Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Democrats and Republicans/Libertarians

Posted 2 months ago on May 10, 2014, 2:58 p.m. EST by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Why can people not see the obvious? No one represents the 99%. I see people going on and on about Democrats on here. The Republicans with their sects the Tea Party, and The libertarian Party are doing all that they can to move wealth out of the middle class. The Democrats on the other hand are doing their best to create a neat little welfare state for those recently divested, formerly middle class to live in. We are being driven to a system of Oligarchy with both of these factions, well funded by the 1% doing their part to both build this new world, and to keep us, the 99%, divided until it is too late. The house is burning down around us, and we are auguring about trivialities instead of putting out the fire. Abortion, gay marriage, affirmative action, gun control, issues that divide. After we are reduced to slavery, of what importance is any other issue. If we remain free, then we remain free to hash out those other issues. Instead how about we find ways to unite the 99%, liberal, conservative, left, right, and end the reign of the moneyed elite. How about passing laws that force corporations to share profits equitably, instead of paying employees minimum wage while the top executives and share holders reap all the profits. How about removing the influence of moneyed corporations from government. We can all agree on these, lets do them first.

62 Comments

62 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

OWS is about raising concern about wealth inequality, the GOP work to make the rich, richer if you don't know that you should read a bit.

Untill we remove all GOP from office the rest is window dressing.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 months ago

how about an open forum for congress

so laws become accessible to anyone ?

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

300 million is a lot of "anyone" I think getting money out of politics would do a great deal to make things better, if there is a great transition in the past that has been a chance for those with power to grab a lot more.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 months ago

bah

I could be set up in a year

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

Cool I will consider your bid for the Crown, but I'm not committing to your Connation just yet.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 months ago

no need to personify

heaven forbid

congress is achieve outside the courtyard

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

but surly someone would need The Crown to do this in a year, we as a whole Nation can get little done in a year...

people who speak of solutions that would require more power to employ than we concede today do not present a way forward to me....

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 months ago

power is not required

participation is

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

really? i guess you must have the "power" to make people particate?

I know what you mean if everyone would just agree with you then we could get this fixed. Isn't that sort of like being King?

We could also fix this by throwing out the GOP and we don't even need "everyone" to agree just a little over half.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 months ago

replace the current representative government with one that is more representive

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

Tough to get people to agree on things these days and that seems to be a pretty big thing, are you sure we won't have to make you King for just a little while to get the job done?

[-] 1 points by WiredforChange (0) 2 months ago

If removing half the problem is goal #1 for you, there is ample opportunity to get involved:

2910 North Central Ave Phoenix, AZ 85012 · Phone: (602) 298-4200 · Fax: (602) 298-7117

[-] 1 points by flip (6401) 2 months ago

would you like to explain for all to see what the dems have done to reverse the trend of growing inequality - 8 years of Clinton and now 6 of Obama - and the rich get richer. should I point out some FACTS since they are so much fun. seems to me that you don't really like facts. you like opinions (well yours anyway) and you do not seem to be able to use facts to build a case for what you think. why is that - must be you go to an elite school - that 's it right? or maybe the facts don't support your view so you ignore them - like most good democrats (ok, and republicans and libertarians - not good anarchists though - we are not ideologues!)

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

Well flip i've been to Bunkervillie have you? I know what anarchy looks like, do you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lq1sFkQXyc

Here's some facts for you

http://illusionofprosperity.blogspot.com/2011/02/wages-ppi-cpi.html

note how in the 90's when Clinton was in office real wages rose against inflation, not so much at other times, of course you don't care about real people wages or the real world you're just a politcal hack set on building a new party to kiss your butt, you ego driven moster

Here you can see the FACT that the us debt was paid down a bit under Clinton, of course it is a key part of the 1% plan to keep the American tax payer in debt to them so they can determine policy by pulling the money away if they have to, the 1% use the debt to keep America under their thunbs, Clinton threaten that, if Gore had been allowed to continue the trend we would be debt free by now and able to aford healthcare for all.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-coming-shrinking-of-the-deficit-2013-1

[-] 2 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

Please, by all means continue to be a voice for partisan politics, it has worked so well for us in the past. If OWS is nothing more than Democrat left, then it has zero chance of uniting a country that is not left nor right, but both and neither. Clinton was Clinton, Clinton worked for bipartisan support, the exact opposite of what you are doing.

