Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: On The Reality of Power and The Necessity of Idealism

Posted 2 years ago on May 24, 2012, 4:05 a.m. EST by GypsyKing (9780)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

What has come to be seen as the fundamental rift in the Occupy Movement is not actually a rift in the movement at all, but instead the oldest and most insideous question that has plagued humanity itself, and it is paramount that we come to understand this now if the movement is to progress.

On one side we have the "idealists," who see the necessity of staying true to the Occupy message at all costs, while on the other side we have the "realists," who see that Occupy cannot succeed if it does not engage in the existing political process - does not face down effectively the factual mechanisms of power. Feelings run very, very, deep when it comes to this issue and understandably so, given that the question engages our deepest and most ardent beliefs.

So the idealists fear the realists are trying to coopt the movement for the Democratic Party and as a result the movement will just peter-out into another failed experiment, thwarted by the entrenched powers of a corrupted bureaucracy - while the realists fear a lack of pragmatism regarding power and how it operates will likewise lead to the movements demise, and both of these fears are justified given this one caviat: that we fail in endurance, in focus, and in the incorruptability our aims and actions.

However: given that we remain true to ourselves and our objectives, remain resolute and rid ourselves to the greatest degree possible of our egos, in which lie the seeds of renewed corruption, then neither of these fears have a foundation - the controversy simply melts into thin air. That is because the answer lies within ourselves and not within the institutions of society. No institution, at any level of society, can be made safe from human corruptability, yet by the same token no institution, no matter how corrupt, can stand against the will of the people united for the transformation of society and the human spirit.

The distinction then is seen for what it is, a chimeara. It is simply the age old question of fear vs. trust, and the answer lies within each of us and by extention us collectively - in our individual strength and in the content of our charactors.

That is the question handed to us yet again, as it has been handed to us throughout the ages . . . the question of trust or mistrust, love or hatred. Do we have the courage to finally affirm ourselves and one another, or do we start over again the revolving cycle of human mysery? Can we have faith in the integrity of one another within the movement, or will we once again divide and allow fear to again become the dominant force in human relations, and thus permenently seal our fates?

Only in the furrow of our fears and hatreds can be planted the seeds of our destruction, and so we must nurture our dreams with trust and love so that they may grow into a great oak tree.

Yes, it is simply once again the never ending question, the paramount question, the question that will never go away until we either find a different answer, or go away ourselves.

The question of human survival, of triumph or defeat, is thus first and foremost an individual question, a question of the human spirit.

162 Comments

162 Comments


Read the Rules

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by friendlyopposition (574) 2 years ago

"Did you ever study at University?" I didn't know Thrasy was Canadian. Interesting and little know facts...

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8655) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

any way you write comes down to doing something or just camping in the park, your retort is nothing but bullshit no actual position, the only way OWS can be "coopted" is by someone trying to define it in their limited way

[-] 1 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

The vast majority of people who march/protest at OWS meetings are not anarchists! Maybe the "people who started OWS" are anarchists and want to start over outside the system, but unfortunately That does not matter. The movement beongs to everyone. To the 99%. If we have no leaders, and prefer consensus then we will find most people do not support tearing down the existing system (even though most would probably agree that the existing system is saturated with corruption). I agree with article that no system is so corrupt that it cannot bend to the will of the people. There is an election in 5 mos! Lets not sit it out. Lets see if we can have some positive affect. support OWS Vote out pro norquist politicians. real or ideal do not stay home!! it's what the 1% wants!

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

My whole point here is that no matter how many times people want to convince me otherwise I see no, and have never seen any reason that there should be any conflict here! I think the whole argument was just cooked up by trolls, I really do. We must get beyond this and get back to the work at hand, TOGETHER!

Let them vote us down with their stupid bots - WHO GIVES A DAMN???

In many ways it's just the most rediculous thing I've ever seen, and I think certain people have been paid quite well to fuel the whole thing.

WAKE UP EVERYBODY!!!

