Forum Post: for all those who think OWS is just a bunch of jobless, good for nothing (Fill in the blanks) Lets talk
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 27, 2011, 10:55 a.m. EST by Indepat
(924)
from Minneola, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
For all of you that view this movement in a negative light, that think it's nothing more than a bunch of lazy, slacker, cry babies. That think everything is okay and they should just find a job, lets talk about that.
Looking for more of your honest opinion, rather than some belligerent rant, but either is okay I guess.
Not really a rant, but I see some shortcomings.This movement has potential, but seems hampered by a lack of a clear goal. As though it was trying to be everything for everyone. Some will say this is a strength, I disagree, but either way it's only part of my observation. If it truly has more support then seems apparent (lets face it even 2000 campers in any city of millions isn't a very significant number) then it should work to change the system by using that system. The tea party, for better or worse, got enough congressmen elected to alter the political landscape during the debt ceiling debate. With motivated people you could do that. Everyone remembers Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, but Thurgood Marshall actually accomplished more real change for civil rights, using the law and the system to get positive change. Both men may have been necessary for change, but your group ignores the effort part. Right now the movement seems preoccupied with the romantic notion associated with protest, someone needs to develop a platform and elect people willing to support that platform. Chanting is easy, real change also involves long hard work. This would be one reason you're seen more as "lazy, slacker, cry babies".
Why aren't you there helping?
We don't want to work within the system. The system is an utterly corrupting influence, as you pointed out with the Tea Party.
The original post asked for our opinion, not what we were doing. I will tell you that though, I'm not going to leave a job and family to work for what is simply dozens of unfocused ideals and slogans. I would support a candidate that reflected my ideals however. I did not say the tea party was corrupt, just that they managed to cause a change, their elected representatives kept to their ideals (even if we don't like those ideals) and didn't sell out once they got to Washington. In just one election cycle a couple of dozen new congresspeople made a difference. This movement could do the same thing, with a clear goal and hard work. Is it your opinion that the entire system of government needs to be wiped away? Doesn't seem like that is something that would get much support. In the end it comes down to a gamble, is what you stand for something that a majority of the population will believe in? If the answer is yes the movement will grow, if no, then I guess the easy way of protest and riot is all that's available to you.
Eh, I completely disagree with your assessment. The Tea Party didn't campaign against labor rights. It was once they got elected that they attacked the unions, many of which had voted for them.
The system is corrupt. No change can come from within the system, so there's no point in voting for another dirty politician. Direct democracy and local government is the answer.
Looks like we'll just have to see how things work out, if a majority believe as you do then they will be able to tear down the entire system and start over. If they are in the minority, they can still produce change. Working within the system has shown itself to work, don't let what the tea party did or didn't do distract you, it's just an example that change can be made from within. It's possible in many ways, women's groups did it by working through the courts with abortion. The EPA was made a major force by grass roots movements. It may not be fast or easy, but I believe it can be done. If you disagree, you're free to attempt revolution or whatever it is you have in mind. You still may find it necessary to focus on a few clearly defined goals.
here here i concur
I couldn't agree with you more. Yes, this things needs focus, direction, s single vision, goals and strategy. It needs to formally organize and it needs some form of leadership group. The free for all, everyone gets a say concept is nice, but it doesn't actually work. I've been posting about this for days now, and some have convinced me that this still might happen but it will take time. I just don't know if this thing has that much time.
But yes, I completely agree with you.
Your obviously a smart guy Here are some documentaries on finance, and politics, I think you would both enjoy, and find interesting.
Finance: Born Rich, Breaking the Bank, College Inc, I want your Money, Inside The meltdown, IOUSA, Maxed Out, Mind Over Money, Money Masters, Speaking Freely, Ten Trillion and Counting, The American Ruling Class, The Best Government Money Can Buy, The Big One, The Card Game, The Corporation, The Madoff Affair, The Warning, Trading on Thin Air,
Politics: After Innocence, An Inconvenient tax, An Unreasonable Man, Burzynski, Business of Being Born, Can Mr. Smith Get to Washington anymore, Casino Jack, Electile Dysfunction, Flow, Freedom Fries, Homo Toxicus, Ken Burns America the Congress, The American drug War, XXI Century, I would be interested in your thoughts on the ones you have seen.
