Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: OWS not the same? What has happened?

Posted 2 years ago on Dec. 27, 2011, 2:02 p.m. EST by sinead (474)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I have been watching this movement since the beginning. The NYCGA website used to be the best way to know what was happening now it is hap hazardously updated, most of the General Assembly minutes are just summaries with very little information. There seems to be a lot of dissension among the working groups. The Accounting/Financial group is coming under a lot of fire for lack of transparency and it doesn't seem as if it is being addressed. There are complaints that proposals are being passed in GAs with very little attendance.

There seems to be so many special interests with the Working Groups that nothing of real substance is getting done. All of this seems to be happening since the eviction at Zucottii Park.

For those of us who have supported this movement with monetary donations and other donations, who can not physically attend or take an active part in this movement, all of this is very disheartening.

Is it time to actually organize a movement that does have some actual goals and leadership?

119 Comments

119 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 6 points by Misfit138 (172) 2 years ago

With no leadership comes no discipline or direction. OWS will fail (is failing) because it can't get its shit together. Just look at how many "Day of Action" posts there are with no results. OWS had a good message at first, but it was lost in its insistence that it remain a leaderless movement. Wall Street will not change because of OWS and DC will not change the laws to get the money out of politics because of OWS, so in the end, it has failed.

[-] 1 points by Brandon37 (372) 2 years ago

I slightly disagree regarding the message. Some of the messages were and still are good, but no one can discern what message is shared by the entire movement.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

@ sinead : Nil Desperandum !!!

3 months is still very early days and dislocation from the parks, while possibly diminishing some local focus is merely a question of geography and detail !!

The 'Occupy' meme is here to stay and has already begun to change political discourse in The U$A and thus, in order to see why OWS is so very necessary, please try to watch The "sine qua non" and Essential Documentary Film of our times ; "INSIDE JOB", The Latest Working Link : http://documentarystorm.com/inside-job/ ! !!!

per ardua ad astra ...~~~***

[-] 4 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I'm not looking for OWS to have made the changes we all know are needed. But if in 3 months they can not form a cohesive movement that has a message that resonates to main stream America how long do you expect people to support it?

OWS is going in so many different directions that we need a map to follow. Just look at the proposals made in the GA over the last 3 months: http://www.nycga.net/category/assemblies/proposals-past/ How many of them are for actual actions to be taken? Not as many as there are for money to do whatever it is the Working Groups want to do.

Dec 1st: Arts & Culture: $2,000 for 24-hour occupation and performance in Times Square on Broadway

Dec 3rd: Tech Ops: $5,000 for a training day at PACE University on December 18th, 10 rooms, space for 500 people.

Dec 4th: Occupy477: $2,000 for repairs and construction to improve housing, including bunks and desks.

There is a proposal for " $20,000 for legal/medical plus 100 tents plus shipping costs be sent to our fellow occupiers in Oakland" that was made on Monday. Another proposal coming up for the GA for today is to move $100,000 dollars from the NYCGA general fund to establish an account with the sole purpose of posting bail.

There are a lot of this stuff but you see no "movement" in an effort to gain real recognition of the issues at hand? No ... because you can't figure out which issue OWS is focusing on.

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

Been following OWS too. All I can say is that there were some people trying hard to do something that should have been very acceptable. It was lawful, peaceful and could see demands met. Article V of the constitution.

That is a concept as leadership. An ideal, one that will supported by a great many Americans and protect protestors when they stand for it.

There were many requests to make it a part of the GA, it never was taken up. Squelched in committee or somthing(?) Dunno, the ART5'ers left because the technology was being used to censor them.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I don't quite understand what your post is getting at. Article V is about the process to amend the Constitution. If you are suggesting that some OWS members wanted to make an amendment to the Constitution what was to be amended?

There are many things going on within the OWS that show some dissension perhaps it is just growing pains.... however with no guidance or direction these type of things are not going to move OWS forward.

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

OWS protestors were trying to get someting very acceptable done. The ART5 people proposed all the demands OWS was making could be met with Article V.

It is a concept leading, not a person. Fitting completely within the leaderless paradigm. The proposal that OWS make a demand of an Article V convention never made it to GA.

No dissension was seen regarding Article V, it was never accepted into the GA as a subject for discussion and voting on. That kind of behavior will not move anything forward. Guidence and direction come from discussion. Sounds to me like OWS really doesn't want to go forward unless the USA is history and some unnamed structure replaces it.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

That could be true as there are plenty of anarchists among OWS. There removal of the 99% Declaration working Group has become quite a contentious discussion on the NYCGA website.

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

sinead


There removal of the 99% Declaration working Group


I had no idea. That is bizzare considering the appeal to unions.

[-] 1 points by jk1234 (257) 2 years ago

I do think money allotted just for bail for those jailed for peaceful Occupy protests all across the US is a great idea. But hopefully the money issue as a whole will not corrupt.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Well, I don't agree. I donated money to OWS, not for the purpose of bail money, or "Tech Ops training" or for performances....... I donated to move OWS forward... nothing is being accomplished anymore within this movement.

[-] 1 points by jk1234 (257) 2 years ago

Maybe it would be worthwhile to have donations be very specific - eg. fund (with a max budget - refund any excess) to pay for materials needed for an Occupy the Rose Parade, or food supplies for those who are occupying? Maybe just as there is a move to get money out of politics, we should get the money out of this process as well - for instance, just request physical supplies (food, tents, books, heaters, etc)

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Like that would happen.

Look, if OWS were doing things like a sustained mass (bringing protesters from all over the country) protest in DC I'd be glad to have my money go for that.

Any movement needs operating capital, but at this point the money isn't going to "operate" anything.

[-] 1 points by ropeknot (359) 2 years ago

Just the bail money and where it goes , I think is corruption !

[-] 1 points by jk1234 (257) 2 years ago

I believe that it is the least we can do for those in the trenches actually performing peaceful, first amendment right, protests - there have been about 5800 arrests so far based on one article.