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Wouldn't surprise me if some group is perpetrating an organized attack to pit us against one another. Somehow we must respect each other enough to accept our differences. move ahead on both fronts if necessary/possible, and thereby grow the movement. Growing will take years but it represents the greatest threat to the 1%. And it is the greatest fear of the 1%.

[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Agreed withal!

[Removed]

[+] -6 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

Tr@shy : Wrong Again JR !!! GK's 'cris de coeur' was more poetic allusion and an invitation to reflect than anything else ! Your narcissistic, pretentious and totally self-referential & self-regarding comment however, clearly qualifies for :

  • "This text is dishonest. It passes itself off as being an objective academical work, when in fact it's an entirely subject (sic) and biased piece based on a flawed dichotomy, in a word - propaganda."

Further, your post-scripted invitations (the second now edited out!) - to others to engage in mendacity and duplicitous behaviour and desire to be mistaken for someone who truly cares for OWS and attempts to further invite this forum to subvert itself, is even more proof of who and what you are ...

et cave - anguis in herba !

You fancy yourself as some kind of 'Merovingean Roi Perdu' but Bali, Canada or France ... I'm closing in on you much faster than you think and will decide what to do once your co-ordinates are clear. I'm not one to easily "cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war" though in your case I may make an exception !

Now that site admin / mods have ceased the 'Collapse Comment at -4 Function', your down-voting BOT-Scripts count for zero, zilch & zip and you are neutered. Now why don't you go ahead and employ your 'shads66' moniker and force my hand ?

ad iudicium ...

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I'm sorry thrasy., I've never heard of a non-political protest. I don't know what in God's name - oh sorry, I forgot you censor people who use the word God - what in God's name you are talking about!

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I see you got out your bot to vote down people on this thread, and vote yourself up again. Do you think you are doing anything to promote anachistic ideas (if that really is your aim) engaging in this kind of really childish tin pot dictaorship. I mean it's just sad. Nothing could turn people off of anarchism more than these kind of schoolyard pranks.

Is your aim to pretend to be an anarchist to undermine them?

[Removed]

[+] -8 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

Tr@shy : ad hominem comes easy for your now ~30+ monikers on this forum ;-)

  • i. Why?! ... a) I reject your premise and faux dichotomy & b) Because I choose to !! Wtf d'ye mean "why?" ?!!!

  • ii. See above !!

  • iii. GK is suggesting nothing of the sort. Also see above !

  • iv. No & you are (x)uming, transferring and projecting.

  • v. Re. yr post-script : You're fixated, paranoid and more than a touch narcissistic. Chillax dude ...

ad iudicium ...

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Well, if he hasn't already, I guess he's now going to subject you to his dreaded bot. LOL!

[+] -7 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I'm somewhat surprized to hear you call me your friend, as you have done everything short of starting an actual witch hunt to drive me from this forum, even though I agree with it's reformist aims completely and have contributed much time here to what I have honestly hoped would be it's betterment.

You say above, if I can make it out, that I am somehow at once claiming that those who started this movement are idealists, and that I am using that term as a pejorative. If that's how you interpreted what I said, then I can only say perhaps I failed to make myself clear.

I am an idealist, and so it would be odd if I consideredt idealists to be worthless dreamers, or fools, and furthermore it is clear that without ideals practicality would be of no value whatsoever - so that would seem to be a doubley foolish argument. But of course you read those things into what I said, when in truth they aren't there - something that has marked our interaction from the begining.

The fact is that I am not trying to set up a false dicotomy, but rather trying to counter a false dichotomy, one that is so widespread people often overlook it. This is, in essence, that the intellect opperates at the calling of the spirit, and is itself nothing. If we are to progress we must see that, and explore why we have this endless need to prove ourselves right, when in the end of course it's all hollow, it matters not.

