• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

We disagree about OWS, let's leave it at that...

Wow, you own a park in New York? How did you get ahold of that?

I was specifically referring to the OWS in my city, not New York. How you assumed I was talking about New York out of what I said is beyond me, but if you're psychic, you're about as accurate as Sylvia Browne.

But since you're hellbent on being pedantic, I should say that not all of the people in the park near me are white and middle class. You got me.

I was just generalizing based on my personal experience of walking by them every day and having to deal with their ridiculous shenanigans. Silly me, going off of local experience rather than national aggregates.
 
This is part of the problem that the supporters of OWS don't understand. It isn't just "right wingers" who don't like the group and think they are a disorganised mob with no perceptible aims, no identifiable leaders, and nothing to offer a civilised political debate. There was a smattering of empathy for them, in their early days, from civic leaders, business leaders, union leaders, and many other people who could have provided them support and guidance.

And they had one of the best marketing slogans in recent memory.

What did they do with it? They pissed it all down the drain and united everyone--leftists, centrists, rightists--business people and unions--educators and police--renters and property owners--net debtors and net creditors--against them. This is practically a first in the history of political movements. The OWS and the various Occupy movement have almost deliberately marginalised themselves into the same category as the Aryan Nations, LaRouchists, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Marxist-Leninists. None of those starry-eyed sociology students from upstate New York are ever going to include their participation in this train wreck on their resume without a substantial disclaimer about their withdrawal before it degenerated into a howling pack of violent criminals.

Those who sympathised with them the most and felt that there ought to be more accountability for corporate America should be the ones most angered by their antics. It is those people who were primarily betrayed by the bottle-throwers, graffiti-sprayers, and looters.


Bravo for what? He just made a comparison to the KKK! Yeah! Bravo to that! WOOOOOOO HOOOOOOO! Bravo!

Your assignment tonight is Reading For Comprehension 101.
 
Did any of you catch where I agreed with another poster here about how I don't support the OWS however I support the right for people to assemble and take a stand against that which is wrong? No. I don't think any of you did because your heads are so far up the orifice that is apparently more capable of critical thinking than your actual brain!
 
What's your argument, and what are you basing it on? It sounds like you're just throwing baseless assertions around.

My "argument" is that I think Occupy and the Tea Party are incoherent and they attract weirdos to their movements. Even those who have defended them on this thread have admitted as much. So, I decided I don't need to take them seriously.

It's easy to understand.

Which baseless assertions am I throwing around?
 
Did any of you catch where I agreed with another poster here about how I don't support the OWS however I support the right for people to assemble and take a stand against that which is wrong? No. I don't think any of you did because your heads are so far up the orifice that is apparently more capable of critical thinking than your actual brain!

You're classy enough to be an OWS supporter, that's for sure.
 
Or going off of confirmation bias, instead of facts?

The article you linked to said that only 1/3 of them aren't young. But I'm guilty of confirmation bias. Right-O then.

But the article did say that only 8% of them have a high school degree, so I guess I was wrong about them being college students. Fair enough, I'll stand corrected.
 
You don't seem to understand the meaning of the word incoherent. All of the movements you mention had tangible goals that could be expressed in a few words: equal rights, an end to the Vietnam War, and increased democracy, respectively. OWS on the other hand had was a protest in search of a goal. Maybe you could argue that they wanted an end to capitalism, although I'm sure that you'd get some pretty stiff disagreement on that from some of their supporters.

Tea Party: small government
Occupy Wall Street: more income equality

Seems coherent to me.
 
I don't find the Civil Rights movement incoherent at all. It was certainly true that it included disparate elements which often disagreed on tactics. But I haven't seen any figures in the Occupy movement comparable to A Philip Randolph, Bayard Rustin, Martin Luther King or Ralphe Bunche and find offensive the suggestion that the aforementioned could be considered as incoherent as the Occupy movement.

If I remember correctly, the Civil Rights leaders were almost all jesus-freaks. Which I don't have a problem with, but if you were being remotely consistent, you'd be bashing the smelly hippies who sat in segregated restaurants, too.
 
Did any of you catch where I agreed with another poster here about how I don't support the OWS however I support the right for people to assemble and take a stand against that which is wrong? No. I don't think any of you did because your heads are so far up the orifice that is apparently more capable of critical thinking than your actual brain!

So you agree they're a bunch of idiots and support an abstract principle that nobody was against in the first place.

Awesome thread dude.
 
Did any of you catch where I agreed with another poster here about how I don't support the OWS however I support the right for people to assemble and take a stand against that which is wrong? No. I don't think any of you did because your heads are so far up the orifice that is apparently more capable of critical thinking than your actual brain!
Um.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom