Forum Post: Thanks jart!!!
Posted 10 years ago on Feb. 7, 2014, 2:10 p.m. EST by shoozTroll
(17632)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
You ROCK!!
Google employee repossesses Occupy’s Twitter account in hopes of reviving the movement
JART - if you actually made the mistake of limiting your comment to just the liberal elite - you should acknowledge that - as OWS is under attack by nearly 100% of the elite of every stripe/affiliation.
If you meant to shock/slap the liberal elites - fine - but they are by no means OWS's only elite enemies.
Note the use of (tm)
It's not unlike my use of the term neolibe(R)tarian.
It's meant to differentiate.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
I constantly have to remember that irony was bred out of Americans from about the late 70s on. Which leaves only blather. Not the Ten Commandments, not words from ethereal gods, simply and exclusively senseless blather.
Want wisdom and a plan? GET OUT THE FUCKING VOTE!!!
[Removed]
The real irony?
We are where we are because FEAR of expressing political opinion has been bred into so many of us, that the pent up need to do so, is destroying our ability to do so in a productive manner..
Our poor tortured and abused victimhood. My heart bleeds for our "fear."
We are here, because just enough of us idiots are completely manipulated, duped, and bamboozled, by smart and powerful people who want us to think we're OK ~ while we fight and shoot each other ~ so we'll still produce, while they make sure we remain powerless, and the redistribution of wealth to them is never interrupted.
We are here, because we are too busy looking for gold dust in Bull Shit, being afraid, lost in petty bickering, doing anything but uniting, when we have the ultimate power right in front of us and we don't see it, deny it, or fear it: DEMOCRACY!
We are here, because we do not feel worthy of our immense & superior democratic power.
If we exercised our democracy, we'd get everything and anything we need and hope to achieve. We'd be able to throw off the yoke of 1% tyranny. We'd be able to enforce our just laws and repeal our unjust ones. We'd be able to free-up our nation's stolen and hoarded wealth and let equality reign.
But we don't, that's why we are here, and that's ironic.
Now WTFU and get out Votes!!!
Welcome to the Disunited States of libe(R)topia!!
Brought to you by FLAKESnews and it's incredible level of associates.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/red-ink-the-movie/
Would you like a glass of fracking water with your libe(R)topia fries?
Not laughing, but I am hungry.
I'm starving for informed vigilance!
I'm savoring empowered dissidents!
I'm sick of pessimistic inevitabilities & tolerated roadblocks.
We have progress and achievement just sitting in front of us!
[Removed]
You should watch the video............:)
It seems everyone was quite frightened by it.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/red-ink-the-movie/
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
So, what's the game plan?
Time will tell. This in itself is a new development.
Good. I hope it reduces the amount of garbage analysis composed by the media and a bitch slap to the damned libertopians. Let's freaking move forward already.
Libe(R)topians , know no shame.
[Removed]
[Removed]
sorry If I made you look bad in that Les Miserable song
any similarities are accidental
I hadn't noticed.
Was I supposed to?
I guess I won't either, it's a 404 error.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
Edit
Does she mean from the Liberal Wealthy when she says elite? I know - I know = Stupid Question. Because it is true that the wealthy - of any stripe - are not in it with the rest of us in trying to address issues to move us all into a healthy relationship with each-other nor with the economy nor with the environment.
Funny thing though - not ALL of the elite/wealthy are so self - centered/involved - HEH - yeah - this the funny part ( in a sense ) - as perhaps 1% or is it more like .001% - ummmm .0000001% (?) of the elite/wealthy actually care for others - others without wealth - as well as care about the world/environment - funny that - "their" 99% suck shit.
I like names to be named whenever possible.
With the (R)epelican'ts fractured by the libe(R)tarians.
Perhaps now they are after the Dems?
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/02/no-liberals-dont-control-the-democratic-party/283653/
The rethuglicans in office are doing their best to commit political suicide as well as murdering the planet while they do so - and they are the majority in office claiming conservative status.
That being said.
There are those claiming to be Democrats ( not nearly as many - yet - thank God for small favors ) - that are just as bad in every way as the rethugs.
