Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: OWS: Coherent Defining Message vs Incoherent Message, which is the better strategy?

Posted 2 years ago on May 1, 2012, 1:02 p.m. EST by Endgame (535)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

When OWS first burst on to the scene the many legitimate messages of the Occupy movement made it interesting. The incoherent message strategy initially worked. But towards the end of the first act of the movement it started to become more annoying than anything else to a lot of potential future Occupiers.

Now is it time to for the Occupy movement to have more of a Coherent Message strategy? Have a core message that people can latch onto while using that core message as an umbrella for all the other important issues that OWS is bringing to the table.

And shouldn't the core message that ties all the other messages together be getting outside money out of our politics and ending the bribery in our political system so we can have honest debates with only the facts and no influence of outside money?

Movements without action are meaningless. Yes we know the anger is out there. You started the conversation...now what?

69 Comments

69 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

For what it's worth- Coming up with/agreeing upon a central message STILL isn't "taking action" and like you said, movements without action are meaningless.

Repeating loudly and clearly that you are angry or mad about something really isn't a "conversation". It's a just a statement. What does 300 people, or even 30 million people, standing together to declare their anger accomplish other than demonstrating that a certain number of people are angry? The only "actions" that seem to be happening over and over again are people gathering in certain spots and expressing anger. And while 99% of America might agree with them and be angry about some or even all of the things OWS is angry about-SO WHAT? Without proposing some kind of SOLUTION then your "actions" are just meaningless and the American people get REALLY tired, REALLY fast with constant, unceasing screaming about the obvious.

If OWS wants to succeed, it has to come up with and present solutions that the majority of the American people can agree to support. This forum has existed since Sept of 2011 and there have been hundreds of solutions proposed here. Some of them idiotic. Some of them completely impossible to accomplish. Some have workable parts to them. But there is ZERO cohesiveness even within the movement itself on where to start or what they want the end result to look like. How on earth can you expect to convince the 99% to agree on ANYTHING if you, as a very tiny percentage of that group cannot do it yourselves?

Seriously...take a step back and try on the view from the outside for a moment. What we hear from OWS and their backers, is that OWS consists of intelligent, educated, motivated, creative people from all over the world that have been networking for more than 8 months. IF that is TRUE....why is it that such a group has STILL not produced a simple, concise, agreed upon MESSAGE-let alone viable, sensible, SOLUTIONS to the problems they are angry about???

There are TONS of threads here regarding how much higher Liberal IQ's are, how much smarter, enlightened, open minded, and gifted they are and how stupid and backwards everyone ELSE is. Let's assume for even a second that all their assumptions are indeed FACT. It leads me to one question- If the "best and the brightest" among us all cannot even come up with, and agree upon, a central, coherent message-they sure as hell cannot come up with and agree upon central, coherent solutions to our problems. And if the best and brightest among us cannot do it, or will not do it-then surely the mentally challenged and socially backwards majority cannot be expected to.

[-] 3 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

Your right. OWS has to sink or swim, but treading water aimlessly is not sustainable. We need a plan and then we have to initiate the plan.

Putting solutions out there, will give people something to stand for, instead of only taking a stand against. Solutions are a positive affirmations and what will bring in more supporters. Movements rely on numbers. Good post.

Cheers

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Occupy is the messenger that provided the spark to bring about internal revolution. When the people of this nation have been compressed sufficiently by increasing injustice, they will ignite.

[-] 1 points by JS93 (-321) 2 years ago

When they "ignite" let's hope it's aimed upward, not at each other in this Crab Mentality.

[-] 1 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 2 years ago

.............. or it could end like boiling a frog slowly.

If all you have is a spark, and you don't fan the spark with solutions to create a flame, it has the possibility of being extinguished. I am an OWS supporter and I don't want that happening. It's why I mentioned it.

Cheers

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

It does not matter if Occupy supplies the solutions. The people (frog) clearly see the injustice right before their noses. The solutions are obvious. But they pretend everything is OK. The warm water is so comforting.

