We (OWS) Get To Stay!

What a waste. Its a privately owned park and the owner wanted to clean it up because the hippies trashed it. What a bunch of whiners. You arent protesting the govt you are trashing a privately owned park.

 

I would have to agree, the guy that owns it is nice enough to give them more time,,sooo,,,they spit in his face and call it a Victory???

What happened to ....Thank you....Oh I forgot,,their kids and have a right to take private property...

Who's greedy now?

 

Well of were only talking about news,who cares.....no one watches CBS news anyway.I think tho ,if 99% of Americans are identifying with these occuipers as they tell us and are as enraged as the folks being reported on seem to be and display just the slightest bit of activism....casual prime time viewership could most certainly be a casualty of CBS news corporate brow beating and protectionism.

The amount of viewers a program has, directy effects the extent a potential advertiser is willing to go. Turning off ones core audience to protect the secret society called 'corprorate interests' seems farfetched. Obviously w/99% of folks in the mix ,CBSs core has to be in their somewhere.

 

I just explained that!! The people tune in to watch crap like 2 and a half men and CSI, NOT the news. That is where their viewing figures come from. So the few million people who watch the nightly news, is unimportant compared to the tens of millions who watch the above shows, as well as big bang, and all the other terrible cheesy crap CBS puts out.


And as I already explained as well, the media shapes public opinion to a very large extent, so your point doesn't make any sense.

 

LOL This from a Raiders fan? Have you ever seen the garbage and puke left over the Oakland Coliseum after a Raiders game? Not to mention the hooliganism and general anti-family atmosphere.

 

It doesn't look like there is much involvement by the poor, just the children of the upper classes. The people who could make this work are the actual working and middle class, and right now OWS is going out of their way to offend bourgeois sensibilities. They can turn it around, but they have not started to yet.

 

That's incorrect, Polly. The nascent feminist movement in Saudi Arabia is the rightful and natural reaction to the restrictions imposed on them by a patriarchal society that deprives women of the rights and freedoms enjoyed by men. This movement, as is/was the case everywhere else, was birthed looooooooong before the 2008 economic crash.

What part of their political line do you support?

Well, it matters if you voted for a government that has given you exactly what you asked for.

Indeed, let's be honest. You are correct that the current situation is not the doing of one bad or misguided man. On the other hand, it was not the doing of the "class" you mentioned that forced banks to provide loans to people who could not afford the ridiculously over-inflated real estate they were purchasing. It wasn't this "class" that forced people to exceed their credit limits to the point of bankruptcy, or forced young people to make bad decisions about their educational and career choices.

I am glad your comments led back to politicians, however. That's why you should be down in DC protesting their policies instead of railing against "Wall Street" up in New York. Once you (the protesters) are capable of looking past your ideological blinkers you'll realize this.

Of course, I realize there is a difference, Polly - I used to be a New Leftist myself. Our movement was a reaction to the tyrannical expression of socialism that was practiced by the Old Left. However, we did not and can never remove the germ of totalitarianism that exists at the core of both the democratic and tyrannical expressions of Socialism. It was this realization that compelled me to abandon the New Left.

"Just" meaning Socialistic.

No, I'm not saying you should vote Republican or abandon your ideals, Polly. What I'm saying is that you're not going to solve the economic and political problems that exist in this country by railing against Capitalism and banging bongos in Camp ANSWERnik. Our problems and solutions begin at home and then lead us to Washington, not to New York. All of you are misdirecting your frustration and energy.

I would be remiss if I failed to point out that Socialist sentiments are not what produce a good conscience or the solutions to mass misery. Many of the worst monsters of the 20th Century, from Stalin to Mao to Pol Pot, were all Socialists who brought unprecedented scales of mass misery upon the human race in the name of "social justice".

 

Good for you, Polly. Great post.

It's good to see the young people of the world are leading a movement to rehabilitate a world where unemployment, poverty, getting laid off every few years, foreclosures, evictions, marginalization, disfranchisement, etc., has become the new normal.

