Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Occupy is Leaderless because ....?

Posted 5 years ago on Dec. 11, 2012, 7:30 p.m. EST by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Well .. because there ain't a Leader amongst us..

Face it people .. anyone with any Leadership in their blood .. is already at the top .. a member of the Elite .. they are..

They are the people willing to take charge of the situation .. and "make the kill" .. the rest of us .. we are sheep.



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 5 years ago

We are leaderless and we are one. We will wrap the tendrils of truth around the dead tree trunk of tyranny, and slowly reduce it once again to fertile soil; and from this soil will grow green pastures, worthy of the hand of God.

-just saying.

[-] 2 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Nice. Poetic.

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Belongs on a stage..

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Oh now you wanna talk to me. LOL.

Well maybe I'm not ready!

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

GK is taking this stuff very seriously ..it's ruining him.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Oh I wouldn't worry so much, It is a serious matter after all.

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

I'm sure you wouldn't.

[-] -2 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Further down .. the "poet " wrote this :

0 points by GypsyKing (8864) 8 hours ago

One more time . . . sigh. I have nothing against wealth per se. What I am against is criminal, monopolistic wealth so vast and concentrated that it threatens democratic rule, prevents us from solving our problems, and destroys the planet. Capisch?

I'm not going to waste any more time talking to some A-hole named UnFriendly Observer, and I recommend others don't waste their time either.


[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

And how will you prevent another rise of tyranny?

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 5 years ago

Through the reinstatement of the rule of law that applies to rich and poor equally. Not a two tier system of law that coddles the rich and lascerates everyone else.

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

So than .. there will still be rich and poor in your vision of a better tomorrow ?

[-] 0 points by GypsyKing (8719) 5 years ago

One more time . . . sigh. I have nothing against wealth per se. What I am against is criminal, monopolistic wealth so vast and concentrated that it threatens democratic rule, prevents us from solving our problems, and destroys the planet. Capisch?

I'm not going to waste any more time talking to some A-hole named UnFriendly Observer, and I recommend others don't waste their time either.

[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

GK ..you have reached the absolute bottom. good day

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 5 years ago

Perhaps, but at least I haven't reached (-5).

[-] 2 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

Ha! Well said :)

[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Do believe kharma points are an accurate indicator of anything?

[-] 2 points by hoot (313) 5 years ago

they are an accurate indicator of what your peers think of what it s you have to say. As far as Occupy being leaderless, this is a wonderful thing, it allows for the movement to be about ideas. Instead of being about people who can speak well or who think they can speak on behalf of anyone but themselves. Being leaderless and anonymous confuses the system occupy is moving against. Any leader of movement that begins to gain popularity and threatens the white male landowner's way of life, would soon disappear.

It would also be hypocritical of occupy to enforce hierarchy in movement that is spreading the idea of anarchy

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Fear may play a factor of not having a leader .. or perhaps there is a leader and only hides behind the ruse .. of a nonleader movement ..for his/her own protection .. ? just saying

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago


I wanted Occupy to succeed as much as anyone else I am a strong advocate of Equality and Fairness... and I have merely pointed out a few observations as to some of the possibilities of Occupy's shortfall .. but they do not want to listen or hear ,not want to accept /admit their mistakes and thus continue to repeat those same ideological errors.. truthful criticism is a tough pill to swallow.. the preference is usually denial and ..banishment .. kharma points are a reflection of my peers denial on this matter.

[-] 0 points by hoot (313) 5 years ago

But would a leader who hides behind a leaderless movement actually be a leader? What mistakes is occupy making? Karma points don't reflect any such denial. I down-voted a few of your comments because i sincerely disagree with them. Furthermore, how would having a leader be beneficial to a group of people who despise hierarchy?

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Well, so they say ..so they say. Actions speak louder than words.. look at this website for instance .. a person could be banned without warning and without given a reason .. I believe this shows they do not like habeas corpus neither..

"...how would having a leader be beneficial to a group of people who despise hierarchy?"

You will have to figure that one out ..

At this point , I am through with Occupy. Farewell

[-] 1 points by hoot (313) 5 years ago

The rules of a website aren't comparable to the rules of a sovereign state...The internet is just a broader stage for which one may express themselves. if your account is banned make a new one, or don't go somewhere else who gives a shit its 1 in billions upon billions of forums


[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

Sheep follow the herder. Maybe it's YOU who needs a leader... not me. I can think for myself, thank you.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

so - you dont need a leader - arent you something wonderful!
What have YOU actually done to further OWS goals ?
How many working groups do you actually attend every week?