Occupy's purpose should be to wake up these people with real numbers as to the state of our economic and political health (the water temperature). Many only see our economic health as a comfortable luke warm bath, when in reality for many others it is a scalding shower. It looks like it will take years for the message to sink in to the brainwashed minds of the great majority of people. This war for equality will not be won easily or quickly.

[-] 0 points by treasure (-81) 2 years ago

Occupy's purpose is not to supply solutions and there's a very good reason for that. Occupy is inclusive. It accepts people from various political ideologies: anarchists, socialists, communists, capitalists, etc... These people can come together to voice the problems they agree on, but their respective ideologies mean they will disagree on the solutions. As soon as Occupy becomes a solution machine, the protest will fragment into various groups all wanting to propose different solutions depending on their political stance. This is the reason the anarchists did not want to make demands. They were smart enough to realize that if we want to be truly inclusive, then we cannot provide solutions through making demands, or other means like creating a political party with a platform.

Occupy must remain a protest only. Its goal is to identify problems and scream them out so everyone is aware of those problems. That is its only mandate. Solutions have to be provided by other groups.

[-] 2 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

So it's basically a grass roots temper tantrum. That's what I, and apparently the majority of the 99%, view it to be.

And since the population at large is made up of people with different idealogies, they too will "fragment into various groups all wanting to propose different solutions depending on their political stance" and NOTHING will change.

If a very small representation of the population-OWS-cannot come together and agree on THE solutions, then expecting the whole nation to do it is beyond insane!

OWS is then a microcosm that proves that society will never come together on anything except bitching about it's problems.

[-] 1 points by childseyes (85) 2 years ago

Not a temper tantrum. Made too look like one. Agreement on solution is rejected unreasonably by the NYCGA. The action makes the demands go away as the movement is generalized into a state of dysfunction. Your post has lots of cognitive distortions.

COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS

  1. All or nothing thinking: Things are placed in black or white categories. If things are less than perfect self is viewed as failure.
  2. Over generalization: Single event is viewed as continuous failure.
  3. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.
  4. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.
  5. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.
  6. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established
  7. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.
  8. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation
  9. "Should" statements: Self imposed rules about behavior creating guilt at self inability to adhere and anger at others in their inability to conform to self's rules.
  10. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.
  11. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.
  12. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.

I don't post here much, mostly I read, and I saw this list earlier today and realized that media, TV trained people to use them and accept them vastly reducing the capacity to even try to grasp solution.

[-] 1 points by childseyes (85) 2 years ago

Whatever is solution will also be from unity. Basically, you end with "groups" pre empting unity.

After the dumbing down, and the abandonment of true authority on media being accountable for identifying solution which all can then agree upon, you're saying that no one can figure out what the soultion is and cannot recognize it when presented with it, so there is just no point in trying.

Let someone else do it.

Something about this position really fouls cognition.

[-] 0 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

No, what I am saying, and thank you childeyes for the list of cognitive distortions-it actually helps me clarify what I'm trying to say-is that the majority of ANY given population has or indulges in at least a few, if not all, of those cognitive distortions every day. This forum is a showcase of people who over generalize, mind reading, fortune telling, emotional reasoning etc.

Now, again, such cognitive distortions are a REALITY. Those distortions result in dysfuntion-in both OWS and society as a whole. In order for either OWS (on a small scale) or society (on a large scale) to become UNITED, those cognitive distortions MUST be resolved. FIRST. As long as members of any given group, in particular the majority of that group, are engaging in such thought/behavior patterns, there CANNOT ever be true unity.

If you disagree with that statement, please tell me why.

[-] 1 points by childseyes (85) 2 years ago

Sadly I agree. But without free speech there is no way to resolve or unite. Taking our information on a nation wide basis from corporate media and corrupt officials must end.

[-] 0 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 2 years ago

Betsy is right about the cognitive distortions, they are everywhere. They were taught by media with sitcoms, soap operas and cartoons.

