Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Can We All Agree Occupy Was A Tactic?

Posted 8 years ago on March 1, 2012, 12:35 p.m. EST by LloydJHart (190) from Vineyard Haven, MA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Occupy was a public relations tactic in the purest sense and now that the occupy tactic has failed to change any policy for the betterment of the working people of this country, now has to evolve from the purely public relations version of itself which is "Occupy" which can on longer occupy the public square, into two different but effective tactics, the militant labor tactic of direct confrontation to blockade the economy and the Gandhian non-violent civil disobedient non-cooperation tactic to also blockade the economy. Take away the oligarchs profits and we will have leverage to negotiate.

Occupy was a tactic that the oligarchs dealt with very effectively. They simply removed the occupiers from the public space they occupied. Now Occupy occupies office space that they pay rent for. The occupy tactic claimed to have changed the conversation from the economy to income disparity but thats not true. The public was already talking about the economy and income disparity and have been since the mass lay offs and mass foreclosures spiked in 2008. Actually the coordinated and deliberate assault on the living wage began in 1987 and led to the Free Trade deal with Canada and then the North American Free Trade Agreement, Work for Welfare, deregulation of the banks, deregulation of the electric utilities etc. etc... The public who have been taking all this oligarch crap for decades now are perfectly aware of the screwing they have been taking and have been talking about it.

All of these legislative activities have artificially lowered wages and artificially raised the cost of living and finally with no real investment in jobs for the working people after the mass lay offs and mass foreclosures since 2008 have made the job market meaner, having workers clawing at each other to get a low wage part time job or nothing at all. Because almost all human needs have been bundled into having currency in your pocket, the response from those us suffering homelessness, hunger and joblessness tend to be very emotional indeed. Occupy tapped into these emotions but failed to strike the iron while the iron was hot and has lost public support as a result. There was also the co-opting of Occupy by the liberal elite's who the public is very disappointed in. When Occupy activists lose their footing because they get addicted to seeking stardom on MSNBC and in the democratic party instead of watching what is really happening to the public good will toward Occupy you have a recipe for public disillusionment.

Occupy had promise but the general assembly was infiltrated liberals and libertarians and manifested a completely ineffective strategy of orthodox non-confrontation. Now Occupy activists with their hands on dwindling bank accounts refuse to evolve to the two tactics I have pointed out above. What I have learned in all the years I have been active is that the public will back your play as long as you show integrity in resolve to win concessions from the oligarchs for the health and welfare of the public. Occupy activists have not shown integrity and have allowed the media to pigeon hole the Occupy movement as the liberal version of the tea party. Public support has completely collapsed as donations are radically down from the peak when a glimmer of hope in the campaign occurred on the Brooklyn Bridge when an actual confrontation between Occupy activists and the NYPD blossomed. Since then OWS squandered nearly a million dollars.

If you don't actually confront the economy of the oligarchs with traditional tactics that work, your simply a wet rag slapping against the hot boiler of hate the oligarchs have for the working people on this planet.

So, can we all agree that Occupy was a tactic that has run it's course and that the working class must now confront the system to get democracy in the most important area of our lives, the distribution of wealth?

Can we all agree that both the democrats and republicans are in cahoots to screw the working class as they continue to ratify and sign into law free trade deals with slave labor states that only deepen poverty here in America?

Can we all agree we are only going to be thrown crumbs from the democratic party and that the democrats never really represented the working people and must be confronted as much as the republicans, the generals and the oligarchs?

Can we all agree that the main problem in the economy is forcing the working people in America to compete against slave labor in China, Mexico, Columbia, Panama, Guatemala etc. etc. destroying working class power and shifting the wealth of the nation and the world radically and disproportionately up to the oligarchs and that going back to tariffs on trade is the only way to protect a living wage?

Can we agree that articulating clear messages embodied in deliberate confrontational actions is the only way to maintain public support and win the ages long battle for democracy in the economy?



Read the Rules


[-] -1 points by greenanarchosyndicalist (85) 6 years ago

except there are plenty of rich democrats in office like all of them. picking the lesser of two evils is still picking evil any way you slice it. it is time for an alternative.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Who would you propose as an alternative???

And what's with the religious reference.

[-] 1 points by greenanarchosyndicalist (85) 6 years ago

to our government, our economy, or our culture? religious reference? i am not religious.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

You didn't mention who you proposed.

Why would you skip that most important of questions?

The "evil" thing is most definitely a call out to the religious.

One that I reject wholeheartedly as an attempt at propaganda, as it assumes that all humans are inherently evil.

[-] 1 points by greenanarchosyndicalist (85) 6 years ago

i assume all humans are inherently good.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Then vote for the better of the lot, instead of one of the evil ones.


