Happy Birthday: The Occupy Movement One Year Later
147 replies, posted
[QUOTE]New York (CNN) -- Police encircled Lower Manhattan's Zuccotti Park on Sunday as protesters geared up to observe the one-year anniversary of Occupy Wall Street.
A loosely organized group of demonstrators first gathered in New York one year ago Monday as part of a movement that thrust "the 99 percent" into the political lexicon. The protests spread to dozens of cities across the United States.
On Saturday, police said, they made "multiple arrests," charging protesters on various counts, including disorderly conduct, resisting arrests and felony assault.
Video of the scene showed people near the park being detained, while others banged on drums and shouted. Zuccotti Park is located in the city's financial district.
The group's messages have ranged from protecting the environment to protests over education costs. There's been an overriding theme of condemning income inequality and social injustice.
It put out a statement Sunday, saying "the day's events are about flexing people power in the streets and utilizing public spaces."
"The Occupy movement continues to utilize culturally creative tactics to build the movement for social and economic justice," the group said.
The movement also has been criticized for its lack of focus, and over reliance on a physical space.
"The camp is one of the central points for the first couple of months and that's just not a sustainable form of protest," said Fordham University professor Heather Gautney, referring to Zuccotti Park.
"So I think there was a transition into more localized acts of protest but they never really had the momentum that the camps had."
Occupy had "a problem of transitioning into a new strategy," she said.
The group's mantra has traditionally been directed against the so-called privileged 1 percent of society -- such as banks, the mortgage industry, insurance providers and others.
The 99 percent is a reference to the broader public, which the group said had been undermined by those institutions.[/quote]
Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/16/us/ny-occupy-anniversary/index.html?hpt=hp_t3[/url]
I think Occupy worked, somewhat. Sure it didn't dismantle any lobbyships or any of that, but it changed a lot of people's opinions and thereby their votes too. And in the big picture, it's the votes that matter. Like breeding, if you keep picking the lesser evil you will end up with the greater good.
[QUOTE=mac338;37688314]I think Occupy worked, somewhat. Sure it didn't dismantle any lobbyships or any of that, but it changed a lot of people's opinions and thereby their votes too. And in the big picture, it's the votes that matter. Like breeding, if you keep picking the lesser evil you will end up with the greater good.[/QUOTE]
I do have to admit, it was a good concept. However, it only lasted so long.
Occupy facepunch
The no demands, no spokespeople thing kind of fucked them over and was dumb
If they had had people who could go on the news and say look the bankers fucked us over we need to slap their shit, I think a lot more people would have supported them
Here in the UK Occupy London was widely reported as an 'anti-capitalist protest' which is just not accurate at all
[QUOTE=Naaz;37688339]Occupy facepunch[/QUOTE]
Like you don't do that already.
[QUOTE=mac338;37688314]I think Occupy worked, somewhat. Sure it didn't dismantle any lobbyships or any of that, but it changed a lot of people's opinions and thereby their votes too. And in the big picture, it's the votes that matter. Like breeding, if you keep picking the lesser evil you will end up with the greater good.[/QUOTE]
it raised incredible amounts of awareness, which is an invaluable asset for the future.
[QUOTE=Bobie;37688416]it raised incredible amounts of awareness, which is an invaluable asset for the future.[/QUOTE]
Awareness of what? That the economy is sinking and the government and Wall Street were either not doing anything or barely to fix it? That was pretty well known prior.
I thought it was too idealist for its own good. Lack of direction, or at least lack of spokesman made execution look a bit daft.
It may have changed people's opinions but it's more likely that any cuts that took place may have changed those opinions more directly.
I'm in Atlanta and they just set up tents and camped here. They didn't have protests and they didn't even have a point.
If they had better leadership this could have gone somewhere. I think it had a bigger effect in Chicago and New York but here it was pretty useless.
[QUOTE=smurfy;37688395]
Here in the UK Occupy London was widely reported as an 'anti-capitalist protest' which is just not accurate at all[/QUOTE]
Not accurate? Kind of hard with photos like these:
[img]http://anticap.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/dear-capitalism-occupy-wall-street-occupy-pittsburgh-gift-economy-usury-lewis-hyde-charles-eisenstein-sacred-economics.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/zucc-2.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/Jp16k.jpg?1[/img]
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zwicbMr3WD4/TqVi3LTOkWI/AAAAAAAAAgs/380S7SqJcvk/s1600/Anti%2BCapitalism%2BOccupy%2BWall%2BStreet.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37688453]Awareness of what? That the economy is sinking and the government and Wall Street were either not doing anything or barely to fix it? That was pretty well known prior.[/QUOTE]
It shifted the focus somewhat from simply jobs and "The Economy" to Income Inequality and Corruption.
