Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Liberals, shape up or you'll ruin the movement!

Posted 6 years ago on Oct. 11, 2011, 2:47 p.m. EST by imrational (527)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Liberals, shape up or you'll ruin the movement!

YOUR DEMANDS This movement isn't about you pushing your ideology and agenda on the rest of America. That won't succeed. Most people are too entrenched in their beliefs and when you attempt to push your agenda onto them, all you end up doing is pushing away people that would otherwise support this movement.

We need to concentrate on a platform/agenda that 99% of Americans will support, this necessitates that it would have to be embraced by conservatives too. There are not many things we can all agree on, so we need to stick to those few things we do. We need to send a clear message that this movement is about eliminating corruption in government and keeping it gone.

Keep the agenda towards cleaning up the corruption. Focus on that. Bring in people rather than pushing them away. If your suggestion would not be immediately embraced by the vast majority of Americans, drop it for now. We have enough on our plate without being sidelined by personal agendas.

DEALING WITH OTHERS Remember, when HBGary was hacked, it was found that the government was developing software to turn social media into weapons. For example, software that would allow people to operate sock puppets and post comments on boards like this one or other ones. How do we know that software is not being used by other groups whose interests go against cleaning up corruption?

When you act out with insults or in ways not currently embraced by the greater society... you define yourself by those actions. People see that and are pushed away.

For example, I've seen hatred towards cops. Just a short time ago, over a hundred people were arrested in Boston or failing to obey police warnings to not go on a stretch of property. Cops are part of the 99%. There are bad cops, but there are good ones too. Cops are friends and relatives. When many Americans see protesters denigrating or disrespecting police, who do you think they side with?

WHAT YOU NEED TO DO! This movement needs to be about something that 99% of Americans would embrace. That is, eliminate corruption in government and close those doors so it doesn't happen again. Any other agenda you want needs to be tabled until we get that one item accomplished.

In order to accomplish that, we need to be as inclusive as we can. We need both liberals and conservatives, because without the other side we will be disregarded and dismissed.

In order to be inclusive, we need to stop insulting those who have different ideologies than us. When people try and pick fights, we need to take the high road and point to the goal 99% of us want to accomplish.

What is more effective? A crowd gettiing into a shouting match with a person, or several people quietly staring them down with not even a word said on their part?

On this board, you need to avoid getting dragged into Troll threads. People/Journalists come to the site and see intelligent threads without any replies, while insult threads are filled with hundreds of responses. It makes us all look like arguing children.

TAKE THE HIGH ROAD. STICK TO THE PRIMARY MESSAGE. DON'T GET SIDE-TRACKED.

86 Comments

86 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by bootsy3000 (180) 6 years ago

I'm a howling queer liberal feminist and I completely agree with you.

[-] 1 points by coolnyc (216) from Stone Ridge, NY 6 years ago

Howl away baby! Howl loud, and howl for all of us!

[-] 3 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 6 years ago

Thank you for posting this!! I have been insulted numerous times by liberal minded folk for my views. I have been called ignorant, stupid, evil, and I don't know how many times I've heard people say "it's people like you...." WTF?

At the moment I consider myself a libertarian, but I'm also a farmer, a scientist, an ex-teacher, I have an environmental degree, and I'm a nurse practitioner.

STOP with the personal attacks, you are driving away at least half of the well-intentioned and aggrieved people like you who want to see major change as well. If the right, the left, and the middle finally see each other's points of view and unite, this movement will be both legitimate AND unstoppable. I believe we must finally consolidate the American people in to one cause: taking back OUR government from the corruption and the money.

My own personal view is also that we must unite to stop these wars - they are morally bankrupt, and they are monetarily bankrupting us and contributing to the economic problems we are all fighting about. You think you have problems? Try being bombed with depleted uranium or a drone, and being occupied by an aggressive foreign power for years with no end in sight. If we want to stop being oppressed by our own leaders, we must rise up and DEMAND that they stop oppressing everyone. This is a human issue. This is larger than just the U.S.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I thumbed up your comment. I agree.

[-] 3 points by smate1 (72) 6 years ago

Getting all $ out of elections is the one movement we can all agree to join together on while we have the chance. We need to stay focused on this. Division is their only weapon. We can argue later.

[-] 3 points by Fredone (234) 6 years ago

Yes I agree we should try to focus on the fundamental corruption issues, and you might want to steal some of the ideas why in my post at http://occupywallst.org/forum/crucial-we-must-acknowledge-the-distinction-betwee

The consensus process helps a lot to bring out minority viewpoints but ultimately we need to reel in more conservatives.