[-] 1 points by andwee (13) 2 years ago

Fully agree with this^--but I'm from Chicago, not NY (I only represent myself, not OccupyChi. I know you probably know that, but...has to be stated)

One of the things that originally helped the movement grow so quickly was it's ambiguous nature. It didn't have specific goals, but it had a direction...Anyone could come to the table...I always described it as a bunch of people with a bunch of different issues, united under a common contempt at being exploited by our financial institutions, the "1%" and our government. It's awesome that Occupy is a leaderless movement but at some point, that void of leadership has basically led the movement in Chicago to just be an extension of the Communist and Socialist parties. I mean, I have no problem with them being there (if anything I like that they're there) but they have become so prominent that it clouds the original direction of the movement. I don't think it's necessarily necessary for there to be a formal definition of what Occupy "is" and what it's trying to do, but I do think that it would be constructive to clarify what Occupy is not and setting a goal to change public perception. There was someone in a thread earlier that said that OWS is a revolution...like a real, overthrow the government kind of revolution.I don't think that revolution resonates with very many people. When the movement was focused on corruption in our financial and governmental institutions, it was hard for me to find anyone that could say anything negative about Occupy. Now it's seen as a fringe movement. How the hell could "Occupy WALL STREET" be a fringe movement?! 99.999999% of Americans got royally fucked by investment bankers.

[-] 2 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Perhaps, however "99.999999% of Americans" look at OWS and see no progress in the initial concept of the movement, at least in the way it was first presented to them.

I am disappointed because they have become a fringe movement... What could have been something very powerful has now become nothing more than a nuisance.

[-] 1 points by jk1234 (257) 2 years ago

I think you and others have valid concerns. Maybe as a whole the Occupy movement, much like what Celente calls Octopy, a general framework and social recognition and forum to demonstrate for change will survive and likely grow. But with so many people with so many different ideas for what that change should be, there will be factions that have no relationship to any centralized GA. It would be ideal if there was a common denominator that would resonate with the whole, and not lose site of that - for instance, stop the looting and begin prosecuting, and basic political reform like get the money interest out, close the revolving door, etc - for Occupy as a whole at least in the US. I know that I am rambling - but I do think, for whatever reason, there is less public participation in the protests lately, and this is probably not just a weather related issue or the recent crackdown on Occupy sites - but the underlying discontent is still present in the heart of the public.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Oy Vey ! Thanx for your "Glass Half Empty" Negativism !! Happy 2012 to you !!!

[-] 2 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Sorry if you have a hard time facing the reality of all this.... Do you read the NYCGA website at all?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Reality ? What, according to The Gospel of Sinead ?! Hmmm ... & tho' I nearly appended "Nothing Compares To You", I thought better of it and instead offer : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFa8VZfucaA ;-)

[-] 2 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Aren't you ever so clever. Look all you have to do is read the NYCGA website to see that the movement is fracturing from the inside out.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

IF such a thing were True + Your Gloating Here = TROLLing, quad erat demonstrandum(b)~{;-(

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Of course I'm a troll.... I must be right? Because I question the movement? We find ourselves in the position we are in now because we didn't question what was being done. I have supported this movement from the beginning, but I will not follow it blindly.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

What the heck is your point?

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

I know what you mean as I prefer Tim Buckley's original too ;-)

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Bugger off.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

@shadz66. Great post! It is early days. The movement is strengthening and deepening. Interesting quote "per ardua ad astra", the slogan for the Royal Australian Air Force.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

And the UK, RAF too ! + 'p a a a' = "By Hard Work To The Stars" !! Have a Gr8 2012 ! & Thanx ;-)

[-] 0 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

If it is strengthening then it needs people to convey that via the NYCGA.... because when the GA minutes are only summaries for days on end, when the Bulletin Board section of the website goes 20 days without updates, and then it is about a request from Brazil for a "spokesperson" to come there for 6 days. Nothing about the "actions" taken by OWS to achieve anything of real substance.

Read the posts at this link: http://www.nycga.net/groups/finance/forum/topic/spoke-council-was-created-to-keep-you-blind-7

I am not sure that this Movement will gain any strength if it doesn't get a handle on itself

[-] 0 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

From what I can see, the main power of the Movement is through networking. The GAs tend to get bogged down in admin issues. As for a "spokesperson", anyone is the Movement can do that.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Networking? Within what? And to what end? As far as the GAs it is the only way that those of us who can not be there know what the movement is doing, as proposals etc are made there. Although "anyone" can be a spokesperson, what message do they take with them, as no one in the movement seems to have the same idea as to what the movement is.

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

I am clear as to what the Movement is. The Movement is there to end the "monied corruption of our Democracy". What could be clearer than that?

[-] 2 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Really? So why does OWS need so many working groups with different "special interests"? Why is there no clear cut moves to do what you say the movement is about?

I'm sorry but the message isn't clear. It seems to mean something different depending on who you are speaking to.

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

Really. Do our enemies have clear goals? No. Each bank executive is after making as much money as he or she can. If one is weak, the other circle round like sharks. They have no loyalty to each other. They are worse than crooks.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

So because the "enemies" have no clear goals that is why you feel OWS needs no clear goals? Lame...... very lame.

[-] 0 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

@sinead. We do have clear goals. To end "the monied corruption of our Democracy". What could be clearer than that? You place enemies in inverted commas. Why? They are our enemies. I am guessing you are one of them. If so, get ready for jail.

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

It is absolutely not clear what the goal of this movement is. This movement is all over the place. I agree with ending the monied corruption of our government. The 1% have a clear goal of using money for the corruption of government. If we do not address this with a laser beam like focus, how can we achieve that goal?

The stated goals of this movement is to enact a revolution and promote a society with a general assembly/direct democracy on every corner, and backyard. OWS does not believe in politicians. That is clear. See the News Page. Ending the monied corruption of our government as a goal is certainly not clear.

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

The OWS movement is after corporates, especially banks. What the hell are you trolling about the government for? These brave men are after these crooks also. The banksters are the core enemy. Never forget it.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

You don't think it's important to overturn the Citizens United case? I happen to think this is very important.