I probably have seen some of them, but I have to admit, I rend to be wary of political documentaries. Many that I have seen tend to be slanted one way or the other.
Still, I don't need them to know that our government has been purchased by the ruling elite, the 1%, and that if that doesn't get fixed we are all going down. And not just the middle class, but the entire nation. Washington cannot go on forever just catering to the needs of such narrow special interests, while forgoing their responsibility to all other issues that effect this nation.
Anyone who thinks that everyone in OWS is a bunch of jobless, homeless people,
...umm...have you talked to everyone in OWS?
http://occupyyallstreet.blogspot.com/
Don't have to. In any group you will find a varied spectrum of people and situations from one extreme to to the other and with people in the middle. Most of the people I talk to in this forum, have jobs, pay, taxes etc... I'm one of those.
Every time there is an authentic grassroots movement in this country the nay sayers come out of their hidden caves. Every movement in this country has faced these negative opinions. If you don't believe me ask abolitionists, who were largely shutdown by large sectors of the population for struggling against slavery. Ask women's suffrage movements who faced tantrums from major corporations and media outlets in the early 20th century. Still they overcame. As labor unions who faced murder and assassination from the police in the 1930s. Still they won important rights including improved work conditions and the New Deal measures, which brought the middle class in this country. Fast forward to the 50s and 60s and you witness the civil rights movements, which at the beginning were largely ignored and tarnished by the mainstream culture. Eventually, like ever before, this movement also over came......With this in mind I say God Speed to OWS. These are early days. This is a long struggle. There will be ups and downs but the movement will continue and it will be successful.
I know. I'm just looking for their actual arguments. One, so I can understand them, and two so I can better argue against them.
The people that don't like, or don't understand this movement, either do not support direct democracy or do not understand the purpose of it. I submit that you are one in that group.
Lack of understanding is a major issue. But this movement serves to that purpose, without a clear and concise message, with out a singular vision, goal, leadership, this movement will remain open to misinterpretation.
Of course there is also AM radio, Fox news etc... feeding them misinformation.
this is one I have heard every day, many times a day at Occupy LA and SD - "no private money in politics, at all - for starters.
Getting the money should be the only issue, it is the root cause, everything else that everyone is screaming about are just symptoms of this problem. That's just my opinion. OWS and all the other movements should focus on this single issue and take their fight to Washington. With out some type of structure I can't see any of that happening.
no focus.. so i do not want to a part of the 99%
no I am not a billionaire but do employ 75 people and also do not pay my self minwage. most of them are temps that work 40 hr a week. I need to weed out the lazy people before i hire them. if you drop out of high school you can't expect to get paid the big bucks, some has to pump gas in my 65 foot yacht.
sorry minimum wage for you. you are part of the 99%, or you want to keep getting shafted by rich people.
But do you agree with the premise? That the root cause of many of our problems has to do with the fact that Washington has been purchased.
You are correct, no focus, and it desperately needs some, so that they can focus on the actual root cause, on not on the many symptoms.
By the way, you mean you don't want to be part of this movement. You're already part of the 99%. It's a economic distinction. Unless your a Billionaire, you are technically a part of that 99%.
You got the attention of your intended audience; but once you got your audience you didn't clearly communicate a coherent message. In other words, your "pitch sucked and sometimes that is worse than not getting the attention of your audience at all.
Who is this "you"? The people that don't like this movement don't like direct democracy.
Not my pitch. I just started paying attention to this movement.
So you just have a problem with the fact that their message, or should I say messages, are all over the place, lack focus, in many cases seems to be left leaning? Do I have that right?
I'd be curious to know if you agree with the original principal and core issue, that the true problem, the root problem is the money in Washington?
Yeah --- I think most people would agree that govt operates more to benefit special interests rather than the population as a whole and , of course, money contributes to that. However both sides seem hypocritical when they disregard criticism of preferential treatment or legislation aimed at “special interest groups” which they may favor.
Here's where we may differ, I don't think our government operates "more" to benefit special and corporate interest, I think it now operates to solely benefit this small group.