[-] 2 points by mgiddin1 (1057) from Linthicum, MD 6 years ago

You must or the conservatives themselves will tear your movement down, either passively by undercutting it and seeing it as illegitimate, or actively since they do not agree with left ideas of expanding government and raising taxes.

Divide and conquer, that's the name of the game of elites who are currently running the show. Hence, the way forth for the people is to unite and rise up.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I totally agree. If we don't bring in more conservatives to balance the movement, we're going to lose. One side will make an agenda that doesn't represent everyone and then it will be attacked and lose before it could ever be enacted.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

I suggest challenging conservatives to use the constitution to support and defend the constitution. Article V is expressy designed for that.

[-] 3 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 6 years ago

Where's the like button at? this is a great article.

[-] 3 points by MadCat (160) 6 years ago

Good post.

[-] 3 points by WhyIsTheCouchAlwaysWet (316) from Lexington, KY 6 years ago

Hear, hear!

[-] 3 points by L0tech (79) 6 years ago

Bravo! Well said. This guy (or gal) should be our spokesperson.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I guess I should elaborate on that comment. I think that we shouldn't have official spokespeople. I think that at certain times, people will naturally be embraced by the 99% with the message they have. I hope, that after they have their 5-15 minutes of fame, that they will fade back into the hive. This helps avoid character assassination and keeps the movement from alienating people who don't like that temporary speaker.

[-] 2 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

imrational is pointing out a very important point here. QUOTE:"On this board, you need to avoid getting dragged into Troll threads. People/Journalists come to the site and see intelligent threads without any replies, while insult threads are filled with hundreds of responses. It makes us all look like arguing children."------

I would suggest that the insult threads are mostly created and participated in by agents of "cognitive infiltration".------- http://politics.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/ I've got immense experience being directly opposed by such agents and have harvested proof, evidence of exactly how they work.--------- http://algoxy.com/poly/nwo_cognitive_infiltration.html http://algoxy.com/psych/whatis9-11disinfo-sitemap.html We need to become much more sophisticated in our communications. Realize, an agent will never rationally discuss anything that is actually useful for creating change. They will only put it down. With enough of them, they can bury quality threads and create a circus for lurkers to confront = COGNITIVE DISSONANCE.

[-] 2 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

Term limits is something 99% of Americans can get behind.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I'm against term limits. All they do is oust politicians that have been approved by a majority of the voters. I find that "term limits!" is usually the cry of a losing political party.

If anything, term limits would only increase corruption as every election would have challengers vying for money and rewarding the politicians who sell out the most (he with the most money usually wins elections).

[-] 1 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

I find term limits keeps the door into politics revolving. New blood and ideas every so years. I think it would work for the better.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Again, I differ. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

[-] 1 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

No problem :)

[-] 2 points by Democracydriven (658) 6 years ago

wow, That was awesome advice. It has to be a great asset thanks.

[-] 2 points by Flsupport (578) 6 years ago

I agree and have been calling out the trolls recently, though I will admit, I only clicked on this because I saw the words "howling queer liberal feminist". I hope that does not make me shallow.

[-] 1 points by thebeastchasingitstail (1912) 6 years ago

haha me too

[-] 2 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

now do another thread just like this one addressed to conservatives, to show you aren't biased ...

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

You're absolutely right and I was planning on doing one tomorrow. I was hoping to see more conservatives around here before I did though. :(

Any suggestions on what I should change or include in addition to what I said here?

[-] 5 points by anotherone773 (734) from Carlyle, IL 6 years ago

Here's the problem. We are leaning left some. That is a problem to me as liberal and to you as a con( i am assuming).

You say you are rational( by your name), so here is some rational thought. We are a community that is about as pure democratic as you can get. We lean left because a majority of us are left wing or more neutral.This is causing all of us to lean left as a group.

I want us be mostly neutral at least for this cause, because it is not going to work if we lean left or right. But this is not our fault( I am not saying it is your fault or cons fault either). You have a majority that are left thinking. You tipping the scales that way. IF you want us to be more neutral we have to get more right wing views.

I have been courting any conservatives that will listen for the last 3 days.I do this because you are right. Neutral is going to be when we are the strongest.I have accepted this. One problem we all are having is ideology. Get rid of it.EVERYONE. We are NOT politicians and their ideology is what has kept us divided for so long. We can think for ourselves. So do so. Do what you believe and not what idiots in office and running for office want you to do. THINK.

