Forum Post: Sadly watching this movement be co-opted.
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 11:14 a.m. EST by gtyper
(477)
from San Antonio, TX
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
It's not that I'm opposed to a properly established liberal mindset. It's not that capitalism or socialism is (or is not) the answer. It's that this movement began as a non-partisan movement and I'm watching that slowly change and devolve into nothing more than a mirror image of the Tea Party -- and this truly saddens me.
In this time of strife, we need unity. We need to come together as a nation and find universal goals that impact all of Americans - regardless of political ideology.
They say that 75-85% of all Americans are currently disenfranchised. Simply motivating 10% of that group, regardless of their political affiliation, is far easier and is ultimately more powerful and widespread than motivating 50% of the democrat/liberal base.
What hurts me with this movement is that I hear more and more the notion of "tax the rich, tax the rich". As if this is going to magically solve the problem. Taxation is but one aspect of our problems and not even a huge one. The problem is how our tax money is being handled without accountability. Solve that before you give them more money to bilk.
I would put forth the majority of the top-1%, of which I'm a part of, wouldn't have an issue paying more in taxes so long as the money was being spent properly. As long as these politicians funnel our tax dollars to their friends and defraud the American public -- I don't think anyone should have a desire to give them more. They don't know how to handle it.
With all that said, I have to set aside my current political ideology. Being divisive is not the key to getting our combined voice heard.
What we need to do now is toss our governmental concepts to the side and embrace our brothers and sisters, regardless of political ideology, and fight to remove money from government. It's non-partisan. It's universal. Until we do that we can't get ANYTHING accomplished - liberal or conservative. We've been sold out and we need a unified voice to get it back.
I may be opposed to certain aspects of socialism and/or capitalism -- but in order to enact the change we need we need to drop these differences until the broken system is fixed.
down with move on!
1. END THE FEDERAL RESERVE.
Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution gives power to Congress to “coin money and regulate the value thereof.” John F. Kennedy was the last President that attempted to restore this power back to where it belonged. The Federal Reserve is a private bank that is owned by powerful international banking families. The “Federal Reserve” is as “Federal” as is “Federal Express.”
2. END THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX AND THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE.
Adopt a Federal value added tax (VAT) OR a flat tax that is fair to all.
A VAT would fairly tax all individuals and corporations based on consumption with unprepared food and medicines being exempted from taxation. Those who can afford to purchase a luxury yacht, a private jet, a mansion with an ocean view and lavish dining at an exquisite restaurant would pay a much higher amount in consumption taxes whereas those who can only afford a picture of a yacht, a round-trip airline ticket to go to visit grandma for Christmas, a studio apartment with a parking lot view and an occasional meal at McDonalds would pay much lower taxes for their consumption. It would take very few federal employees to administer this form of taxation.
A flat tax would tax all individuals and corporations at the same percentage of their income with no deductions and no exemptions, regardless of how the income is derived. A federal tax return, regardless of the amount of income should be no longer than one page and the corresponding regulations should be no longer than 25 to 30 pages.
Both forms of taxation would serve to eliminate lobbyists and corrupt politicians.
3. END ALL WARS AND ALL FOREIGN OCCUPATIONS THAT UTILIZE OUR MILITARY.
Our military should continue to be the best and most well equipped in the world but should be utilized to protect our borders from illegal invaders. Bring the troops home and see how quickly we can begin to reduce our federal debt.
4. IMPOSE SUBSTANTIAL TARRIFFS ON GOODS AND SERVICES THAT ARE PRODUCED BY U.S. CORPORATIONS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES.
The United States is still the biggest market in the world. U.S. Corporations that have manufacturing operations in China, Mexico, India and other countries so as to exploit lower labor costs should be required to pay high tariffs to sell their products in the United States. I have no doubt that most of those manufacturing jobs would move back to the United States if those high tariffs were to be imposed!
One thing to add is: Monetize the Debt, and/or default on debt held by banks. Debt service is nothing but ransom paid to parasitic international bankers who co-opted our money when the Federal Reserve System was begun. We, the people, do not owe these parasites anything.
This is just about perfect. Please, people: Notice that the above is Non-Partisan! Its an economic and moral demand, not a political party endorsement!
Unity is needed, but I think it's the media that is trying to make our movement seem liberal. It's not. It's not one thing or the other. It's about stopping the corporate greed. I hope the majority of the protestors agree with this and don't allow themselves to be labeled one thing or the other.
The media doesn't understand us, which has been shown several times, and is just trying to fit us into a nice neat little box. They don't get this movement and they won't. This is about us, not the media, not the different political parties, not celebrities, it's about us.
It's liberal now and out of the hands of those who started this movement.