I also disagree, there should not be two sides. Not sure if your referring to the two political parties, but they are now essentially the same. They have both been purchased.
My issue is singular, get the money out, so that our government can make decisions on what's best for the country and not just the tiny percent of the population that pays for their elections.
By both sides I mean the left and the right, with the left having greater influence with the Occupy movement and the right having greater influence with the Tea Party movement .
the democratic party holds no sway over the Occupy movement, can't say that about the Tea Party though, they get fed in a trough by the GOP/FoxNews.
I agree with that. The Tea Party is in the process of being co-opted by the right, and this movement is open to a take over from the left, no doubt. and that would be terrible, because both were born out of a true desire for change, but may ultimately become just another tool, to stop that from happening.
But regardless, there is a real problem, and it has to be fixed. even if this thing is clumsy at least it's making an attempt.
Still, at the first sign that this just becomes another tool of the parties, I'm done.
Wow, this is weak
I thought there would be more of you out there. Is there a forum where the opposition congregates? would like to hear what they have to say
Is there not a single anti OWS that wants to talk about this, or at least vent, maybe even just rant?
Man, I have to tell you, this is weak. You've got an opinion, so give it. Looks like I'm going to have to find that, "We are the other 53%" group to get any action.
Holy crap, maybe you haven't figured out that 403 issue and are convinced it's an effort to ban you from this forum
the 403 was a bug in the URL. not a conspiracy.
Yes, that's what I was thinking, but you never know. I'm just glad it's gone.
Okay, if you won't come to me, I'll have to look for you.
hhhh
It doesn't help you're on a specifically OWS forum.
But I've seen a lot of people opposed to this thing in here, sometimes in other peoples posts, or something they post there own thing. I'm just looking for their point of view in a single forum, not spread out all over the place.
I'm genuinely in hearing the other side of the argument. But it's hard to get that in bits and pieces.
OWS is a leaderless, unfocused movement. I came here looking to find out what this was all about and was met with profanity posting an opposing opinion. It is not open-minded, anyone that posts opposing opinions are deemed a "troll". The more I read, more I realize OWS doesn't know what it wants. So many people with their own agendas. White Power, Anti-Semites, bigots co-opting this push their cause. This was not a spontaneous uprising by the American people. A call to action put out by someone in Canada, who gets his rocks off by stirring the pot and then sits back and watches. OWS supporters are lab rats to him. "America needs its own Tahrir acampada now more than ever. Can we get 20,000 people to flood into lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens, a democratic assembly and occupy Wall Street for a few months?" Who is he to say what this country needs? The movement claims to not be affiliated with this guy - Quote"OccupyWallSt.org is the unofficial de facto online resource for the ongoing protests happening on Wall Street. We are an affinity group committed to doing technical support work for resistance movements. We are not affiliated with Adbusters, anonymous or any other organization." A movement calling for transparency - Where is OWS' transparency? A leaderless, unfocused movement is just a trend. I see this as being more an affectation than true support of the movement by most. Trends come and go and change with the seasons. And if a leader does come up through the ranks, will you really know who they are?
Yes, this movement has many flaws, but it is brand new, barely a month old. Most movements take time to sort themselves out. Because it it is so inclusive you get all walks of life and all kinds of opinions. I don't agree with much of it. What I do agree with is the core principal that the root problem is the mony in Washington.
I also believe that if this movement does not gain some focus, some organization, leadership, etc... soon it will die. The concept of a formless, leaderless movement sounds nice, but it doesn't actually work, as evidence by your experience.
As for me, I'd still like to give it time, because for one, the true problem is a real one and it needs to be fixed and if this does anything, it at least puts a light on the problem and keeps the problem in the news.
But for the most part I agree with you.
That's like looking for a liberal voice on Fox news. It may exist, but for the most part no one takes it seriously. I'm somewhat of a moderate on OWS and I've already been called a troll. There is are strong forces of ignorance even in a progressive moment like this. I grew up in an extremely liberal area that accepted everyone (all races, genders, nationalities, sexualities,...) except those who were republicans. Now while I'm quite liberal myself, I was sadly one of the few people I new who recognized the irony. My point is, that you can not expect those with opposing view points to hang around long in an environment like this where disagreement is treated as an attack on the dignity of the organisation.