[-] 0 points by WSmith (2033) from Cornelius, OR 2 months ago

And what working notion do you advocate IDIOT!!!!!?

Despite the RW Propaganda: Register and Vote People!

[-] 0 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

I propose a third party, one with only a handful of planks in their party platform. What was it 6 issues that was suggested https://occupywallst.org/forum/afterparty-populist-party-future/

A third party would have to straddle issues, some left some right so as no to pull support entirely from either side. Further it would have to seriously limit the issues it addressed, sticking to consensus issues and vowing to take no action on divisive ones. It would have to do what you are not willing to do, give and take.

Failing a third party, I suggest that we challenge both parties in the primaries, with candidates that have signed onto Free Democracy Affidavits https://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/ and that likewise only address consensus issues.

Those are the things I suggest. Not more of the same.

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

So your answer to the parties is to create your own? You are just a politcal hack bent on power,

[-] 3 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

So your answer is to vote tails, instead of heads without realizing that your voting for the same coin?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

I always knew you were one of those that didn't know the difference between drilling in Alaska or not, between going to war or not, between paying down the debt or not, your only concern is What helps me build the party?

(Your Party)

[-] 2 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

If the party is Democrat, then you just described yourself. That is an observation based on at least 80% of your posts here.

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

I support taking effective action, putting people on the ballot that pull votes and put people like Bush into the White House is not effective action. I believe we are way past the time when we can sit around hoping for some perfect party to come along to save us, I think we have to kill the GOP ourselves i think we have to take effective action. That does not describe your ego seeking political party building hack ass at all.

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

That's right, take the easy path, vote d not r. The koch brothers weren't smart enough or rich enough to buy out both parties.

[-] -3 points by WSmith (2033) from Cornelius, OR 2 months ago

When we have let things get this out of hand, we can't fine tune.

We Just Have To Show The Fuck UP!!!

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

If you think the polices of the GOP are acceptable then you are an idoit but you're entitled to be one if you want to.

As far as recoginzing who the GOP is and fighting for their removal from office if you "look how well it's worked" I guess the same could be said for voting altogether, I suppose you would prefer we go back to Monarchy as the GOP would have us do?

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

Quote please, where I said that.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

"Please, by all means continue to be a voice for partisan politics, it has worked so well for us in the past. "

You say that removing the GOP from office is not worth doing, you are an idoit it is the beginning of getting anything done at all.

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

No, I did not. You read what I wrote, and interpreted it to say what you wanted it to say. You are looking for a fight, so you will twist my words to make them say what you want them to say. For you the only Answer is a partisan one. For me the truth has nothing to do with either of the two broken bought out parties that we currently have.

[-] 1 points by flip (6401) 2 months ago

If you are saying that Clinton and Obama are less bad then I agree. Your point about debt and deficits shows a lack of understanding about how money works. Time for you to read Galbraith and Hudson - learn some real world economics instead of watching youtube

[-] -2 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

and your reply shows that you are lazy and understand nothing, if you did you would make your point here rather than name drop

[-] 2 points by flip (6401) 2 months ago

I made my point - you are just too young and stupid to understand it - that is not my fault. here - how about this - paying down debt takes money out of the economy - running a surplus as Clinton brags about is the policy of the wall street journal - it takes money out of the economy. here is what the journal says about the Clintons - " At the same time, Mrs. Clinton is a different sort of Democrat than the president—more aligned with the pro-business views that her husband championed as he moved the Democratic Party toward the political center in the early 1990s. As a senator from New York, she voted for trade deals with Singapore, Chile and Oman over the objections of organized labor.

[-] 1 points by turbocharger (1127) 1 month ago

How organized labor could support Dems or Reps after the 90s and watching them ship all of the jobs out of here is beyond me.

Of course, the union leaders are still getting paid, so I guess thats part of it.