People kept squabbling over loony Libertarian economics and extremist socialism. We lost sight of the original goal and couldn't put our differences aside. It's not the Medias fault this happened... It's ours.
Yes I agree... nothing will be gained from fighting with our Brethren the Tea Party. It's like we're Scotland and their Ireland... and the 1% is Great Britain... we must remember who we are really fighting, for they will try to turn us against one another... we must rise above... for the greater good. imho
Yep!! Well said. We as a people are all together, not the political parties or corporations. We as a people need to stick together and realize that the media is wrong. It's odd b/c we need to use the media to get our messages out, but we shouldn't let them define us or box us in.
Cuwen,
I think you're too deep when you say "stop corporate greed". What does this mean? How do you define it?
A little greed is a wonderful thing. It motivates us to achieve. It is a necessary evil in a capitalistic society.
With that said, I can't be behind "end corporate greed". It's nebulous. Who defines greed versus success?
I can be behind the message of keeping corporate/union money out of politics. Find ways to close the gateways we've opened to ship our jobs away for slave labor. Close the gaps in our tax code, or reinvent it.
These are all commendable goals. But, end corporate greed is a losing argument that will rankle people with a conservative mentality. It's akin to demanding "fair".
I'm here as long as it is non-partisan.
As am I -- but it's starting to hurt me as I see the non-partisan unity turn to us vs them mentality.
Someone keeps posting about the Tea Party being in line with a lot of OWS thought (and they are). But rather than answering that with positive reinforcement and reaching out to bridge that gap and weave solidarity -- we get people denouncing the Tea Party and pointing to the co-opted portion of the Tea Party. Rather than forging a new paradigm, we seem comfortable forging the same one.
I was surprised more people didn't comment. :-/
With all that said, I think it is only fair that I explain what my political view is. My mindset is somewhere in between. I'll explain it so that people can understand where I'm coming from.
I have an issue with this assumption that socialism is somehow going to prevent a power consolidation from occurring. This is pure nonsense. If anything it helps promote it by putting more power into fewer hands.
Socialism, or it's more base foundation "communal-ism" is a wonderful theory and is a great model for a society to enact. The unfortunate reality is that it is no better than what we have currently and no better accounts for the power of human greed. At the end of the day, it just ignores it - much like pure capitalism. So, socialism is really just different in philosophy not action.
If you look at communal-ism, it works best in small societies. Take the example of a small tribe of 20 people. Each person has their role in the society and the entire society depends on its members to perform. If someone is unable to perform, society can band together and fill the gap. If someone decides not to perform their role, society is small enough to chastise them and motivate them to produce.
As the society gets larger the people that don't perform get larger and the punishment for not participating is less severe. It becomes more difficult to demotivate this behavior and make these people productive. Ultimately, the right-wing is correct in the notion that the behavior becomes positively rewarded. That is not to say that programs should be abolished, just altered to provide more disincentive for being a drain on societies limited resources. (and before I get railroaded - I think being truly incapacitated is the exception to this)
Further, the larger and more advanced a society becomes, the more distance is put between those that run the society and those it intends to rule. That is not to say that the same doesn't happen in capitalism. It most certainly does. The difference is that with federal socialism you create a class of individuals with far more power. And as we probably can all attest to (and based on the argument of the vast majority of Americans) - this power is hard to wield and is easily corruptible. This is why the consolidation of power is mitigated by our Constitution. A Constitution that we've allowed the same politicians, that we seem intent on giving more power to, usurp. Do we really think giving them more power is good?
What good have they done with the power we have granted them so far? I would ask what successful government program you are very proud of? I can't think of one. The war on terror? No child left behind? The public school system? The Federal Reserve? The war on drugs? The current welfare system? The EPA and it's many blunders? Clinton-homes?
And you want to give these same individuals MORE power? Let them invade aspects of our lives that they don't know how to manage?
Would you buy a television from the Coca-Cola? I would bet not as it is too far outside their comfort zone. They make drinks, not electronic products. The same with the government - they would diversify into areas they don't have expertise in.
My feeling is that there is nothing innately wrong with a government that runs a socialistic society. I believe that there is a need for many social programs in an organized civilized society.
My issue is that we are consolidating power to a select few with no roots in the common person's world and are asking them to understand what the common man experiences. We are asking the same people that put us in this situation to have more power and to use it wisely. It's like passing around shot glasses full of whiskey at the beginning of AA meetings.
These are the same people that sold out the American dream to Wall Street. The same people who have wholeheartedly auctioned our political capital to the highest bidders. The same people who play the game of politics while their citizenry suffer. And there is a very vocal segment of this movement that wants to consolidate more power to them?
