Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Some hard strategic facts

Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 23, 2011, 5:17 p.m. EST by Owlet (99)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I know, I know. This is a revolution and we're all the spiritual heirs of Buddha and Jesus, etc. But unfortunately no matter how paradigm-busting this all is, one has to look at some hard realities here.

  1. WE HAVE NO ECONOMIC POWER. We are rebelling in a time when there is massive unemployment and there are too few available "suitable" jobs for too many people. The 1% do not need you. They have Chinese and Bangladeshis to make the consumer goods they sell, and Mexicans and Hondurans to pick the tomatoes they sell. They only need us to consume, and in fact they really don't need us for that either now, since they pretty much have all the toys already. They would be quite happy to go back to a situation where they, the aristocrats, play power games with each other and fight each other for each others' money (using guess who, you, as serfs and soldiers).

So to sit around talking about "peaceful consensus" and "occupying" is all well and good, but you're not going to actually make anyone do anything this way just by sitting around in a park. Why? Because the economy really doesn't need you any more. Why aren't the 1% concerned at the fact that you're out of a job? Well, because they don't care; they have all the toys now. So, please reflect on this hard reality while you are dreaming of a sit-down revolution. The only real power you have, since you have no economic power, is to muck up the public order and sow chaos, and you all say you don't really want to get into that. Marches, active civil disobedience, throwing stuff: that's all very distasteful to you, and not surprisingly, because you believe you're "above all that" as the American middle class. You're civilized and moral and educated. You went to college. Blah de blah. What you really are, is a lot of good-intentioned but politically very weak people sitting in a park, and the cops can come in and clear out some or all of you any time they want. And they will - bit by bit, this place that week, the other place the next week, until next year at this time you'll still have occupy encampments but they will not have grown and nobody will really care any more. Ten arrests here, 20 arrests there, week in and week out, until your much-vaunted media impact is totally neutralized because the rest of the American public will simply become desensitized to it all. The process has already begun.

  1. THE WORLD DOESN'T FEEL SORRY FOR YOU. I know this movement likes to style itself along the "We Shall Overcome" lines, as if the American masses are terrible victims in all this, but the rest of the world doesn't see it that way. As an American, I personally feel sorry for people who are unemployed and screwed over by the 1%, but if you really believe that all this global Kumbayah we're experiencing this week means that we're all gonna rise up in solidarity together with the Australians and the Libyans and the Syrians, and start a brave new era (one where, naturally, we Americans still get to be pretty much in charge), I don't think so. The world does not feel sorry for Americans who bought into the globalization and our problems here are pretty much peanuts compared to the problems of other people around the world. We have no real moral high ground to claim, which means that when the cops and military get sick of sitting around and start busting heads, it's not exactly going to have the same impact on the global stage as the water cannons and German Shepherd dogs in Birmingham had. Everyone's got their own problems, and Americans are at the top of the global food chain. Your sociopolitical genes are much closer to the 1% than you care to admit. Trust me: the rest of the world has already noticed.

So, to review: 1) we have no economic (and therefore no political) power, and 2) no moral force power.

And yet, you still think you're going to accomplish something in a "nice, middle-class, non-confrontational, moral force way."

Uh-huh.

Word to the wise: stop nattering on about "consensus" and "paradigm shifts" and start thinking about good old fashioned organization and leadership. Better start choosing some good leaders, before you wind up with bad leaders you don't want. Because you WILL wind up with leaders whether you want them or not.

50 Comments

50 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 12 years ago

Damn, reality sucks.

[-] 1 points by ourtimetoact (5) from Glen Allen, VA 12 years ago

very good statement!

[-] 1 points by Shalimar (167) from Martinsville, IN 12 years ago

"WE HAVE NO ECONOMIC POWER." Are you kidding me? We have ALL the power if we decide to use it. That 1% needs us - DESPERATELY! If you heard us by another name you might understand - consumers/workers. If we don't buy tickets to ballgames, movies, buy products from companies or work for those same companies guess what - THEY go down the tubes!

What's Wal-Mart going to do if there are no workers and no one buying items in their store? Now put any company's name in place of Wal-Mart and you get the idea.

The Berlin Wall fell not due to tanks or bombs, but to the average person standing up and saying ENOUGH.

The average American isn't powerless - we are the power!

[-] 1 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

If we really have all this consumer power, why hasn't the bottom dropped out for the 1% yet? Since 2008? They seem to be doing just fine. I don't see Jamie Dimon on the street in rags.

Maybe that's because the rules have changed. Billions of consumers in China, Southeast Asia, India and other parts of the formerly Third World are taking your place. Not just as workers - as consumers! Are you going to organize them too? Hope so. If so, you better have more coherent tactics than just sitting around in a park.

[-] 1 points by Shalimar (167) from Martinsville, IN 12 years ago

"If we really have all this consumer power, why hasn't the bottom dropped out for the 1% yet?" Because we have never applied the pressure. Just because we have not done it, doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be done.