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

I attended the DNC protest in Charlotte. I further OWS goals through education, one on one... or groups if necessary, face to face and on the 'net. My specialty is environmentalism and AGW, both of which I have a great deal of experience with. Economics comes in second.

No, I don't need a leader or oversight. The term is self motivated.

[+] -5 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

But can you Lead ?

[-] 2 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

I have. I would rather work with people as equals.

[-] -2 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Most people prefer to follow(and support) ..but they need a leader .. Occupy does not offer them that.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

OCCUPY does even better - it presents the people with good and healthy ideals for all to live by and so work towards. That I think Is The Best Leader = HEALTHY FOR ALL IDEALS.

[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

It's a lot of chitter chatter ..

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

In your perception - perhaps - sorry bout that.

[+] -4 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

It's true.. many if not most of the voices are highly intellectual at Occupy .. with a very impressive entourage.. but none of them truly know what the poor man feels.. or thinks.. the poor hard working man ..

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

OWS/OCCUPY does not need to - not really - as the individual thinks and speaks for them self - and it is groups that form in affinity with but separate from OWS/OCCUPY that take action - the people - not an organization. Besides - how can you comment on what an educated or otherwise intelligent individual knows about life? Poor - Middle - Rich. Intelligence is not tied to any one state of being.

[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

The poor hard working man.. has never had the option to think.. or speak for himself .. certainly not publicly..and if he did .. he certainly wouldn't know how.. that is why leadership is so important .. but not the kind that deceives , ..we need true honest leadership ..Intelligent leadership..uncorupted leadership .. Why do you want to do this without leadership.. ? Why is Occupy so determined to prevent leadership from emerging..?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Einstein was a patent clerk. How many extremely intelligent individuals are out there in the world at large who have not had extensive formal education?

Occupy has never stated an objection to leadership being found/discovered/developed - they have just said that it will not be them that does the choosing.

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 5 years ago

I've been a poor hard working man many a time in my life. But I guess you don't think people like me should read books and learn from our experience. Engaging in intellectual pursuits is a bad thing for people like me you say. Or are you just trying to keep people like me poor and powerless by stigmatizing "intellectualism.

You see, some of us have been on both sides of the fence. Probably most of us. So please be a bit more careful with your generalizations :)

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Yeah no problem .. take care

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

None? How do you know?

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

VQkag2, I notice you look to chitter c hatter with everyone.. I really have no time for you right now .. perhaps another time .. ok..?

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

You can't possibly know if the intelligent voices 'know what the poor man feels or thinks'.

So let me ask you. Why would you present that lie?

And if you wanna have a private conversation with someone we have a privite message function. If you don't want to get responses from people don't comment.

If you don't want to respond to me. Don't!

your silence regarding the offensive lie you spewed is enough.

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

later ..please

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Oops you responded again.

Didja watch this? Might help you understand better.


[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

You might want to watch the program/presentation here :


Then take some time for consideration.

[-] 0 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

They have been socialized to need a leader. Elitism is taught.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

By choice. Occupy is not a leader - Occupy is an educator and facilitator - the people who associate with Occupy and go on to organize actions do so out of recognized need and spotting of opportunities - they are not tied to an ideology other then the good of all - and that will be shown - to be so or not - by each group and the support involvement they garner.

No one and everyone for attackers to try to discredit.

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

I disagree. I say it is "not" by choice..

edit: One does not choose to be a Leader.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Sorry that your vision is restricted on comprehending this point.

There is nothing and no one to subvert or attack and there is everything and everyone to subvert or attack.

[-] -1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

It is not my comprehension that is faltering.. but rather my willingness to concede to an authority that does not exist, .. or rather "follow the blind"

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

There is no authority to concede to. There are living principles to support.

[-] -3 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Okay.DKA Okay.