I would have to disagree, I came to this site about 2 weeks ago and for the most part, I've been welcomed even though I'm openly conservative.
I've had many many lively discussions, but those that wanted me to gotohell tended to be neocon ranters, though a couple flaming liberals don't like me as well.
But for the most part I've been accepted as part of the 99%.
OWS forum and OWS goals seem nebulous, because we are so diverse. And I've posted a need for clear goals too, I think it will come, most people here and on the street seem to have the same Idea, that criminal activity in corps, banks, and gov't needs to be prosecuted. And that the corrupting influance needs to end. And that this is a moral imperative, hence the vatican comming out in favor of OWS.
I just have to remind myself that this movement is ONLY 6 weeks old, though at some point, the goals have to come
I don't think so. They are actually in here. No liberals at fox. well sometimes they have a token one on. Or one just to beat up on.
There will always be ignorance. But a good way to combat that is to listen, and that's what I'm doing. I just want to know what they think.
While I applaud you, I think it is too late for this forum to have a balanced approach. I don't think of that is necessarily bad, there always needs to be places for those of one mindset to coordinate, collaborative, and vent.
The New York Times and other news sources have none a descent job of presenting a more full spectrum view, especially when taken in aggregate.
I'm not looking for balance in this forum. At this point I'm just looking for different points of view. Just for my own information.
I didn't find that with you, since it seems we are both on the same page.
A few other views:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/28/us/oakland-and-other-cities-crack-down-on-occupy-protests.html?ref=us
http://www.redstate.com/laborunionreport/2011/10/27/occupythis-free-enterprise-its-more-than-an-idea-it-works/
Thanks. I just want to talk to them, because their rants usually start with, "lazy, jobless slackers who are just looking for a hand out." and I'd like to know how and why they are arriving at the same conclusion, especially when that conclusion is wrong.
Now I probably already know the answer, because Fox news, Hannity, the Republican Party, Rush, are all toting the company line. But I just want to get it from the horses mouth. I'd like to engage in some honest debate, but for the life of me I can't get anyone to answer this post. at least not anyone who disgarees
Someone from out west said OWS has neo nazi friends. Is that true?
Friendship is a two-way street. The best they can hope for is to hang around OWS asking to be friends, until they realise that this is never going to happen.
Because it is so inclusive and basically anyone can join, I wouldn't be surprised. Just one of the flaws in the whole formless, leaderless concept.
I personally believe that you need structure, leadership, a single message, vision, focus etc... and that if these things don't happen this will not work.
I think the initial mission statement of OWS was very good. And I see no reason to definitively expound on that; in fact, to so I believe would be a serious mistake.
The Weather Underground, the Black Panthers, the Chicago Seven... Angela Davis... Kent State, My Lai... Jane Fonda, John Kerry... Marilyn Monroe, the Kennedys, Martin King, Jr... a blur of body counts and body bags and baby killers and napalm... Timothy Leary, Ken Kesey, Haight Ashbury... "tune in, turn off, and drop out" -- what? ... acid trips and heroin... the "drug culture"... Watergate... we can go on and on, there was not one news worthy event of the 1960s or early 1970s that can be labeled a cultural "good."
Well, with the exception of the music... and perhaps the moon.
All I am saying, is that I think we need take time to consider that with exception of perhaps some general expansion in both intelligentsia and tolerance, that there was nothing of good that came of the activism of the '60s, nothing at all.
If we are to revive the "Students for a Democratic Society" then let there be some positives so that we might gain support, gather strength, and move forward to a better America.
I disagree, the civil rights movement was a just cause, and one that succeeded in changing things for the better.
I also think it's incorrect to make a direct parallel between this current movement and the hippie movement of the 60's. It's apple and oranges, different people, different culture, different issues, etc... Not the same, it would be a freak coincidence for it to be the same. It would be like comparing the 60's to the American revolution, different time, different climate etc...
I do think that your perception that this is the same as the hippie movement is a view being pushed by the right.
Yea, I forgot to mention the "hippies and yippies"...
