[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;34630258]
To end my argument with a quote , "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
[/QUOTE]
"Hell is full of good meanings, but heaven is full of good works."
[QUOTE=Zeke129;34627166]General strikes are the best form of protest because people have no choice but to notice[/QUOTE]
Except a lot of people won't strike unless it's through a union.
Only unions can make good strikes.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34630224]Honestly, I could not agree with Regulas201 any more on this subject. If the Occupy movement is ever going to accomplish anything it's gonna have to knuckle down and come up with specific problems and specific solutions. All they've done so far is introduce rhetoric and pick broad stances on broad issues, and while that's nice, they've yet to come up with any specific action they'd like taken. Occupy could be a movement with the influence of the progressives, or the civil rights movement, if they could just recognize that once you make your voice heard you need to use it to give actual demands.[/QUOTE]
You're both either really new to the whole "politics" thing or are being intentionally naive.
Civil unrest is a symptom of underlying social damage, nothing more. What you're doing is analogous to a doctor looking at a patient with a bad case of zits and asking the zits why they aren't homogenous and just telling you what caused them [I]specifically,[/I] stupid lazy uneducated zits. Don't they know you can't identify a disease with more than one variable to it?
How they change things is by remaining until enough people go "okay fuck we need to deal with these goddamn blemishes" and actually investigate things further. They don't owe you shoehorning their entire multi-region, multi-demographic, multi-party movement into a nice little political party with a a manifesto and gameplan for the next four years. You just need to actually do some thinking about what types of shit cause civil unrest and look at those (broad, easily noticed) factors, rather than go OH GOD I HAVE ZITS WHY WHERE'S THE PROACTIVE FUCK.
The tea party and corporate-backed political movements are ruining the public's ability to actually employ critical thought. You see "movements" that had fucking marketing departments and assume everything which doesn't fit into nice prepackaged slices is doing something wrong.
To those asking for specific problems and specific solutions, I have this to offer.
We reached the consensus at our local GA that corporate bribery was the forefront of the problem, and the first obstacle to reestablishing a true democracy. So long as the Citizens United v FEC Supreme Court ruling stands, and corporations can legally wine and dine politicians before using them to figuratively fuck the public, the needs of the average citizen will always come second to the perversion of money. A lot more of our state's Occupy movement came to that same consensus, and we're working on petitions and legal reform state-wide. If we can reestablish our power as constituents, we can reform the country. That's the dream anyways.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;34630258]
To end my argument with a quote , "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
Later, I'm going to sleep.[/QUOTE]
are you fucking kidding me
anyway my sweat smells like weed
[url]http://strikeeverywhere.net/portfolio/banner-drop-128/[/url]
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34630506]You're both either really new to the whole "politics" thing or are being intentionally naive.
Civil unrest is a symptom of underlying social damage, nothing more. What you're doing is analogous to a doctor looking at a patient with a bad case of zits and asking the zits why they aren't homogenous and just telling you what caused them [I]specifically,[/I] stupid lazy uneducated zits. Don't they know you can't identify a disease with more than one variable to it?[/QUOTE]
What a shitty analogy. Zits aren't capable of voting, making demands, or, you know, talking. Why is it considered unfair to ask protesters why they're protesting and expect a specific response? I never implied they weren't capable of giving one, I believe they are. It's silly to just ask people to guess why they're protesting when they're perfectly capable of saying it themselves.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34630506]
How they change things is by remaining until enough people go "okay fuck we need to deal with these goddamn blemishes" and actually investigate things further. They don't owe you shoehorning their entire multi-region, multi-demographic, multi-party movement into a nice little political party with a a manifesto and gameplan for the next four years. You just need to actually do some thinking about what types of shit cause civil unrest and look at those (broad, easily noticed) factors, rather than go OH GOD I HAVE ZITS WHY WHERE'S THE PROACTIVE FUCK.
The tea party and corporate-backed political movements are ruining the public's ability to actually employ critical thought. You see "movements" that had fucking marketing departments and assume everything which doesn't fit into nice prepackaged slices is doing something wrong.[/QUOTE]
I'm not asking them to become a political party, I'm asking them to organize and start to have actual objectives and demands instead of just saying "Do something." The demands of the movement aren't going to be met [I]if they don't have any demands to meet.[/I] I look at movements like the civil rights movement, which had organization and demands that could be accomplished, and think of all the good the Occupy movement could do if they did the same.
[QUOTE=MarstunoM;34630987]To those asking for specific problems and specific solutions, I have this to offer.