I have done this myself and not only do i lean more neutral but i can have a conversation, an intelligent one, with a con on here that last hours without us fighting, bickering or being disrespectful. And the con leans more neutral and so do I. We actually work out our differences in a way and become more appealing to each other. More human.

Also do not use labels outside of 99% and occupy type labels UNLESS you are trying to prove a point on unity. Do not label me and do not label you. When you do you single groups out and when you do that it causes rifts. We all know as a liberal i am not going to agree with a con traditionally on many things. But i dont want to know you as a con. I want to know you at a fellow American that wants to fix their govt so it works for the people the way it was intended. Labels is how the bad guys with all the power divide us( one way). IF we are fighting each other then we are to busy to think and figure out what is going on.

Be respectful. You guys have really impressed me on here and i say this as a veteran forum warrior that spends a lot of time in debates on boards all over the net. I have never seen so many opposites come together and NOT fight.

We can do this but you have to use your head and stop being greedy. You are not going to get everything you want. This is not the United States of ME. You are going to have to bend for the greater good. We all want the same thing to fix this problem. If we didnt you wouldnt be here. Fixing it does not mean you get all your wants. It means you get some, if we are successful.

Worry about fixing the govt not getting problems in the govt fixed. I see to much of this. The govt must be fixed first so that the problems are just not recreated later. You want to the power back in the hands of the people through representation. We are not here to change our government type or economic system,if that is what you think our goal is you need to come back to reality. We are here to fix the system we already have in place.

Court Cons please. We need to try to stay balanced. Libs, i say this as a lib, give some ground, this needs to work for all Americans not just left wing Americans.

You may use any of this or none of it. Good luck in your task!If you use it clean it up on grammar and such though. I have typed over 15,000 words today and im just to spent to check it.

[-] 3 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Anyone reading anotherone773 (Carlyle, IL)'s post... PLEASE hit the "thumb up" button, the upper little grey "I" to the left of the post. I think he/she is entirely correct and we need to spread messages like this.

[-] 1 points by Democracydriven (658) 6 years ago

Thanks for you effort and insight. I am hearing more logic and commom sense than I have heard for a very long time

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

ever hear of the purple dialogue?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q3EzZRVvpo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPuf38HDdHM&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmpMRQG7FXk&feature=PlayList&p=2CD2383F4F5AAB57&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=13 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xHw9zcCvRQ&feature=PlayList&p=2CD2383F4F5AAB57&index=11 http://purpledialogue.blogspot.com/2008/05/welcome-to-purple-dialogue.html The Buckminster Fuller Challenge

THE PURPLE DIALOGUE

Purple Dialogue SpiralPurple Dialogue is the process of bringing two 

diametrically-opposing points-of-view, represented here by the colors red

and blue, into alignment such that they both UNDERSTAND each other's

point-of-view. The Purple Theory is that if there is ever disagreement on any

issue then this simply means that one or both sides of the issue does not

understand the other side's point-of-view. At least one may need to learn

something. Either or both people may need to learn how to express

themselves better for the specific other person and/or they may need to

learn how to learn or figure out what the specific other person is attempting

to communicate to them. Once both sides understand each other accurately

then mutually beneficial solutions become more obvious. see purple_dialogue_spiral.jpg

Now let's take this concept to a more extreme highly-leveraged level.

By the year 2010 the total amount of information available is expected to 

double every 72 hours and the digital data generated from storing that

information on computer hard disks is expected to double every 11 hours.

This means that the majority of people who DON'T understand things

accurately grows exponentially becoming increasingly worse at an

accelerating rate. Whether or not some calamities are intentionally

produced or brought on by nature we can not afford to have MISTAKEN or

ambiguous communication cause disastrous events to occur. The Purple

Dialogue as applied with people in highly-leveraged positions of facilitative

power to eliminate ambiguity BEFORE it is introduced into the

exponentiating data delivery stream is an ecoficient maximally-enabling

demonstration of Trimtab potential.