Feminism, albeit somewhat misguided by the likes of Gloria Steinem (as in, "we're exactly the same" [what?] and therefore equal) and the civil rights movement, I believe can be blanketed under an increase of "tolerance." Because that's exactly what it is.
And, unlike you, I am uncertain that "Students for a Democratic Society" is not an apt label.
I'm not student, hippie, non of the above.
The cause is just. Or do you think your government actually works for what's in our collective best interest?
We can't give honest opinions back. Anything any of us say that contradicts your whining and chanting of bumper sticker slogans meant to trigger emotional responses from all the sheeple, is "removed" from the forum.
like this post??? ;)
Your post does not trigger an emotional response. Just want to know if your against, why? again, looking for the others side genuine take. I may not agree, but I still want to hear the other side.
Honest opinion: It's a rebel without a cause.
Belligerent rant: technically they most protesters are probably not holding down jobs or actively seeking on, they're too busy getting arrested / sprayed in the face with mace by the NYPD. Think about it.
They may or may not have jobs, in fact I'm sure that some do, and some don't. Obviously those with more free time can actually camp out. I on the other hand, do work and cannot.
But what do you think about the actual issue? Do you think it's a problem that our government has been purchased by corporations and special interest? do believe this, or not?
This is a little dated, but interesting. http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittPolicyWatchCongressional1995.pdf
Keep going. I'm doing more research
First, there are always problems with government, it's just a question of magnitude.
Secondly, I believe that the sole purpose of a publicly traded firm is to make money for its owners. Therefore it is the job of government to make that what is best for the owners best for the people through regulation, taxation, and prosecution.
Third, I think that allowing firms to make unlimited donations is tragedy to the republic.
Fourth, OWS needs to focus in on a few realistic, achievable, goals. Without a metric for success, the movement is domed to failure.
Fifth, it need to determine these few goals without falling apart. This is where I feel the trouble lies.
I agree with all of that. So you are pro OWS?
I agree with some parts and I disagree with others. Oh the whole I support the general movement but I can't help myself from laughing at it from time to time. If the movement can mature into a singular force I think it can do a lot of good, particularly as a foil to the Tea Party. On the other hand I'm afraid that the unrealistic goals, particularly economical and political, may doom it. It needs direction, it needs focus, and it needs a sense of what can be realistically accomplished.
I feel the same way, it's all over the lace, and it's total lack of organization may lead to it's destruction. But the general issue is a valid one. I just hope it can make it through this infantile stage, because the issue is actually important.
But yes, it's a little crazy right now.
it is democratic, it begins with people actually going to the GA's in each city and making themselves heard. It is only beginning, and will get progressively larger as the Government/Money get even more greedy. Just take a look at the Quarterly profits (google - quarterly profits banks for best effect) and then look at wages/jobs in this country. Millions of Americans are in dire need, that WON'T go away. I pray for the future generations of the world. Mass extinction of fish and wildlife, corruption of fresh water sources, side effects of bio engineered foods yet to be realized. All in the name of profit. Maybe there isn't a defined goal yet, but there is a unity in people who want a better future. A wild fire begins with one spark, it has yet to catch on across the country at the mass level. I have no doubt it will.
I still think all those things are symptoms. People and corporations have a right to make money, but not at the expense of the rest of us. The playing field should be fair. Get their money and influence out of Washington, and government can start working for us, instead of them, and can regulate the properly, and protect us from them.
"Therefore it is the job of government to make that what is best for the owners best for the people through regulation, taxation, and prosecution. Third, I think that allowing firms to make unlimited donations is tragedy to the republic." All reasonable responses from my pt. of view. However, we"ve obviously left that playing field some time ago friend. Now we live in an increasingly "rigged" game where a tiny elite some call the Oligarchy / Aristocracy move the goal posts around whenever they feel like it. I think #OWS is simply and justifiably pointing this out in a admittedly dramatic way. It was necessary though to break through the Corp. owned Media's agenda which of course is to try and make us all think we still live in a Republic and have democratic rights. I agree with you that a leaderless movement without more focus is problematic and could simply dissipate , but what other alternative do we have at present?