[-] 1 points by winn (0) 12 years ago

Observe that sometimes, historically, revolutions by underclasses have succeeded in spite of powerlessness larger than that described in "Some hard strategic facts" (being absent of ANY practice of democracy). Exactly what was the mechanism by which they succeeded in spite of their (even greater) powerlessness?

The Revolutions of the French, Russians, and, more recently, Egyptians, prevailed because the ruling group's people with guns (army, police, guards) became not sufficiently willing to follow orders to use them on their own people.

Add the ballot to the picture (in this case), and a lot can happen and a lot not happen.

"Better start choosing some good leaders, before you wind up with bad leaders you don't want." And that's WHY we have elections, because history has so well shown the other ways of leader emergence aren't as good.

If enough people want substantial change in the manner of distribution of money in the US, let them choose on that basis who they vote for and inspire others to vote for. 99% of the people still have 99% of the vote, and given the many well-educated 99%ers, something approximating 99% of the intelligence.

Many thousands have died to establish democracy in the world, but it takes constant work to keep it healthy. Too many Americans have been remiss in working at their "government of the people" - that is why things have gotten so bad for them. Folks, this work is YOUR work; it cannot be neglected or delegated to others. So that you should never be as powerless as the peasants of old, MAKE SURE YOU DO THAT WORK.

[-] 1 points by EarthdogGil (1) from Spring Green, WI 12 years ago

This person just signed up today with no identity. This type of comment is real citizenship within a movement, but it is lost to autonomy.

Real names should be in. Autonomy is for chickens.

[-] 1 points by TitlUpward (4) 12 years ago

Exactly! We must come together through Intelligent means of Capital Creation to create what we want for ourselves. This is possible. We live in a world of infinite possibilities.

[-] 1 points by MJMorrow (419) 12 years ago

Note to self, resistance is futile. Are you done spelling out my doom or should I get a bag of popcorn? Get to the part where you will jack me back into the Matrix, if I agree to be a good little battery? [Giggle]

[-] 1 points by stephenadler (118) 12 years ago

here Here!!!! more more!!! you've hit the nail on the head. I've been saying this all along! I just posted the following....

"OWS needs to break the revolving door between Wall St and congress/white house/supreme court"

The finaical industry is a HUGE Gorilla/Gozilla/'insert big badass monster here' and is eating everyone's lunch. Frankly, they are laughing at the poor attempt of OWS which so far has only turned into an inner city park camp out....

[-] 1 points by EarthdogGil (1) from Spring Green, WI 12 years ago

OWS needs to violently pound the crap out of that revolving door. That is where the real revolution should be.

[-] 1 points by Justice4All (285) 12 years ago

The lack of economic power due to debt slavery is shocking. It is why I favor a moratorium on foreclosures, loan modifications, and student loan amnesty.

[Deleted]

[-] 1 points by Justice4All (285) 12 years ago

Yes.

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

We can have political power if we look at the areas of consensus and vote on the basis of those issues.

Look at who gets the most in donations from the 1%, and refuse to vote for that person, but do vote. A few losses and the politicians will see that we are voting away from Wall Street. It will make votes more valuable to them if they know they can lose elections by pandering to the big money.

[-] 1 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

And why would this work when it hasn't worked for the last 40 years?

I thought we were at some sort of revolutionary point here. That's not revolutionary, that's a failed idea.

Then again, it's pretty clear OWS doesn't want revolution really. You're children who just want someone in the existing political class to make it all better again.

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

It is easy to discourage anyone from trying anything. The idea of "move your money" isn't new, as I know because I've been pestering my daughter to move to a credit union for years. Now it is happening, and the numbers are growing.

It can work. It may, or it may not, but I'll keep putting the idea out there and see if it lives.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

Very interesting thread topic. Basically, psychology has a way to understand what you describe as group behavior. Cognitive therapy developed this list to use to identify the mechanisms that people use to delude themselves.--

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.

  1. Mental filter: Details in life (positive or negative) are amplified in importance while opposite is rejected.

  2. Minimizing: Perceiving one or opposite experiences (positive or negative) as absolute and maintaining singularity of belief to one or the other.

  1. Mind reading: One absolutely concludes that others are reacting positively or negatively without investigating reality.
  1. Fortune Telling: Based on previous 5 distortions, anticipation of negative or positive outcome of situations is established

  2. Catastrophizing: Exaggerated importance of self's failures and others successes.

  1. Emotional reasoning: One feels as though emotional state IS reality of situation. ie.

  2. "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.

  1. Labeling: Instead of understanding errors over generalization is applied.
  1. Personalization: Thinking that the actions or statements of others are a reaction to you.
  1. Entitlement: Believing that you deserve things you have not earned.
[-] 0 points by thekingofnewjersey (3) 12 years ago

imagine an economic system where banks don't exits because they aren't needed, where everyone has a basic standard of living, where good jobs are always plentiful, where everyone has healthcare, where our indigent are cared for. Can such a system exist? YES! read "thekingofnewjersey" available on Nook for inspiration. Any profit from this Nook Book is donated to the OWS movement. Send any comments to thekingofnewjersey.steve@gmail.com

[-] 0 points by thekingofnewjersey (3) 12 years ago

imagine an economic system where banks don't exits because they aren't needed, where everyone has a basic standard of living, where good jobs are always plentiful, where everyone has healthcare, where our indigent are cared for. Can such a system exist? YES! read "thekingofnewjersey" available on Nook for inspiration. Any profit from this Nook Book is donated to the OWS movement. Send any comments to thekingofnewjersey.steve@gmail.com

[-] 0 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

troll.