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

I think that focusing on the government like you want to do will let the banking criminals off the hook. This goes against against OWS thinking. The Movement is against corporate greed, not about "get Obama".

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

@April. The goals of the movement are very clear - to end the monied corruption of our Democracy. You appear to be trying to extend the goals to somehow include government corruption issues, which are way outside the present scope. I am pleased to see that you are still interested in the banks. I cannot se how running around after Obama and his fellow politicians will help OWS. It will certainly delight the banks.

I do know what Glass-Steagall is.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Overturning the Citizens United case has nothing to do with "get Obama". Do you even know what the Citizens United case is?

Please do some research. There have already been four pieces of legislation in Congress as a result of the Occupy movement, to overturn Citizens United in order to enact campaign finance reform.

We have to focus our efforts on government. That is where the change will happen. This does not let the banks off the hook. It is the exact opposite. How do you think Wall Street was allowed their deregulation that destroyed the financial system and ruined the economy? It was the corruption of government that allowed them to do this. If we don't fix the corruption of government, the next batch of bankers will do it again. How do you think we will prevent another financial catastrophe? Don't you think we need some additional financial regulation? Like Glass-Steagall perhaps? Do you know what Glass-Steagall is? Why hasn't Glass-Steagall be re-enacted? Because of the corruption of government.

Please do some further investigation into these things.

This post clearly demonstrates how the goals of this movement are not at all clear. The true goal of the movement is to keep its direct democracy in existance.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 2 years ago

Bankers can only do what the laws permit them to do. If there is something that they are doing that is hurting society, it's the government's job to pass the required laws to make this practice illegal and punishable in the court of law. And it's the job of citizens to make sure their government isn't corrupt and does that job when it needs to do it.

How else will you go after bankers? Shoot them? Laws are the only decent and logical way to stop them from doing bad stuff. And to pass laws, you need to either interact with the government or with the courts.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I see. Okay, so the goal is what you say.... I'll accept that. But why is it that there seems to be a refusal to voice just exactly what is going to be done to achieve that goal? How does doing a performance in Times Square help to rid the corruption of our Democracy? Which by the way is not what we have.... we live in a Republic... a representative Republic.

The reason I put enemies in quotations is because I view these people as criminals... not enemies.

And you threaten me with jail??? Is this what you as part of the movement are also going to do? Jail those who question the movement or do not agree with you??? Sounds like you are the one that is an enemy of Democracy.

I have supported this movement from the beginning..... but I have seen nothing that tells me that I should continue that support. I will not follow anything blindly, we find ourselves in the condition we are in because we did not ask questions.... I will continue to ask questions especially when I feel that the movement I contributed to does things I do not see as helpful to achieve anything.

[-] 0 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

The message is clear. The enemy says it is not. Well it is. We are against the "monied corruption of our Democray". As for "grow or stagnate", we are not concerned with growth. The monied people are. That is what is wrong with them. They are greedy. We will stop them. We have over a milion supporters worldwide - more than enough to do the job.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2740) 2 years ago

Allright: that's fair and balanced. but your good ideas should prevail.

how about for the 99 percent who can't get past the surface and see the beauty of ows ideas, because they are just trying to survive, and don't have enough attention span to focus on the message? And are fed the Fox news versions of reality? They are 50 percent of the nation, and the 1 percent has them on their side.

They may work against you, consciously or not.

[-] 0 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

I agree with what you are saying. Most people want an easy life, and who can blame them. As for Fox news, many of the people you refer to probably don't even watch the news, rather they watch celebrity type reality programs.

The best way is to be persistent, and start off a platform from where the intelligentsia can project their ideas. Some of them want change, but need a climate in which to express their views. This is already happening. Then, at various top level dinner party discussions, they would hopefully begin to get the message across. If the viewpoints are widely held by these people, the Government will start to change direction also, and the broad mass of people will follow whatever the Government says.

This is the smart way - get our supporters, well intentioned people and ones that want to improve society on side. It is happening. The message is being reported - even on Fox News. :)

[-] 1 points by gsw (2740) 2 years ago

you probably know more than i do, iowa caucus upset. The whole iowa caucus is 120,000 people. If everyone called someone, or went, I hear one can show up and register, and there was a write in candidate, say Rocky Anderson. wouldn't that shake things up: get the issues out there for the public.

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

@gsw. I don't really know more that anyone else. Sure any individual person can make a huge impact. If you think you can do something, just do it. Remember that you have the whole movement behind you. Get in there and shake things up. Good luck to you - and Happy New Year! :)

[-] 2 points by DunkiDonut2 (-108) 2 years ago

This post reminds me of how corporations live and then die. OWS will do the same.

[-] 2 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

OWS does have actual goals and actual leadership. One of the primary goals of OWS is embodied in its very name. Another aspect of its goals are embodied in the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City. As for leadership, anybody who has spent a day at Zuccotti Park or at 60 Wall Street would see very clear evidence of leadership. What there is not is ego, I do not mean to suggest that there is a complete absence of ego, but OWS is the least ego driven movement I have seen in nearly 50 years of activism,

I do not mean to trivialize the impact that the eviction has had on the movement, though I do think that the failure to successfully re-occupy a space on December 17 was considerably more demoralizing, Certainly the eviction, the whether, the holidays and the intensity of activism have all conspired against the movement.

From September 17 events moved so rapidly that every time there was a lull of activity for more than 3 days there were predictions of the death of the movement. I don't think that is the case for many reasons, among them are that the crises that the movement addresses are real and systemic and as such unlikely to disappear. It is also the case that the movement is not only national but international and if it is suppressed or weakened in one area it will undoubtedly spring to life in another.

We can see that, for example with the west coast occupations taking the initiative and shutting down ports. This is also partially the consequence of milder weather on the west coast and a somewhat stronger movement in some localities.

I do think that an actual occupation is a defining characteristic of the movement and that is especially the case in the vicinity of Wall Street. I also think that despite a certain level of demoralization, that problem will eventually and ultimately be solved in New York, precisely because this is an international movement addressing systemic problems.