I live in a conservative county in California and in my city two independant Occupy groups have formed. I will most likely join them at some point. First I want to see where this is going and what issues/ideas for change will emerge. Right now they are occupying the Chase Manhattan bank who are trying to illegally evict a war vet. That's right. Someone who served their country is being treated like trash by a huge corporation that rakes in billions in profits every year.

Expect the professional right-wing activist types (like that phony pimp O' Keefe) and the FBI to send plants and moles in to try to disrupt and discredit the movement. Remember Cointelpro? It's still active. It reminds me of these FBI stings that are going on currently where they send some mole to try to goad and trick disaffected American Muslims to participate in terrorist activity. If you see somebody suddenly show up with plans of violence that don't seem to make sense, be wary and tell everyone you know to ignore them.

In the mean time, keep up the good work and know that over half of Americans support your cause, according to the just released Time poll.

 

Since you both basically said the same thing, I'll respond to both of you at once:

There is no shortage of ideas concerning solutions in this movement. No shortage at all. We just haven't reached a consensus. We have a consensus though that the continued rule of the financial aristocracy is unacceptable. That is our starting point, not our ending point. This is a process as much as a protest. We are having a protracted conversation on solutions, even as we attract more and more attention to the unacceptability of the rule of the financial oligarchy.

Many here consider this movement to literally be a collection of new societies in miniature itself. They consider it a revolutionary movement. Again, this isn't about issuing demands of the government, but about finding our own way to resolve this dilemma independent of the powers that be. That is why we do not issue a set of central demands. Most of us have given up on doing that. There are, in fact, lots of socialists, communists, and anarchists here, in addition to a number of trade unions. The latter are the wealthier and more conservative participants in this movement, broadly speaking. They tend to be the reformists who really just want us to re-elect Obama next year and/or turn this into simply a dialogue on tax levels. Most of us don't have unions though. Many are unemployed. It seems like you have your own ideas concerning solutions. Why not join in this conversation and unite with us on the basis of mutual opposition to Wall Street's reign while we have it?

This video from way back on day five of our occupation helps explain the OWS movement's basic mission and showcases some of the early range of opinions.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwWInp75ua0&feature=player_embedded"]Nobody Can Predict The Moment Of Revolution ( Occupy Wall Street ) - YouTube[/ame]

For further info, you might also check out our official publications:

The Occupied Wall Street Journal, issue 1

The Occupied Wall Street Journal, issue 2

This recent video explains the purpose of our newspaper.

I agree with you on those things, but I think it's obvious that the government isn't interested in such things. We should take up the task of resolving these issues ourselves, independently of the two-party system.

I am a democratic socialist myself. In my view, we should indeed consider this movement a collection of new societies in miniature and begin comprehensively organizing a parallel government run directly by the people. From there, we will be positioned to address society's ills. We will be able to craft a new and egalitarian America without the super-rich and their bought-off officials in Washington. My gut tells me you are more moderate than that. That's a great example of why we need a protracted conversation on solutions as we build this movement. We should unite now on what we can and dialogue about solutions as we go.

 

Great post, frodly, however, I question the constitutional and economic feasibility of the solution cited above. While the thrust of your solution makes sense, I expect that many people would oppose it on the grounds that it constitutes a violation of the First Amendment.

 

I am aware of that, which is why I specifically want an amendment. All previous attempts at campaign finance reform have been overturned by the courts, because they have illogically decided that buying elections and political corruption is a free speech issue. We need an amendment which changes that fact, and makes it clear that the ability to buy politicians is not covered under your first amendment rights!!

 

It makes perfect sense and it does because I agree, the media shapes public opinion.

So why would they turn thier backs on the 99? Why do you think the 99 wouldnt make CBS pay via boycotts of their sitcoms and drama? After all there are 800 other channels to choose from.

Perhaps its really only 9% or 19% who really care about corporate malfeasance,rest wont let media bias get in the way of the newly destroyed Two and half Men.

 

That's got about as good a chance of getting through Congress as a Balanced Budget Amendment.