If we can't allow ourselves sufficient flexibility of thought to compromise with even those who share our aims in their entirety then I would say we have no chance whatsoever of being the 99%, and are threatened with the failure of so many such movements in history, movements that may have been intellectually correct but had at their center a spiritual vacum, an emptiness that people could sense and perhaps rightly, fear - movements that failed from the very reason that this one now appears to be threatened - because all this conflict arises not out of reason, or of reasons, but out of putting the desire to be intellectually correct over what is spiritually right.

Ah, but of course, you see everything as a logical fist fight with a winner and a loser, so perhaps I'm failing to reach you on this one.

Were we animated by a higher set of motives than this, this conflict need not pointlessly escalate to the degree that it plays into the hands of our opponents and fractures this movement. I wonder if that matters to you. It's hard to understand a disembodied mind.

It seems to me, frankly, that you are more concerned about your view being intellectually correct than any other consideration, and also that you have failed to articulate any real intellectual view of your own at all, so I can only conclude that you will remain in your own league intellectually. I hope it gives you satisfaction.

But please, don't continue to make the argument that you aren't motivated by emotion because you are the most emotionally sensitive person on this forum - the most insecure, as are most people who have an obsessive need to be proved right all the time. I have nothing against you, but why don't you put your bots and sock puppets and everything else that so clearly reveals your inner-totalitarian away and just talk to people here without all the ego defenses?

And please stop trying so hard to impress people. It works with those under thirty or thirty-five; beyond that age people find it less impressive. If we could all get beyond all of this perhaps we could come together and save some remnant of civilization, but you will first have to get a grip on whatever's eating at you. It's worth the effort, and don't feel alone. It's a struggle for everybody.

I may be able to respond to whatever ax you will undoubtably want to grind below, but only if I think you aren't just thrashing about for ways to contradict me, without any serious consideration of what I have said at all.

PS I do appreciate your signing your actual username.

[-] 0 points by lIllllllllllllllllllllllllllll (1) 2 years ago

Predictably, you aren't able to offer any counter arguments and fall back on lame logical fallacies like ad hominem. Predictable indeed.

If I say that you're an idealist and I'm a realist, it implies that I can get things done better than you can. It implies that I am not dreaming a utopian dream like you, but that I am facing the situation in a sober fashion, i.e. without delusions. Your post implies that the anarchists are utopian dreamers, and that you, the political co-opter, is a realist and a doer here to provide the path towards a practical solution, a path which, according to you, cannot be found through anarchism.

For your information, I have not used bots in the last two months. However, I'm quite sure someone else did use some in this rubbish posting of yours. Most likely an anarchist helped by jart. You see, my reply to shadz66 was deleted, but my main retort to your romanticized propaganda pro-democratic post was not. The moderators did come here, but why do you think they left my retort intact, especially since it's obvious a bot voted it up?

[-] 5 points by factsrfun (8655) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I've been watching it for 30 years, and it's the concentration of wealth that will over-ride all in the end if OWS does not address that, it seems they are willing to give up on that for some republican votes, like Obama has been doing....

[-] 4 points by lkindr (58) 2 years ago
  • The problem of idealism (such as shared power) versus realism (such as unshared power) is certainly real, but there may be a pretty simple solution, which I think it would be great if Occupiers would adopt. Actually, some seem to have already adopted something like it in Spain at least. And it relates to love, which some Occupiers already promote. I take love to mean caring.
  • The solution I'm talking about is Win-Win decision making. It's very similar to consensus decision making, apparently used by some Spanish Occupiers. Win-Win, like consensus, is a very unifying practice. The way I use the term Win-Win is different from conventional win-win, used in business and it's different from consensus in that, instead of being a merely mechanical process, it goes to the heart of any issue, by having both or all parties seeking to understand everyone's concerns on the issue, including especially the concerns of seeming opponents. And, when the concerns are seemingly understood by all involved, everyone is asked to think of and mention proposals that might satisfy everyone's concerns. And there are almost always solutions that would satisfy everyone and they don't usually take long to discover. Someone's proposal usually comes close right away, so it usually just takes a little modifying of it to make it agreeable to all.
  • Win-Win should work for just about everyone, but those most resistant to using it would likely be those who are addicted to power. But I think eventually even they would succumb, after enough of the common people adopt it.
  • I suppose I need to start a thread on this topic sometime. But it would be probably worthwhile for idealists and realists to try out Win-Win and see if they can find agreement. I feel that I'm both a realist and an idealist, so I suppose I wouldn't be able to be in just one group or the other.
[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