All of em need to be routed out of office.
If this world is to have a chance.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
It is a strategic time to rebuild the movement because our political system has just given its middle finger to the long-term unemployed and the children waiting for nutrition. These are such no-brainers that our political system may literally have no brains.
By "our political system" do you mean the one sabotaged, obstructed and paralyzed by the 1%-owned RepubliCon Cult? or the one that gets the lowest Voter turnout of all the world's democracies allowing Big $ to exploit and control to a near fascist or plutocratic degree? or the one that your only participation in is bitching, condemning and smearing, rendering you irrelevant because if you don't even Vote, you don't even count?
I mean "our political system" to be all of what you had mentioned - aren't they all different descriptions of the Same Cesspool in our backyard with crocodiles, alligators, caimans, mosquito larvae, etc. swimming in it?
[Removed]
With all of the heated arguments here about jart's taking control of the Occupy Twitter account, let us ask jart to explain her action. Isn't it a bit premature to assess right or wrong if we haven't heard from the principal involved? I would like to get answers to these questions:
What did jart do? When did jart do it? In what context did jart do it? There were recent timeouts accessing occupywallst.org. There were very long login validation time required at times. Were these bandwidth problems due to too much graphics or were the ISPs delaying data due to the demise of net neutrality? Why did jart do it? With whom did jart do it? For whom did jart do it? How did jart do it?
The recent time outs were due to the site being under attack. WTF is wrong with you?
Whatever, just wake up and VOTE!!
Voting in cocoon politics makes little sense. Silk extraction after scalding the cocoons makes great beauty.
Tell that to Florida and Congress.
Sending both back to Africa makes eminent sense. I surmise that Florida got its alligators from the crocodiles of Africa. Congress will learn quickly what Ebola can do for real, rather than just playing with political tectonics in imitation.
Vote in November!
If You don't Vote, You don't Count!
If you vote in November, you will lend legitimacy to the wrong people. Yes, you will be counted -- OUT AGAIN! Dead crow or deceased raven - gourmet's choices of the people, for the people, and by the people, huh?
I do see the point of voting in the primaries though to affect the campaign issues and the candidates. If you think only about waiting to vote in November, it tells me loud and clear that you are a political neophyte. If you want to play the rigged game, learn the tricks first before playing it to win.
Always Vote, Idiot, that's how the 1% gets Cons and laws in POSITION!!!
What's wrong with you!!?
Is it true that the 1% gets Cons and laws in POSITION through voting?
There is nothing wrong with me except that idiots like me got needles pierced into our heads and acquired sharpness.
[Removed]
It's all twitter if you want to know the reasoning.
The site is not "under attack", its simply being redone a bit with some new focuses. Working on a site while keeping it live makes it sluggish.
It was under attack. Thanks for the above, that is all that I needed to see.
Ditto & after seeing http://15now.org/ please reflect upon the clarity herein :
ad iudicium ...
Ms Sawant's voice is like a breath of fresh air in the midst of a sea of polluted air.
From your link, excerpts from Kshama Sawant's RT interview;
"I think the conditions for the left, for alternatives to Democrats and Republicans to build their forces exist. The question is, are we going to take advantage of it?"
"Our primary task is not only to run independent canidates, but also to build a mass movement."..
"If you are serving the Democratic Party, then you are serving the interests of big business."...my emphasis
"Look at the amount of money and the number of foot soldiers the labor movement provides for every election for the Democratic Party, and what have we got out of it? We've got a long-term assault on labor unions."
Ms Sawant exemplifies what Occupy is about, and I respect her greatly.
Especially when she stressed unionization as a key to moving forward.
NO stress needed.
But here's an example of an impediment.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/grover-norquist-attacks-the-uaw/
And some words of understanding and support.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/saving-our-unions/
are you on board?