They invoke nothing but confusion and are useless for defense of liberty, rights and freedom.

childseyes has real point that the Article V proponents have great solution for. Visit the site linked below to learn how America can cope and compensate; Preparatory amendments that firstly return enough constitionality to the nation via un abridging free speech so constitutional intent can be known.

All amendments must have constitutional intent.

http://www.dailypaul.com/228404/soldiers-citizens-defense-restoration-of-the-constitution-through-article-v-a-real-plan

[-] 0 points by childseyes (85) 1 year ago

Did you see where ALEC is being tested on their support for ART5?

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/956/975/440/does-alec-really-want-an-article-v-convention-with-constitutional-intent/

Great thread at the dailypaul BTW:-) I think the author did the petition.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I get tired of the Dems and Repubs fighting too

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

The core messaging in and of itself may not be taking action but that doesn't mean it isn't extremely important and that it is not key towards getting more people into the movement or at the very least getting support from the population.

I agree that Occupy needs to now evolve and find ways to go about fixing these problems(I think it should be a combination of Occupy getting involved politically while continuing the protests). BUT you can not deny that how Occupy initially came onto the scene was brilliant. Because it got the country (and the media)talking about serious core problems that were not being discussed by the media at all. Should that be the end goal? Absolutely not. Far from it. But you can't deny that huge first step wasn't important.

There are probably very few supporters on these boards that have been more critical of this movement than I have. I see serious flaws in this movement. But the difference between me and you seems to be the fact that you don't see any benefit to this movement at all. While I see its potential greatness. You sound as if you want the movement to completely go away, I want it to acknowledge its mistakes and fix them.

And about the other questions you asked about why this movement hasn't moved further than it has in the last 8 months. Well you already know why I feel that is. The reasons are because of the few Anarchists that make up the movement do not want to get involved politically(mistake), holds the entire group back from forming a core message(mistake), and has end goals(end all forms of government and create an Anarchic socity) that completely go against the goals of 99% of the people that make up the Occupy movement.

The huge difference in tactics and end goals will have to be debated from within the movement. And once all of that gets settled(whether it ends up causing the movement to splinter or not) is when you will see real power from a true populous movement.

There is no other movement that even comes close to addressing issues like getting outside money out of politics, income inequality, education costs, financial reform etc. That is why I believe this movement(after it gets its shit together) will make transformative changes to our government and our political system.

[-] 3 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

I'm not denying that the first step wasn't important. I'm saying that if that message is not followed up with SOLUTIONS, then the only value it will have had is that it generated "talk". Charlie Sheen can generate talk all over the world and in the media for crying out loud.

"You sound as if you want the movement to completely go away"... how I "sound" to you is completely beyond my control. If OWS does not quickly become something more than a large, public megaphone-it WILL go away because people get tired of hearing the same thing repeated over and over with no other visible purpose involved.

You and I both agree that the potential exists for a large, vocal, energized group to transform our government and political system. Whether or not THIS group-OWS-can or will be able to "get it's shit together" remains to be seen. Obviously.

But it needs to stop pretending that the population at large has even the remotest desire to join or support a group that does NOT have it's shit together yet. It doesn't. It simply flies in the face of logic to think that it would.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

parallel processing more than one subject can be handled

whilst complimenting the other

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Thats kind of my point BetsyRoss..

And like I said I blame the Anarchists for this setback. If you go out to any of the protests you will see that the overwhelming majority do have solutions and answers. You will see that they want to transform and fix our political system and our government.

I think the distinctions between what the Anarchists want and what the rest of the 99% of the movement want to do is extremely important. And its important for this movement to have this discussion.

[-] 3 points by rayolite (461) 2 years ago

Wants and needs are different, and intertwined, then there is confusion about them too. If the anarchists want change, they might need a certain societal mechanism that they are ignorant of and won't even discuss because of ageism and divided perceptions.

Of course, with the dumbing down and the kind of education young activists have gotten, its hard to break them away from the social event well enough to communicate logical strategy.