You should start a thread. This is exactly the kind of important thinking that needs to go on here - rather than distractions:)

[-] 4 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 2 years ago

This is another excellent post, you conclude that this is a question of the human spirit and I agree. I want to point out this from your post, "No institution, at any level of society, can be made safe from human corruptability, yet by the same token no institution, no matter how corrupt, can stand against the will of the people united for the transformation of society and the human spirit."

I wish that this quote was true, but I fear it's not. Because people accepted many years ago that history proved that power corrupts, a new form of government was formed where, All Men are Created Equal, was a worthy ideal and the mechanisms of government must be at the consent of the governed. History had proven that all previous forms of government were corrupt.

"That government, of the people, for the people, and by the people, shall not perish from the earth"

[-] 5 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Deep questions. I wish I could devote the time to respond to this in the depth that it deserves. I will, but can't right now.

Thanks.

[Removed]

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

-Abraham Lincoln ·

[-] 0 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 2 years ago

Yes, his last sentence of the Gettysburg Address.

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

yep

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

"You must either be idealistc, or pragmatic . . . but please, please, please don't be both!!!"

This message brought to you by the trolls.

Think about it!

[-] -3 points by llllllllllllIllllllllllllllll (-32) 2 years ago

Actually, you are the one who talks about the false dichotomy of realists (pro democrats) vs idealists (anarchists). I think anarchists have shown they are idealists and realists, and a zillion things more. You have shown that you can write unscholarly articles from your armchair.

[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

lllllllllllllllllllllllll = nuts. I mean really nuts. Our "conversation" is through. You really need professional help.

[Removed]

[+] -4 points by llllllllllllIllllllllllllllll (-32) 2 years ago

Troll tactic #1 - Use ad hominem instead of proper arguments.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings."

Ultimately, the fault lies not in our institutions, but in ourselves, for our institutions are made up of ourselves, and so to blame the institutions of democracy is a logical falicy. We can only transform the institutions of our world through the recognition of our own weaknesses.

Let's overthrow greed and corruption by overthrowing the ego that lies within us, and through the process of renewal, both within and without of our institutions, because in reality our "institutions" don't even exist - they are just an extention of us, of our glory and of our failings.

[-] -2 points by llllllllllllIllllllllllllllll (-32) 2 years ago

Ultimately, the fault lies not in our institutions, but in ourselves, for our institutions are made up of ourselves, and so to blame the institutions of democracy is a logical falicy. We can only transform the institutions of our world through the recognition of our own weaknesses.

Is this a lesson for 5 year olds? Can we talk about things that aren't uber obvious. Thanks.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 2 years ago

US Citizens don't know enough history or philosphy to Triumph.

Speaking for myself. I like Philosophy, but don't know enough. And then politics, law, psychology, and propraganda might be under the philosphy umbrella.

It doesn't seem possible that philosophy as a school hasn't evolved enough yet. It is more likely that we have corrupted our own country. Er, we have corrupted the global community. Probably with the neoliberal economics philosophy.

How about "Occupy Neoliberal Economics" Globally for the next full Year.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I will make a prediction. Thrasymaque will not come onto this forum in any recognizable incarnation until he can again manipulate people's true perceptions of his views by voting up his own comments and voting down those of others. It's the only way for him to work his Voodo.

When he does please Do Not Respond. I won't.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (5805) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

He's heeeeere!

By the way, glad to see you back, gk.