Meanwhile, I have to say that I am extremely skeptical of the value of financial contributions either for the movement or for the givers. After all, when OWS started it didn't have a dime, and its decision making processes make dispossing of the vast sums it has accumulated extremely problematic.

For people who cannot be full time occupiers I have always pointed out that nearly everyone has two days a week off and nearly everyone lives within a few hundred miles of an occupation or at least a GA. IMHO the greatest contribution that anyone can make to the movement is to take a weekend out of their busy lives and attend an occupation or a GA. Then, if they live too far to occupy or attend a GA regularly, go home and start one in their own community, If they are having trouble ask for help from the closest occupation or GA. They would be happy to send someone to help, though you might have to pay transportation and room and board, To me that is the greatest help anyone can give the movement,

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

Well whether it's weather or whether it's not their you have it. So much for hononyms,

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

A one day occupation of the West Coast ports as an example of the strength of OWS is not a very good one. What was achieved? Nothing. Did anything change? No. Perhaps a sustained occupation may have actually brought about something valuable... but one day? That was just than an inconvenience for the ports, nothing more.

BTW, not all of us are physically able to spend a weekend in NYC with OWS... that is why I chose to donate money and goods.

[-] 1 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

OWS is continuing to mobilize public opinion, to focus public awareness on problems caused by ever-increasing extreme wealth disparity.

The movement will only grow in strength according to greater public awareness of the actual numbers detailing the extent of this disparity. The consequences of this disparity are already being felt and will be felt more acutely with time, unfortunately. It's sad we haven't learned from past mistakes (like The Great Depression, for starters). I know we can do better than this.

[-] 3 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Greater public awareness? There isn't a media outlet that even gives OWS the time of day....

I read an article in our local free paper (a very progressive paper) that I feel addresses the problem OWS has:

"....the goals of OWS have morphed into a grab-bag of unrelated items. Rein in Wall Street? Check. Reduce my mortgage payments? Check. Recognize the ancient rights of indigenous peoples? Check. Kill my landlord? Not yet…but you get the idea."

"Strong popular movements (think civil rights, the Vietnam war, and the Indian independence movement) have coalesced around one important idea. Trying to be all things to all people and including everybody’s hobby horse of an issue sounds like, well—a political party instead of a protest movement." \ http://artvoice.com/issues/v10n51/letters_to_artvoice/occupiers_heres_a_cause#ixzz1hrrJtyxC

The movement has spread itself so thin that the strength it may have had or potentially could have, has been zapped.

[-] 0 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

Here is a simplification of OWS's message: FOLLOW THE MONEY.

The 400 richest Americans are worth close to 2 trillion dollars. How much are the other 310 million Americans collectively worth?

How have corporations been granted the same free speech and political donation capability as individual persons?

The message is that IT ISN'T RIGHT FOR WEALTH TO BE SO UNEQUALLY AND UNFAIRLY DISTRIBUTED.

That's it in a nutshell.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Yes, we have all heard that message since the beginning of the movement..... However I didn't think this was about class warfare but about the corruption of Wall St and the influence it has on our government.

Whatever the message is there has been no really action to do anything about it.

[-] 0 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

Please evolve from cliches of fifty years ago, from where the phrase "class warfare" came.

Just try for once to solve a problem we're having, that of extreme concentration of vast wealth in the hands of 400 or so people. If you don't grasp the reality of this, you're fundamentally useless. I won't respond to any more of your posts unless you appear at least interested in the reality of our situation and willing to help solve the serious social problems it presents.

Happy New Year!

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

If your attitude is representative of how OWS reacts when people express doubts or have questions, then I really don't need your "responses"..... because you are "fundamentally useless" to me.

[-] 1 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

All right.

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Of course we can do better than this. But I think this movement could do alot better too.

Tell me one successful movement that had horrible marketing, lack of proper leadership, lack of organization, demonized authority, uses direct democracy (shaking head, rolling eyes, cannot even begin to understand the thinking here, truly absurd), is all over the place whining and complaining about everything under the sun, had no clear message (we are the 99% is not a clear message, makes us sound like a wanna-be mob), does not think we need politicians (huh??), uses anarcho-communist images, and thinks of itself as a "revolution" (shaking head and eye roll again).

Tell me one successful movement that had these characteristics?

[-] 0 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

Did the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's have great marketing? Just curious.

Since when has true democracy become orderly, predictable, and smooth?

The movement is based on sound principles which carry it through a lot of the problems you mention. The message is very clear: extreme and growing wealth disparities are the root of the breakdown of civilization and democracy. The message is very clear for anyone interested in the Central Intelligence Agency's statistics on wealth inequality in the world. Just follow the money. Simple.

Thinking Occupiers know politics are center-seeking and concerted political participation yields results. A third party candidate is not the answer, but mobilizing at multiple levels is.

Which political party claims a monopoly on polite, informed discourse?

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

The Civil Rights movement had Martin Luther King who was one of the greatest most thoughtful speakers and leaders in our history. So yes, I think that was pretty good marketing.

True democracy? We live in a Republic. Who wants true democracy? You're joking right?? Democracy is not what we need. Democracy is for mobs in the park. Like Zoocotti.

Sound principles? What are those sound principles? Anarchy? Non-hiearchical organization? Direct democracy. None of these are sound principles.

Breakdown of civilization? There is no breakdown of civilization. There is 10% (on the low side depending on your source and calculation) unemployment and too much money in politics. I hardly consider that a breakdown in civilization. We are not Egypt. The majority of this country is relatively stable and safe (all things considered) and goes about their daily lives with no thought whatsoever to this mess of a movement.

Breakdown of democracy?? We don't live in a democracy. We live in a Republic.

[-] 1 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

We had a media who broadcast his speeches and followed his leadership. Our media today doesn't necessarily do this.

Who wants true democracy? Is that actually in question? Democracy flourishes in well-run republics. Yes, democracy is messy but the best way to govern. Any society that allows homeless mobs to remain homeless should be ashamed. These people are "the least among us."

