Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Adbusters: Time to scale back and refocus...

Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 15, 2011, 4:44 p.m. EST by Oneofmany (85)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement


The occupation strategy is winding down and it appears the focus will be on something the "majority" of Americans want to see. Getting the money out of politics.



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 12 years ago

Sounds good to me.

[-] 3 points by Freeman82 (8) 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by qazxsw123 (238) 12 years ago

My thoughts exactly: Bernie! Bernie! Bernie for Prez!!!!

He said he expects the Occupy movement to re-emerge with more focus next spring and predicted it would rise to a third political party in the United States.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/adbusters-occupy-wall-street-innovator-movement-wind-start-spring-article-1.977956#ixzz1dp2vOVfv

[-] 1 points by dreamingforward (394) from Gothenburg, NE 12 years ago

There was never any need to scale back. It's just that there needed to be anticipated resistance from the existing order and plans to argue a case in court. Otherwise, it's just seen as complaining, and they don't know what to do with it, because they (the existing rule) consider themselves entitled to the land they are occupying and the power they have.

Absent that, subversion is the only alternative.

[-] 1 points by RexDiamond (585) from Idabel, OK 12 years ago

You people touched upon a valid problem regarding money and politicians. It's an age old problem. However, you went about it the wrong way, alienating the majority and participating in futile tactics. We will stand with you when you propose a strategy that actually works.

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 12 years ago

From the article: "He said he expects the Occupy movement to re-emerge with more focus next spring and predicted it would rise to a third political party in the United States." - Cool! Sign me up! Please, please, please just make sure you don't accept ANY donations. Not even a dollar.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 12 years ago

please don't confuse grass roots support with "money in politics". Dedicated people, real patriots, are heading to Philadelphia for a National General Assembly. wiki Suffolk Resolves to get a sense of what is happening: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Resolves

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 12 years ago

I must say, I do like the idea of of a national general assembly. I guess money is necessary, but what stop is in place to prevent the same thing happening over and over again?

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 12 years ago

good question, i think the selection of delegates process at the grassroots level has to remain vigilant and scrutinize the candidates closely. I think the 99% can spot a 1%er from a mile away!! The process of electing delegates is discussed in the declaration: https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 12 years ago

I like the declaration. But the suggested issues should probably reside on separate page, clearly titled 'suggested issues' with room for people to add comments. Also, since 91% of the American population thinks congress is doing a lousy job, I suggest they should be forced to explain to the American people what the hell they think they are doing. We are boss of them, and they need to be called out.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 12 years ago

OWS called them out but it should be obvious by now that TPTB aren't listening. Time to take it to the next level. It's called 'escalation'. The list of grievances, whatever ends up being on it, is the LEGAL next step. Backed up by the credible threat of forming a third party should they ignore it (as they have in the past), TPTB have one last chance to come clean. My guess is that right now TPTB are laughing about the breakup of the camps thinking Philadelphia will NEVER happen. With voter apathy what it is or was, announcing the NGA would be the one thing they really don't want to hear about. What if apathy was waning???

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 12 years ago

Money out = Restore Democracy 60 Wall St Nov 16 6PM We have a large number of great, well thought out, COMPLICATED ideas that will require a huge amount of "selling" and “explanation" and will garner GREAT OPPOSITION.
We need to be realistic & pick an issue that is simple – and that is popular -
that 83% of Americans already agree on -
that 76% of Republicans already agree on -
that 56% of TP already agree on -
that will bring together the people in OWS with the people outside of OWS.
Everybody wins!

Our only goal should be to pass a constitutional amendment to counter Supreme Court decisions Citizens United (2010) & Buckley v. Valeo (1976), that enable unlimited amounts of anonymous money to flood into our political system.
“Corporations and organizations are not a persons & have no personhood rights”
“money is not free speech”.

We don’t have to explain or persuade people to accept our position – we have to persuade them to ACT based on their own position. Pursuing this goal will prove to the world that we, at OWS, are a serious realistic Movement, with serious realistic goals. Achieving this goal will make virtually every other goal – jobs, taxes, infrastructure, Medicare – much easier to achieve –
by disarming our greatest enemy – GREED.