[-] 0 points by StevenRoyal (490) from Dania Beach, FL 12 years ago

You're absolutely right. We should just give up and let the 1% continue to dominate.

[-] 2 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

I wouldn't agree with that. But the 1% will continue to dominate if you keep up with this toy protest where you disavow the need for leaders, platforms, and anything resembling real political action. There have been a lot of powerless people in history who have made things better for themselves, but they sure didn't do it by sitting around in a park with no economic power or moral authority.

[-] 0 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

don't need leaders, the best solution is direct democracy.

[-] 1 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

Yeah, we've had direct democracy for 200 years and look how it turned out.

I don't think you get it... you can say you don't need leaders all you want, but leaders will arise. And it's your choice whether you will have good or bad ones for your movement. How do you think Muammar Gaddafi came to power? He was a terrible leader for his people. He showed up because no good people stepped up to the plate.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

sorry, no, we have had feudalism and corproate oligarchy, NOT democrcy and certainly not direct democracy.

i do understand that leaders will tend to arise. direct democracies job is to keep the field as level as possible.

the best way to ensure that leadership stays good is to not have persons as leaders but rather insist on ideas and truth as the leader.

What you are in essence asking for is a new hierarchy. thats not a solution, its just a repetition of the problem.

you are dead wrong about this; period, and its clear you don't understand the game and systems theory reasons why no leaders is the best option.

[-] 1 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

Hate to break it to you, but all the art, culture and genteel comforts you have enjoyed come from civilization, which requires a hierarchy to function in the manner to which you have become accustomed.

If you want a consensus-based society, great - you're not going to be able to run a city or a nation that way. Maybe a small village or a collection of yurts. And that could be a nice way to live. However, I'm pretty sure they're not going to let you do that in the park indefinitely. Maybe they will, but I don't think they're going to keep letting food trucks in. Hope you have enough space for crops in the park.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

quite the opposite. al lof art and culture is wounded and held back and held primitive by corporate forces for dumble down.

hierarchy dumble downs and group thinks, it does not produce an artistic culture.

You most certainly can run a city or nation that way.

you are just trolling. i see that now.

inobvious troll is more obvious.

[-] 1 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

Nevertheless, the fact (lamentably? regrettably?) remains that in a consensus-based society, what you get is folk art, which has its own cultural constraints. You certainly won't have the money to support "the arts" as an industry.

You misunderstand my meaning. I understand the kind of lifestyle you want to promote, and frankly I find it an appealing lifestyle... but it's a lifestyle based on survival, not on leisure pursuits. You are simply not going to have a culture the size and complexity of the United States with a power structure that is all about "consensus." Consensus government went out with hunter-gatherer bands. And if that's the way you want to live, that's fine - it is an appealing lifestyle to me as well. But don't kid yourself that you can change the way states operate. You are better off trying to escape the state. Which is kind of tough to do in a city park. You will be persecuted, and mercilessly, and the world will not care.

[-] 1 points by gawdoftruth (3698) from Santa Barbara, CA 12 years ago

dude, you are BSing. that is not a fact, thats garbage. there is no such constraints and obviously more money happens for everything as soon as we get rid of the pyramid scheme.

I don't misunderstand anything. you don't understand the lifestyle i am trying to promote, you are spinning and lying and BSing nonsense to prove this.

it is entirely possible to have the USA run on consensus, sorry you can't imagine it thats a problem with your imagination.

consensus government was not used in hunter gatherer bands- pack psychology was.

shut up and don;'t kid yourself that you have the first clue what you are talking about. you don't, and you are clearly just trying to be a very sly troll.

[-] 1 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

Wow. You think native Americans operated under "pack psychology"? Amazingly ignorant (and insulting). Try learning about native Americans some time, they used consensus government a great deal.

[-] 0 points by jph (2652) 12 years ago

lol, that last bit is priceless!

you just can not imagine anything being run by a community or a collective can you? Sorry to point out that many coops exist and worker collectives, and communities that decide issues by consensus. i.e. no leaders. you know democracy!

economic power lies where then? if not in the hands of the 99%,. you actually believe the 1% can run sht here all by themselves? that they can maintain the system all on their own?? wake up and smell the people.

[-] 3 points by Owlet (99) 12 years ago

When's the last time a co-op took over a country? LOL.

This isn't playtime.

[-] 0 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 12 years ago

Agreed, and I particularly like the statement -- we have no economic (and therefore no political) power -- so perhaps you would consider our group's proposal of an alternative online direct democracy of government and business at http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategically_weighted_policies_organizational_operating_structures_tactical_investment_procedures-448eo , hit the facebook “like” button if agreed, and then join our group's 20 members committed to that plan at http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/