Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

[WildCat]

argument by assertion (and wrong)

argument by assertion

It is you who is arguing by assertion, you making the claim. You prove that free speech rights forbid an employer from firing an employee for speech outside the workplace.

Proof please? Please to show that any employer can fire any employee for what the employee says on his or her own time? You must have cause.

Nope, an employer can fire you for any reason at all or no reason at all, unless the reason is protected by law, such as Title 7.

And BTW, you are ignorant of the law. There is a concept in the law called wrongful termination. An employer cannot fire someone for any reason.

See above. And see below.

Second, the NLRB’s general position is still that employers are permitted to regulate employee behavior, including speech on social media websites. Indeed, in prior cases, the NLRB stood by employers, approving of policies that maintained order in the workplace. It is well established that employees’ “free speech” rights are limited, especially when it comes to speech about employers, their business, and other employees, and this applies both inside and outside the workplace. Furthermore, at-will employers can legally fire their employees at any time and for nearly any reason; unless an employer fires an employee for one of the few, specified illegal reasons, the termination is legal.

http://btlj.org/2011/03/07/nlrb-v-a...ase-of-protected-employee-speech-on-facebook/

Look, before you pretend to be an expert on something and hold forth to lecture, at least do a modicum of research.

I have done so. I even took a business law class in college way back in the late 80s.

 

[RandFan]

It is you who is arguing by assertion, you making the claim. You prove that free speech rights forbid an employer from firing an employee for speech outside the workplace.

Nope, an employer can fire you for any reason at all or no reason at all, unless the reason is protected by law, such as Title 7.

See above. And see below.

http://btlj.org/2011/03/07/nlrb-v-a...ase-of-protected-employee-speech-on-facebook/

I have done so. I even took a business law class in college way back in the late 80s.

You are a day late and a dollar short. I apologize.

 

[WildCat]

You are a day late and a dollar short.

I see that. I was going to delete that post but it's too late now, you already saw it.

 

[RandFan]

I see that. I was going to delete that post but it's too late now, you already saw it.

No problem.

 

[Virus]

Protester says they threw bottles and rocks at police.

 

[Alt+F4]

The OWS want to teach us how to better regulate things when they themselves cannot do something as simple as regulating a drum circle despite quite valiant and well meaning efforts to do so. Crime and filth are systemic risks at these encampments. They want good food for some occupiers, and poor quality food for other occupiers based purely on their socio-economic status alone. There is greed, corruption, and violence. These problems seem to be systemic and they need better regulation, something that can be said about "Wall Street" as well.

Well put. Add vigilante justice to the crime and filth in these occupations. Their "new society" is worse than what we have on the outside. Imagine a society with no law enforcement, just security teams that search your home (in this case tent) if they feel like it and bully you out if they determine you're not one of the worthy. If this is the "uptopia" they are trying to bring to the world, I'll choose Wall Street thank you.

Organizers took other steps to police the squatters, who they said were lured in from other parks with the promise of free meals.
A team of 10 security volunteers moved in to the trouble-prone southwest section of Zuccotti Park in a show of force to confront them.
“We’re not going to let some members of this community destroy the whole movement,” a volunteer said.
Some arguments broke out as the security team searched tents -- but no violence erupted.

I guess the 4th Amendment doesn't apply anywhere in this occupation, especially in their ghetto.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/..._kitchen_i5biNyYYhpa8MSYIL9xSDL#ixzz1cGxSz66e

 

[theprestige]

Well put. Add vigilante justice to the crime and filth in these occupations. Their "new society" is worse than what we have on the outside. Imagine a society with no law enforcement, just security teams that search your home (in this case tent) if they feel like it and bully you out if they determine you're not one of the worthy. If this is the "uptopia" they are trying to bring to the world, I'll choose Wall Street thank you.



I guess the 4th Amendment doesn't apply anywhere in this occupation, especially in their ghetto.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/..._kitchen_i5biNyYYhpa8MSYIL9xSDL#ixzz1cGxSz66e

It's like I keep saying: they're reinventing civlization from scratch. They've gotten as far as discovering the police force and border security (among other things). I'm waiting to see whether they discover warfare before or after they discover coups d'etat.

ETA: And I'm pretty sure if this goes on for another week or two, they'll invent fiat currency and letters of credit. Give it another month, and they'll be preaching the virtues of representative democracy.

 

[RandFan]

Yes, it's much easier to malign and belittle than to have an honest discussion about the reasons they are protesting and what changes can or should happen.

 

[theprestige]

Yes, it's much easier to malign and belittle than to have an honest discussion about the reasons they are protesting and what changes can or should happen.

Easiest thing of all is to discuss the topic of the thread in the thread itself. Occupy Wall Street--the people encamped in Zucotti Park--is having some identity problems.

The many anecdotes presented so far in this thread speak directly to their identity problems, in that they reinforce a negative identity. These anecdotes are documented facts of OWS behavior. They are absolutely germane to any discussion of OWS's identity problems.

Truth be told, even positive "counter-anecdotes" wouldn't change the fact that there are a plethora of negative anecdotes to draw on, when considering whether OWS has identity problems.

But if you want to discuss reasons for protesting and suggest changes, you should probably start a thread for that. I imagine it will be more productive than anything on in Zucotti Park. It certainly would be more productive than trying to address OWS's identity problems by pointing out the things you wish people would focus on, instead of the things OWS is actually doing.

 

[Alt+F4]

But if you want to discuss reasons for protesting and suggest changes, you should probably start a thread for that. I imagine it will be more productive than anything on in Zucotti Park. It certainly would be more productive than trying to address OWS's identity problems by pointing out the things you wish people would focus on, instead of the things OWS is actually doing.