[-] 1 points by flip (6401) 1 month ago

i think that they, like too many here, feel that they have no choice. since thee gop is so far to the right it makes it easy for the dems to pretend to be "for the people" while they pay corporations to ship jobs overseas, cut taxes for the rich and fight wars all over the planet - real lefties!

[-] 2 points by turbocharger (1127) 1 month ago

Its pretty incredible. To listen to everyone complain, and their lone action is to endorse some politician to save them, is pretty insane.

Vermont usually does a good job or organizing and passing things. But everyone else just kind of sits arounds and bitches. I mean, where are all the organizers putting together the platforms for healthcare, for financial reform, etc.

Its the peoples job to put this stuff together. The politicians work for us. If you dont give them anything to do, like a child they will wander.

[-] -1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

You are an idoit, or a banker trying to convice us debt is good.

[-] 0 points by flip (6401) 1 month ago

time to read one of the founders of ows - graeber - "debt the first 5000 years" then you will understand that money is debt. sorry it is not my fault just a simple fact. here is kelton quoting learner - “Abba Lerner was an economist, a contemporary of John Maynard Keynes. He saw this very clearly. He said:

“‘By virtue of the power to create or destroy money by fiat and its power to take money away from people through taxation, [the State] is in a position to keep the rate of spending in the economy at the level required [for full employment]." and now alan watts - that should do it for your education if you have any brains at all - . on the fundamental confusion between money and wealth: Remember the Great Depression of the Thirties? One day there was a flourishing consumer economy, with everyone on the up-and-up; and the next, unemployment, poverty, and bread lines. What happened? The physical resources of the country -- the brain, brawn, and raw materials -- were in no way depleted, but there was a sudden absence of money, a so-called financial slump. Complex reasons for this kind of disaster can be elaborated at length by experts on banking and high finance who cannot see the forest for the trees.

But it was just as if someone had come to work on building a house and, on the morning of the Depression, the boss had said, "Sorry, baby, but we can't build today. No inches." "Whaddya mean, no inches? We got wood. We got metal. We even got tape measures." "Yeah, but you don't understand business. We been using too many inches and there's just no more to go around." A few years later, people were saying that Germany couldn't possibly equip a vast army and wage a war, because it didn't have enough gold. What wasn't understood then, and still isn't really understood today, is that the reality of money is of the same type as the reality of centimeters, grams, hours, or lines of longitude. Money is a way of measuring wealth but is not wealth in itself. A chest of gold coins or a fat wallet of bills is of no use whatsoever to a wrecked sailor alone on a raft. He needs real wealth, in the form of a fishing rod, a compass, an outboard moter with gas, and a female companion.

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

I think you may have missed my point.

[-] 1 points by flip (6401) 2 months ago

he did not miss your point - he is just blind to the FACT that both parties are funded by the rich. I tried to have a discussion with him and he not capable of thought. he is young and in college so maybe that is the reason!

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

you seem to feel that the only thing that matters is where the money comes from, have you considered that 7% of the money is shared by 80% of the people in this country, so basically everyone works for and takes money from rich people you state that we all live under a blue sky and think you've said something....

[-] 1 points by flip (6401) 2 months ago

he who pays the piper calls the tune - is that clear enough for you or should i spell it out? AGAIN!

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 1 month ago

So you support the ideal that if you pay the bill you should get your will?

I am not surprised, I always considered you to be a supporter of Monarchy and inherited power and wealth, and you think that those that pay should have their way. Well I think we should take the power away from money and the first step of doing that is to throw their lackeys out. The GOP stand for making rich people richer and money more powerful, if you don't know that you're stupid, if you do and don't do all you can to defeat them you are evil, it really is that simple.

[-] 0 points by flip (6401) 1 month ago

Obama campaign 2008 - University of California $1,799,460 Goldman Sachs $1,034,615 Harvard University $900,909 Microsoft Corp $854,717 JPMorgan Chase & Co $847,895 Google Inc $817,855 Citigroup Inc $755,057

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

If he cannot be swayed, then he must be ignored. Arguing only has a point if a valid question is asked or issue pointed out that might then be answered, or addressed. Otherwise it is an exercise in futility. I am enjoying this, although I do not have all the answers, I can see the opportunity all around me. The working class is starting to realize that the TEA party is not their friend, I suspect that it won't be long before the Libertarians are out too.