What do we need to get done what we want to do. That is the discussion we need but OWS seems unwilling to take on. Logically it would be article v.

[-] 1 points by BetsyRoss (-744) 2 years ago

"the overwhelming majority do have solutions and answers"

What are they? Are they actually doable, viable solutions? Or are they just ideas? There IS a difference even if OWS says that there is not.

The reason I ask is because if what you say is true, then what any normal person would naturally deduce is that the "overwhelming majority" of the smart, intelligent, focused, motivated, "best and brightest" among us (OWS) is either WILLINGLY oblivious to the fact that a "SMALL number" of anarchists are completely derailing their global movement or they simply do not KNOW or have a VIABLE SOLUTION on how to rid an organization of CORRUPTION in the first place. Not even their own!

Yep. That's a group of people that EVERYONE should all want to join up with. Yep. That's a group of people to listen to when it comes to getting corruption and evil under control and progressing as a country.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Well of course some of the solutions to the problems being talked about are just ideas right now. The reasons that they haven't been adapted as solutions are for reasons I've state multiple times in this thread already.

I can't help but see that you have taken a lot of offense to some of the comments here about the tea party or comments in regards to the intelligence of people of both parties. But you seem to be letting those threads that you have run into come to the conclusion that those are the views of everyone in Occupy. This forum ironically isn't a good place to get into the train of thought of the majority of the Occupiers. So I would ask you to keep that in mind.

[-] 1 points by writerconsidered123 (344) 2 years ago

thank you endgame there are streams of good ideas but they to be organized and implemented. The good ideas I keep hearing and aspousing are end corp. personhood and end money equals free speech

both those ideas apeal to most of OWS and the population at large. However that needs organizing and implemention If not OWS then perhaps a splinter group.

No matter what happens OWS will always be a part of the conversation and is not irrelevent.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Thanks for posting, writer.

I think no matter what Occupy will be at least a small part of the conversation for some time to come. But will we end up turning up in conversations as a mockery and a movement that people don't take seriously anymore or are we going to be known as a movement caused real tranformative changes.

I honestly don't know anymore. But I really hope its the latter.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

Your posts are too long, what are you a liberal or something?

[-] 2 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

getting outside money out of our politics and ending the bribery in our political system

I'm guessing that would fall under "dissatisfaction with government", which rates 14% of responses as "the most important problem facing this country today".

http://www.gallup.com/poll/149453/Unemployment-Emerges-Important-Problem.aspx

Compare 39% for unemployment/jobs and 28% for economy in general, and 12% for federal budget deficit.

You can define OWS's message as being for an issue most people don't think is as important, but don't expect much success.

Job creation without goverment spending: http://jobcreationplan.blogspot.com/

[-] 2 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Most people actually do care about this issue. But unfortunately a lot of those people don't rate it as high as they should because do not see it as the core problem. But it is the core problem. And Occupy should be educating people as to why it is.

Unemployment is high because of the sad state of our economy. Our economy is in a sad state because our government officials cater more to their real masters rather than the people. Because of our corrupt political system most if not all of our elected officials are bought off and paid for. And the same could be said as to why our budget deficit is the way it is but that has more factors into it. But it all boils down to corruption and bribery. Just look at the amount of money this country shells out on Corporate Welfare. How do you think those corporations came to get those government subsidies? Pay and bribe enough politicians and anything is possible.

[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

Unemployment is high because of the sad state of our economy.

You seem to state that almost as a tautology. You realize that corporate profits have long ago recovered, right?

http://www.slideshare.net/USTreasuryDept/recent-us-economic-growth-in-charts

(One slide shows how profits are basically back to the 2007 peak... useful mainly because of the source, not that the same information isn't available in hundreds of other articles.)

Also see this: http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/03/apple-and-samsung-claim-99-of-profits-among-top-mobile-phone-vendors/

Apple's profits right now are several times that of the entire mobile phone industry in 2007. By that measure, our economy is not in a sad state at all. Even if Apple was paying the full 35% corporate tax rate instead of 9.8% (when corporations average around 12%) that would just have meant it paid taxes of ~$10 billion... its profits would still have been $34 billion pre-tax which has nothing to do with special government treatment and everything to do with the willingness of people to accept high prices for Apple products.