We reached the consensus at our local GA that corporate bribery was the forefront of the problem, and the first obstacle to reestablishing a true democracy. So long as the Citizens United v FEC Supreme Court ruling stands, and corporations can legally wine and dine politicians before using them to figuratively fuck the public, the needs of the average citizen will always come second to the perversion of money. A lot more of our state's Occupy movement came to that same consensus, and we're working on petitions and legal reform state-wide. If we can reestablish our power as constituents, we can reform the country. That's the dream anyways.[/QUOTE]
See? There are effective methods of protest and it appears Occupy is picking them up. They're petitioning their government, and asking for specific, concrete reforms by coming to a consensus within the movement. This is how you protest. Sitting around and shouting "do something" isn't going to accomplish anything.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;34628684]You mean like affirmative action?[/QUOTE]
oh you poor little Caucasian, you are SO oppressed.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34640228]What a shitty analogy. Zits aren't capable of voting, making demands, or, you know, talking. Why is it considered unfair to ask protesters why they're protesting and expect a specific response? I never implied they weren't capable of giving one, I believe they are. It's silly to just ask people to guess why they're protesting when they're perfectly capable of saying it themselves.[/QUOTE]
That isn't the issue. If you ask local protestors you'll always get a cohesive response because, you know, they're dealing with local issues. Anybody saying "All they've done so far is introduce rhetoric and pick broad stances on broad issues" is only paying attention to large-scale shit, which they aren't going to be homogenous on unless they become a political party.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34640228]I'm not asking them to become a political party, I'm asking them to organize and start to have actual objectives and demands instead of just saying "Do something." The demands of the movement aren't going to be met [I]if they don't have any demands to meet.[/I] I look at movements like the civil rights movement, which had organization and demands that could be accomplished, and think of all the good the Occupy movement could do if they did the same.[/QUOTE]
If you're implying the civil rights movement didn't contain several smaller, sometimes competing groups and a general populace that was just displeased with the status quo I think you need to take a history class.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34640228]See? There are effective methods of protest and it appears Occupy is picking them up. They're petitioning their government, and asking for specific, concrete reforms by coming to a consensus within the movement. This is how you protest. Sitting around and shouting "do something" isn't going to accomplish anything.[/QUOTE]
Except it drove a group of non-Occupy folks to think about a situation and take action.
[QUOTE=Governor Goblin;34640345]oh you poor little Caucasian, you are SO oppressed.[/QUOTE]
Obviously white people can't be oppressed.
[editline]11th February 2012[/editline]
Also that message sounds like it was written by some angsty college know-it-all hippie that wants to bring down capitalism (and I'm not one for pure rampant capitalism, I'm one for a middle-way). Hey, if people want to stop studying and working, it's fine by me, it's survival of the fittest in the real world so someone making things harder for himself only benefits me
Why am I striking? I rather not lose the money and I have no reason to strike against my employer like that. They treat me very well.
[QUOTE=acds;34647907]Obviously white people can't be oppressed.[/QUOTE]Not for racial reasons in the U.S.
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;34648022]Why am I striking? I rather not lose the money and I have no reason to strike against my employer like that. They treat me very well.[/QUOTE]
Do whatever the fuck you want, it's wildcat. And you're not the only person in the world.
Filthy atheist communist Nazis taking over our God fearing nation...
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34647881]That isn't the issue. If you ask local protestors you'll always get a cohesive response because, you know, they're dealing with local issues. Anybody saying "All they've done so far is introduce rhetoric and pick broad stances on broad issues" is only paying attention to large-scale shit, which they aren't going to be homogenous on unless they become a political party.
If you're implying the civil rights movement didn't contain several smaller, sometimes competing groups and a general populace that was just displeased with the status quo I think you need to take a history class.[/QUOTE]
But they can be homogeneous without being a political party. While there were local groups within the Civil Rights movement they still had organization and demands on the nationwide level and succeeded in nationwide reform. The Occupy movement, if they were just trying to deal with only State or City level issues, wouldn't need national organization and what they're doing at the moment would be fine. However, since their rhetoric and slogans is [I]entirely[/I] about the biggest shit, they do need to establish common goals and demands.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34647881]Except it drove a group of non-Occupy folks to think about a situation and take action.[/QUOTE]
Uh, where in his post did it say that? Because the post I read simply showed that Occupiers were actually starting to gain greater organization and were more directly attempting to influence things.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34653153]But they can be homogeneous without being a political party. While there were local groups within the Civil Rights movement they still had organization and demands on the nationwide level and succeeded in nationwide reform.[/QUOTE]
Who ever said that homogeneity was what led to their success?