[-] 1 points by flip (6401) 2 months ago

Right on man

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

The enemy is indeed among us, hell, it is us. Until we can learn to set aside some differences and overcome corporate America as a united people, we are destined to fail.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6437) from Phoenix, AZ 2 months ago

the first step is to unite to remove the GOP from office that is clear and easy to see by anyone who wants to create real change....

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5854) 2 months ago

With the implementation of suggestion #6 of the Municipal National Political Initiatives http://occupywallst.org/forum/omni-organizing-municipal-national-initiatives/ (see http://occupywallst.org/forum/freeda-free-democracy-affidavits/) the National Democratic Congress could immediately liberate the public good from the subversive control of private interests thereby removing the influence of moneyed corporations from government.

[-] 0 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

Good post, I did read it, and agree completely. I think it will be hard to get anyone to sign on though.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5854) 2 months ago

Probably, http://occupywallst.org/forum/twenty-four-states/#comment-885192 but nothing ventured, nothing gained. The most that can be done is to make sure that the option is known. From there, it's on the people to decide what to do.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 months ago

The last guy to be adamant about that, was chased off the forum by libe(R)tarians.

Oh, and by the way....teabagg(R)s raised my taxes.

[-] 0 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

I've noticed that the Tea party folks don't really do what they claimed they wanted to haven't you? TEA, was supposed to stand for Taxed Enough Already. When they organized here in this area things went well for a couple of months, I found myself agreeing with most of what they said,then some well moneyed folks came in and put up a guy for political office. Things changed then. So to say they were co-opted would probably be a correct statement. I am not sure what they are about now, but they lost the support of people around here a long time ago.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 months ago

You misunderstand the teabagge(R)s, they are a faux populist movement, started by avowed libe(R)tarians, whether you look them as started by the Koch's, or Ron Rand.

Either way, the last guy around here who was adamant about getting the money out, was chased off by the forums own cadre of libe(R)tarians.

I doubt, he'll back and that's a sad thing.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

You are right, and wrong at the same time. The TEA party had elements of a populist movement. I know because I was there in the beginning. You are right that it was a fake, the people turning out for rallies were serious and genuine. They were lied to and mislead. I knew pretty quickly that something was up, our local group hadn't been going long until an outsider arrived with a plan. Looking back the whole thing was too well funded from the beginning. I know that TEA has very little local support left, here at least. They don't even do rallies anymore, which is kinda sad because the people attending wanted many of the same things that OWS does.

I did expect personal attacks, but what are Libertarians doing on this forum? Unless they are here to disrupt it, I can't see how a true libertarian would fit in very well. Now many of the people who think of themselves as Libertarian are on the same page as OWS, they just picked a movement that is content to lie to them about what they really stand for. I don't blame them, I just hope that they eventually realize that the Libertarians have a far greater agenda.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 months ago

What I believe, is that those people that populated the teabagge(R)s were "softened" by years of exposure to FLAKESnews, Limbaugh and any number of late night radio "personalities".

In reality they were/are tools for the libe(R)tarian infection.

Here's the original agenda of the "true libe(R)tarians", a group without which few would have known about this philosophy.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/koch-brothers

I've been under heavy attack since posting this revelatory link.

No one has been willing to admit, how much of this agenda has already been instituted in their own State.

There is the reality of their "greater agenda".

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by Narley (531) 2 months ago

While your ideas are admiral, they will never happen. First and foremost, the masses are so polarized on almost every issue. I don’t mean people just disagree, I mean we have wild eyed, foaming at the mouth, fist shaking rage type hate. Anyone who disagrees with your view is called the vilest of names, bullied, harassed and every effort is made to make the offender pay for disagreeing with you. People don’t want to hear other opinions, and will go to great length to punish anyone who has a different opinion.

