Forum Post: I'm uncomfortable witht the word occupy. why not liberate?
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 12, 2011, 8:47 p.m. EST by ThinMan2
(46)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It reminds me of WWII France or the west bank
because all the sites would have to be re-named... ;)
I like the idea of occupying things that are your right to occupy.. kinda ironic humor I think =) Plus it is unique so it works well on the internet, for example google searches.
"liberate" might remind the old people of the Symbionese Liberation Army : )
Wall Street is a parasite. You do not occupy or liberate a parasite. A parasite must be severed from its host and exterminated.
I think the occupation has been an amazing great way to get initial attention, and I am so indebted to the folks carrying it out for us, but I worry about it's sustainability long-term (especially now that temperatures are starting to drop). Eventually this need to move to something bigger and more dramatic. I saw another post where someone was suggesting a million person march on DC. I think that's the next step. We need to shake that place with numbers.
Liberate would indicate that you are helping another person or persons to become free, which might be an apt illustration but this is about the right to peacefully occupy a space. The right of occupation is the only right everyone has universally because you occupy anywhere you are, even in prison or, in many cases, death. It is important for everyone to concentrate on what they bring individually to this first and not try to liberate anyone. The reason is that this movement revolves around no one being forced to do as they do not choose. Even in WWII, there were people who did not want to be liberated because their interests were served by not being liberated. It is important to understand these people do not wish to be liberated. Our central tendency and problem is that of a people who wishes to make everyone believe as we do. Do I not do the same thing myself? But as movements gain power, the urge to coerce becomes very strong and it is important to realize that liberation through coercion is no liberation at all.
Liberate would indicate that you are helping another person or persons to become free, which might be an apt illustration but this is about the right to peacefully occupy a space. The right of occupation is the only right everyone has universally because you occupy anywhere you are, even in prison or, in many cases, death. It is important for everyone to concentrate on what they bring individually to this first and not try to liberate anyone. The reason is that this movement revolves around no one being forced to do as they do not choose. Even in WWII, there were people who did not want to be liberated because their interests were served by not being liberated. It is important to understand these people do not wish to be liberated. Our central tendency and problem is that of a people who wishes to make everyone believe as we do. Do I not do the same thing myself? But as movements gain power, the urge to coerce becomes very strong and it is important to realize that liberation through coercion is no liberation at all.
It is a liiiiitle late for changing the name of the whole thing, that's just practicality.
That said, it's a bigger word than a form of military domination. You also occupy your home. It's a big word with many contexts.
If we said liberate wall street, then from who? The united states? Now you're talking an invasion.
We are the citizens of this country, we occupy it, we have the right to assemble in our country and if someone is not going to want us there, then we are going to occupy that space until such a time as we get what we want.
So please don't freak out about it.
First you invade then you occupy. That's how it sounds to me.
You know how dictionaries have definition 1. 2. 3. 4. etc.?
It's like that.
Does one invade their own bedroom every night when they go home? Does a business occupy a building? Are you not an occupant of your home in legal terms?
Yet no one was invaded.
Semantic distraction concluded, afaiac, but be well! viva OWS!
two reasons
they are literally occupying a park on wall street. As in living there. So they are occupying wall street in the sense that you occupy your house, or a room at a hotel or a porta-potty.
If anything we are trying to liberate Washington DC from Wall Street, not the other way around
That's my point. You don't think it's kind of belligerent? Why not liberate then?
Here's how I look at it and depending who you are, you may not like this analogy but -
Are you old enough to remember Queer Nation? They were around 1990-ish, I think.
Slogan:: We're here, we're queer, get used to it!
And, America DID get used to it. That's how they started the "gay rights" movement as we know it today.
So - I think "OCCUPY" is a way of saying The 99% is here, we're ready to organize & speak up, get used to it.
Just my take on it.
You don't think it's kind of belligerent?