Purple Dialogue evolved from the concept of PiALOGUE (Pi Dialogue)

and is a highly-defined form of the word "dialogue" which uses a metaphor

of the mathematical constant p (pi) as a methodology for finding an unknown

quantity that may be impossible to measure or to determine directly from

only that which appears to be obvious. For example, a person's words do

not necessarily communicate that person's meaning and intent accurately

during the initial speaking of those words. Verification of meaning and intent

needs to take place otherwise ambiguity tends to sneak into the dialogue

like an evil spirit disrupting the integrity or accuracy of our communication

without our even realizing that an error has occurred in the expression of our

ideas. PiALOGUE Trangulation of The Purple Dialogue Dot

If a circle or "pie" represents the totality of human experience and we slice

up that pie into smaller pie-ces and then triangulate on those aspects of

individual human experience (represented by the smaller colored dots) and

by relating those triangulated experiences to each other (represented by the

pink lines) then we can all come to a greater understanding and awareness

of the whole pie represented by the Purple Dot in the center. With Purple

Dialogue there is no need for giving in, conceding, or otherwise

compromising a person's personal opinion because each point-of-view is

integral to the overall understanding and awareness of all participants in the

Purple Dialogue. see purple_dialogue_triangulation.jpg

Purple Dialogue is a "LIVE" integrally-progressive accurate 

communication insurance process. It is the TWO-WAY exchange of information by and between ONLY two specific people or groups who desire to accurately understand what each person/group is attempting to communicate. If 3 or more people/groups are involved in a dialogue then the Purple Dialogue aspect only takes place between two specific people/groups at a time to insure that they understand each other accurately

before addressing an additional person or group. Purple Dialogue is a

social architectural design communication technology component. As a

verbal language and thought-oriented concept it requires zero expenditure

of additional physical resources and is therefore an ecoficient maximally-enabling activity.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

interesting and simple enough in theory. Sounds like it might be a little hard in practice if the other person isn't on the same purple dot though. :)

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

yeah, well, it assumes the other guy actually has any interest in compromise or truth. often they don't.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

More specifically, Purple Dialogue uses the mathematical expression X -

0 (as X approaches zero) where X equals the set of ambiguity or the set of

unknown variables. To the people of different languages and cultural

backgrounds the metaphors in seemingly opposing viewpoints are the

unknown variables whose values have yet to be accurately determined by

someone other than the actual originator of those concepts.

The Purple Dialogue central dot is that which exists at the theoretical 

"Zero Point" (absence) of ambiguity, dysfunction, miscommunication,

misunderstanding, etc. (see purple_dialogue_dot.jpg). Trangulation of The

Purple Dialogue Dot Logo For example, if two points-of-view initially appear

to be in conflict with or in opposition to each other then I represent them

graphically as a red and a blue dot. The more that each dot expresses the

progressively finer points of their perspective the more information that is

available for the other dot to consider and the more opportunity they have to

respond with additional applicable information that may not have been

considered previous to this Purple Dialogue process. Even if the two dots

initially think that they are still in opposition to each other, and it may appear

as though they are not making very much progress (not changing color), the

more that they communicate the closer they get to the theoretical purple line

between them. As each dot receives additional feedback from the other dot

as to how they are receiving the expression of the other dot at each step of

the Purple Dialogue process they have the opportunity to "adjust" their

languaging and semantics accordingly for that specific other dot and how

the information is being received. As more words are spoken and more

illustrative diagrams are presented a new transcendent language evolves

that is specific to the two dots. As a new common integral vocabulary grows

between them then the distance or separation between them and the Purple

Dialogue Dot decreases and X -> 0 (X approaches zero) where X equals

the set of ambiguity, dysfunction, miscommunication, misunderstanding, etc.

Purple Dialogue PO Presiding Oligarchical PyramidIf someone who 

understands Purple Dialogue can accurately communicate with a person in

a position of extreme power, like the leader of the presiding oligarchy or

Presiding Oligarch (PO), whose singular actions affect the literal majority of

the people on Spaceship Earth, then the person utilizing Purple Dialogue

will have the ability to enable the implementation or actualization of whatever

their objective is whether it be a project or an adjustment in philosophy.

Without personal knowledge of the specific intentions of the PO all other

actions taken may be counterproductive regardless of how useful they may

initially appear to be to someone who is lower on the power pyramid.

Therefore, within the course of a single conversation they can be maximally

efficient by accomplishing the most productivity with the least effort and the

least utilization of physical resources and thus being an example of Trimtab

potential. see purple_dialogue_PO_pyramid.jpg

Adding the single phrase "Purple Dialogue" (a trimbtab) to the global 

vocabulary will not only help guide humanity to a more integral conscious

awareness and the optimization of harmonious coexistence, this simple act,

in and of itself, uses absolutely no natural resources. It is a simple

psychological tweak to the human thought process. Initially the Purple

Dialogue enablement is offered to our leaders to apply amongst themselves

on matters of the greatest importance and then trickled-down to the general

public as it becomes more and more understood.