Also see http://blogs.hbr.org/fox/2010/11/the-real-story-behind-those-re.html

You might not be able to tell this from the chart, but the third-quarter 2010 profit share, at 9.46%, is slightly below the peak of 9.58% in the third-quarter of 2006. But it's still quite high by historical standards. The chart above only goes back to 1947, because that's as far back as quarterly data goes. There is annual data to 1929, and the only time besides 2006 and (one can predict with some confidence) this year when the profit share topped 9% was 1929, when it hit 9.9%.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

You know, I believe this web site gets most of its relevancy by not picking a side but illustrating the issues. I believe it is up to those who awaken to the issues to find solutions. I see ows as more of an information hub than a political force. It is up to those who care and are informed to come up with the solutions needed to address the concerns that OWS brings to the social consciousness.

Besides, the ones who are saying OWS are not doing enough are probably the same ones who thought Obama was going to be the silver bullet, as if. Corporate America took a few decades to get the influence it has today and to think that their influence could be ex-nayed in one political season is a sign of an entitlement attitude. How could OWS find all the solutions when the problems are so great? The biggest contribution OWS has given us is a revolution in thought. It is up to the individual to make sense of what is being articulated and change his/her self. What's the old saying? there is no free lunch. well there are no easy solutions that others can implement. The accumulative effect of individual actions is what got us here, so why should it not be the same force that gets us out?

[-] 2 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Just look at the front page of this site. It seems to be more infatuated with confronting the police than actually solving problems. So yeah I don't buy the explanation anymore that this site is here to find solutions. Unless you mean finding solutions for Anarchists to somehow create this fantasy Anarchic society they so desire while the rest of the majority of Occupy's ideas of fixing our system gets shunned by the Anarchists here.

Corporate America has had so much more influence over this country than the people have for a long time. Its not like it just all of a suddenly happened. Its just now happening more than ever.

OWS doesn't need to find all of the solutions now. But it should at least know what it stands for. Are we here to fix the problems in our system by weeding out the bribery and corruption in our system or are we just going to clash with the police, vandalize and strive for an Anarchic society?(Which Occupy did NOT advertise its self as wanting to achieve when it bursts into the public eye.)

This isn't about Obama or any one person or one party. Its about fixing our system so it works for us. Its about being able to put pressure on politicians and the system as a whole. But this movement can't even do that anymore because none of the politicians even fear us anymore. The power of this movement is in the amount of people that support us. Our support is going down.

I hear what you're saying but it sounds like it all boils down to us continuing down the same path we are going down now without us figuring out what we're doing wrong and what our goals are. There seems to be the goals of the Anarchists and the goals of everyone else in the movement. Thats a problem.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

police issues were more common when OWS was occupying the parks

not so many these days

Footage of Scott Olsen being shot by Police at Occupy Oakland

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Yeah thats a sad story.

Im not saying that the police are innocent by any means. But I do think the way we handle the situations sometimes when it comes to the police is not good for the movement. And I do think there is still to much emphasis about confrontation with police over this movement dealing with populous issues.

But I do thank you for posting that link. Because out of all the situations with the police that one is probably the one that should be highlighted the most. Its just sad what happened to Scott Olsen.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 2 years ago

Well. the way I see it is that this place is more of a reality check than a conspiratorial attempt at a new world order.

The reality is that many, many people living many, many different life styles are going to have many, many different perspectives.

This place and other web sites, I believe, are the closes things that we posses in this nation that truly captures the notion of "the market place of ideas."

When there are no regulations as to what can be thought, then the solutions will be as plentiful as the respondents. Debate demands that you defend your ideas, and this site is the forum that facilitates such debate.

I guess I have to go back to my belief that this place is more of a information hub than any violent revolution or political action group. The closes thing to anarchy i see this site creating is the proliferation of individual thought. I could see how that could be scary to some.