The only reason we are not in Egypt is we pay attention, clamp down hard on corruption (compared to them), allow ourselves to become educated on the issues, and engage in civic participation. We are not afraid, as so many are across the globe, to say what we think, in a forum like Occupy. Sorry if people engaged in lawful assembly seems just a tad too messy for you, but most people are too busy just trying to survive to attend rallies. The fact that they occur is a sign that too many people can't find anything more productive to do in these United States.

Quibbling over whether we live in a democracy or a republic is splitting hairs. The real issue concerns the extreme and growing wealth disparities in our nation and world. That's the only message of OWS as far as I can see.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

There is a big difference between democracy and a Representative Republic.

If we can work to end the corruption of government, get money out of the political system, we have the best chance to address the wealth disparity and fix alot of other things too.

This movement is a mess of anarchy, no real leadership and a nonsensical ineffective organizational structure. This is not how to go about achieving results.

[-] 1 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

I should study the difference between democracy and Representative Republic. The spirit of the two are more similar than dissimilar.

We must work to end corruption in government, get rid of crony capitalism, money in the political system, and reduce wealth disparity.

Politics is center-seeking and a third party candidate isn't the answer. The only way to effect change is to support candidates which stand on these principals, to find the party with the preponderance of like-minded candidates, and to support party unity. Whether we are democracy or a Representative Republic, we have to find the strength to participate in our political process and get people to vote the right way.

Occupy rallies are a symptom of how bad things have become, and their message should be focussed on political activism. We wouldn't be in the economic mess we're in now if we hadn't become complacent and inattentive to these issues.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Now I'm starting to agree with you. We are all part of the problem that things got this way and we all need to be part of the solution to fix it.

We need to work with and through government to affect these kinds of changes. OWS certainly is an indication of our problems. When there is anarchy in the streets that is certainly cause for concern and just goes to show we need to make some changes.

But anarchy is not a solution. Democracy is a dangerous concept. Please do some research on this. I had to research it a while back too. Direct Democracy is associated with anarchy. Our Founding Fathers specifically gave us a Representative Republic because they knew the dangers of democracy. So did alot of Greek philosophers.

Democracy destroys itself because it abuses its right to freedom and equality. Because it teaches its citizens to consider audacity as a right, lawlessness as a freedom, abrasive speech as equality, and anarchy as progress.”― Isocrates

This movement is a horrible mess. This movement needs to lose the anarchy and get its act together, with some real strong leadership (like Martin Luther King), an effective organizational structure and focus like a laser beam on government corruption.

We need to do everything opposite of what I said at the beginning of our conversation.

Are you familiar with 99%Declaration? This group has plans to make change through government. I'm not sure OWS ptb will change it's ways. OWS was started by anarchists and uses anarchist principles. This is no way to make change through government.

http://www.the99declaration.org/read-the-99-declaration/

[-] 2 points by ebri (419) 2 years ago

Thank you. Anarchy certainly isn't a solution, by which I mean "audacity as a right, lawlessness as a freedom, abrasive speech as equality," etc.

Audacity sometimes is advisable, but lawlessness and abrasive speech are never advisable.

Representative Republics are a civilized form of Democracy, but it still is essentially democratic in nature. Please don't use the word "dangerous" with respect to democracy. Dictatorships are far more dangerous.

Thank you for focussing the message. The possibility of corruption in government is ever-present and must constantly be guarded against, in good times and in bad.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

You are talking about a movement that is only literally weeks old and expecting it to have the level of success of movements with decades and even lifetimes of experience under their belts.

What is remarkable about OWS is how much it has accomplished in its very short existence. For a movement with such a short history, merely to exist is, after all, a signficant accomplishment. Among its other accomplishments are its explosive and world wide growth, which is perhaps why people expect so much more of it in such a short period.

It is still a tiny, tiny movement, not more than a few thousand activists in a nation of 300 million. Just as the primary responsibility of a fetus and an infant is to live and to grow, the primary responsibility of OWS at this very early stage in its development is to itself, to live and to grow and new GAs continue to form all the time. Once there are 10 or 20 million people occupying will be time enough to talk about a next stage.

Meanwhile, the kind of alliances that OWS has been forging have been quite remarkable. By no means do I mean to suggest that OWS is perfect or above reproach in this regard. What human endeavor is? But it's growth and impact on society given its tiny size has been truly remarkable.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Look, if OWS had taken the steps to be cohesive from the very beginning with a clear message it would have grown far beyond the "few thousand activists". I am no fan of the Tea Party, but look at what they were able to achieve. OWS had a lot more support in the beginning that the TP did in it's early days....

I am not concerned with the OWS in other countries.... I am interested in its growth here. I'm sorry 3 months and hundreds of thousands of dollars should have enabled OWS to, at the very least, have become a very real national force, that main stream America can stand with.

I hope it does come back in the spring with force, I hope that my support has not been wasted.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

The level of growth that OWS has experienced, which is truly astonishing in such a short time, is probably a direct result of its openness, can probably be attributed to the fact that anyone can put any content into it that they wish. To say that it only has a few thousand activists is based primarily on the number of people occupying and who more or less regularly attend GAs in the US. When looked upon as an international movement it is considerably larger and no older, which makes its early growth all that more astonishing.

And the number of people who come out for a called OWS demo can frequently number in the tens of thousands in one town, though these are episodic participants.

It is important to realize that OWS is an internationalist movement. To reject that or to dismiss it is to fall into classic American jingoism. It was symbolic, but in the very first days of the occupation we were sent pizzas from Tahrir Square. The crises we face are international and will not be solved on a national basis. And our movement is deeply rooted in an ethos of international solidarity.

The Tea Party can accomplish apparently more (and only apparently) because it vision is much more restricted. The only political document that OWS has produced is called The Declaration of the Occupation of New York City and it is addressed to "the people of the world." Not Congress, not the President, not the Court, not any govenment, not the UN, not Wall Street, and not even to the people of the United States, but to the people of the world. I cannot express what a thrill ran though me when I first read it and realized just how big a project OWS had taken on.