[QUOTE=Spooter;34653153]The Occupy movement, if they were just trying to deal with only State or City level issues, wouldn't need national organization and what they're doing at the moment would be fine. However, since their rhetoric and slogans is [I]entirely[/I] about the biggest shit, they do need to establish common goals and demands.[/QUOTE]
They really don't, though.
Again, you're making this really weird mistake of assuming people being displeased with a large-scale issue necessitates that they be able to provide a solution. It's entirely possible they do not know or the issue is too complex for them to provide one at present. You likely accept this is the case for doctors, therapists, teachers and the like, I'm wonder why you can't understand that' it can also apply to political affairs. OWS is not made up of politicians, financial sector tycoons and economists.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34653153]Uh, where in his post did it say that? Because the post I read simply showed that Occupiers were actually starting to gain greater organization and were more directly attempting to influence things.[/QUOTE]
He's not an OWS protestor, and yet after OWS became visible, he and others took action. I would say that's because OWS fulfilled it's purpose as a symptom and alerted people to the presence of an issue.
[quote]shutting [b]capitalism[/b] down.[/quote]
I'm sorry is there something wrong with capitalism?
[QUOTE=nemmises5;34655943]I'm sorry is something wrong with capitalism?[/QUOTE]
Generally, yeah.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;34655968]Generally, yeah.[/QUOTE]"Defective" barely begins to describe it.
[QUOTE=nemmises5;34655943]I'm sorry is there something wrong with capitalism?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, quite a bit.
ie a colossal fuck tonne.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34655072]Who ever said that homogeneity was what led to their success?[/Quote]
Facts? Logic? If they had been a bunch of squabbling local groups without any greater leadership, do you honestly think they would have accomplished anything? Without MLK or any of the other leaders the movement had could they have really gotten anywhere? It's historical speculation, but I find it tremendously unlikely.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34655072]
They really don't, though.
Again, you're making this really weird mistake of assuming people being displeased with a large-scale issue necessitates that they be able to provide a solution. It's entirely possible they do not know or the issue is too complex for them to provide one at present. You likely accept this is the case for doctors, therapists, teachers and the like, I'm wonder why you can't understand that' it can also apply to political affairs. OWS is not made up of politicians, financial sector tycoons and economists.[/Quote]
I'm not asking them to come up with a complex treatise on how to solve it, I'm asking them to come up with any demands. [I]At all.[/I] On the national level they haven't even come up with a simple demand like "Repeal Citizens United", though the local ones have. It matters that they make demands, even simple ones, on the national level about a national issue
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34655072]
He's not an OWS protestor, and yet after OWS became visible, he and others took action. I would say that's because OWS fulfilled it's purpose as a symptom and alerted people to the presence of an issue.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MarstunoM;34628107]I'm part of the Occupy movement, and our group is gearing up for multiple actions in the Spring.[/QUOTE]
The only specific issue that Occupy has brought to people's attention is income inequality. The language of 1% vs. 99% has thoroughly penetrated the political discussion all across the world, but that's all the average person would know about the movement. As far as I know, the movement is drastically more complex than that, with many more overarching views and potential demands. But since that's the only language they're consistently using that's all people know of them. And if an Occupier's reply to my suggestion of specific demands is that they're trying to do that, who are you to argue?
I would strike but I don't get off work until 9.
[QUOTE=nemmises5;34655943]I'm sorry is there something wrong with capitalism?[/QUOTE]
Capitalism is great on paper.
It keeps innovation fresh and prices down, when there's a multitude of options to go for business have to adapt or die.
[b]American[/b] capitalism is the problem. Some corporations are too big and far, far too political.
How aboutwe Occupy congress? Protesting big corporations won't do jack shit. Congress makes the laws allowing them to do what they do. Congress is being heavily influenced (if not bought) by corporations. Congress is where the real change happens.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34657328]Facts? Logic? If they had been a bunch of squabbling local groups without any greater leadership, do you honestly think they would have accomplished anything? Without MLK or any of the other leaders the movement had could they have really gotten anywhere? It's historical speculation, but I find it tremendously unlikely.[/QUOTE]
Leadership =/= homogeneity. Or did you forget about Malcom X as you cited MLK?
[QUOTE=Spooter;34657328]I'm not asking them to come up with a complex treatise on how to solve it, I'm asking them to come up with any demands. [I]At all.[/I] On the national level they haven't even come up with a simple demand like "Repeal Citizens United", though the local ones have. It matters that they make demands, even simple ones, on the national level about a national issue[/QUOTE]
Two issues with that:
-If the majority of the local Occupy protests take issue with Citizens United, then logically, the national movement takes issue with Citizens United.