That wasn't so hard, was it?

So, who did you say you proposed??

That's 3 times I've asked you now.

[-] 0 points by greenanarchosyndicalist (85) 6 years ago

the better of the lot are still corrupt and rotten to the core.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Let's see what you've said here.

And I quote.


"assume all humans are inherently good"

Yet you also say.


"the better of the lot are still corrupt and rotten to the core"

And you expect me not to figure you for totally confused?

You fail at that.

Now, for the 4th time.

Who do you propose?

[-] 0 points by greenanarchosyndicalist (85) 6 years ago

i didn't say the good in man could not be corrupted and destroyed. who do i propose for what?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

So. Confused and on a cell phone it is then.

Since you're lost, maybe you'll understand you're own quote this time.

You said.......

" it is time for an alternative"

To which I asked.

"who do you propose".

It's quite a simple question, really.

I don't understand why it's such a problem, except for your cell phone being unable to scroll properly.




[-] 1 points by Copiosis (19) 6 years ago

Hmm, I'm not sure the "can we all agree" statements are the right ones. I don't believe the people OWS rails against are inherently evil. They have become exceedingly good at extracting wealth from the system and in doing so, they have ruined it. The political class has been their mechanism and the vote has been usurped as a result.

The problem with OWS is there is no viable alternative and no principles upon which to build one. Loosely organized bands are well and good for short-term protests, but as folks below point out, they are too easy to corrupt via the CIA and others.

Is it any wonder why the republicans are so good at messaging and propaganda? Not in my mind. They literally run circles around liberals. Liberals can't seem to get on the same page about anything really.

Bucky Fuller (as well as a number of martial arts) had it right when he said, don't oppose, offer a better alternative. OWS has failed on this one crucial point. But I don't blame them because it's exceedingly difficult to innovate a system that can replace what we've enjoyed for 200+ years, especially if you're looking for that alternative in our past.


  1. Total freedom for all aka Human Sovereignty
  2. No personal debt, ever again
  3. Abolishment of the financial services industry
  4. Food, clothing, shelter, education and healthcare provided at not cost to all
  5. The elimination of unemployment, poverty, crime and other market externalities
  6. Human centered markets where trade is unrestricted

There are more principles, principles that can be accomplished, with a new future-oriented socio-economic innovation. Until we rally around a better alternative, we will not escape the nightmare that is living in America today.

[-] -2 points by oktoberchill (-3) 6 years ago

Both parties the same? How repelican of you!

[-] -2 points by FreeDiscussion5 (12) 8 years ago

The goal was, "Hey guys, obama just lost the "Raise the Debt" debate, what do we do to protect him now?" "I have a great idea. We use the big email server in the basement of the White House and overnight we can get send a huge email blast to our secret numb-nuts that have nothing else to do start some movement to take the heat off our guy." "Great Idea." "How about we call it Obama Won Shit, or OWS." "Works for me." Send it out.

[-] -2 points by nweiner (-9) 8 years ago

Essentially your right, but the reality is as follows.

1.) Soros paid for CANVAS years ago, a bunch of servers to cause unrest around the world. The CIA used this software to bring about all the 'arab springs', CANVAS while paid for by Soros is owned and ran by Kall Lasn of Vancouver, Canada.

2.) Kall Lasn decided to use the software in the USA, and he called 'Occupy Wall Street', the goal was an 'arab spring' in the CIA, and of course had it been ran by the CIA from USA it would be illegal, but under the law as long as it was offshored, ... its all good.

3.) Yes, the OWS only exists to PROTECT-OBAMA, it has NO other purpose.

4.) Worst of all is that OWS was co-opted from day-one by Van Jones and SEIU, and now completely taken over by the public education and prison unions. Modern USA education is prison for children, and then later they're warehoused in permanent prisons.

Welcome to the CIA's "Arab Spring" for the USA.

Ran from the white house? Sort of true. Paid for by Goldman Sachs? Absolutely true.

Numb Nuts? Hair-lip single digit IQ ameriKKKan's are god's chosen people for the coming slaughter.

[-] -1 points by aprilsnow (14) 6 years ago

A bit exaggerated but basically true. How many current/former cabinet folks/other dc agency heads have goldman sachs on their resumes??

[-] -3 points by HCHC4 (-28) 6 years ago

"Can we all agree we are only going to be thrown crumbs from the democratic party and that the democrats never really represented the working people and must be confronted as much as the republicans, the generals and the oligarchs?"

The vast majority of the population agrees with this. And I also agree that occupy did a very poor job of communicating things, allowing the media to pigeon hole it as the left's own tea party.

That being said, hindsight is always 20/20.