That is why, and I know this is going to be REALLY controversial, I don't think the banks or the corporations are to blame. They were doing their job. It is our own fault for not properly insulating the government and passing laws/regulation to protect the populace.
It is important that we start to work together to roll back the influence of these corporations, but outlandish demands and terrible economic/financial literacy and understanding hurt the fight.
My biggest complaint about OWS is that it is failing at the most important of its missions by including too many side goals and lacking patience.
SO instead of begging of the government to get MORE involved with rules, regulations, and policies, why not try encouraging all the mindless sheeple to vote for politicians who want the government to "BUTT OUT"?
Here's my answer to that. It's not about wanting the government to give more, its about wanting them to act in our best interest, in our national interest. But our government does not do that. It has been purchased by corporate America and special interest, and our government solely works for them, in their best interest.
Voting people in or out of the system doesn't work because it's the system that is broken. The system rewards and promotes those who play by the current rules. That is why we need to change the system, get the money and the influence it purchases out of Washington, so that our government can work in what's in our best interest. Both parties have been purchased.
so it's not about wanting the government to do anything specific, although I will admit there is a lot of that in these forums, it's about getting government to do the right thing.
While I agree with what you are saying I disagree with the means. You can never expect any organisation with huge perverse incentives to act as you would hope. I the real irony is that corporate boards have been plagued by this problem for decades, just try reading some research on executive compensation some time to see what I'm talking about.
Unlike you, I do think there are specific things that can be done though.
First, redefine corporations as corporation, not as people. This may take a constitutional amendment sadly, or a few new justices on the Supreme Court.
Second, guarantee public funding for the nominee of any party with more then 5% of the registered voter. This must be applied to all national elected officials. No other funds my be used, and all finances must be audited.
These two steps remove the perverse incentives, but it is still up to us to elect the right people. There is nothing that can or should be done to change that.
While none of these are likely to be enacted in the next 12 months, if steps can be made towards these goals over the next ten to twenty years I'd call it a success.
In that light, I think that the majority, but not all, of other OWS goals are secondary and should be pushed to the side.
I strongly agree with you and am trying to get people together to figure out a plan. Could you please post something on my thread so that I don't lose you in the fray? I would like to make sure you are aware of what I put together so that you can give your input. Thanks.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/get-the-money-out-of-politics/
No, I agree this current format can't work. My view is that it will either evolve into something more organized or it will languish and eventually die.
We also agree on the true problem. You have to get the money, and the direct influence it buys, out of Washington. What I keep posting, because again I totally agree with you, is that everyone should focus on this root cause, and not the symptoms. Most of the other issues are just that, a symptom of the root cause. No point in going after the symptom.
Again with the tea party stuff, come on guys, that last year. Anyways, when you write "sheeple" I can't help but imagine half sheep half humans grazing on an picaresque field the the sun setting... and suddenly I can't remember what I was just reading. Seriously, that world is the biggest indicator that you're more confrontational/mad then well read.
But there is a general mantra here of "action speaks louder than words."
OWS = Urban Burning Man
What does that even mean?
google it
Not interested in pulling something up off the internet. Interested in what you actually think. So either put it into words, or don't respond. Your choice.
OWS has devolved into a wandering herd of grateful dead followers sans the grateful dead.
Its like going to Burning Man without the Burning Man.
If there are 10K people, there are 11K opinions and reasons.
And that's all great....but ultimately its just a party. It means nothing.
I don't see it that way, although I don't doubt that some are similar to a "grateful date herd".
I sometimes feel the same way. I've called for some form of leadership, organization, with a clear and concise message, focused on the actual true problem.
But maybe it will get there. But no matter how you view this, the actual issue is true, the actual problem very real, and if this movement keeps a light on this issue for long enough, maybe some form of organization and leadership will emerge.
It's worth a shot. simply doing nothing is not acceptable. I truly believe, that if our government continues to act int he best interest of only a few, that they will spend and lead this nation into oblivion.
joeschmoe 1000 has been seen leaving nothing but negative remarks and views. nothing positive, no actual input or factual evidence. he has not actually been to the movement, or he is lying about what and who he sees there. either way, he is absolutely a paid off troll, or a bored anarchist, or a GOP member