This is where the market place of ideas is allowed to manifest its self. It is up to the individual to defend hIs/her idea and don't take it for granted that their idea is best because it has got the best air time on YOuTube.

I guess I agree with Jart's comments yesterday, what has been accomplished already is what should be honored. What comes next is up to you.

And I know that's cheesy but tough, lol

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28487) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Well said - very well said.

Yes OWS is the thorn in the side of corruption - the spotlight shining onto the darkness that is amongst us. The minute people ( used to be men but that was back in the day before the equality of all was pushed forward ) warning of danger.

[-] 2 points by alexrai (851) 2 years ago

Money out of politics... revolving door closed etc. Public election funding with strict enough limits to make it impossible to get elected without grass roots support knocking on doors; and strict enough audits to ensure politicians get more than a slap on the wrist for illegally outspending their opponents; and kicked out of office for accepting gifts. (We don't let other officials or officers accept bribes).

i.e. Basically, a complete end to the influence of Wallstreet and people like the Cock brothers.

For that matter, offering to trade money or cushy jobs for politicians should be illegal as well.

I think everything else will follow from there. I have a lot of bitches with the current system, but the root of all of these problems, including the problem of politicians not governing for the people, is the same. Corruption and money.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Well said atexrai!

[-] 2 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

I think you're a bit late.

the failure of the ows movement was that two profoundly divergent movements (huge nanny staters + anarchists) combining made it a joke from day 1.

the truthers were the icing on the cake. you might have had a chance to do something good (campaign finance, end the drug war, etc). but the divergent groups plus the truthtards...no fucking chance.

[-] 2 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

The fact that you think it was a joke from day one just shows that you are against this movement no matter what. You can't deny that Occupy has changed the national dialogue from "Cuts,cuts,cuts and TAX CUTS!" to actually talking about growth and income inequality. That is a big deal.

But I do think now that everyone knows Occupy exists its needs more structure to stop the crazies from making them look bad. And they need a universal core message.

I just don't want to see this movement turn into its own worst enemy with its stubborness to not adapt and evolve. By no means do I think this movement is over but its up to them to decide if they want to enact real long lasting change or to just become a quick fad that fades away.

[-] 3 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

"The fact that you think it was a joke from day one just shows that you are against this movement no matter what."

that is not so. I mentioned just a couple of things that I would have supported. but zoom back in. I called it a joke because it had extreme leftists and anarchists, two diametrically opposed ideologies, as the prime movers. such an alliance can never work. it is flawed by design.

and I think the crazies (vocal "gimme gimme gimme" lefties, truthers, and trust fund anarchists) have already tarnished the perception beyond repair.

evolving into something reasonable is a good idea. start with term limits and end the drug war. politicians have put us all on notice for decades that they, people who go out for elected office, are the worst scumbags among us. no way we continue to let them enrich themselves while in office. end entrenchment. how this isn't a huge movement, I have no idea. that and end the ridiculous drug war, or at least remove federal precedece over state laws. feds can watch the border only, like they are supposed to.

accomplish those (or something similar) and move on to another pair of low-hanging fruit policy wins. that would make this whole thing not a waste of time and effort. I hope I'm wrong, but I do not see that happening.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

I see what you're saying..

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by jbgramps (159) 2 years ago

That’s am excellent post, and good food for thought. Although I think you’re a troll, on the outside chance you’re not I will respond.

I’m a very early supporter of OWS. I care about a lot of their ideals. Unions and collective bargaining, get control of the banks, get the big money out of Washington, affordable education and healthcare, etc.. I think the masses have the same concerns.

However, over time I’ve become concerned the adults have lost control. I see too many “rebel without a cause” types who just want to attend a street party. I think a lot of over privileged, over idealistic, kids are just here for the beer (so to speak). Just read some of the posts on this site for a clue. Kind of like the sixties.