[Removed]
[Removed]
NB http://15now.org/ & thanx for the excellent Kshama Sawant quotes, further to which, I also append :
https://twitter.com/VoteSawant ;
https://www.facebook.com/VoteSawant ;
http://occupywallst.org/article/occupy-response-sotu-president-obama/
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/1/6/a_socialist_elected_in_seattle_kshama &
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/us/a-rare-elected-voice-for-socialism-pledges-to-be-heard-in-seattle.html .
e tenebris, lux ...
There's nothing like a toxic dose of rigged, crony capitalism, which benefits the few at the deleterious expense of the many, for people to re-evaluate the term and tenets of socialsim as,
The stigma of being being branded a socialist is coming to an abrupt end much to the chagrin of the corrupt elite.
'They' may now be forced to defend the rigged system that they created on merit, and that no doubt will be an extremely difficult task.
[Removed]
Article explaining how negative attacks keep many a good man/woman from becoming involved.
It's not just you. It's your entire family. Smeared in public and made a joke of.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/negative-attack-ads
Humans appreciation for achievement inevitably leads to feelings of ownership, which inevitably leads to other's feelings of jealousy.
Whatever people's personal feelings are, everyone needs to remember that occupy was about building something together, as one unit, completely diverse and still working together building a framework to address those differences.
You shouldn't speak in the past tense.
Will you be answering the question you brought up and then never answered?
Not answering, doesn't build toward what you are suggesting.
It detracts from it.
IFoundedOccupyWallSt showing a lot about political organizing with the individuals involved.
This is of the utmost importance. For one to attempt to create change, a public persona and a public spotlight WILL HAPPEN/NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
Change cannot come from being anonymous. And making 100% of the people- or even the supporters- happy 100% of the time is a physical impossibility.
With this in mind, the question of how involved one becomes in political/cause activism depends on the fear of exactly what is happening right now.
This is a great example for all of how things work.
"Change cannot come from being anonymous."
exactly.
Who did you say you used to be?
[Removed]
[Removed]
Do you have a name? One would think an introduction would be in order before asking the other's name?
I do, and I've posted it several times.
On the other hand I've always had and NEVER had any other username here.
How about you?
What usernames have you posted under?
That would be the $64 question.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
You first. We are experiencing the symptoms of the above issue, the hesitancy to state ones name in order to achieve greater success.
If you'll excuse me, I already did. Several times.
It's like I always used to say....If you snooze, you lose.
You still have the option of reviewing all my postings though.
AND since I already admitted to all my previous forum usernames.
(none)
It's you turn to give it up.
You first. Are you willing to lead? One cannot approach and demand a name. An introduction is in order.
I already did lead, You were sleeping.
That's a shame, huh?
But since you think you're Madonna and you want to play truth or dare......
My name is Michael Moore, I've never had another username on the forum.
Now.
You will answer honestly and in full, or you will be gone.
You have already dragged my name through the mud.
Rules of return, still apply, and I am not easily swayed.
Michael Moore the director?
No more questions.
Answer, or be gone.
[Removed]
[Removed]
"The “Liberal Elite™ has always fought hard to destroy Occupy,” she wrote. “It’s why they spread lies about us. Because we’re #winning.”"
Exactly.
Names, quotes, hard evidence please?
As I've said many times before. there is actual evidence of libe(R)tarians doing this as well.
Just look at this place.
[Removed]
Justine's words, not mine. Read what is posted.
True, but who did you used to be?
[Removed]
[Removed]
You are one of few that supports jart's action. The vast majority of occupiers are appalled. Did you read the various Twitter feeds on the issue?
https://twitter.com/search?q=%23IFoundedOccupyWallSt&src=tyah&f=realtime
https://twitter.com/JustineTunney
An articles: http://my.firedoglake.com/kitoconnell/2014/02/07/what-the-hell-happened-to-occupywallst/
It seems all very strange to me. Jart didn't take the Twitter account from malicious hands. It was held by various different occupiers who were each using it to post. What she did was change the password so only she could use it. I'm not sure a movement that is supposed to forge communities and the idea of working together is advanced by one person taking control of accounts and websites. She did the same with this site early on and it pissed off many people. That's why the NYCGA refused to acknowledge this forum and why we never saw many occupiers here, i.e. the people you see on Twitter and anarchist forums seldom if ever come here. Different crowd all together. Those people were at Zucotti. The people here were not.