-If you're looking for "any" they've been present since the beginning, and you're just not paying attention, or don't believe things like the 99% rhetoric are implied desires to have income inequality in this country balanced. This is to be expected since it's been demonstrated "[URL="http://www.gallup.com/poll/150164/americans-uncertain-occupy-wall-street-goals.aspx"]Americans are not highly familiar with the movement's activities or its goals.[/URL]"
But now you're going to say that's not specific enough and I've really lost track of whatever the fuck you're on about.
[QUOTE=Spooter;34657328]The only specific issue that Occupy has brought to people's attention is income inequality. The language of 1% vs. 99% has thoroughly penetrated the political discussion all across the world, but that's all the average person would know about the movement.[/QUOTE]
Are you John Q. Public? Have you ran a poll to determine this? What empirical evidence do you have that this is the "only specific issue" they've educated people one?
I suppose the fact that there was no specific sub-study done of those following OWS to prove they've convinced anybody of anything means it's impossible to state with certainty that they have, but as long as you're accepting the premise that they have, why do you assume it's only that one particular issue they've helped enlighten people on?
[QUOTE=Spooter;34657328]As far as I know, the movement is drastically more complex than that, with many more overarching views and potential demands. But since that's the only language they're consistently using that's all people know of them. And if an Occupier's reply to my suggestion of specific demands is that they're trying to do that, who are you to argue?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.nycga.net/resources/declaration/[/url]
[QUOTE]We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.
To the people of the world,
We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.
Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.[/QUOTE]
That's a statement that the goal of OWS is to make [I]you,[/I] an unspecified third party, learn something, and hopefully take action based on what you have learned, nothing more. I would take their word for it.
Bump. We're one month away. Here's some support listed on the Occupy Wall St NYC May Day website.
These are just some of the many local organizations are supporting the Day Without the 99%:
May 1st Coalition-NYC
Industrial Union Council-NJ
International Workers of the World
1199SEIU
AFSCME DC73
AFSCME Local 372 DC 37
AFSCME Local 375 DC 37
CWA Local 1180
Greater NY Labor-Religion Coalition
La Fuente
Left Labor Project
New York City LCLAA
New York City Taxi Workers Alliance
NY Civic Participation Project
PSC/CUNY - AFT
SEIU 32BJ
UAW Region 9A
United NY
Workers United, SEIU
I believe the May 1st Coalition did the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Boycott]2006 immigrant general strike[/url] back in the day.
Also, (confirmed) supporting occupations:
[quote]
USA:
NYC
Los Angeles
Long Beach
Pasadena
Boston
Phoenix
Indianapolis
Miami
Oakland
Twin Cities (Minneapolis-St. Paul)
Inland Empire (Riverside, Ontario, Redlands, San Bernardino Valley)
Tampa
Fayetteville, NWA
Cincinnati
Nashville
San Luis Obispo
Brooklyn
Portland
Seattle
El Paso
San Diego
Iowa City
Denton
Oxnard
Sacramento
Chicago
Pensacola
Providence
Oklahoma City
Boulder
Detroit
Dayton
San Jose
Naples
Durango
Orange County, CA
SLC
Burlington
Huntington
Mira Monte
Durham, NC
Salem, MA
Austin
Sante Fe
Atlanta
Australia:
Melbourne
Sydney
Canada:
Fredericton
Montreal
Torronto
Other:
Panama City
[/quote]
No love for Kansas :(
Firstly, I think these people are great people, taking the initiative to try and change America. Gotta love 'em, agree with them or not.
I fear this may not work though. As far as I've seen, no union is backing this. And strikes only really work when unions back it, as far as I've seen. Except for Gandhi's and such, but that situation was very different.
How about you go protest and waste your time sitting in a street, and I'll work hard, go to school, get involved in the government, and change America.
mmmmm'kay
Why are they protesting in Canada, we have a awesome government. Expect NDP next election.
[QUOTE=Disotrtion;35419542]How about you go protest and waste your time sitting in a street, and I'll work hard, go to school, get involved in the government, and change America.
mmmmm'kay[/QUOTE]
yup, best way to change something is to keep it the same...
was probably sarcasm...
[editline]4th April 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Heli;35419560]Why are they protesting in Canada, we have a awesome government. Expect NDP next election.[/QUOTE]
because harper
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