As a demonstration of the viability of the Purple Dialogue we have been 

attempting to communicate these concepts with the 2008 Presidential

candidates. So far only the Barack Obama Campaign appears to have

embodied them in endeavoring to provide truly integral non-partisan solutions.

Purple Dialogue Mediators, Counsellors, & Consultants help people 

participate in Purple Dialogue to achieve Purple Solutions. Join with us or

ask us to join with you to achieve truly integral results. I envision a monk-like

service-oriented non-religious non-profit-motivated organization whose sole

purpose is to ensure the integrity and accuracy of communication between

people and organizations whether they be homeless or in high positions of power and influence.

[-] 2 points by laffingrass (362) from Normal, IL 6 years ago

Incredible post, my thoughts exactly. We need EVERYBODY with us. We need to circumvent mainstream media and let the conservatives know that we are them, too.

[-] 2 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

EXCELLENT POST! "We need to concentrate on a platform/agenda that 99% of Americans will support, this necessitates that it would have to be embraced by conservatives too."END That would be Article V of the US constitution. People need to understand it first and how congress is VIOLATING the constitution and has been for a long time. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html RIGHT ON! "On this board, you need to avoid getting dragged into Troll threads."END You actually know whats going on. People, heed this citizens recomendations.

[-] 3 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 6 years ago

Amending the Bill of Rights is a proposal in the category of "getting side-tracked", in the original poster's words. Especially your proposal to revise the First Amendment to add the words "forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love, protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", that you've been talking about here. These are not ideas that the main stream are going to get behind.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Gotta agree with TechJunkie. Any attempt to amend the Bill of Rights makes me VERY nervous. Any changes to our government needs to both liberals and conservatives behind it because I don't trust either one side to get it right (and I also know that if one side makes a proposal without the approval of the other... they'll fight it tooth and nail)

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

If either of you had explained a method to deal with corporate medias neglect to truths showing treason, that would be great, but now you are working to assure things continue exactly as they are. How can democratic elections work if people are not educated into the truths they need to make decisions? If you had cited an alternative law that would allow Americans to enforce the constitution and to become informed then share opinions, that would be good too, but you've not even mentioned that what I propose would bring back the usenet, and recreate the "global village" tax dollars paid for and was faithful to free speech. You just don't like the idea. How far is this movement going to get with behavior like this?

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Everyone has their own little pet projects (me included). Just because you don't get a massive upswelling of support for your ideas don't get offended. Maybe the time just isn't right for it. Right now, we have enough on our plate with just dealing with getting corporate funding out of politics. If we can succeed with that, we can move on to the other stuff later.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

With Article V corporate funding can be barred from politics. Perhaps you do not understand, this is the most powerful tool in existence for creating change in America. The dumbing down included not teaching anything in schools about it, or universities, the reason why is because congress is afraid of it.------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution "Congress acted preemptively to propose the amendments instead. At least four amendments (the Seventeenth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth Amendments) have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention."

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I'm very leery of any attempt like that. Don't forget that we have had people proposing amendments regarding the sanctity of marriage and a host of other repressive ideas.

I want change, but in a good direction. Any reform can be metagamed into something bad. WE have to be very careful.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

You've fallen to the misinformation that proposals mean anything. They only mean something when ratified. Most will not be. The states must rally, 3/4 or more in order to control and the people of all the states are basically ready, all that is needed is sound strategy rather than unreasonable fears at using our constitution to protect our constitution.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

that's a good point and you've got me reconsidering my stance. Congratulations :)

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 6 years ago

Hey, you are rational!:)
I've got strategy, and it is fairly far reaching which makes it harder to visualize at the far end. Each step is in logical sequence in accordance with law.-------------