I very concerned about the anarchist element. Borderline terrorists in my view. The guys arrested in Ohio are home grown terrorists, period. Their association with OWS will be a hard rap to beat with the public. They won’t support terrorists.

So, I don’t think OWS is dead, but it may be on life support. OWS must re-invent it’s self and evolve quickly or it will become irrelevant. Right now it seems more like a staging arena for anarchists.

[-] 3 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 2 years ago

Ever consider Mkultra creates the foundation society to what we are seeing?

jbgramps wrote: "I very concerned about the anarchist element. Borderline terrorists in my view. The guys arrested in Ohio are home grown terrorists, period. Their association with OWS will be a hard rap to beat with the public. They won’t support terrorists.

So, I don’t think OWS is dead, but it may be on life support. OWS must re-invent it’s self and evolve quickly or it will become irrelevant. Right now it seems more like a staging arena for anarchists."

If I've learned one thing in the last 10 years it is that there are a boatload of people that pretend to be reasonable but never get there. Social unity appears to be what is the justification for the obsessed and fixed viewpoint.

I mean to the point where the demands don't even matter.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (28487) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Many will try to discredit while trying to play the part of a supporter. Smiling faces smiling faces tell lies.....they don't tell the truth.........

People be aware of the spewing of subtle poisons.

[-] 1 points by TruthRightsFreedom (259) 2 years ago

Yes the poisons of violence and unreason as a social theme.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

"Right now it seems more like a staging arena for anarchists".

I disagree with that for the most part but unfortunately this is the perception of our movement for a lot of people. Better PR structure for Occupy is seriously needed.

Everything else you said I think has some truth to it.

[-] 3 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

I hate that I agree with all of that.

By no means do Anarchists represent what Occupy truly stands for. But all it takes is literally 4 or 5 nut jobs to put a bad name on a large part of the movement if the movement as a whole isn't out there with better messaging and representation of their core purpose.

And this is another area where the lack of coherent message and better structure hurts the movement.

[-] 3 points by slizzo (-96) 2 years ago

we agree on a lot.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Coherent Defining Message vs Incoherent Message, which is the better strategy?

and Presidential Race is Off !

[-] 1 points by know1 (210) 2 years ago

If we do nothing other than educate ourselves and the world about the real story of money creation, there would be a revolution. ( a peaceful beautiful one, of coarse) Its just such a mind blowing story of slavery, that would be enough. It's the basis of the whole dictatorship.

[-] 1 points by know1 (210) 2 years ago

The basis of the whole dictatorship

Thats big

Big yawn

aaaahhhh...... world wide dictatorship, for four centurys... aaahhh.. boring

[-] 1 points by JS93 (-321) 2 years ago

Loud and Clear signs, banners and American flags. Lose the cardboard and crayon scribbles, lose the Woodstock reenactments. Copy European and Union protestors, Loud and Clear!

"Wake Up America!" "A Greedy Few in the 1% are Waging War on us 99%!" "We're in a Class War and We're Losing!" "Now VOTE Now!"

[-] 1 points by forourfutures (393) 2 years ago

Legitimate messages but no legal process = fail.

Article V convention and a good long effort to know what "constitutional" is, when it comes to the "duty " of "the people". We "are the people" are we not?

Free speech is abridged, we are not a we, we are an it, it the public.

The key to article V for "the people" is "all intents and purposes of this constitution". All we have to do is understand the natural law principles which are actually embodying the "legitimate messages" but there is no associated legal process. Fail. I got educated in this back in November when first on this forum. The strategy is here.

http://articlevconvention.org/showthread.php?33-Amendment-By-Layers-Of-Priority-Amendment-Package-Making-CONST.-Intent

Why it works is because it is legal process, it is the constitution and there are a boatload of Americans that love the idea, but haven't a clue about "constitutional intent".

Accordingly, owser's you got a bunch of communicating to do and weave legal process, "constitutional intent" into the "messages" and make them "ultimately legitamate" as in "the law of the land" by amendment.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

There has been a decent amount of talk about the legal process of getting outside money out of politics. But I do agree that the legal aspect of it needs to be more in the forefront than it is now.