I just thought I'd give the boat another rock .. you know How I can be !! :-)

[-] 1 points by pigeonlady (284) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

Wow, dude, your metaphors are extreme -- leaders are killers, and everyone else is -- sheep? I can't even relate to that. True leaders are capable, never abandon their ethics and consider those impacted by their actions even if not part of their group. With Occupy there are times the leaderless concept is trying Ever sit in on a group? A lot of the kids don't want anyone 'over 30' or classifies their interaction, like old people are facilitators. I was booted from 3 meetings in succession (in the Atrium last year) and told I was welcome at facilitators ONLY. And some like their personal prestige and dominate a meeting, in particular if they don't like the other's politics. Occupy does some of the same as the parties, organizations, and companies they criticize! THAT is something you should have pointed out.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 5 years ago

I am alive and well, We are not in need of defining others of what they are not. Who are you to take leadership capacities of these fine, capable loving Americans? Being sheep is okay follow? Lovin' you

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

There are a lot of articles out there regarding orginizations that are leaderless. Here is an article I found that focuses on OWS. It is an interesting read - Here's the link and a paragraph taken from the article:


Occupy Wall Street is a great boon to the extent that it helps draw attention and build effective opposition to the unjust mechanisms of upward redistribution and to the many flaws in our political economy responsible for the disproportionate influence of the wealthy and powerful over the rules that profoundly affect us all.

However, insofar as OWS is meant to persuade Americans to adopt a wholly different and better way to live with one another, it is bound to fail.

Even if consensus-based, leaderless participatory democracy could work on a grand scale, Americans aren't interested.

And face it: sooner or later, Brookfield Properties is going to get it's park back. So for those deeply committed to realising a lasting community governed by the ideals of OWS, let me recommend a seastead http://www.seasteading.org/

[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Thanks for your comment.. but I have to respectfully oppose the idea that a leaderless organisation can handle the scope of problems we are dealing with , and somehow manage to produce a " well oiled functioning machine" I would have to see it to believe it.

[-] 2 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

You may be right because what I have researched dealt with small entities - corporations - not 300 million people.

There are a few small corporations out there that can operate "leaderless" but they are small in number.

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Well if it were possible, the world is not ready for such a leaderless utopia..

People have been trying to fight Unfairness and Inequality on their own for thousands of years .. and we still have Unfairness and Inequality.. The American Revolution merely shifted power from King George 3 to the wealthy Elite. But that was a great fight for Equality. Only problem was .. it was Run by Middlemen.. and they took the spoils .. wrote the Constitution and called it a day.

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

But we are talking about "leaderless" groups aren't we? Never did mention other things that you brought up -

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Okay, back to leaderless groups. These small leaderless corporations you mention ,how do they function without leadership ?

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

Well apparently the people who work for the company make the "critical decisions" as to employees pay, profit, benefits and so on. Each month a panel meet to discuss issues regarding those topics. From what I have read a new panel is replaced each month so that everyone has a say.

This is just one example that I came across and there are more out there - do a search for "leaderless corporations" and you will find a wealth of inof out there.

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

sounds interesting , thanks for the tip.

[-] 1 points by Shayneh (-482) 5 years ago

There is a lot of info on it - and one of the posts I read listed a Orchestra being leaderless - making the point that it still can operate without the conductor. Pretty interesting.

However on a small scale as with a corporation it will probably work ok but on a grand scale I doubt that it could work - too complex. But again, never say never.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (3900) 5 years ago

But who is the more highly evolved of the two? - going in for the kill seems to be base brain behavior - those more sensitive intuitive people probably evolved compassion and all that contemplation and thinking so that human beings could exist together in groups. Feeding from your own group is cannibalistic. The killers have been defeated many times in history - how did that happen? If the more sensitive people came together before (many times) and defeated the "killers" it can be done again. Being a killer is short lived - because they stand alone against a great mass of thinkers (and those who can feel what is right intuitively) - when the masses come for them they will still be alone. All propaganda is done to prevent this from happening it is often believed for a while by many, but truth (and compassion) usually prevails and those with intuition and who can feel what is right will guide it.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

If truth and compassion usually prevailed, the world wouldn't be the chaotic mess that it is. The "killers" have never been defeated in history. Only "killers" with greater power or organization have defeated other "killers". The "killers" prevail because most of the people are "killers" within the limits of their own lives. The big "killers" are just the more successful "killers" of the pecking order.

Humans have always existed together in groups, just like the killer lions and the killer wolves and the killer chimpanzees. No contemplation has ever been necessary for it.

[-] 3 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

I think that when real growth occurs, in the economy for example, it is based on the prevalence of compassion. Examples would be the Renaissance, the Chinese Tang dynasty, classical Greece.