1) Movement consolidates demand for Article V. 2)Citizens supporters in states create ballot intiatives or demonstate in demand at state offices and capitals to get legislators to apply to congress for an Article V. 3) Congress begins to convene delegates. Guarding the citizens voice, and ability to share then form quality opinion, with some uniformity to be tested, only the First Amendment is accepted for revision by the public because the movement has warned them away from all but the 1st amendment and elections. 4)While this is happening an interim proposal for amendment is made regarding election systems to assure that the vote will be properly taken and counted. 5) Citizens decry any accelerated amendments which may be in corporate interests, nwo interests, etc. BEFORE the First Amendment is revised giving national mass media to activist interests that can show their proposals for information meet the criteria for public support on national level. Paint them as corporate attempts to do again what they already did with 50 years of extremely manipulative, deceptive and exploitive media dividing and disabling Americans from unifying in support of the constitution. 6) Ratification elections in states take place and AFTER Article V is used to make certain that speech needed for survival is shared and understood, http://algoxy.com/poly/meaning_of_free_speech.html revision of the 1st amendment, then national media is used perhaps 4 nights a week for 1 to 2 hours of primetime tv to expose the entire hijacking of constitutional government. This educates the citizens to the point where their appreciation of what has happened compels them to unify properly and be prepared for survival through a wider, set of amendments dealing with economy, environment, immigration etc. 7)Following the education of America, about a year maybe, delegates are reconvened to review a newly created structure of amendments that undo all the unconstitutional aspects inserted over the last century or so. The informed public will have vetted the proper insertion of amendment to reduce the amount of amendment putting fears of rampant amendment to rest. Voters will ratify and the nations focuses on recovery.

[-] 1 points by Gylliwynn (56) 6 years ago

If you want to bring liberals and conservatives together on this, which I think is a great goal to have, then you need to educate them a bit more on how our country got into this mess in a way that EVERYONE can understand. Please read this article that came out two days ago by an economist who articulates and offers a damn good, realistic solution to this confusion. The masses need to vote in the next presidential election and in order for them to be convinced they need Obama to sign a legal and binding contract stating he will repeal the nine economic measures listed in the article. Then send this out, even if you don't care about voting. The masses NEED to be educated about how this mess occurred so their causes can become more defined. Peace!

http://www.truth-out.org/occupy-wall-street-movement-and-coming-demise-crony-capitalism/1318341474

[-] 1 points by Elysium22 (95) 6 years ago

agree

[-] 1 points by coolnyc (216) from Stone Ridge, NY 6 years ago

I love it when somebody says everything I want to say better than I can say it. I'm a howling gay manist and I completely agree with you too!

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

lol, there's a lot of howling going on! What ARE you people doing? ;D

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 6 years ago

Exactly, it must appeal to all 100%; therefore, we need is a comprehensive strategy, and related candidate, that implements all our demands at the same time, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:

http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures

Join

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/

if you want to be 1 of 100,000 people needed to support a Presidential Candidate – such as myself – at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.

[-] 1 points by Dost (315) 6 years ago

Excellent commentary here. Good post. But, we must be realistic. Getting 99% agreement is an impossibility besides there is no mechanism for it. Trying to get a lot of conservatives to agree with you is a waste of time. They will hate you and disagree with you JUST BECAUSE you are an OCCUPIER. If you have EVER worked on any campaign or cause, you would know the pitfalls of trying to appealing to everyone. You will satisfy no one. Your idealism is great. But if you are going to focus on one issue: Corruption, that is a huge issue. There is corruption on Wall Street, the Banks, the Govt. etc. I think we can come up with three or four fundamental things to work for. My suggestion is the following: 1) Reform Wall Street Financial Institutions and the Banks (I won't waste time here detailing the reforms needed, others have done this here already); 2) Reform the Electoral Process (public financing of elections for example); 3) Tax Reform (make wealthy people pay a lot more); 4) Reform Legislative Process (get rid of filibuster, change parliamentary rules); 5) Create jobs with Tax monies.

I think they are all essential but we can dicker about which ones to work on. If you feel strongly that Corruption is the one issue, great. We can expand that to include the Electoral Process and/or the way our Congress works.

Ultimately, the two issues most important (and we can turn this into two major parts of a platform: 1) End Corruption & 2) Create Jobs by Taxing the Wealthy. You can modify the wording on these but these two concepts cover most of what most people want. Under the first, we can delineate what we mean by corruption. For the second, we spell out a little more clearly the taxes on the wealthiest (for example, 5% surcharge on anyone making $1 million to $5 million and 10% surcharge on those making over $5 million.

There is lots more to say here but it would be better in an article. But I agree with you, we need to stay focused on one or two issues, and eventually bring more detail to both. The real focus should be on organizing chapters across the country. We need some structure and organization. A name would be good (Occupy Wall St. is great but the implications are too radical for most people). 1000 chapters with dues paying members (yeah, I know, a lot of people don't like it but the dues would be nominal, like $10-$25 sliding scale; this helps to raise money, see who is committed and screens out troublemakers). I say all this based on a lot of experience over four decades. Think about it as I have for a long time. I have noticed on these posts that too many people are reacting emotionally, and are not digesting ideas but having knee-jerk reactions to suggestions. We have to approach this without egos (hard, I know) and with some kind of commitment to spiritual values if at all possible. Again, great commentary here. Excellent critique.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I chose END CORRUPTION because although it is a broad issue, it is something that can bring in everyone. We all know the system has been corrupted.