Indeed, the media now seems to be more focused on crime in Zucotti Park and the other encampments than it is about crime on Wall Street.

 

[Brainster]

Well put. Add vigilante justice to the crime and filth in these occupations.

This appears to be a feature, not a bug. Check out this sympathetic feature on one of the intellectual leaders of the movement.

Years later, Graeber was a graduate student at the University of Chicago, and his field research brought him into contact with another, albeit very different, anarchic community. His dissertation was on Betafo, a rural community in Madagascar made up of the descendants of nobles and their slaves. Because of spending cuts mandated by the International Monetary Fund—the sort of structural-adjustment policies Graeber would later protest—the central government had abandoned the area, leaving the inhabitants to fend for themselves. They did, creating an egalitarian society where 10,000 people made decisions more or less by consensus. When necessary, criminal justice was carried out by a mob, but even there a particular sort of consensus pertained: a lynching required permission from the accused’s parents.

 

[WildCat]

Now the pimps are trolling the OWS protests for fresh meat:

A city woman is accused of pimping a 16-year-old girl she met in Victory Park during the Occupy NH demonstrations.

Justina Jensen, 23, of 341 Hanover St., is charged with felony prostitution. Police allege Jensen met a teen at the local protest, which is an offshoot of Occupy Wall Street, and used the Internet to arrange a first liaison for the girl with a man who turned out to be an undercover police officer.

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20111028/NEWS03/710289961

 

[RandFan]

Easiest thing of all is to discuss the topic of the thread in the thread itself. Occupy Wall Street--the people encamped in Zucotti Park--is having some identity problems.

So it's claimed.

The many anecdotes presented so far in this thread speak directly to their identity problems, in that they reinforce a negative identity.

Do they do that honestly? Is there a discussion or points made than can be discussed? Read the comments made that are associated with the anecdotes. They argue by assertion and paint broad brushstrokes. I'm sorry but this is disingenuous.

Truth be told, even positive "counter-anecdotes" wouldn't change the fact that there are a plethora of negative anecdotes to draw on, when considering whether OWS has identity problems.

Oh, I know. I hear that a lot. "No evidence or reason could possibly change my mind" the theists say. They have lots of anecdotal data to prove god. I understand what it means to know the truth and to spread faith promoting rumors. I was once a Mormon. You aren't telling me anything new.

 

[RandFan]

But if you want to discuss reasons for protesting and suggest changes, you should probably start a thread for that.

It's a skeptics forum. A claim has been made. To support that claim anecdotes without context and assertions are being made. I would hope that in a skeptics forum such poor reasoning and evidence could be pointed out and challenged. Or is this a thread simply to malign and belittle a movement? Was the intention an echo chamber? Is that really what JREF is about?

 

[bikerdruid]

Now the pimps are trolling the OWS protests for fresh meat:

your link does not support your assumption.
this article was about an isolated incident....a single pimp.
why are you treating it with 'plurals' like it has become the norm?

 

[Brainster]

Still more on the mob justice theme:

A sex fiend barged into a woman’s tent and sexually assaulted her at around 6 a.m., said protesters, who chased him from the park.

“Pervert! Pervert! Get the f--k out!” said vigilante Occupiers, who never bothered to call the cops.

“They were shining flashlights in his face and yelling at him to leave,” said a woman who called herself Leslie, but refused to give her real name.

She said that weeks earlier another woman was raped.

“We don’t tell anyone,” she said. “We handle it internally. I said too much already.”

They handled a rape internally?

 

[Neally]

Firing someone for participating in a politcal movement is a violation of that person's rights when it does not negatively effect the honor and morality or ability of the employer to do business.

What "rights" exactly are those?

Easiest thing of all is to discuss the topic of the thread in the thread itself. Occupy Wall Street--the people encamped in Zucotti Park--is having some identity problems.

The many anecdotes presented so far in this thread speak directly to their identity problems, in that they reinforce a negative identity. These anecdotes are documented facts of OWS behavior. They are absolutely germane to any discussion of OWS's identity problems.

Truth be told, even positive "counter-anecdotes" wouldn't change the fact that there are a plethora of negative anecdotes to draw on, when considering whether OWS has identity problems.

But if you want to discuss reasons for protesting and suggest changes, you should probably start a thread for that. I imagine it will be more productive than anything on in Zucotti Park. It certainly would be more productive than trying to address OWS's identity problems by pointing out the things you wish people would focus on, instead of the things OWS is actually doing.

Well stated.

 

[Ziggurat]

They handled a rape internally?

The first rule of Occupy justice is: you do not talk about Occupy justice.

 

[Checkmite]

I'm neither ideologue or idealist. I tend to be dispassionate when it comes to rhetoric and ideology. I tend to value principles more. Having read The Case For Democracy by Natan Shransky I champion any popular movements and find the kind of minimizing and belittling of them as I have in this thread disgusting and that I am passionate about. I guess I'm moved more by the contempt for the expression of speech of citizens more than anything else. Call me Tom Joad I guess. It really baffles me that people feel a need to marginalize people who are simply exercising their most fundamental of rights.

Do you seriously think that we are all lying about our individual expressed reasons for our criticisms in this thread, and are in fact ridiculing them because they are protesting?

 

[RandFan]

Do you seriously think that we are all lying about our individual expressed reasons for our criticisms in this thread, and are in fact ridiculing them because they are protesting?

Did I call someone a liar? When a theist shares with me his anecdotes I don't call him or her a liar. It's nothing to do with lying.

A.) Over and over I've conceded the very real problems of the protest.
B.) Hell, I've had productive discussions with folks about those problems on this very thread.
C.) No, my problem is with the character attacks and broad brush strokes intended to malign the movement as a whole.

You are way off base.