I think the people that we call killers are really parasites, their function is to breakdown the growth of living things. For periods of growth to occur, the parasites have to be restrained. If not, they kill the host.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

Growth accompanies increased trade which has nothing to do with compassion. In fact, it's more likely to accompany the opposite of compassion. None of those times and places are particularly known for their compassion.

For the most part, the "killer" is in all of us. Greater socio-economic stresses bring it out more in those most subject to those stresses while greater opportunities for those more inclined towards aggressive acquisition brings it out in people clawing their way to the top.

Parasites are all around. Developed nations are the parasites that live off the cheap labor and resources of the undeveloped world. Some of the populations of these developed nations even occupy the ancestral lands of nations they've all but completely destroyed. Within each underdeveloped nation are also parasites exploiting those socially beneath them even if it just comes down to being a man taking advantage of the various members of his family or the family members taking advantage of younger members. People taking advantage of whoever they can whenever they can or not caring whenever they see it happening to others is unfortunately the norm, not the exception, for humanity.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

I believe that growth is derived more from creativity than trade, and that creativity is a quality that has to be nurtured, which requires compassion. The 15th century Renaissance, for example, was based on the establishment of schools for poor children out of compassion:

""The Brotherhood of the Common Life was a teaching order, started in the 1390s and early 1400s in The Netherlands and in Germany. The importance of the Brotherhood's work was that, in focussing on the education of poor children, it began a process that led to a Renaissance throughout Europe in the fifteenth century, through the creation of a national intelligentsia derived from the poor and oppressed, not merely from the ruling elite. In doing so, they laid the basis for the development of the modern nation-state in France, between the years 1461-1483, under Louis XI."


In the Tang dynasty, while Buddhism grew in popularity among the people, Confucianism was the main political ideology and was based on the concept of Ren - 仁, or compassion. The Tang government established state run schools to teach such Confucian ideology and a flourishing of creativity resulted.

I don't believe that developed nations are always parasites, but can also be quite the opposite. To the extent that they are imperialistic, they are parasitic, while more republican forms of government are the opposite. Republican governments are derived from Plato's Republic, which emphasizes the concept of "agape" or compassionate love.

The US has had booth tendencies, which have both dominated our country from time to time. For example, after WW2, Roosevelt's plan was to export high tech industrial goods to developing countries on credit, to allow them to become independent from imperialism. However, after Roosevelt's death the US reverted to imperialistic policies with Truman.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

The Renaissance began in Florance Italy in the 1400s among the artists who sought funding from wealthy families made wealthy from international trade. The wealth from trade had always been behind it without which there would have been no Renaissance. From Florance, the Renaissance spread to the rest of Europe especially after the fall of the eastern Roman empire in 1453 when many Greek scholars immigrated to Italy. The time of the Renaissance had coincided with the religious persecutions and wars of the Reformation not to mention the Spanish Inquisition. It had been no more compassionate than any other time.

The Kong Tzu philosophy had been the main political ideology since the Han Dynasty. Ren was simply the humaness that had accompanied the orderly living that was in accordance with li. The first half of the Tang Dynasty had been extremely cosmopolitan from its trade which brought all kinds of items and ideas from far away places stimulating cultural growth. It was no more compassionate than any other dynasty enjoying the fruits of its establishment before the inevitable end.

Republican forms of governments are derived from the Roman republic, not from Plato's Polis. The Polis does not emphasize love (agape). On the contrary, it emphasizes compliance to a strict social order far more strict than what even the Soviet Union had turned out to be.

The US exists on the lands of other peoples it has broken treaties with and all but exterminated. At no moment does it ever cease to be a parasite.

To replace the League of Nations conceived under the Wilson administration, Roosevelt had been behind the creation of the UN and its world domineering permanent members of the security council. He had miscalculated the post war intentions of the Soviet Union despite Churchill's warnings and could never have forseen the demise of Nationalist China. Thus, he supported their inclusion in a security council that was to be the support for a US dominated world.

[-] 4 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

Trade can result in growth if it is in fact a trade in new ideas. Articles or information containing new ideas, when traded to one country and installed in its economy can lead to real growth. However, trade by itself doesn't necessarily lead to sustainable growth.

One example would be the "free trade" policies established between the US and China. While seeming beneficial at first, we now can see the results have been disastrous to the US. Similarly in China, in the beginning, free trade allowed poor villagers to move away from their villages, where they earned next to nothing, to the cities where they might earn a few hundred to a thousand dollars a month.