I would put forth the proposition that the Federal Government should be relegated back to its Constitutional authority levels. Very limited internal powers. Each state should be granted much more power, limited only by the spirit of the constitution.
This allows the populous to have a direct representation within the politics of the state and be heard by their elected officials. Should the state no longer align with their beliefs, people would be free to leave the state. This would allow open competition among the states and ultimately the most efficient rules and regulations would come forth.
This is just my mindset. One I'm willing to ditch as we ask for political reform and justice/accountability for the corruption that has destroyed our political system.
I am not surprised that there weren't very many comments on this. Too many people have been putting so much emphasis on personal complaints, and the bigger picture has been left out. A lot of people, too, it should be said, just want to get revenge and tax everyone who is rich thinking that they will personally get that money somehow...and that is all they can see. People are trying to fix a broken leg by putting Band-Aids on it. And they don't care about/don't understand the complexity of the policies in place. Yes, a lot of them do need to be reformed. But whining about policies with no suggestions of HOW to fix them, and not even THINKING about how to fix them...just saying that they need to be fixed...isn't going to change anything
Amen to that!
It's awful seeing it take place too. People pushing forth their own personal agenda and propaganda. Refusing to have intelligent debate on the issues that actually face the nation that almost 100% of the American people agree with.
People think "taxing" is going to solve the problem. Sorry, it won't. The issue is rooted in our government and our political system. There is no accountability to how they use our funds. So, giving them more isn't going to fix our problems.
I'm going to go out on a ledge here and say 100% of the problems facing this country have their base in the ineptitude or all-out bribery of our current political system. That's not to say that there isn't blame past the system, but everything can be traced back to having issues with the government platform.
Reform our government and political system first. Political agenda second.
This is what I would argue this country needs: http://nycga.cc/2011/09/22/the-demand-is-a-process/#comment-3839 Essentially, what I'd like to see is the institution of the New Deal, only modernized to correspond to how things are now. I'm not proposing that government march in and take over everything; I would merely like to see a return to the system that brought us incredible prosperity in the 1950s and 1960s.
Why do I trust the government more than the private sector? It's simple; the government (at least in theory; also in practice if Sections VII and VIII get through) is directly accountable to the American people and can be subject to forcible restaffing procedures every two to six years depending on the branch we're talking about. Businesses owe nothing to anyone not contributing to their bottom line, which may originally have been consumers but now has evolved into each other.
@ARod - I agree with some aspects of your plan, but others "not so much". For instance, in my opinion you are doing all the things that appeal to the left side of ideology, but little to counter-balance.
An example -- the tax brackets seem insane without reform on government spending. Throwing money into the government coffers is just lunacy until there is some sort of restriction in their spending and the programs the government is involved in.
The only way to TRULY fix this mess is a conglomeration of ideals from both sides.
We need to understand the government budgeting process. For instance, most people don't realize that Social Security is supposed to be an escrow. For those that don't understand, an escrow is a place to set funds in "trust". You can't touch that money. The Federal Government actually counts Social Security as income and budgets against it. Worse, as much as it pains me to admit I agree with the man, Rick Perry wasn't far off in calling social security a giant ponzi scheme.
Here's the thing: you're right that budgeting FICA money as regular income is dishonest, but I don't believe that Social Security and Medicare are unsustainable if the FICA is uncapped. As far as the taxation vs. spending debate goes, see this: http://www.themultitude.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=23 for why I feel the way I do about income taxation. Sorry about all the links, but my proposals are long enough that they're a real PITA to type out every time and/or hunt down on the OWS forum.
I'm even more opposed to what you propose in the link.
You're consolidating power in the Federal Government. Giving them more money, for which they've shown the propensity to spend without accountability.
Further, income taxation was never something outlined in the Federal Constitution for the exact reason that we are seeing today. It grants too much power to the Federal. It allows them to exert control over the states, which they don't have the constitutional authority to rule.
Further, you're taking the money and power further away from the people it is supposed to represent the most. The representation quits being local and influenced by the people.
Sure, you can show examples of local corruption -- but there is far more examples of decentralized corruption.
Higher tax is not necessarily a problem, but government spending and pay-for-play IS a problem. If you want the top wage earners to want to pay into this system ... you need to show accountability.
You are not seeing the forest because you are arguing about the trees! Our problems started a century ago, and won't be fixed until we undo the corrupt, ill-fated decisions that have led us to this inevitable result. Please, learn your history before you start these silly, meaningless arguments! (Hint: Its all about money - its creation and distribution, which rightfully belongs to the people, but was co-opted by corrupt bankers)
I'm with you completely on accountability; what I'd want to do is require that each iteration of the annual federal budget, from the initial version proposed by the president and introduced into each of the legislative houses, all the way through to the final version that leaves the president's desk, be made available on the Internet for citizens to view (along with a list of with whom each part of the bill originated). I would also propose that instead of block grants to states and municipalities that each community put forth a request for funds and a budget of their own to send to DC for federal funding, so that you and your neighbors can choose what you do and don't need federal money to do. If you don't need anything right now, there would possibly be an option to request either a partial refund or to earmark your community's share for repayment of the national debt, national infrastructure programs, etc.