Don’t believe me, check out the comments sections of any new site. This forum has a serious problem with hate. Don’t believe me? Then make a pro-republican post and see what you get. The topic doesn’t matter, could be guns, abortion, the budget, immigration, voting or whatever. For too many people the only solution is their solution. I don’t see this changing in the foreseeable future.

[-] 0 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

Oh, I see it. I just see the only hope for us being to unite. I didn't say I knew how to accomplish it. Just that there were issues we do agree on. Someone has to take the high road. When an issue like that comes up, just say, "I am sure we probably disagree, " but what about this issue or that issue. Refuse to argue, don't even state a position on divisive issues, for some one in politics, a candidate, stating that their constituents are not in agreement on this or that and therefore they will take no action for or against.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

I noticed that I didn't answer one question you had asked. How will the money divide us. Probably by making sure that the other choices are polar opposites. They will attack what they consider to be the weakest links. For the right it will probably be the gun control crowd, and for the left the LGBT. They might be nice and through one or both of them a bone, to draw their support away, but most likely the moneyed left will run an ardent gun control supporter with strong ties to the gay rights community, and the moneyed right will run a pro-gun anti-gay. The idea being that people will be afraid to vote third party for fear that the (the other side) will win. That's assuming that we ran a third party. If we can get someone in on either party that is willing to do this sort of coalition thing. I suspect the money will still make sure that everything we call a non issue will be brought up front and center.

[-] -1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

There is more than one issue that most agree on. They word it differently, and there in lies both the problem and the answer. The libertarians believe that government is to big, the conservatives believe that government listens to special interest, the Tea party believes they are taxed too much, the liberals believe that wealth is not being distributed equally. OWS is closest, I think to a correct assessment of the problem. The libertarians believe that government is to strong, and thus exerts too much control, OWS believes that the 1% controls government and are exerting too much control. The conservatives belief that special interests control government is also mirrored by OWS, in that well moneyed special interest groups control the government. The tea party comprised of primarily (the ones I've met anyway) middle class believe they are taxed too much, OWS believes the same, in that the tax burden falls unfairly on the middle-class with the elite being favored. The liberals believe that wealth is being horded by the rich. Aren't these all just different takes on the same thing.

Then my next to last statement, "How about passing laws that force corporations to share profits equitably, instead of paying employees minimum wage while the top executives and share holders reap all the profits. How about removing the influence of moneyed corporations from government." Those are common issues. Maybe not 99%, but how about 80%, still a substantial majority, could agree on those.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

How do 'I' plan on selling it? What, I have to have all the answers? That's why I am here, you guys were headed in the right direction. You might not know it, but when the only message coming out of occupy was punish the 1%, a lot of average people supported OWS. You guys got highjacked by the media, they started focusing on a few who had different messages, and there went the support. I remember going in to work, and most people talking up OWS. Those folks watch fox news.

You can't call it wealth redistribution. You have to point out that this percentage of X corps profit went to share holders, this percent went to CEO salaries, and this little bit that was left went to them the employees. Start calling salaries a form of profit share, and not just a business expense. Talk about how the distribution of earned money is unfair, how share holders spend no time in bettering the company and get a dividend check while the employees spend 40 plus per week and make less money. In short equate the money invested by share holders with the time invested by employees, and show people how the balance tips against them. They already know this, there talking about it in the break-room in some factory right now. OWS just doesn't speak their language yet. That's the part we have to figure out.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by wickerman (157) from Cleveland, AR 2 months ago

Of course, it is a matter of pragmatics. The average working class person knows that they are underpaid, we just need to word it in a way that they understand. I think redistribution was the message that undermined OWS support before. For the average middle class person that term brings up images of their house being taken from them, along with what little money they have. They don't understand what OWS is saying, So to answer your question we sell it with psy-ops. We don't tell people what we are selling, we sell the concept never the name. We use key words, to subtly shift peoples thinking. Drop redistribute it is misunderstood and scary. wage inequality sounds better, but it is being used by the Democrats for a gender based wage bias campaign. Help me out here, what else could we use to clearly define the concept, that the media can't easily distort, and that rings true to the average person?

[Removed]