Forum Post: I love the 1%
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 6, 2011, 10:30 a.m. EST by another1forfreedom
(26)
from Ithaca, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
And I'm part of the 99%.
I think the power in this movement comes from modeling new social structures. It's a democratic, consensus-based, non-hierarchical movement. Alot of people would like to see society at least a little more like that.
I think it's also important to model more sociable attitudes and values. This movement is non-violent, which is critical. But it can be even more than that by embodying a truly compassionate attitude toward our adversaries. As much as we think they are destroying the Earth, making people's lives miserable, whatever it may be, they too are human beings, and deserve to be treated like human beings. I for one would like to live in a society where those who commit errors are forgiven and cared for. So why wait? We can model that society right now.
So what I'm envisioning in practice is a less angry, shouting attitude in our demonstrations, actions, etc. Rather than seeking to embarrass or shame individuals, it would mean challenging them, respecting their humanity, and inviting them to change. And in reality, we don't need them to change - we need the 99% to change. And as many people understand that a non-violent movement is more inviting to others to join, I believe a more compassionate movement is even more so.
If nothing else, I think it's important to recognize that anger generates a lot of energy, and is very hard to control. That energy can easily be transferred onto others in the movement, creating infighting and division. No need to mess around with that. And I'm not saying anger should be denied or suppressed, but rather recognized, validated, and not exactly encouraged as the driving force.
Troll like me
Don't fall for this psychological crap from any one percent goon. It's an obvious attempt to discredit our cause or divert our attention from the obscene, unjust, immoral, and illogical concentration of wealth. Donald Trump went on record the other day telling us to blame the government instead of Wall Street and the richest one percent. Other well known public figures are trying to stereotype all of us as lazy entitlement junkies without a brain or spine among us. Their goons are obviously online and on air trying to break our will. Don't fall for any of it. Just follow the law and keep protesting no matter what the one percent goons say or do. Our message is vital. Below is my two cents:
We have been mislead by Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, and nearly every other public figure. Economic growth, job creation, and actual prosperity are not necessarily a package deal. In fact, the first two are horribly misunderstood. Economic growth/loss (GDP) is little more than a measure of domestic wealth changing hands. A transfer of currency from one party to another. The rate at which it is traded. This was up until mid ’07′ however, has never been a measure of actual prosperity. Neither has job creation. The phrase itself has been thrown around so often, and in such a generic political manner, that it has come to mean nothing. Of course, we need to have certain things done for the benefit of society as a whole. We need farmers, builders, manufacturers, transporters, teachers, cops, firefighters, soldiers, mechanics, sanitation workers, doctors, managers, and visionaries. Their work is vital. I’ll even go out on a limb and say that we need politicians, attorneys, bankers, investors, and entertainers. In order to keep them productive, we must provide reasonable incentives. We need to compensate each by a fair measure for their actual contributions to society. We need to provide a reasonable scale of income opportunity for every independent adult, every provider, and share responsibility for those who have a legitimate need for aid. In order to achieve and sustain this, we must also address the cost of living and the distribution of wealth. Here, we have failed miserably. The majority have already lost their home equity, their financial security, and their relative buying power. The middle class have actually lost much of their ability to make ends meet, re-pay loans, pay taxes, and support their own economy. The lower class have gone nearly bankrupt. In all, its a multi-trillion dollar loss taken over about 30 years. Millions are under the impression that we need to create more jobs simply to provide more opportunity. as if that would solve the problem. It won’t. Not by a longshot. Jobs don’t necessarily create wealth. In fact, they almost never do. For the mostpart, they only transfer wealth from one party to another. A gain here. A loss there. Appreciation in one community. Depreciation in another. In order to create net wealth, you must harvest a new resource or make more efficient use of one. Either way you must have a reliable and ethical system in place to distribute that newly created wealth in order to benefit society as a whole and prevent a lagging downside. The ‘free market’ just doesn’t cut it. Its a farce. Many of the jobs created are nothing but filler. The promises empty. Sure, unemployment reached an all-time low under Bush. GDP reached an all-time high. But those are both shallow and misleading indicators. In order to gauge actual prosperity, you must consider the economy in human terms. As of ’08′ the average American was working more hours than the previous generation with far less equity to show for it. Consumer debt, forclosure, and bankruptcy were also at all-time highs. As of ’08′, every major American city was riddled with depressed communities, neglected neighborhoods, failing infrastructures, lost revenue, and gang activity. All of this has coincided with massive economic growth and job creation. Meanwhile, the rich have been getting richer and richer and richer even after taxes. Our nation’s wealth has been concentrated. Again, this represents a multi-trillion dollar loss taken by the majority. Its an absolute deal breaker. Bottom line: With or without economic growth or job creation, you must have a system in place to prevent too much wealth from being concentrated at the top. Unfortunately, we don’t. Our economy has become nothing but a giant game of Monopoly. The richest one percent of Americans already own over 40 percent of it's total wealth. More than double their share before Reagan took office. The lower 90 percent of Americans own well under 20 percent. Still, the rich want more. They absolutely will not stop. Now, our society as a whole is in serious jeapordy. Greed kills.
I don't want to discredit or distract. I think we can be more powerful and successful by embodying more pro-social values. Resist, rebel, demonstrate, take direct action - all of that can be done with compassion toward our adversaries, and I believe it will allow us to be more effective and grow much more.
I really respect your opinion. In general, I agree that a search for common ground with our adversaries can produce positive results. In general, but not when it comes to greed. Not when it comes to record high concentration of wealth. It's like trying to negotiate with a rapist over how much your mother should bleed.
I don't think we can find common ground with them. We need to find common ground with the 99% and unite in opposition. But when targeting the 1%, when putting a wrench in the gears of big business, I think we can do so with a sense of respect. As a specific example, I find it a rather fruitless exercise of anger to go to certain 1% homes or restaurants - such acts also seem like a rather pointless attempt to convince them of something. On the other hand, peaceful, compassionate protests or sit-ins or whatever may help convince others that people have power and that we should all join together in opposition.
I love the Top 5%.
A modest proposal:
The 95% may eat the bodies of the former richest 5% as burgers, hot dogs, sausages, or pizza toppings.
Children of the former richest 5% may be eaten whole roasted with a variety of gourmet BBQ sauces, or dry rubbed with organic, salt-free seasonings.
YUMMMYYYY!!!!
I am for necessary change, violent or not makes no difference. The end justifies the means. We have the right to defend ourselves and the duty to defend our nation, and democracy as a whole, also
I disagree with the ends justify the means. The present time is what we're living in, instead of postponing peace for the future, lets create it now. OWS could be make quicker decisions if it were not democratic. It's democratic because democracy is more effective, and because we're modeling the social structures we wish to see. That is much of its strength. Therefore, I believe we can take it further and more fully embody a non-violent attitude which is pro-actively compassionate for all people, whether they are on our side or against. I believe this is ultimately more effective to achieve our ends.
Okay, non violence it is, then. I don't like violence, except when there is absolutely no other way, or if they are using it on us. One person has now died of an overdose and I think that is suspicious, just when they want us to pack up and go home and he police need a safety excuse to depop the park. We will see.....
[Removed]