This. As to the rest, this post just seems to be another attempt to co-opt by the small government crowd, which is to say the unfettered capitalism crowd.
Very new facebook page focused on that one goal. No parties, no other issues.
Help it grow, develop and contribute. There is another one, run by a member of the controlled elite media. Personally, I am suspect of those in the media. This one was started by one person a few days ago. Hoping Americans can make it a ground swell issue.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Get-Money-Out-of-Politics/170454236375392
I just created a forum that addresses your forum subject and "what you think about it being co-opted"
. No bodly seems to care or is it the people that are left are the ones I am talking about?
Check it out I would be interested in your opinion. It seems we see somewhat eye to eye
http://occupywallst.org/forum/kkeep-in-mind-that-the-web-is-the-real-battle-grou/#comment-127037
The movement can't be forcefully co-opted. There is not power structure, no hierarchy in place to allow that. The media can try all they might, they can't actually change what the people on the streets say or think. You folks can, and must, resist this.
Don't despair, but heed this man! You, the people, are #OWS. The parties are free to ape your lines, but they don't stand for you, none have a claim to your loyalty. You stand for yourselves.
I agree, but this isn't what we are seeing.
The tones on this board and from other sources seem to indicate that the slow crawl to being willfully co-opted is inevitable. I am screaming for us to fight this, but it seems that there is a segment that really want this. A strong and vocal segment.
We are seeing more and more - me, me, me and us vs. them mentality.
I haven't been personally able to participate in any decent sized occupation yet, so I don't know how things are looking on the ground. Have you seen that at actual protests?
Some measure of me me me is normal. For a lot of people this movement means coming out of a long period of alienation from financial and political institutions.They need their voices heard, and that means talking about what they personally think. It's okay, I feel, to indulge in a bit of enjoying hearing yourself talk.
Us vs. them though must be fought tooth and nails. It's the one thing that could kill this. And it's the game all power players have always played. It's the dance the media dance with the politicians, demanding ideological purity, pretending like you can't at once be against wild unregulated free market and strongly believe in god, or that not adhering to some part of the neat package somehow undermines your belief in every single item.
OWS must welcome all ideologies, but stand for none. It must stand only for those very obvious, despite all the obfuscation, core issues it has been about from the start.
I agree with your posting. I've been saying it for awhile and wrote a long post trying to explain it to liberals that we need to check ideologies at the door. You can check it out HERE
Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion
I haven't verified this source
but a pie chart would be a useful tool to view the US government budget
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm
"DoE nuclear weapons $17 billion"
the DoE did build nuclear weapons but I doubt there are still building them
last I heard there were attempting to produce fusion via atoms together with lasers from all sides
they certainly could continue researching alternative energy sources
I would put forth the majority of the top-1%, of which I'm a part of, wouldn't have an issue paying more in taxes so long as the money was being spent properly
That's amusing
As am I.
I have no problem paying a higher tax - but I won't pay a higher tax into a corrupt, broken system. I won't pay a higher tax into a hole that I know my money will never come out of.
Would you give a credit card to a 12 year old that doesn't understand money?
Would you give money to an alcoholic, drug abuser?
Would you drop an obsessive gambler off in Vegas?
I would assume not. So, why would some people be willing to give MORE money to the government who have prove to have no accountability??!!
I think this movement will address these issues; nobody wants freeloaders and thieves sucking the life out of America. As far as the 1% that are workers go, they are just the 99% that have a better job And the tax system sucks big time but that is also more of a symptom than the problem
The real issue is "Corporate Global Domination" and what it has done and is doing to America
Correct.
It's that our laws and politicians are being bought and paid for by corporate dollars.
These same politicians pit the American populous against each other in the greatest game of misdirection the world has ever known.
"Taxing the rich" more doesn't accomplish anything but revenge at this point.
In my opinion, OWS needs to have a multi-step approach: 1) Get our government back. Get money out of politics and get the government representing the people again. 2) Determine what we actually need to spend. Analyze the budget. Determine the REAL tax consequences of programs and spend. 3) Reform broken social programs and unwarranted spending. 4) Determine the right tax dollar requirements.
We might find once we reduce our ridiculous military budget and reform a lot of the broken programs this nation supports -- we can decrease tax impact.
It's going to be interesting. Things are going to happen