Changing the world takes a long time. Talk to me in 20 or 30 years and we will see where OWS is then. I have every confidence that it will still be around because the crises it is addressing are that big and that systemic.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

So then explain to me why the international components are important. Is the actual goal of the OWS to bring about a global revolution that results in a world with no governments at all?

And I'm sorry but I don't have 20 or 30 years to wait to see IF OWS makes a difference. As I said I don't expect overnight changes but it would be nice to see something tangible coming from the movement.

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

Outside of its name and the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City OWS as a movement has not explicitly stated or articulated goals. It is clearly inspired by international movements, not only the Arab Spring, but also especially the Spanish encampada movement. The Declaration of the Occupation of New York City is addressed to the people of the world and it seems to be asking them to organized themselves to reorganize social relations democratically from below. That is a very long term project, especially when you consider how small OWS is compared to the population of the world. So it seems to me that we are still in the very earliest stages of the movement's development, If we were to continue the biological metaphor I would say that OWS is hardly in its infancy, barely out of the womb. And few people can predict what a full grown adult will be like or look like based on the observation of that person as an infant. The primary obligation of an infant and even a child is to itself, to live and to grow, and to me that is where OWS is now and where it is likely to be for the foreseeable future.

It is interesting that it is the radicals in OWS, popularly thought of as impatient, who are considerably more patient than the liberals in the movement. BTW I think 20 or 30 years is an extremely conservative estimate of how long the kind of changes OWS seeks will take. It is more likely to take several lifetimes. Patience is a revolutionary virtue.

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

I don't believe most protesters or supporters want a re-organization of society from the bottom up with a GA on every corner and direct democracy as a form of government, which, will take 20-30 years to achieve.

I don't believe most protesters and supporters even understand that this is the central goal of OWS. Which is why so many people are confused and frustrated by this movement.

It's simply deceptive to have some ridiculous 130 Working Groups, acting like they are working on something that has anything remotely whatsoever to do with the regular protester in the movement that wants to end government corruption, for example. It's deceptive of OWS ptb to draw people into the movement with a message of inclusion, come as you are, complain about whatever you want to.
When their true intent is to promote anarchy and direct democracy.

How come OWS ptb isn't more straight forward about this intent? I find this disingenuous. I think it causes the movement to lose more supporters in the end.

Rather than respond to the many people that would like to see better leadership, organization and focus. OWS ptb is unresponsive to these requests. And remains, in my non-statistical view, undemocratically anchored in anarchy and direct democracy.

[-] 1 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 2 years ago

I agree with you April. The intent was very disengenuous, and still is . The originators of this protest have protests going on around the world .. it's as if they just protest to protest ..and sit back and watch all the trouble they created. And although I like that we opened up a dialogue about the health and fairness of our economy, I think the police breaking up the camps is a good thing. I hope they find the people behind this and lock them away.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

I completely agree. It's protesting for the sake of protesting. David Graeber himself described this whole thing as an "experiment" in direct democracy. What better way for an anarchist to conduct such an experiment than to start a "revolution". I think it is important for people to understand this. For anyone that is a part of this movement, it's important to understand what it is really about.

I agree too that there have been some side benefits. There are many legitimate messages coming out of the movement. Inequality and corruption. Moving the debate politically, moving the national conscienceness. All good things. This forum is wonderful, like a giant Town Hall.

But I think the anarchy that got this whole movement started is now holding the movement back from being so much more. We don't need a revolution. We need political power to make change in government. I keep hoping that something will come out of this that will be bigger than the Tea Party. I wish OWS would change its ways so it can be the OWS Party. I doubt that will happen.

But, I've been here a few months now, and I can say, that the tone is ALOT more moderate than when I first started here. That's a good sign I think. I'm not sure how long you've been here. But when I first started, the majority of the people on the forum were, what I would describe as, hard core anarchists. Pushing direct democracy and talking about overthrowing our government - like rabid dogs! Many many times, 2 or 3 of them at a time would gang up on me. It was actually kind of scary. I don't see that at all anymore.

If this movement got some real leadership and organization and a focused message, if it would lose the anarchy, this thing would be huge. People would be signing up in droves! So many mainstream middle Americans see this mess of a movement. Who wants to sign up for that?

99%Decl is slowly gaining support. I don't really understand why more people here are not supporters there. Maybe they are. It's hard to tell. What do you think about 99%Decl?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 2 years ago

I just had a quick look on wikipedia about the 99% decl. It is written by a lawyer of one single individual that was arrested on the Brooklyn bridge? .. and is calling for a male and female from every congressional district to meet on july 4th for a vote on a petition of grievences.

my thoughts go back to watching video of a protestor with a bullhorn and a small group of people .. he says a few sensless words ..and they repeat him .. I would not want tobe a part of anything like that .. certainly not.and this petition looking at the list .. is a half baked potato. I am sorry the scrupulousness I simply can not follow.

As for the rest of this movement and how it has evolved and possibly ended .. remains to be seen if it will take on a new direction of hope or if someone will pick up the baton .. I see this as a bit of a relay .. from one stage to another .. but I don't know if the same people will be in the next stage .. I just don't know if they have what it takes .. it may be up to someone else to finish this race .. or at least carry the next baton.

As for this forum .. yes I am hoping to see positive development amongst us all .. I know I have seen signs of development in myself.. and perhaps others.

I certainly believe we need change . .and am glad we have opened up dialogue. If there is one direction this might all go would be to form a lobby group where we can in fact have a voice in politics .. legally and have our petitions represented in proper manner.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

You should look into 99%Decl further. If you want change through government. They basically split off from OWS because of philisophical differences. They plan to develop a platform and do write-in for 2012. The Declaration list is just a start. I know it's a little hodge podge. But it's better than no demands, no focus, at all. When they do the assembly in July, they will refine the list. At least they have a plan!

http://www.the99declaration.org/read-the-99-declaration/

Another group I like is Rootstriker, associated with Lawrence Lessig. http://www.rootstrikers.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Lessig

Of course, the Feingold PAC. http://www.progressivesunited.org/home

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 2 years ago

Honestly April .. there is something behind this movement that I get a bad vibe from .. something ..warning me. I participate in discussion .. but that is far as I am comfortable with..