Choosing how we end corruption can come later. Right now, a simple rallying cry is more needed.

Trust me, if more and more people are screaming for it without giving any specifics, it will make those in power nervous enough that they will start initiating reforms themselves. Then we take those victories and press further and further.

[-] 1 points by Dost (315) 6 years ago

Sorry, I disagree here. I agree with the strength of your argument to stay singularly focused and not make things too complicated (I have commented on this on other threads). But simply screaming end the corruption over and over won't work. The press will ask what you mean and if we do not have a response, then everybody who is asked, will make up their own. I suggest detailing generically for now, Ending Corruption on Wall Street and the Banks & Ending Political Corruption. They are tied together by Money which is made illegally or unethically and then used and abused to corrupt the Political system. We have to have a simple response to the question: What do you mean by Corruption. We can discuss it further but we need clarity on this. Leaving it to a diverse crowd to come up with their own answers will give the corporate media the opportunity to denigrate what we are attempting to achieve by pointing out the vagueness, absence of organization and leadership. We do need spokepersons. We need organization. I realize this is hard to do with such a diverse and amorphous group but that is the challenge.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I think we only have to point to things like the SCOTUS ruling that allows for unlimited political funding by corporations, ENRON contributions to political parties, the Keating Five and how many other politicians took funding, etc.

[-] 1 points by Dost (315) 6 years ago

Good luck.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

It worked fairly well for me when I gave an interview to a Forbes blogger earlier this week...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterleeds/2011/10/11/whos-occupying-wall-street/

[-] 1 points by Dost (315) 6 years ago

Again, as an activist and organizer, I would be interested in your plan of action. I think you have a difficult road ahead. Talking and discussing is one thing, building a movement of people to support and carry out actions is totally different. That's why I asked if you have ever done any organizing. It would be a very ambitious project.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Different kind. I used to be a bureaucrat (municipal level) once upon a time and organized special events/functions run by volunteers.

Actually, once you get critical mass, people start undertaking their own actions. Those that are embraced gather steam, those that aren't fail. All you have to do to see this in practice is to look at OWS protests springing up in other cities and towns. Individuals are taking the ideas and running with them. They are organizing themselves.

Using social media (like Google Docs, YouTube, Twitter, etc) we can communicate and educate one another as to HOW to organize, with each generation of guidelines/suggestions evolving and improving.

It's basically a form of evolution/natural selection. Ideas that prosper in the environment and replicate (ie. are embraced by more and more people) dominate and then diversify. Ideas that don't die out and become extinct.

[-] 1 points by Dost (315) 6 years ago

Sorry, bro, but I think your idea at this point is pie in the sky. But good luck. I could be wrong. No need to carry on this dialogue further. I wish you the best. Nice chatting with you.

[-] 1 points by MyHeartSpits (448) 6 years ago

Completely agree with you. I hope you or someone similarly convincing can get to Wall St. and make this case.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I think more and more people are picking up this message. I was in the Chatroom during the wee morning hours and things were kept pretty neutral. People who started pushing against conservatives or attacking religious beliefs were shouted down for example.

[-] 1 points by jmcdarcy (158) 6 years ago

I'm with it.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

I am excited to see a conservative (I am assuming that you are conservative) use the word "us" in this message. In that there is real hope, because as someone once said about a former revolution "united we stand, divided we fall.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

I'm a social liberal, fiscal conservative. Basically, a Libertarian (although I don't subscribe to their party platform and am a registered Republican).

I (and many of the other conservatives here) just hope we're not wasting our time and see this movement embrace socialism instead of sticking to reform we can all agree on.

[-] 1 points by Mrcake (27) 6 years ago

I've been saying this since the movement started, please someone moderate this forum and boot racist assholes.

Please don't let this message slip through you fingers OWS

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Honestly, I've been debating about booting trolls. On the one side, we want to be inclusive, encourage diversity and free speech. On the other, some people can't let a troll starve.

What's worse is that I wonder if we are being attacked by weaponization software like the kind HBGary was designing for the US Military. We're seeing an inordinate amount of trolling from both the left and the right. I could easily see these as sock puppets attempting to cause division within our ranks. The only way to really combat them is for people to grow up and not respond with knee-jerk reactions.