So what exactly is it that you think is good in all this? Perhaps I missed something?
It's twitter, silly.
Who's Kit O'Connell?
FDL's been pretty iffy lately anyway.
You're talking out your proverbial.
Are you related to a former poster known as occupyleader?
or some other former poster?
Seeing as you've made some large assumptions here, I'd have to say you missed a lot.
So what? It's one of the forms of communication that Occupy uses. There's no reason one person should take control of it without asking the rest if that's OK. Many occupiers use Twitter. These people deserve respect. Many gave a lot of their time to Occupy. It's not right to go behind their backs and change the password like that.
No, are you?
What assumptions? Jart is the one saying she took over the Twitter account from other Occupiers. Not me. Again, what assumptions?
Do you even keep track of what's going on with Occupy?
PFFFFFTT!!
Ephemeral nonsense.
I've been smeared there too.
So who did you used to be around here?
Why do I always have to ask that question of people who come here for the purpose of smearing the forum?
and jart too?
Why the fuck is that?
I've been posting all sorts of stuff on Occupy activities and articles of support.
Didn't notice a single comment from you.
not one.
All you've done is toss shit at people.
Like a monkey in a cage.
Why is that?
Do you have an ounce of honesty in you?
this could be someone new
Not a chance.
probly not
but you knew repeat visitors
no worries
it's engaged
Not here to smear anybody, but when someone does something that hurts Occupy I think it's important to call it out. Jart may have great ideas, the problem is her delivery in my opinion and the opinions of hundreds of other occupiers.
Don't you think Occupy should be run by the community? If not, don't you think we should at least vote for who becomes in charge of things? If not, why do you prefer authoritarian type leadership to a leaderless movement or voting system?
I wrote here because I was surprised someone would be happy at what jart did. I don't think any other occupier was.
Perhaps I'm wrong. I'm willing to reconsider my position if you can clearly explain to me why it's good when one Occupier takes over something that is being run by many occupiers without even asking them or telling them.
You seem angry that I propose a different view than yours. I did provide arguments to defend my position. Is it OK to have a different position and to ask others to explain their position? You don't have to explain if you don't want. I was only asking in the hopes of having a productive conversation.
Um, what is with people who refuse to be honest and then expect ME to answer umpteen questions.
The last guy to challenge me got his bluff called and proved to be a dishonest coward.
And there's the bullshit about how I seem angry.
A line fed to me by umpteen trolls.
WTF?
No.
You need to be honest.
You DO need to explain yourself.
You came here to stir up bickering.
And to do so in a thoroughly dishonest fashion.
Honest about what? I don't have to explain myself further than to make the comment as to why I disagree with jart's authoritarian move and to provide arguments for it which I have done. That's all I wanted to contribute to this thread. That's what the topic is about. Does everyone who wants to contribute an idea to this site have to answer your 20 questions? Are you some kind of guardian?
You call me a troll because I disagree with you that jart should be commended for having taking over the Twitter account by force? WTF? First my idea is in line with Occupy principals, second there is such a thing as freedom of speech. Isn't this forum made for discussions? If it is, then why call people trolls simply because they disagree with you?
"Honest about what?"
Everything.
I didn't call you a troll.........yet.
I don't like it, when people lie about what I say.
On the other hand, you did come here to stir up bickering.
As you are now trying bicker with me, while pretending you're in your ivory tower.
Now that freedom of speech has allowed you to have your say, and you squandered it to smear jart, will you be leaving?
It's not like you've had a single word to say on ANY of the issue oriented threads around here anyway.
Honesty, is the best policy.
You should try it sometime. The sooner, the better.
I came here to offer an opinion backed by arguments which I did. I simply asked you why you supported jart's authoritarian move. You were not able to provide any arguments as to why. You went into a rant of deflections.
You're saying I'm not honest, but I have no idea what I should be honest about?!? My opinion is honest, else I wouldn't have given it. My arguments to support my opinion are honest, else I wouldn't have given them. Why would you consider them dishonest? That makes no sense.