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Laughing where there shouldn't be? That's just the COINTELPRO ops probably. I don't think you should let it bother you. haha Am I laughing where I shouldn't be?

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Do you mean OWS? or 99%Decl? Tell me more. You mean in addition to the anarchy? I think I understand. I'm not involved in anything further than being on this forum. I don't go to the GA's or anything. You should absolutely listen to your inner voice if you're getting a bad vibe. I feel the same way. That's why I won't get more involved either. But for me, its because of the anarchy. What do you think it is?

[-] 0 points by FriendlyObserverA (610) 2 years ago

its definitley not the anarchy , or the leaderlessness , or no demands .. there is something else bothering me .. it's just that their seems to be laughter where there shouldn't be .. you know ..

[-] 0 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 2 years ago

I would agree that most supporters of OWS are not conscious revolutionaries. On the other hand they also tend not to read the very few most basic documents of a movement they claim that they support. The only political document that OWS has produced is called the Declaration of the Occupation of New York. It's only 600 words long so there is no need for me to paraphase it extensively here, but it is clear that its sentiments are very radical. It lists over 20 grievances, which, taken as a whole would suggest considerably more than even extensive reforms and it's addressed not to Congress, not to the President, not to the Court, not to corporate power, and not even to the people of the United States. It's addressed to the people of the world. It frankly brings tears to my eyes when I read it and it is certainly one of the most radical political documents ever published in America. It is the political basis on which the NYC GA grounds itself. Several other GAs have adopted it, and several GAs that have not adopted it tend to use it as a guide post.

The Russian Revolutionary Leon Trotsky once quipped that the American Socialist leader Norman Thomas was a socialist as the result of a misunderstanding (eg, Thomas's misunderstanding of what socialism was). I think many liberals who see themselves as supporters of OWS do so as the result of a misunderstanding. That's ok. We'll take what we can get and on whatever terms we can get it.

Seriously, there is a tension between the more radical and more moderate tendencies in OWS, but I see that tension as a good thing. Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) had a conception back in the 60s. It said that it needed both liberals and radicals, as it put it then, "liberals for their relevance and radicals for their vision." I thought that was a good idea then and I still do.

OWS does seek a fundamentally different society, so different that it can hardly envision it. I think a biological metaphor is useful. It's hard to tell what a full grown adult will look like or be like or behave like from looking at an infant. OWS is barely in its infancy. The kind of society it envisions is yet to be born. To me GAs are provisional, Perhaps the new society will be governed by GAs in every neigborhood. Perhaps not, It's really too soon to tell. Meanwhile, GAs are what we have to work with and the model we are building on.

It is really inaccurate to characterize OWS as leaderless. It is more accurately leaderful and it asks people to step up and take responsibility, to take responsibility for the skills and talents that they have and for the ideas that they have. If the "average protestor" really only wants to end government corruption and has no interest in more fundamental social change then it is their responsibility to step up with a program modelled around what they think is necessary. If they don't do that then other people will step up with a program that they think is necessary.

I think OWS is very straightforward about its intent. People in OWS are more open about their politics than any social movement I have been involved in in nearly 50 years of activism. And the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City is, I think, an extremely articulate presentation of their vision. Actually getting people to read it is another issue, but even if people don't read it, I think the politics of OWS would become patently obvious to anyone who took the trouble to sit through a single GA. There is no hidden agenda. Just look at the home page of this website. It says The revolution continues worldwide. People can either take the trouble to see that or not, but I don't see anything hidden.

I'm not an anarchist and I'm not especially wedded to direct democracy, but I do recognize that OWS is charting really new territory and in so doing is bound to make mistakes. It is well beyond any other social movement in living memory whose goals were modest and very specific such as voting rights or ending a specific war. The goals of OWS are much more global and more comparable perhaps to the old Socialist Party in the first two decades of the 20th century or the Populist movement at the end of the 19th century.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 2 years ago

It did put people out of work - that was one thing that was accomplished - was that necessary - no?

[-] 2 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Absolutely yes. I don't believe that the Working Groups were meant or structured in such a way that anything meaningful can get done, or even that there is the intention to get anything substantive done. According to Otpor, the purpose is to keep people busy and involved.

There is no leadership therefore there is no accountability on anyone's part to accomplish anything. So I think people, discussions, working groups, GA's - mostly just go in circles because there is no goals or direction.

The 99%Decl seems to be making some progress. I haven't checked up on the status of them as a Working Group lately.

http://www.the99declaration.org/read-the-99-declaration/

[-] 1 points by jk1234 (257) 2 years ago

Phildelphia: 99% Declaration Receives a Vote of “No Support” from OP GA http://news.infoshop.org/article.php?story=20111217130645347

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I think there was a post in the GA website today that someone thinks that that group should be removed...... I'll look for it and get back to you.

It seems that the Spokes Council is causing a lot of issues among the working groups.... Some members view the Spokes council as an attempt to keep the groups from being transparent.

This movement is fracturing from the inside out.

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Predictable. It's only a matter of time so long as this non-organization organization continues.

I quickly took a look, just scanned some posts on the NYCGA site. 99%Decl is still up. I wouldn't be surprised if they get rubbed out again though. I didn't see anything like that on the GA minutes. Could have missed it. If you find anything like that, please let me know.

I have been discussing with some others how I think it is such a bizarre double standard the way 99%Decl has been treated by OWS ptb. For all the anarchist theory that does not believe in authority, I find it very strange that OWS ptb, PhillyGA, NYCGA, have no problem at all imposing their rules and their "brand" of authority against 99%Decl. It makes no sense. I wish someone could explain this to me.