THE SUCCESS STORY OF THE AMENDING PROCESS The Prohibition movement started as a disjointed effort by conservative teetotalers who thought the consumption of alcohol was immoral. They ransacked saloons and garnered press coverage here and there for a few years. Then they began to gain support from the liberals because many considered alcohol partially responsible for spousal and child abuse, among other social ills. This odd alliance, after many years of failing to influence change consistently across jurisdictions, decided to concentrate on one issue nationally—a constitutional amendment. They pressured all politicians on every level to sign a pledge to support the amendment. Any who did not, they defeated easily at the ballot box since they controlled a huge number of liberal, and conservative and independent swing votes in every election. By being a single-issue constituency attacking from all sides of the political spectrum, they very quickly amassed enough votes (2/3) to pass the amendment in Congress. And, within just 17 months, they were successful in getting ¾ of the state legislatures to ratify the constitutional amendment into law. (Others were ratified even faster: Eight —took less than a year. The 26th, granting 18-year-olds the right to vote, took just 99 days.)

If they could tie the left and right into a success -
If Ohio won. If Arizona won. If Maine won. If Mississippi won - WHY CAN'T WE ??????????

I feel that we should stay with this simple text to overturn CU:
”corporations are not people” and “money is not free speech”
for four simple reasons and one – not so simple:
83% of Americans have already opposed CU in the ABC/Washington post poll and the above
We don’t have to work to convince people on the validity of our position.
Simple is almost always better.
This simple Amendment is REQUIRED to overturn CU.
And all other electoral reform can be passed through the normal legislative process.

OWS and these pages are chock full of ( mostly ) excellent ideas to improve our country.
All of them have strong advocates – and some have strong opposition.
None of them has been “pre-approved” by 83% of Americans !
Pursuing this goal – without additional specifics is exactly what Americans want.
What do we want? Look at that almost endless list of demands – goals - aims.
Tax the rich. End the Fed. Jobs for all, Medicare for all. So easy to state! Can you imagine how hard it would be to formulate a “sales pitch” for any of these to convince your Republican friends to vote for any of them?
83% of Americans have ALREADY “voted” against CU. And 76% of the Rs did too!
All we have to do ask Americans is to pressure their representatives – by letters - emails – petitions.

Wanna take your family on vacation?
Convince your 7 year old to go to Mt Rushmore.
Then try to convince her to go to Disneyland.
Prioritizing this goal will introduce us to the world – not as a bunch of hippie radical anarchist socialist commie rabblerousers – but as a responsible, mature movement that is fighting for what America wants.

Ohio won. Arizona won. Maine won. Mississippi won -
I feel that using their tactics, and the tactics of the NRA, the AARP an the TP – who all represent a minority – who have successfully used their voting power to achieve their minority goals - plus the Prohibition Amendment tactics – bringing all sides together - is a straight path for us to success that cannot fail to enable us to create and complete one MAJORITY task. Read more: http://bit.ly/vK2pGI

[-] -1 points by Apercentage (81) 12 years ago

You can NEVER take money out of politics people. Enforcing new regulations on lobbying and other private donations, will only drive them to be dirtier and more well hidden from the public eye.

Money talks, it always has, It does today, and it always will. Anyone thinking other wise is being unrealistically idealistic.

[-] 1 points by Oneofmany (85) 12 years ago

What is worse; being idealistic and fighting for change or being a coward who refuses to fight against something they know is inherently wrong?

[-] 0 points by Apercentage (81) 12 years ago

I'm just saying its an impossible battle to fight. People who have power will always want to sway political decision, and they will no matter what laws are in place. Its an inherent part of any political system.

[-] -2 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 12 years ago

The problem is that politicians will not listen to this, because they have too much at stake. Ergo, the system is irreversibly screwed.

[-] 1 points by Oneofmany (85) 12 years ago

The problem is that we have allowed it to happen through apathy and acceptance of their actions.

[-] 1 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 12 years ago

The problem now is that people need money in order to get elected.

[-] 1 points by Apercentage (81) 12 years ago

And how would you propose we change that?

[-] 2 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 12 years ago

By making tv campaign ads illegal except for an allocated time for each candidate.

Which would INCLUDE third party candidates.

[-] 0 points by Apercentage (81) 12 years ago

Well thats a legal nightmare, advertising is protected under the first amendment. Its free speech.

[-] 0 points by ronimacarroni (1089) 12 years ago

No, its commerce.

[-] 1 points by Apercentage (81) 12 years ago

"Comercial Speech" which is what all types of advertising falls under, is protected by free speech. It is even more protected than subversive advocacy, fighting words, and obscenity.

Source : Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U.S. 748, 96 S.Ct. 1817, 48 L.Ed.2d 346 (1976).