My comments here were on topic. Yours were not. They were deflections. I'm still waiting for you to explain why you think jart's taking over of Twitter was a good thing. If you can't answer, then I must conclude you have no arguments. I'm not sure why you keep trying to veer this off topic by claiming I'm somehow dishonest. Really, what are you talking about?
And, what's up with asking who I am? When I signed here, the site had a message telling me I shouldn't give my real name in order to remain anonymous. So, please, follow the site rules my friend. This place was designed to respect the privacy of its users.
The first thing you did was accuse people of bickering,
Then you lied about what I said.
Then you completely ignored my calls for honesty.
Somewhere in all that, you attacked jart.
And made a particular point of attempting to divide, from the forum and from jart, your perception of forum posters, through her video. ( another old argument, that was settled here, a while ago.)
Now you climb back up on your ivory tower.
And no, you weren't on topic. you've been bickering with posters, and smearing jart..
I'm well aware of the reaction elsewhere, but until I hear her reasoning, I reserve my opinion.
I don't like jerking my knee for anyone.
So in the end, like FLAKESnews, you reserve your "right' to be dishonest.
That's all I really need to know
When you are ready to provide a comment which is on topic, I'll be glad to answer you. I was interested in your opinion concerning jart taking over the Twitter account in authoritarian fashion. This posting is about jart taking the Twitter account. I think it's a waste of time to veer off topic like you are trying to do.
For the time being, I'll conclude you have no arguments to back up your position.
She has explained her reasoning in various threads already. She said her voice was not being heard because she was a trans and a geek. That other occupiers were not respecting her because of that. Strange considering she is one of the voices which had the most airtime in Occupy. She was interviewed by prominent publications, has had total control of this website and write almost all the news articles, has been heard on the Twitter account which was maintained by many occupiers until a few days ago. Everyone heard her when she wrote the article against Consensus and Graeber. Everyone heard her when she made a call to create a paid militia. She's basically doing deflection. A few trans women of importance have stated recently that her reason is bogus. They had no problems in Occupy because they were trans.
But, even then, even if we give her the benefit of the doubt and decide not to listen to all the stories of hundreds of Occupiers who are calling her authoritarian... Still, her move has no defence. There is no valid reason for one Occupier to take over a public means of communication using the Occupy name. No reason at all. Occupy is supposed to be democratic. She should have made a call, asked permission, etc... Going behind the backs of other legitimate occupiers is not OK no matter what.
I simply cannot think of a single reason or excuse where it would be legitimate to bypass the democratic process of Occupy to take over something being used by the community by force for one's own benefit.
[Removed]
It's all about dissension and disruption.
I like jart.
You don't.
She was attacked here, mercilessly.
For all I know, by one of your former usernames.
It would follow the attitude you're showing here..
I would tend to think that would follow through to elsewhere.
Graeber wrote an article against consensus too. So what?
So why do you think that means you should attack forum users?
All you've done so far is deflection, along with casting aspersions..
Every post.
You know what they say about people in glass houses.
Oh, and you've already lied about me, so WTF????
I have no reason to believe a single one of your aspersions.
I never said I disliked jart. She is a nice person and has done a lot to help OWS. However, that does not mean I have to agree with everything she does. I happen to think, like the many occupiers who have recently complained, that taking over the Twitter account in authoritarian fashion was anti-Occopy. Occupy is about democracy if anything. There is no place for authoritarian type takeovers. None.
Graeber did not write an article against consensus. He wrote a rebuttal to jart's article against consensus. His article defended consensus.
When and where did I attack a forum user? I did not attack jart. I expressed disagreement at one of her actions, just like so many other occupiers did. I think it's important to be able to criticize one another, especially when one of us transgresses the philosophies we have worked so hard to establish. Of course, when someone betrays democracy we must voice our opinions about that.
Don't be scared of ideas. If I disagree with you or jart, it does not mean I am attacking you.