Economic decline is now hitting China, however, since fewer and fewer westerns can afford even China's cheap products, while the Chinese villagers who have become sweatshop laborers surely do not earn enough to buy their own products either. As a result of such free trade policies the whole world economy is collapsing.

Free trade was not initiated out of compassion, but rather out of the greed of that particular fraction of the 1%. Its main purpose was to enrich themselves at the expense of all the rest of us. But now as their free trade empire is collapsing, even they are becoming desperate, and are having to resort to desperate measures, such as war, to continue their insatiable quest for profit.

We all would have been better off if we would have followed a more compassionate trade policy, as advocated by FDR after WW2, exporting high tech goods to developing countries, which would have freed their workers from tedious sweatshop labor, allowing them to produce and earn more for themselves by working with a higher technological level of infrastructure. Their higher earnings would have allowed them to purchase their own products resulting in a sustainable economy.

There is still time for us to undertake a more compassionate trade policy. If we were to enact Glass Steagall, and establish a national bank to finance the redevelopment of infrastructure and industry in the US, we could export high tech goods to countries like China, in exchange for their inexpensive consumer products, and evolve from our current state of codependency towards a state of co-independence.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

"free trade" is not an example that trade by itself doesn't necessarily lead to sustainable growth. Free trade is a specific government policy in favor of big business, not simply trade in itself.

Nothing leads to sustainable growth. Growth, no matter how prosperous and how long, inevitably comes to an end. Sustainability can only be achieved without the endless pursuit of growth.

[-] 3 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

I think that "discovery" and "invention" could lead to sustainable growth. For example, some scientists imagine a process whereby we would colonize, first, the moon, and establish an industrial base there. On the moon's surface there is enough of a helium isotope that could be used in fusion reactions to provide for humanity's energy needs over the next couple thousand years.

From there, we would have the potential to expand throughout the solar system, and eventually, the universe. There are vast supplies of many materials just to be found in the asteroid belt. This is not to mention the growth that is possible through the scientific discovery alone that is involved in a space program. Just the spinoffs from JFK's space program, for example, returned ten dollars for every dollar put into it.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

Discovery and invention can only lead to limited and refined growth. The bottom line will always be that resources are limited and even the means of obtaining more from off world locations is limited. The energy and resource requirements for establishing and maintaining an off world presence is extremely greater than what's feasible even with idealistic advancements in technology (such as anti-matter power and light speed travel). The simple recycling of resources alleviates any need for pursuit of off world resources and more than enough hydrogen already exists on earth for whenever fusion technology is finally developed. Any colonies established throughout the solar system will have to be just as self-sufficient and will require far more resources than what is required on earth just to be sustained. By far, Earth will always be the best place to live and the best place to rely upon for resources.

[-] 3 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

The anti-technology attitude is a creation of the ruling oligarchy, intended to keep the lower classes "in their place". The space program did a lot to help the working classes, by creating a whole new industry, aerospace, which provided good paying jobs to both blue and white collar workers. The oligarchy had to put a stop to that by disseminating the green anti-technology philosophy.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

Toward Zero Waste: Waste Pickers Running Bio-Gas Plants in Mumbai, India

Sunday, 16 December 2012 07:02 By Virali Gokaldas and Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, Other Worlds | Report


Green technology is by no means of an anti-technology attitude nor is it of an oligarchy. Quite the opposite. Much technology goes into the advancement of green tech and its the oligarchy of the oil industry that seeks to maintain its profits by the suppression of green tech.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

The world today is arranging itself into a great experiment in which developing countries, such as China in Asia and Argentina in South America, are embracing advanced technologies such as nuclear energy and space exploration, while developed nations are rejecting them.

If our world is allowed to survive into the future, we will be able to observe the result of this experience and base our future decisions upon what we have observed.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

No developed nations are rejecting advanced technologies involving nuclear energy and space exploration. Developed nations are always seeking to address public safety issues and budgets for further advancements.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 5 years ago

Obama has made cutbacks to NASA:

Timeline - How the Obama Administration Wrecked NASA http://larouchepac.com/node/23576

Germany has cut back on nuclear energy, and is beginning to pay the price for it:

Drastic Electricity Price Increases in Germany http://larouchepac.com/node/23420

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33496) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

And advancement progress "growth" - does not necessarily mean expansion does not necessarily mean getting bigger or having more not more - grown-better-improved

[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

For the most part- you are correct.