 

Should I not use my arm because someone out in the world has none? Should I walk around with my eyes closed because someone else is blind? Should I let my livelihood be taken from me just because someone else is poorer? Should we strive to be less and have less and think less?

I count my blessings, but I also realize that we can always do better and be more and make life more full and well for ourselves and everyone else.

In America the rich are getting richer and are gaining more control over our government. The poor are getting poorer and you try to turn our heads and distract us by making us look at the poor in Africa, all the while the others are digging into our pockets.

Don’t get me wrong. I understand there is truth for some in what you say, but for many of us, you are making a false statement and assuming we are whining instead of striving for a better America. You should also realize the statement you made is double edged sword that can be used against those who complain about taxes and the rich who complain but still have more than all of us.

No matter who they are or what they believe, you must realize that people hardly ever do something for one reason alone. There is much more behind the curtain than just thinking they got the short end of the stick. Many people simply want to make this a better place to live but disagree on how to get there. So I would like it if you ceased your generalizations and judged us each as unique individuals and accept that some people are content with they have but still wish to make the world a better place for all of us.

 

wrong. I do not care for wealth distribution. You're blaming business for tax laws enacted by your congressmen. Lower taxes for everyone means better economy. I am not going to engage in class warfare against people that make more than i do. They pay their share and have more than their share of the risk.

If it comes down to it. I'm going to be on the side of the wealthy that your group wants to penalize financially and worse when the real culprits are your democrat politicians intent on pulling in as much money as they can for themselves(gov't).

 

The real enemy is this globalized economy brought upon us by the greedy rich and poor who wanted cheap goods at the cost of american labor.

 

The greedy poor, GrayMan?

While I agree with your sentiments concerning the need to buy American products, I think it's unfair to attack poor people for purchasing the goods they need at a price they can afford. One of the reasons poor people are forced to make that choice is on account of the cost of American labor.

 

Pardon me for interjecting here, GrayMan, but I believe that is precisely what Liebe suggested - that people make a contribution instead of futile complaints and gestures. As I pointed out to Polly, the protesters are misdirecting their frustration and energy when they could be channeling it into more productive and constructive channels.

 

That's irony for ya. Children of the upper classes protesting greed.

They consider OWC useful. As soon as you get to be an irritant or cease to be useful, you will be squashed.

And the existing government is going to stand idly by and let that happen? You really haven't thought all this out, have you.

You are never going to get there. Because you are going about it the wrong way. You're going after the people who take advantage of the laws instead of the people who write and pass the laws. You need to head to Washington if you want to bring about any kind of change. And change has to start at the ballot box.

In reading your postings, you sound very well educated. Do you actually think you can form a parallel government without getting squashed by the current government's military??

This talk of organizing a parallel government run directly by the people is ridiculous. You need to change the duly elected government so that it works for the people like it is supposed to. That goal is going to get you much more support than the ridiculous "parallel government" nonsense you are currently spouting.

 

Its somewhat more complex than you think.

Nothing is ever as simple as the simple-minded see it. Read the Guru of Greed -

here :-

http://www.politicalforum.com/latest-world-news/212090-we-ows-get-stay-9.html#post4584401


cheers .


;;

 

I fear you are right, in as much as I don't think it will happen!! However, it is an issue that transcends partisanship. It is just a good idea, that both sides should agree on. That of course never happens, but it is not like the balanced budget amendment, because that is seen as a right wing idea, and can therefore never be supported by the left. Publicly financed elections is ideologically pretty neutral, but would put politicians back in the business of representing the best interests of the American people(at least whatever that meant to them). That is the issue on which the Tea Party and the OWS protestors should unite, in opposition to the status quo and the establishment!!

 

Your global economy was brought on to YOU by your Politicians.

 

I'm beginning to think the 99% mob are starting to think that they represent 99%, when in fact its only membership of a demographic.

 

greedy was and adjective that described the rich that I was refering to. The poor were not give the same description in my statement.

I wrote the greedy rich and the poor.
What I meant was, "the rich that are greedy and the poor people"

 

Yes, but driven by rich corporate greed and their lobbiests. I also would like to ask you which politicians are not rich?