My suggestion to you is to learn the art of debate. Join a debate club. You're all over the place. At times (almost all the time), it feels like you're using deflective tactics on purpose.
http://www.urbandebatedetroit.org
I did not ask you to believe. That's why I provided arguments and links. I provided a opinion, nothing else. It's not about believing or disbelieving my opinion, it's about agreeing or disagreeing with it. And, when you disagree, you should either not say a thing or use arguments to show why you disagree. That way a discussion can be had. What you are doing is just one red herring after another. Everyone can see that.
No, you just smeared her.
So you only smear the ones you love?
What did I just tell you about proven, unrepentant liars.
You lied about me. How is that not an attack?
and now you climb back up on your ivory tower??
Oh please, not that debate team bullshit.....again.
Not from a known liar... That's against the rules.
So is casting aspersions.
gosh, what puppet master have I heard that debate bullshit from before.?
If I recall it was an extraordinary liar. Truly that guys only claim to fame.
Lies are not ideas. They're lies. Nothing more.
Lies are not opinion. They're just lies. Nothing more.
Lies are red herrings too.
hey shooz, I know very little about what is going on here - I will do some reading now. what I do know is that this is what the left has done down through history - infighting and imploding. on the face of it the defender has a good argument and it should be met with a counter argument - just my opinion. I know nothing about lies he might have spread or whatever but seems to me that here and now we could use a reasoned debate on the issues.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
you're kidding right - "I would postulate that since I am both here now and never have been banned, that both of your assertions cannot possibly be true at the same time." - that is just about the dumbest thing I have read on this site - but sadly it makes perfect sense
[Removed]
i understand each word but when put together they make no sense. you seem to say that the fact that you have not been banned means that jart is neither authoritarian or in total control of the site. i am not making a judgment either way but there is no logic to your statement. as to you being an example of an anarchist - well i will leave that to others - you have shown your self to be either ignorant of anarchism or .............
[Removed]
oh dear
an old argument
http://occupywallst.org/forum/forum-topics/
lol
I'm just glad someone's holding the post
was there a struggle for the position
or did jart decide that work needed to get done?
I generally approve of the front page articles listed here
Whether work needs to get done or not is not an excuse to take over Occupy's Twitter account behind the back of other Occupiers. The type of work Occupy wants to do cannot be done by one person. If we make this world better it's going to be with the efforts of many many people. Jart should give the account back to the community. She can share her ideas, and those that agree can help her make that a reality. No problem there. She also already has her own Twitter account.
jart doesn't work alone
people will look to occupy for information
I like the articles here
[Removed]
Is Anonymous and Occupy onto something with staying just that- anonymous?
Perhaps, yet when the time comes to create after disassembly has occurred, to do so from a mask would be near impossible. When we need to organize and create, we need to work with one another. Putting faces to names and names to faces is the natural human condition, and its not likely to change anytime soon.
Seeing one's self on the news protesting, or giving an interview, is a very uncomfortable experience for many on the first occasions, including online interviews that have local comments sections.
Once initially passed, the speaker will usually decide they can either A) handle it, or B) not make the same "mistake" again. This is especially true when dealing with press that will misquote and interpret an interview to the angle, or paraphrase due to "readability".
When looking at the hastag IfoundedOccupyWallSt, a few questions come to mind.
First off, this is not considering whether the statements or the person in question was right/wrong/etc etc etc. This is a study on the reactions of society to such moves.
When looking at the reactions involved in this, ask yourself
"Could I handle that?" Do not fool yourself into thinking you would do it differently and therefore would not have to consider it. It happens to everyone. Everyone. And it will happen to you, too.
Could you handle it? Few can. Few are passionate enough to go that far.
What did you learn?
Whether Justine was correct in doing what she has done, or what the experiences of working with her were like - everyone has an opinion that is unique to them- its a reminder of what happens when people go hard at affecting change.
Occupy was a mess, but it was a beautiful mess. As raw as raw gets, lots of mistakes all around. In many ways, this is nothing more than the same story as usual. XYZ dont agree with ABC, que drama.
The changes are still coming.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/02/07-5
[Removed]