[-] 0 points by ogoj2 (32) 5 years ago

Mr. Unfriendly, Do you know the word for leader in German? How about Italian?

Sometimes I think that there's a deeper divide than the political divide between right and left.

There's a divide between those who love authority, the humble lickers of the bossman's ahole, and those who are psychologically healthy because they can relate to one another as equals.

[-] 0 points by mideast (506) 5 years ago

we are leaderless for the same reason Muslims are led by a book and Catholics are led by a pope


The Quran religion has led to brutal failure for 1400+ years
The Papal religion has led to brutal failure for 2000+ years
The OWS leaderless religion - . will succeed only when it learns from its mistakes- leaderlessness,
silly, unattainable goals: [ end the fed; end banks; end capitalism, etc ] fear of politics and leaders

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Leaderless is a .. faith ? is this what you are implying? No one can really explain how it works .. but if you believe in it than it will work .. ?

[-] 0 points by mideast (506) 5 years ago

my point - not very well stated -
is that OWS's "worshiping" certain things such as leaderlessness - has hurt OWS - I have seen it first hand
The catholic church could not deal with its pedophile issue - and lost big time
If you have been going to OWS meetings and see attendance shrink from 50 to 7, leaderlessness - and inability to deal witl leaders is one of the reasons

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Occupy may soon reconsider their position.. Occupy will not remain in this " Dormancy stage" for very much longer...Leadership , if need be, will emerge.

[-] 1 points by mideast (506) 5 years ago

I hope you are right, but I see too many people leaving and giving up.
I have been to hundreds of NYC WG meetings Leaders can be leaders without being dictators or "rulers"

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

They may have left .. but they came out and showed there support.. it was more for Occupy than the world .. they are now waiting for Occupy's next move .. they haven't given up .. they will never give up ..

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 5 years ago

I'm not sure you can equate leaderlessness with a dogma. Quite the opposite perhaps. There is actually such a thing as evolving consciousness that has nothing to do with dogma - in fact, quite the opposite. Your anlalogy doesn't hold true.

[-] 0 points by mideast (506) 5 years ago

then let me turn it around- what would actually happen to America if we had 10 more Bernie Sanders & Elizabeth Warren leaders in the Senate & 50 more in the House?

my analogy is that we OWSers "worship" leaderlessness because we are afraid to admit that leaderlessness will not cut the military, or create jobs or tax the rich.

How many OWS demos have you been to?
I have seen hundreds of "corporations are not people signs"
I never saw a "vote for pro-mendment candidates"
for 80% of OWS, voting for an eclectable candidate is a sin,
just like eating pork for Jews

......................If we dont wake up to the facts, we will remain in dreamland

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 5 years ago

Okay, I'm with you there. I had some guy basically make the assertion that now that Elizabeth Warren was in congress we could no longer consider her a leader, and we needed to find new, unimpowered leaders. I don't think he was really a member of Occupy though. We have these phoney members who try to push this thing of division.

But there may be a real issue here. If Occupy won't integrate with left-wing allies within the mainstream of politics then the movement will whither and die. How sad.

[-] -1 points by letsdomore (89) 5 years ago

Forum Post: Occupy is Leaderless because ....? Of hopeless idealism.

Occupy is nowhere because it is Leaderless.

[-] -1 points by captcha42 (54) 5 years ago

Sometimes I think if the elites did not conceive #OWS they would sure like to take credit for it. It's perfectly designed to show the population just how futile opposition to the ruling class is. Every element about it is designed to result in failure.

  • Leaderless
  • No involvement in politics or other policy establishments.
  • Their tactics demonstrate to the population that any opposition to the ruling class will only result in punishment to the 99%.
  • They support policies that only a fraction of the 99% support.
  • They have poor utilization of media resources.
  • Their supporters are asked to participate in dead end demonstrations that result in being beaten, pepper sprayed and arrested by police.
  • They believe that Anarchism will be embraced by a nation as diverse and divided as the USA.

Does the World need change. YES !!! Will the means and tactics used by #OWS be able to facilitate that change. NO !!!


[-] 0 points by UnFriendlyObserverB (-55) 5 years ago

Failure reduces hope .. and if this were set up by the elite , and set up to fail ..? It would have been a very clever tactic.

Interesting comment. thanks.