Forum Post: Best commentary I've seen so far on OWS:
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 4, 2011, 4:41 p.m. EST by hismat
(1)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
At first I was against it - then I was for it. An excerpt:
"In many ways Occupy Wall Street will be most successful as a failure despite a full-fledged effort waged on behalf of those involved. It will function as a crash course in political education needed by those still unclear as to the vast diversity and interconnection of problems in an advanced capitalist society as well as deracinating the idea that spontaneity alone is a sufficient political practice."
way to stay on topic, people.
Well..no. Our whole point is to be successful, if it fails, we're going to fall into an economic depression comparable to The Great Depression, then NWO taking over. They will say it's our only hope for a world bank, which will in turn have rule over most of the worlds economies and trade practices. Failure isn't an option people. Stay strong!
http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-will-endure
How can you be successful when you are asking our government to solve problems that our they created? They created the housing crisis by forcing lenders to lend to people that were not likely to repay, then raised the price of oil by restricting production, taking money from the people who had to repay their loans. Then they printed money and gave it to the very corporations that you hate so they are still here -lol. Taxpayers for generations to come will have to pay for the debt they created, while the people in positions of power in government are all rich.... And you want them to fix it? LMAO
The people are going to fix it. That's why we are coming together. Power in numbers. And the act of boycotting itself can shut down the system. Try not to be so shortsighted when talking about important issues, please. Peace and love.
what is your plan for taking power from our government so "the people" can fix it? Shouldn't we be protesting Washington instead?
The power isn't even in government, it's in the banks. The banks control the government man, and there are occupy movements all over the country, and world now...DC is this week. Support us.
The power is in the government. Only the government has the power of the gun behind it. Have you ever seen a bank require you to pay taxes and threaten you with imprisonment if you don't comply? Does a bank have the ability to print money out of thin air that taxpayers will be required to repay? Can a bank send troops to war?
Yes banks and other large corporations can influence a corrupt government to do bad things, and they have. This is the point - the government is corrupt and it is too powerful. A less powerful government would have more controls on its power and be less of a target for big money and more vulnerable to prosecution when it became corrupt. I will support you (us) when the focus is on the right target.
The reality is simply that the offshore banking cartels funded Obama's election campaign and are the cause of the corruption in government. People involved with this movement really need to look deeper. They want to bring about an World Bank, we cannot let this happen.
Where did you get the info about offshore banking cartels? Maybe they funded in part, under the table, but this link shows actual recorded contributions. #1 is U of CA followed by Goldman Sachs, Harvard, Microsoft, Google, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Time Warner.... http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638
what is even bigger, but not shown are union contributions because they are broken up into small amounts and recorded per union member - good way to keep it secret....
Yes they want to form a world bank as long as they are in charge. That's why I say limit government power.
Why would you limit government power when the power influencing government lies with the banks and the individuals who possess trillions of dollars who run the banks?
My point is that if government had no power except for national defense and the legal system, banks would have little interest in buying influence. When the government has the power to do things like give 500 million to a sham green company like Solyndra, there will be lots of corruption. BTW are you familiar with the Solyndra mess? If not, research it. It provides a perfect example of what I am talking about. The full circle of corruption, from campaign contributions to huge money handed out.
Well that's wrong too because one of the main interests of the powers that be is in the actions of war and dominance of other countries for spread of political power and buyouts of other cultures. So minus national defense off that list also. So the government controls the legal system? Oh wait, no, the constitution is changed all the time to the liking of corporate entities and banking powers. Which means, it MEANS nothing.
Actions of war and changing the constitution are actions of government. So we should focus on fixing our government. Do you agree that a proper, ethical government could not be influenced by banks, etc.?
No. You should understand that the pursuit of profit hence the actions of individuals for their own self interest and personal gain will always breed corruption of people in positions of power. That is why we need something completely different from capitalism, the system itself is inherently flawed because of the values it teaches.
I asked, "Do you agree that a proper, ethical government could not be influenced by banks, etc.?" If the people in government are ethical, how could they by adveresly influenced?
Actually, I make things for people in the pursuit of profit and personal gain and food on the table, and I am honest will not be corrupted. How could I be corrupt without breaking a law anyway? Many people in government have a propensity for trying to get money for not doing anything that people desire. They just want to take from the people that do produce.
Capitalism is not a system. It is one entity (in my case me) asking another, "what can I do for you that you will compensate me for?" Nobody forces anyone to do anything. Nobody has power over anyone else. Capitalism by itself is perfect. When it is distorted by the government deciding winners and losers, then it can be bad. What is flawed is people, so I am against giving people power over other people - this is what government is all about and why it must be limited. The writers of our constitution understood this, but socialist thinking has granted the government more and more power over time.
I'm sorry you can't get the point of what I'm trying to say to you.
Maybe you are not articulating your point well.
You did not answer my question, how could ethical people in government be adversely influenced. Maybe answering that might clear things up.
Define ethical and how someone could not be corrupted with socio-economic influences surrounding them.
If you really think that everyone can be bought, then you reflect on yourself. I assure you that there are some really good people, but they are getting hard to find because when the country moves toward socialism (as it has since FDR) it goes to a system that rewards failure and dishonesty penalizes hard work and success. People that are corrupted try to teach others that corruption is ok..
If you really think that everyone is subject to corruption under pressure then you are wasting your time being politically involved - if you are trying to make things better.
Hey. You still don't understand. Put your ego aside and admit that I propose valid points that you have been unable to counter effectively. Socialism or capitalism, under either system there will always be people subject to corruption because both have monetary currency involved. There will always be those people, in both of those systems, who will be corrupted by the very societal influences that are fostered by the economic system of their time. We are all products of our current society, and hence we have similar values right now, those who have sense and knowledge enough to realize what I have, know that the solution is in abandoning capitalism and socialism is not what I'm suggesting. Don't even ask what I'm suggesting, I'm simply putting this information out there so people can decide collectively on appropriate courses of action. I'm only wasting my time if you still cannot comprehend my position.
our discussion started when I responded to you post assuming that you were taking the position of many of the occupy wall st people, that we should demand that our government fix things (my fault if the assumption is wrong). I am only proposing that we fix the government rather than ask it to fix anything.
If you have a solution to propose, I am open to hear you out
I have ideas but I doubt laying out groundwork for a new economic system on these forums would help, I just want to help see to it that this movement means something, and that it actually does cause a change, for the better, not worse. We just can't continue in the type of capitalist system we currently have, and socialism will not work either. I believe in the complete elimination of monetary currency altogether and I've been trying to explain to people the merits of doing such. Politics is past its expiration date and needs to disappear as well. People should understand that I'm talking about a change that we as a people haven't attempted before. We certainly can't keep trying the same systems with a few changes patched in here and there, over and over. Something completely new and greatly more efficient and sustainable is needed for the world today.
I'm old, so I know the words of the John Lennon song REVOLUTION: " you say you have a new solution - we'd all love to see the plan..." - that the way i remember it anyway -lol
Good luck developing your plan. Post it when you get a rough draft - hope there's not too much bloodshed to make it happen.