[-] 1 points by Poplicola (125) from Jersey City, NJ 6 years ago

http://occupywallst.org/forum/four-attainable-goals/

  1. End the Federal Reserve Board.
  2. Outlaw lobbyists.
  3. Hold a recall election with campaign finance reform.
  4. Develop a sustainable economy.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/who-are-we/

We are open to all ideas.

We are the ideas.

We have no leader.

We are the leaders.

We stand united.

We stand as a voice of the people.

We hope for a constitutional government.

We hope for a sustainable economy.

We hope you will join us if you have similar interests.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Not meaning to offend, but...

  1. is probably not attainable until after the Presidential election (and you-know-who wins). Most Americans don't even know what the Fed is or does. they just know Bernake's name and that he plays a major role in the economy.
  2. How do you propose non-profits and "good" special interests reach politicians? For example, the Secular Coalition of America lobbies for the separation of church and state.
  3. campaign finance reform yes... recall election? Things would be too chaotic.
  4. that might take awhile.

My list.

  1. Overturn SCOTUS rulings: Corporations and special interests cannot donate to elections, let alone unlimited donations. Corporations are not entitled to the same privileges as people. Eminent Domain cannot be used to take a citizen's property and then hand it over to corporations.

  2. voting machines must generate a papertrail and be easily audited before, during and after elections.

  3. Institute run-off voting in federal elections (this is more of a pipe dream, but I think a large majority of americans would support it with a little effort at education).

  4. ban all paid political commercials. Debates must be real actual debates and all candidates must participate.

[-] 2 points by MyHeartSpits (448) 6 years ago

Man, we need you on the ground in NYC... I'll be going there in a week to spread the message that we must be more inclusive in our stance. We need to live up to the name 99%.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Thank you very much. BTW, to help spread messages like this, there is a "thumb up/thumb down" feature. Look just to the left side of people's comments and you'll see two grey "I" marks, one above the other. This attributes points.

I'm currently in Northern Michigan. I'm flying to Vegas in Mid November and (hopefully) to Portland's at the end of the month.

[-] 1 points by looselyhuman (3117) 6 years ago

Will try. Grr.

[-] 1 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

How is the trying working out for you?

[-] 0 points by carlos321 (2) from Niantic, CT 6 years ago

he talks like obama,... makes me suspicious.

[-] 0 points by carlos321 (2) from Niantic, CT 6 years ago

he talks like obama,... makes me suspicious.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

Lay off the pot, it's making you paranoid.

[-] 0 points by johnlocke76 (9) 6 years ago

The primary message is that republicans kill jobs.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

johnlock76, stow that kind of talk. You're being divisive and that's not helping us. We need conservatives and Republicans, otherwise they will end up against you and you won't accomplish anything.

[-] 0 points by johnlocke76 (9) 6 years ago

name me one reasonable and "rational" republican serving in Congress now. Not Snowe, not Brown, not Collins, not Lugar. Not one of them puts the public interest above party masters like Limbaugh, Koch clan, Hannity, and the money masters residing in corporate suites. The decent and good republicans remain silent while the extreme crazies run the show. Look at what they have done to Romney who has been forced to retreat from reason and acts like he never even visited Harvard.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

You're arguing about corrupted politicians. Say that. Don't label all Republicans with them... it insults people we need, members of the 99%

[-] 0 points by RichardGates (1529) 6 years ago

i'm a lib, not interested in selling a point to those living in a religious fear mongering fantasy. if you push them to back their comment, they know they are supporting people that do not have their interest in mind but they have stockholm syndrome. you have to push them to speak in full view of others step by step their position, before they begin to think for themselves.

[-] 2 points by imrational (527) 6 years ago

weren't you a conservative just a couple of days ago posting troll threads against the liberals? Sorry if I'm misremembering you.

Anyway, please do not be divisive. We need to be inclusive if we want to accomplish anything.

[-] 0 points by RichardGates (1529) 6 years ago

if your going to accuse me you need to post a link backing your accusation. and i will represent my interest the way i see fit, stop trying to corral people. a unified party is still a party.

[-] 0 points by jjrousseau714 (59) 6 years ago

Congressional republicans controlled by plutocrats, hate-mongers, and criminal obstructionists constitute the real problem. Republican obstructionism is treason because it stalls economic growth. Any good and decent republicans remain silent. Did you see the republican debates last night? If you would vote for any of these shitheads, then you have self identified.