So far, I can only conclude that it is because of the philosophical differences between the two groups. That 99%Decl wants to work with government and OWS ptb does not. So 99%Decl gets treated with hostility and contempt and the threat of being rubbed out again. Instead of being able to work side by side. I'm not sure I even like that idea necessarily, but it seems to be what 99%Decl would like to do.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

When you have a movement with no real organization the differences in the various groups around the country are bound to happen. No guidelines, no charter etc.... it's a big free for all.

I'll look for that post again, I know it's there just have to remember where!

[-] 1 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

I hate when that happens. : )

I'll keep looking around too and let you know!

I hope you had a great Christmas. PM me when you get a chance, I'd love to hear about it!

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 2 years ago

I feel like this movement is a boxer that just got thrown in the ring with Mike Tyson, and amazed to find itself still on it's feet after round 1, somebody in the crowd shouts. "Hey, why don't you have that guy flat on his back yet?"

[-] 1 points by OccupyLink (529) 2 years ago

Don't worry. The Movement is changing - and consolidating. I can see the same here in Edinburgh. If you have a problem with some people in the Movement, and you will, then sort out you differences by speaking plainly and honestly. As far as finances are concerned, get the transperancy sorted out, and move forward. People are supporting us financially, and we owe it to them to show their money is being spent wisely.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2740) 2 years ago

http://occupywallst.org/forum/patriot-party-ows-adapt-learn-grow-or-stagnate/

at least the tea party had one clear message, and all got behind it. they took it to the congressmen. but people continually getting put in jail, the 1 percent just think they earned. you need to make the message clear for the public-they have a 4 second attention span, and they are wrapped up in their own world, trying to get by, cause there the 99 percent. My post above has some ideas you may want to consider soon, before you alienate too many

[-] 1 points by perspicacious (17) 2 years ago

Sinead - All the minutes for the GA's and the Spokes are available on livetweets. Check out this link and just use the dropdown menu to choose other dates:

http://livetweets.occupy.net/display/2011-12-28

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Thank you perspicacious........ I wasn't aware of that... appreciate your help.

[-] 1 points by TrollDestroyer2000 (29) 2 years ago

I agree!! this movement went to shit. It was great at first but it turned into a power struggle at least thats how I felt at my local Occupy. But you don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water. All the things that have happened the last few months had nothing to do with OWS it came from a general feeling of disgust amongst the average person. OWS might die but the disgust will still be there and people are still mad. OWS is nothing more than a reflection of a much deeper frustration and resentment the common man has with society and the government in general. Im in on the new movement with leaders and a position. Were do I sign up.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by wiseoldowl (86) 2 years ago

What really broke OWS was the infiltration of Ron Paul supporters that drowned out the message and cast an eye of suspicion on the real motives disguised behind the front image of OWS . Until OWS not only disavows but utterly condemns Ron Paul, there will be an unwashable stain that will continously haunt the movement

[-] 1 points by Samcitt (136) 2 years ago

OWS has become a piece of furniture and like most pieces of furniture they can often be overlooked as mere pieces in the house, only really noticed when its prominent or when its needed. They've become a bookcase nobody reads from, its a shame.

[-] 1 points by ayn (8) 2 years ago

OWS need to read and understand this-

SECURITY CULTURE for ACTIVISTS

pdf 16 pages http://ruckus.org/downloads/RuckusSecurityCultureForActivists.pdf


mp3
http://www.multiupload.com/71AT9EN98A


while we are trying to stop bad things from happening, our powerful opponents (usually governments or corporations) are working hard to stop us. This guide is about the security measures activists can take to protect ourselves and make our work more effective.

OWS became such a threat to the us government - that it had their best agents infiltrate it at all levels. Here we have Jart

[-] 1 points by sato (148) 2 years ago

sadly OWS is losing traction. I have noticed this in the past 2-3 weeks.

an indicator is the website traffic which has been crashing down every day

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/occupywallst.org

Also, OWS isn't on the news anymore. It's old news now. I say this protest is effectively contained.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

It is really a shame that this is happening. I believed that OWS could have been a very strong movement for change in this country.....

Perhaps it is the holidays that have slowed things down a bit... I'll hang in there a bit longer and continue to support OWS but if things don't start to happen by spring I will no longer support it.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

This is why we are here this is why you are needed.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/inside-job-documentary/

Share, circulate, educate, inspire.

[-] 1 points by bill1102inf2 (357) 2 years ago

Taxes? The rich dont care about taxes!!! Who cares when you make 300 fraking million!?

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

What does that have to do with my post?

[-] 0 points by DunkiDonut2 (-108) 2 years ago

On day one they started singing "99% bottles of beer on the wall, 99% bottles of beer, take one down pass it around, 99% bottle of beer still on the wall." Everyone got tired of singing it over and over again.

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

The Burlington Occupy Movement seems to be functioning fairly well.

It's a BOM!

haaha!

[-] 0 points by necropaulis (491) 2 years ago

1st off, don't send any money.That's just silly

2) this whole thing is losing steam and faster every day.

3) the reason the transparency is going away is for the same reason your "bankers" are rich. People feeling they are entitled to more than they are and pipelining money into their own coffers.

4) there is no leadership, therefore, everyone is allowed to do what they wish. Once there's nobody looking over your shoulder, things get different.

5) They have goals, but they don't want a leader because they would then be like the government and corporations they hate so much. These guys have a real problem with structure.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 2 years ago

OWS became irresistible bait for every left wing group in existence. Everyone, from the DNC down to the anarchists has made a effort to co-opt the movement to advance their own agenda and the result is the chaos you see today.

OWS is being pushed in ten different directions and as a result, will go nowhere.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I believe you are right, foreeverLeft

[-] 0 points by blackbloc (-19) 2 years ago

i am starting to believe ows was a fall 2011 event and that is sooooo over. however i fully anticipate a new movement in the spring with a much more revolutionary tone..... spring 2012 will be a year of transformative change or you will see the full on implementation of a fascist state that has always been in the wings and know will use this opportunity to raise it's ugly head.