[-] 0 points by forourfutures (393) 2 years ago

Campaign finance reform will take a constitutional amendment. The SCOTUS served congress what congress couldn't do for themselves without being too obvious.

Since the SCOTUS did that, and congress is 100 years overdue for convening an Article V, the people will have to get SERIOUS with their states via ballot intiatives where possible, and impeachments of state legislators that refuse to participate and take the states role in an Article V.

[-] 0 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Im with you all the way on that. I do believe that this should be one of if not THE main core message of this movement.

[-] 1 points by forourfutures (393) 2 years ago

YES, article v is the only logical action that can be expected to create meaningful, widespread change. With the preparatory amendments Chris Brown is proposing here,

http://articlevconvention.org/showthread.php?33-Amendment-By-Layers-Of-Priority-Amendment-Package-Making-CONST.-Intent

there can be no fear of a runaway. I'm still waiting for one of these corporately trained government lovers to address that strategy, or even OWS. I'm following Browns action where I can and found him slamming mislead conservatives at the dailypaul, LOL:-)

http://www.dailypaul.com/228404/soldiers-citizens-defense-restoration-of-the-constitution-through-article-v-a-real-plan

When are these f'nnnn anarchists going to wake up and realize that the co-opted movement they are merging with is actually a corporate front playing on their emotions? In many ways the original intent of the US constitution is an anarchical structure imposing very little control over the individual. All they have to do is unify behind the constitution and mainstream America will appreciate their passion and join them.

[-] 0 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Very informative post.

"anarchists going to wake up and realize that the co-opted movement they are merging with is actually a corporate front playing on their emotions?"

That is an interesting take on whats going on. Can you go into more detail?

[-] 1 points by forourfutures (393) 2 years ago

Without the socialist conditioning of the last 10 years of the American universities creating a social base that appears to understand OWS, the anarchists wouldn't see a coherent enough movement to merge with.

It was corporations merging with government that designed OWS to merge with the anarchists the CIA were breeding to take protest into violence that had what appeared as similar motivational structures.

Keep in mind that was the same union between corporations and government that inspired the WTO and creation of GATT/NAFTA that trained a generation of Americans for high tech work then sent it all to China and India.

So the socialist quasi intellectual front became a comfy home for the real anarchists and the radical violence is imported by fake ones in a cointelpro to create attitude about the anarchists through media collusion.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

I guess im going to have to look more into this subject...

[-] 1 points by forourfutures (393) 1 year ago

So it's been 10 months, what do you think?

[-] 0 points by treasure (-81) 2 years ago

The incoherent message strategy initially worked.

Who ever said OWS original message was incoherent? I found it quite clear and coherent.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

The fact that OWS was new and unique and talking about populous issues made it both coherent and incoherent all at once. But I honestly feel this movement can not survive continuing the same exact non-core messaging strategy and expect people to join and support us.Im not saying we stop bringing up all the important issues. But we need a core message that ties them all together. Something that will instantly let people know what we stand for.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by BannedAgain (6) 2 years ago

Really. Getting money out of politics and working for justice for the Mainstreeters hurt by the Wallstreeters could have galvinized our nation.

Unfortunately, the man behind the curtain of OWS wasn't interested in the above.

Hopefully the movement will regain it's focus since the initial msg DID resonate and still could if OWS sheds the anarchist, I want it all for free nonsense.

[-] 1 points by Endgame (535) 2 years ago

Im curious, who do you believe is the "man behind the curtain of OWS"?

[-] 0 points by JIFFYSQUID92 (-994) from Portland, OR 2 years ago

YES!

Please be Loud and Clear and Coherent (signs and banners and vests and hats...)! America wants to be with this movement!

Show Americans that Occupy is for America: Many many more American Flags!!

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

NO WAR

Food, shelter and health

Voter Holidays

direct democracy

Coherent Defining Message vs Incoherent Message, which is the better strategy?

the Republicans and the Democrats like Incoherent