[editline]16th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37688484]Not accurate? Kind of hard with photos like these:
[img]http://anticap.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/dear-capitalism-occupy-wall-street-occupy-pittsburgh-gift-economy-usury-lewis-hyde-charles-eisenstein-sacred-economics.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.thenationalpatriot.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/zucc-2.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/Jp16k.jpg?1[/img]
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zwicbMr3WD4/TqVi3LTOkWI/AAAAAAAAAgs/380S7SqJcvk/s1600/Anti%2BCapitalism%2BOccupy%2BWall%2BStreet.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I am sure most of the protesters were for a more regulated Capitalism. I hope.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37688484]
[img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zwicbMr3WD4/TqVi3LTOkWI/AAAAAAAAAgs/380S7SqJcvk/s1600/Anti%2BCapitalism%2BOccupy%2BWall%2BStreet.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Lol.
Even if they could justifiably make the argument that natural rights theory asserts that everyone has a right to a job, it just doesn't work out in reality. In any productive system there will always be a natural unemployment rate likely around 2 to 5 percent.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;37688453]Awareness of what? That the economy is sinking and the government and Wall Street were either not doing anything or barely to fix it? That was pretty well known prior.[/QUOTE]
it may have been well known to you, but there were alot of people that generally did not know or care beforehand
[QUOTE=smurfy;37688395]The no demands, no spokespeople thing kind of fucked them over and was dumb
If they had had people who could go on the news and say look the bankers fucked us over we need to slap their shit, I think a lot more people would have supported them
Here in the UK Occupy London was widely reported as an 'anti-capitalist protest' which is just not accurate at all[/QUOTE]
Meanwhile, here in the states, the conservatives and filthy rich thought all they wanted was a hand-out.
Naturally the main-stream media outlets (like Fox and even CNN) latched on to that and more or less demonized the movement, so unless you paid attention to it at the beginning and got the message that they wanted to abolish corporate person-hood and demanded the prosecution of the financial institutions that got us in this mess to begin with, you'd be spoon-fed the notion that Occupy was a gathering of hippies and heroin addicts who think capitalism is bad.
[QUOTE=Kymandu;37689123]1 year of unorganized protests in which jobless bums and hippies held signs with no merit of a message. Happy birthday occu-tards.[/QUOTE]
Case in point.
The fact that alot of people who didn't know what it was about either also joined in and started chiming in with their own ideas, like "Ron Paul 2012", "adopt the gold standard", etc., further added to the media's "well these people don't even know what they want" reports. Not to mention the anarchists who were too chicken-shit to do their molotov attacks without the cover of the crowds (dark days for Occupy when the anarchists joined in, I tell you what).
[quote]I am sure most of the protesters were for a more regulated Capitalism. I hope. [/quote]
Most of them are for class war so no.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37688569]Lol.
Even if they could justifiably make the argument that natural rights theory asserts that everyone has a right to a job, it just doesn't work out in reality. In any productive system there will always be a natural unemployment rate likely around 2 to 5 percent.[/QUOTE]
Systemic unemployment or a 'reserve army of labor' is a capitalist phenomenon and not inherent to any system because it's 'productive'. Unemployment did not exist like it does today, a constant fear used to keep a wage-laborer 'competitive' in a large labor market.
Full employment isn't possible now because labor is commodified. If it wasn't, our productivity could easily afford full employment while also trending towards eliminating the need for work.
i think the occupy movement had "good intentions", at least somewhat. at least they realize that the current system isnt working. at the same time however, its sort of stupid of them to preach increased government regulations (and sometimes, power) which was what caused these economical troubles in the first place
[QUOTE=Strider*;37688569]Lol.
Even if they could justifiably make the argument that natural rights theory asserts that everyone has a right to a job, it just doesn't work out in reality. In any productive system there will always be a natural unemployment rate likely around 2 to 5 percent.[/QUOTE]
you should probably read the international covenant on economic social and cultural rights
employment is a human right, bro
[QUOTE=Strider*;37688569]Lol.
