiming that "occupy Oakland" had resolved to have a general strike next week "on Nov. 5th!!!". Considering that November 5th falls on a Saturday this year, a general strike on that day seemed idiotic to me. Fortunately, further tweets clarified that the strike was slated to happen on November 2, not November 5, restoring some of my faith that the occupiers aren't complete morons.
 
Broadly, yes, but it depends on the range. For example, if someone declared that the OWS iPhones, clothing, homes, and money, personally, was going to be redistributed to destitute people in third-world countries along with the corporations they're protesting against...

Maybe they wouldn't be so happy. That doesn't make their demand for less inequality inside the USA unreasonable.
 
When it comes down to sharing the wealth, the Occupy Wall Street crowd seem every bit as greedy as those they oppose:

The Occupy Wall Street volunteer kitchen staff launched a “counter” revolution yesterday -- because they’re angry about working 18-hour days to provide food for “professional homeless” people and ex-cons masquerading as protesters.

For three days beginning tomorrow, the cooks will serve only brown rice and other spartan grub instead of the usual menu of organic chicken and vegetables, spaghetti bolognese, and roasted beet and sheep’s-milk-cheese salad.

Suggested new chant: "Whose food? Our food!"
 
While listening to NPR this morning they mentioned one of the OWS protesters in Atlanta was carrying a loaded AK-47! They interviewed one of the city leaders on the radio and he expressed his frustration communicating with the OWS in which in took them a week and half to come to a decision and response to a letter the city sent to them. Couldn't find a online link to the radio story....
 
That picture got discredited as rampant guesswork, and it's been pointed out several times that it's possible to oppose an economic system that allows massive inequality without opposing capitalism itself. For example, Germany manages to do alright with a gini coefficient of ~25, which certainly suggests the american gini coefficient of 47 isn't a requirement for a successful economy.

How would you go about lowering America's gini coefficient to me more equitable and in line with Germany's?
 
How would you go about lowering America's gini coefficient to me more equitable and in line with Germany's?

Higher income tax at higher levels of income, higher capital gains tax at higher levels of income from capital gains, higher inheritance tax on larger inheritances, lower sales tax. Implement UHC, reduce military spending to help fund it.

That would be where i'd start, anyway. There's plenty of other things that could be done such as subsidising higher education to a greater extent to people from poorer backgrounds (such that if you were from a poor background, you didn't need to be an incredible genius to have the same chance as a rich kid of "better than average" ability), but the above measures would probably be the main ones.
 
Funny old world!

Yesterday, "public health and safety due to defecation, fire hazards, sexual assault incidents, violent behavior and the denial of access of medical aid" (01.11) required a violent police operation that caused widespread theft of and damage to property, fire and health hazards, the denial of access of medical aid, serious injury and mayhem and people to **** themselves.

Today, "public health and safety due to defecation, fire hazards, sexual assault incidents, violent behavior and the denial of access of medical aid" [ibid] required that the Mayor announce that she is committed to minimizing police presence in the plaza and to “building a community effort to improve communications and dialogue with the demonstrators.”



'Oakland Mayor Jean Quan says she will minimize police presence and that she supports the movement.':

After the first heavy-handed police crackdown on demonstrators in Oakland, Mayor Jean Quan wrote a statement on her Facebook page praising police for closing down the Occupy Oakland protest encampment. Now, facing anger from across the world, Quan is backing down on her aggressive language and even says she supports the goals of the movement. She is committing to minimize police presence in the plaza and "build a community effort to improve communications and dialogue with the demonstrators.”




~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~


I did not know that thank you.

You're welcome.

My rhetorical question wasn't directed at you, BTW.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom