Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Change is coming. Hope you're ready.

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 11, 2011, 5:57 p.m. EST by afarmer (65)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Change is coming. Government/union leaders/select corporations will takeover profits of the banks by enforcing a police state, but only if the economy collapses and chaos (martial law) prevails. This is an old playbook.

"Every movement that seeks to enslave a country, every dictatorship or potential dictatorship, needs some minority group as a scapegoat which it can blame for the nation’s troubles and use as a justification of its own demands for dictatorial powers. In Soviet Russia, the scapegoat was the bourgeoisie; in Nazi Germany, it was the Jewish people; in America, it is the businessmen" Ayn Rand

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtyRDSujW6Y

And here's the initial organizer, Stephen Lerner, former SIEU exec. (with Obama and Soros groups). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQQiFW2YDLM&feature=related

39 Comments

39 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by ZenDog (20552) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

right wing scare tactics.

I am not afraid.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

I'm sure your democrat party would never do such a thing.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20552) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I don't belong to any party. I often vote dem

so what?

I've never heard the drum beat of fear emanating from any party as I did from the bushite camp during his entire reign.

anyone who thinks they are the same has simply not looked. It is a complex cluster fuck, I admit.

but consider this one fact:

[-] 1 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

I'm sorry you are so deluded. Keep voting for the democrats. I'm sure they will save us all.

...I thought you might have a brain. Guess I was wrong....

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20552) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

nice convincing bit of persuasion that

one that remains in complete denial of what the above contribution percentages clearly illustrate -

goldman perceives an advantage - and they bet with their money

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

No problem at all. You want Obama to continue as President. I'm not going to waste time trying to convince you of anything. Just for the record I think he will be re elected so you should be happy. But, why do you complain about the state of the country? Your favorite president is in control and doing all right by you. Or is it that he can't save the country because of those republicans that control the house?

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20552) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I'm expecting there is a rational explanation for the appointments of so many wall street insiders to cabinet positions beyond the simple he's corrupt mentality.

I don't think he quite knew what he was walking into - the whole economic collapse occurred with what? 6 months warning, from candidate to President?

I don't think he understood the prevalence of the theory of deregulation or that it would persist even in the face of widespread economic disaster.

I could be wrong - but given some of his early statements combined with later actions I don't think there is any other explanation.

I think he genuinely attempts to provide bold new solutions - like with the health care issue - only to discover unexpected sources and tactics of resistance.

I think he has been attempting to get 'the people' involved, to do that you have to over come apathy - how do you do that?

One way is by saying "Okay, repelicans. We will contemplate big changes to senior services."

Everyone knows that will get the AARP off their couch. And it might have been an unexpected response from the repelican perspective.

I think there is a lot of information we do not have.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

No need to justify yourself to a troll like me. You like Obama. Good for you. I look at him a little differently.

[-] 2 points by Evolution001 (100) from Vancouver, BC 2 years ago

There were many opportunists climbing on the backs of the working class using the "marxist" rhetoric for their advantage. Many middle class youth from the 60's generation who witnessed the brutality of the state and the capitalist system against the working class here in the US and around the world initially sided with the oppressed. But as they grew older they were co-opted into the evolving capitalist system (from teachers to wall street traders and executives to politicians) forming the technocratic cadre of the state with the new "politically correct" or Orwellian language right in line with their pseudo-marxist background so much valued by the capitalists as it gradually consumed the spirit of the 60's generation. This included many previously active in the the civil rights movement (e.g., Jesse Jackson, Andrew Young, Black Panthers, etc.). Many other examples exist in all levels of society (e.g., cultural, scientific, religious, environmental, etc.).

Saul Alinsky himself would be at best discredited by many not just as a pseudo-marxist but as an anti-marxist, at best representing the "state pseudo-socialist and pseudo-communist" trends similar to the Soviet Union and Communist China where a fascist state-capitalist regime ruled in the name of "socialism" / "communism". That is because the working class cannot be represented by Saul Alinsky / Hillary Clinton / Barak Obama not to mention Stalin / Brezhnev / Mao because none of them are / were from the working class. Furthermore, to be from the working class requires that one is actively and presently engaged in production requiring the necessity to prostitute or rent one's labor (in the manufacturing or the service sector, "employed" or "contracted"). So it is ludicrous to suggest bankster clown puppets like Obama or Clinton could be part of a "communist / socialist" conspiracy. That shows either total ignorance about the fundamental economic principles of "socialism / communism" (working class or proletariat who has no ownership of the means of production attempting to establish an economic system based on common ownership of all property, with no forms of private ownership) or rather another opportunistic attempt at disparaging "communism / socialism" by using revisionist escape-goats like Alinsky and his potential ("currently clandestine") current disciples like Clinton and Obama. That would be like blaming "Social Darwinism" on Darwin trying to discredit the theory of evolution, or blaming "Eugenics" on the science of genetics, etc.

Unfortunately or fortunately, capitalism is running out of places to hide. The pig has been colored any which way (red, black, green, etc.). It is still a pig. Time is up for the pig.

[-] 1 points by afarmer (65) 2 years ago

If not capitalism, then what? What kind of "ism" do you propose?

[-] 1 points by Evolution001 (100) from Vancouver, BC 2 years ago

To answer that question justly we must define the problem correctly - i.e., we must diagnose the disease and not mistake the symptoms for the disease. This is a very important subject that I cannot do justice to it, so please forgive my extreme brevity. The problem is so big and critical that it requires a rethinking of many concepts people take for granted (i.e., assupmtion people do not even question) otherwise most people would have figured out the answer long ago. Thanks or unfortunately due to the growing economic crisis threatening our survival we are forced to reexamine them and think of new explanations and solutions which then we can try to implement in our lives and in the streets experimenting for effective and sustainable change.

Very briefly, most every problem we face on local and global scale is filtered through the economic system - capitalism. It is how we access life for our survival needs on this planet , i.e., food, water, shelter, security, energy, education, etc. etc. Any economic system is characterized by its component principles: ownership (private vs. common), production (private vs. cooperative), exchange and distribution (private vs. shared or common). Every economic system is at the base (infrastructure) of the other aspects of life (superstructure: e.g., politics, culture, spirituality or religion, ideology) which represent reflections of the economic life reinforcing its institutions and power structure.

Every economic system is borne out of necessity in an evolutionary process replacing the previous economic system in an effort by the species to adapt to the evolving new economic conditions affecting its survival. When our species' population was low we survived by "primitive communism", a communal tribal hunters gatherers economic society where our ancestors existed for many millenia (at least since 100,000 years ago upto 10,000 b.c.) in common ownership with cooperative production, shared and common exchange based on need and ability to produce. In these societies, individuals had a primitive collective identity and consciousness, not only viewing themselves in unison with the commune / tribe but also with their ancestors / future generations and the bigger nature they depended on.

As population grew increasingly human beings were forced to settle. As such lines were drawn, territories claimed and staked, private ownership was born. Within the tribes the growing needs of production, led to division of labor, the beginnings of class structure due to the necessary unequal nature of power in each labor division. That combination led to division of a power structure / hierarchy and the basis for a new kind of economic system based on private ownership. This set of economic systems evolved again based on the survival necessity of the growing population from the classic slavery of the antiquity (e.g., Greece and Rome) to feudalism and finally to capitalism.

Capitalism represents private ownership, cooperative production, private exchange and distribution. It was selected (in evolutionary terms, as in natural selection, the evolutionary mechanism of survival) based on its ability to improve and increase production which feudalism was not able to do fast enough despite some significant innovations due to increasing pressures for redistribution of wealth including the growing population. However over time, this increased production did not translate into significant increase in distribution for the great majority of the population in the world, most suffering from abject poverty in addition to the huge externalized costs of capitalism e.g., wars, pollution, environmental destruction, new epidemics, climate change, etc. etc. As capitalism adopted better technology to lower its labor costs, it turned its eventual consumers unemployed, spiraling down in a vicious cycle of increased adoption of technology / unemployment / and externaliztions with ever increasing costs and effective theft from labor and the planet, from the past, present, and the future. The key to this self-destructive cataclysmic is the profit motive which through competition has actually accelerated this process. Profit is dependent on the PRIVATE OWNERSHIP principle of capitalist mode of production. Other aspects of production (i.e., type of production, exchange, distribution) are also implicated but to a secondary degree.

As such the solution depends on a new economic system based on common ownership (i.e., no form of private ownership). Furthermore, productive will remain cooperative (as this is not a major source of problem, but has to be modified to serve the common interests instead of private interests). In addition, exchange and distribution will become common and shared based on need and ability to produce (i.e., any form of private exchange such as money is abolished as humans engage in direct / non-commodified exchange and distribution). Such a society is only possible with a high level of productive capacity which is already present within capitalism. In addition to the high level of cooperation, the key to this possibility is a more systemic adoption of "science and technology" which now will not be in conflict with labor nor the environment destroying both for profit.

These economic principles of the new economic system will naturally have their reflection in the superstructure affecting the politics (e.g., "democracy"for the first time possible as in "direct democracy"), culture (e.g., collective / communal forms of arts / dance and music), spirituality (e.g., "collective identity" of individuals with respect to the communal members to the "global village" extending to the past and future and including the dependent "natural world"), ideology (e.g., "dialectical materialism" or "new scientific / ecological / evolutionary view of nature and society" with nature viewed in constant change, and entities viewed as an equilibrium of multiple variables in a state of "dynamic equilibrium").

This is the basis of "socialism / communism" that I describe. Of course everybody using these terms can define it differently as many do "opportunistically" to disparage such a concept / "revisionistically" for co-option to dupe the followers to another dead-end of "private interest" / or otherwise ignorantly using these concepts to "reform" the status quo rather than establish a truly alternative economic system based on more sustainable economic principles. In all such cases capitalism survives de facto continuing its mayhem as time runs out for the species and it too at the end.

As we near "colony collapse" we do not have the luxury of waiting until the full collapse of capitalism to establish the new economic system. All the elements of the new economic system are available. We must adopt them in our lives, systematically and collectively, building the future world in our lives through common ownership and cooperative production, expanding its limits to incorporate all aspects of our survival needs within a communal organization of like-minded individuals using experimental science and technology with the aim of divorcing ourselves from this destructive system which we feed daily through our employment, purchase / sales, and taxes.

[-] 1 points by afarmer (65) 2 years ago

Evolution, I appreciate your response. I see that you have a very good understanding of both capitalism and social/communism, so I can not accuse you of being some starry-eyed trust-afarian. Your thoughts are well thought out and I appreciate your honesty. I'm afraid that your ideas of a communal-style of existence (noble as they may be), will however lead to what you and I do not want - injustice. I will admit that I do not mind the socialism style of governance that will have slipped into (Soc. Sec./Med./ welfare), however I do want us to pay-as-we-go , so that we do not go into exorbitant debt, like we are now. I discovered this earlier today. I hope you watch it and tell me what you think. It is lengthy, so take your time getting back. I haven;t even watched the whole thing myself. It is a 1991 video of a guy named George Hunt who went to an environmental conference and he claims it was a how global banks/UN will use the environmental movement to steal money from the countries. I realize it's conspiratorial, but men conspire all the time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpLnCT6k9Nc&feature=bf_prev&list=SP067DCFD5AD63AC12&lf=list_related

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

So you endorse communism. The single most murderous political system ever inflicted on humanity. But I must say you dress it up in some very pretty words.

[-] 1 points by Evolution001 (100) from Vancouver, BC 2 years ago

I see you are a redneck capitalist pig. No shame with your murderous killing machine, hah? How much are you getting paid for prostituting your labor?? Is it worth it?? I feel like I am talking to a zombie.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

While I am no capitalist don't even fucking try to compare communisms death toll being less than capitalism. You filthy Marxist killed more people than Hitler and the Nazis could have dreamed of killing. Keep your genocidal system. Marxist are the filth of the earth.

[-] 1 points by Evolution001 (100) from Vancouver, BC 2 years ago

You are a capitalist by default whether you know it or not, whether you like it or not, because you are serving the interests of profit by your vile attitude. Stalin, Hitler, Obama and his gangster banksters would welcome your attitude you moron. This sheeple is heading for the capitalist butcher shop. What a shame??

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

So if I'm not a card carrying murderer then I'm a supporter of the current system? And you have addressed NONE of my questions. Typical Marxist filth. Can't defend your beliefs in concentration camps and mass executions to achieve your goals.

[-] 1 points by Evolution001 (100) from Vancouver, BC 2 years ago

I am not going to defend anything I don't espouse. On the other hand you have a lot to answer to with your degenerate love of capitalism. If you are not a defender of capitalism then what are you? Where are your loyalties? Stand up or shut up.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

Sorry. No score for you. Still no answers. I don't love capitalism. Apparently you are too stupid to understand that. Pity.

[-] 1 points by Evolution001 (100) from Vancouver, BC 2 years ago

OK you win.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

No. You do. Good luck with your totalitarian beliefs.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

I propose "workers capitalism" which would be like what we had in the 50s and 60s. Workers benefited from the capitalist system as well. With a high school education and few years experience, they were able to buy houses and cars, and send their kids to college.

[-] 2 points by DunkiDonut2 (-108) 2 years ago

When you said change is coming I thought you were going to be talking about the protestors changing their underware.

[-] 2 points by HPolloi (74) 2 years ago

Put your tinfoil hat back on.

[-] 2 points by afarmer (65) 2 years ago

"Those who make Peaceful Revolution Impossible...Will make Violent Revolution Inevitable" -JFK


"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." J. Edgar Hoover

[-] 1 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

0bama is using ows ( the useful idiots) to forment societal unrest. this year was a trial run. next year they will be reved up ( by cloward -piven, soros, van jones, trumpka, stern ,gerard) . martial law will be declared and there will be no presidential election. be prepared.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Have you seen a lot of ows people here who are strong Obama supporters? Can't say that I have. I think over 70% of the people don't like him. Unless it's the moderators of this site that you are talking about.

[-] 0 points by fandango (241) 2 years ago

the ows people who keep 'occupying " what ever. They are the useful idiot foot soldiers.

[-] 1 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 2 years ago

A police state would be difficult considering much of the population is armed. In most other countries with police states private ownership is illegal. Funny how a disarmed populace doesn't seem to make the people safer.

[-] 2 points by divineright (664) 2 years ago

I'd also take into account the percentage of police and military personnel that would join the side of the citizens if it came down such adverse conditions (I still have hope anyway).

[-] 1 points by freedomanddemocracy (72) 2 years ago

It is not the businessmen, it is the big greedy and corrupt corporations, the Big Banks and Wall Street that are the ones responsible for the big mess we are in now! The small businesses and businessmen are victims of big corporations just as much as the average American worker and citizen! In America it is greedy and corrupt Banks, Wall Street and corruptions who are helped by greedy and corrupt members of Congress!

[-] 0 points by afarmer (65) 2 years ago

What started the bailouts on banks? The housing crisis. Who caused the housing crisis? Government (Community Reinvestment Act). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJY2PCy6FgI&feature=player_embedded#!


Many banks did not need or want the bailouts, but were forced to them. http://www.businessinsider.com/uncovered-tarp-docs-reveal-how-paulson-forced-banks-to-take-the-cash-2009-5


Banks tried to repay but denied by Obama:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Who influenced government to cause the housing crisis? Moneyed interests.

Poor banks, forced to take bailouts.

And Obama wouldn't even let them repay it.

Somehow, this just sounds like a bunch of excuses to me. Obama's whole career seems to have been about making promises to do things, and then coming up with excuses for why he didn't.

[-] 1 points by afarmer (65) 2 years ago

I will admit that there are plenty of businesses and banks that would love to funnel money to themselves, but that requires getting government involvement. We (supposed to) use government's power to prevent unfair trading practices, not allow it.

[-] 1 points by hymie (391) 2 years ago

Personally, I believe that Wall Street is just one face of a vast empire, you could say it is the remnants of the British empire. And since it couldn't beat us in a war, over the years, it has fought another war of subversion against us. That's what we have to understand and fight about today.

[-] 1 points by afarmer (65) 2 years ago

Cause a problem so that the people will ask for the government to help. Another example of this : ATF has been forcing gun dealers to sell guns to Mexican drug cartels. The same government that wants tougher gun laws on dealers. CBS News Report http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ntp4iv_s0dY

[-] 1 points by commonsense11 (195) 2 years ago

Some people will believe anything.

[-] 1 points by freedomanddemocracy (72) 2 years ago

Actually it was Bush2 and his administration that started the bailouts of banks and Wall Street. It was Bush2 and his administration that started the housing crisis back in his first and second administration that encouraged banks to lend people who didn't quality for mortgages because the rich and his cronies made money off these bundle mortgage packages sold as speculative derivatives on Wall Street that made billions to bankers and the CEO's. These banks were not forced to take them, in fact, they begged for them during the end of the Bush2 years because the economy was about to collapse into bankruptcy! Obama and his administration were the ones who were forced to continue these bailouts because the economy was about to collapse. What went wrong is that, no strings were attached to these bailouts due to people who worked behind the scenes that were puppets of the big banks and Wall Street. They again, stick it to the American consumer and the consumer again is taken to the cleaners! The banks were and are being forced to pay back their loans, but the goverment is making little or no money due to the low finance rates that were given to them by the same people who now run Wall Street. Our corrupt Congressmen as soon as they leave office will be hired by Wall Street and the Banks as Lobbyists or heads of these same corporations they once regulated! We are all victims of these scams and this is why people are now out in the streets to protest what is happening on Wall Street and the halls of our greedy and corrupt Congressment!