Even if they could justifiably make the argument that natural rights theory asserts that everyone has a right to a job, it just doesn't work out in reality. [i]In any productive system there will always be a natural unemployment rate likely around 2 to 5 percent.[/i][/QUOTE]
[citashen nedded]
[QUOTE=smurfy;37688395]The no demands, no spokespeople thing kind of fucked them over and was dumb
If they had had people who could go on the news and say look the bankers fucked us over we need to slap their shit, I think a lot more people would have supported them[/QUOTE]
I do agree on what is said. No demands, no goals, etc. But if Occupy starts to get organised and creates a platform, the movement would break internally because the movement is politically diverse (I mean, Occupy was supported by the US Communist Party, and the Nazi Party. Both hated each other.) Occupy members simply wouldn't agree on their final platform and their desired goals.
Of course, that's just my hypothesis.
EDIT: I guess that's the reason why they're like "We ain't making no demands. We no terrorists!", the movement just relies on hype and mass numbers.
[QUOTE=Conscript;37688700]Systemic unemployment or a 'reserve army of labor' is a capitalist phenomenon and not inherent to any system because it's 'productive'.[/QUOTE]
Reserve army of labor, you do realize businesses are just as inhibited by labor? Hell it's why "sticky wages" are a problem.
And sorry no, there are no systems which can even slightly emulate the productive activities of capitalism.
[editline]16th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=BrickInHead;37688823]
employment is a human right, bro[/QUOTE]
Because the UN decided so?
Do you know the difference between law and ethics?
Thousands of people in the streets, mostly the poor and unemployed; the media demonized it, law enforcement suppressed it (violently), and the politicians remained largely unswayed. These are not things that you can dispute, these are facts. Whether you like Occupy or not, it was definitely eye opening for those of us who were paying attention.
[QUOTE=Bobie;37688847][citashen nedded][/QUOTE]
Don't take my word for it, take a Nobel Prize winning economist's.
[quote=Milton Friedman]There is a tendency to take it for granted that a high level of recorded unemployment is evidence of inefficient use of resources and conversely. This view is seriously in error. A low level of unemployment may be a sign of a forced-draft economy that is using its resources inefficiently and is inducing workers to sacrifice leisure for goods that they value less highly than the leisure under the mistaken belief that their real wages will be higher than they prove to be[/quote]
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;37688321]I do have to admit, it was a good concept. However, it only lasted so long.[/QUOTE]
It's still going on, dude.
I think some politicians, and the public at large, noticed it.
Income Inequality was not even a term Americans knew of or used before Occupy happened.
[QUOTE=MarstunoM;37688966]Thousands of people in the streets, mostly the poor and unemployed; the media demonized it, law enforcement suppressed it (violently), and the politicians remained largely unswayed. These are not things that you can dispute, these are facts. Whether you like Occupy or not, it was definitely eye opening for those of us who were paying attention.[/QUOTE]
But I'd rather ignore the messages and focus on the skinny jeaned libertarian college kids with dirty dreds.
[QUOTE=Strider*;37688972]Don't take my word for it, take a Nobel Prize winning economist's.[/QUOTE]
friedman is talking about capitalism in a vague sense. you originally said,
[quote]In any productive system there will always be a natural unemployment rate likely around 2 to 5 percent[/quote]
the two don't really match up.
Glad to see the progress it made.
...wait
[QUOTE=Strider*;37688898]Reserve army of labor, you do realize businesses are just as inhibited by labor? Hell it's why "sticky wages" are a problem.[/quote]
No, I didn't. Businesses exist as products of labor that merely facilitates the exchange of the value of they produce, so it's hard to fathom how they're 'inhibited' by labor.
[quote]And sorry no, there are no systems which can even slightly emulate the productive activities of capitalism.[/Quote]
We have yet to see. Capitalism is the first time in history we've had some sort of socialized production on a huge scale.
In fact, by doing so we've unleashed so much productive ability I think capitalism is starting to be a hindrance. It can't survive any steps towards post-scarcity, maintains an unemployment rate, and only recognizes effective demand.
[QUOTE=Bobie;37689006]friedman is talking about capitalism in a vague sense. you originally said,
the two don't really match up.[/QUOTE]
You cannot have full employment because of sticky wages, job turnover, and a variety of other ailments. Economists don't really dispute this whatsoever so I'm not sure why I'm being rated dumb.
I use the figure of around 2 to 5 percent because it's the most argued for region of natural unemployment and observations from the past 100 years seem to correlate.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.