[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (4464) 2 years ago

Hi Gypsy, So glad to see you back. Best Regards

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Couldn't fucking stay away with this damn bot attack going on unchecked! What, are some people here more fucking equal than others?!!! I don't remember when anything got me so FUCKING MAD!!! They need to re-read their fucking Orwell!!!

No I'm going underground again.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

An interesting question: Which group is more driven by fear?

[-] -2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I think we are all driven by fear, but I think we have a misunderstanding about the nature of the question. The question is, "can mankind set his/her ego aside in order to heal the planet and ourselves. Everything outside of us, including established institutions and processes are secondary, or simply not relevent at all. The question is US.

We must get past fighting in the schoolyard.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

I'm one of the people who thinks we can all work together and people get very mad at me for saying that. Like Rodney King said, "Can't we all just get along?"

I can't help, but respect, the positions of both the anarchists, who want to stay true to the Occupy message (I actually would stand with them above all others, IF I had to choose) and the folks who want to work within the system.

Who are the realists and who are the idealists? I think both groups are both. But, we can and should march toward the same goals as together as possible.

[-] 5 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

yes both are realist & idealist, and yes we should try to purther both goals. Well said. It may seem contradictory but with an election upon us we should be pressuring all candidates for campaign changes that might allow for non party candidates to have some chance of winning in the duopoly in the future. We should also pressure all candidates for the economic changes that might benefit the 99%. And we should not pretend that both parties are the same. it isn't true. We will lose supporters if we push this line.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

You are a reasonable person, VQkag. Keep in mind the ultimate, long term goals of Occupy, they are of the utmost importance.

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

What would that be? real representation for the 99%?. economic justice for the 99%?. breaking the grip of the plutocracy?. eliminating the duopoly of the corrupt bought and sold party system? I'm with all that. If that is the long term goals. Please correct and add.

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

That would be a society that has an over-haul to it's ethos which would bring about great political and economic change moving toward a participatory democracy and an economy where the means of production are controlled by the people.

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Ok. succinct. I'm cool wit' dat. I got dat ethos myself already. we must spread it like a virus.

[-] 1 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Thanks. It's not easy to articulate, but we need big, big changes to our society.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Profound, radical, widescale, fundamental. It is awesome to consider. frightful even. But with patience and cooperation it can happen. by peaceful and inclusive means we can get there.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Yes! Let's all stick together so we can make this happen. I really believe that, ultimately, that is what all the good folks on this forum want.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

yes. Agreed

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Yes, let's not get caught up in the secondary question of how to achieve our ends when we agree regarding the ends we want to achieve. That's counter-productive and foolhardy. What matters is that we all remain active in our respective methods and do not turn on one another. That is far the more important issue. We must be united.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

agreed

[-] -3 points by llllIlllllllllllllllllllllllll (-44) 2 years ago

I believe anarchists want direct democracy, I prefer retaining the institutions of democracy. I think that. in the end, is a distinction without much of a difference.

This is your big mistake that betrays your misunderstanding of the situation. There's a huge difference between a representation republic and anarchy organized with general assemblies on each street corner. The fact that you can't see this speaks volumes about your understanding of politics.

[+] -4 points by llllIlllllllllllllllllllllllll (-44) 2 years ago

But, you don't agree with the ends. Anarchists want to create a revolution and topple the government (that's why they do not want to play into politics), while you want to create a reform only (I assume you don't want to overthrow the representative republic). These are two very different goals. Very different.

[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I believe anarchists want direct democracy, I prefer retaining the institutions of democracy. I think that, in the end, is a distinction without much of a difference. So if we keep our eyes in the outcome (a reformed democracy) then the means are secondary. But we need to all be careful of those who have their own personal agenda, because that is the potentually fatal equasion for the movement.

Once it becomes about egos, turf-fighting, and using process as a means to divide and build fifedoms the movement is finished. Fortunately, I'm not worried about that very much because the movement now has an impetus that can overrun such schemes.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Really, you were just blaming the anarchists for all our problems. So you don't like anarchists and you don't like those who want to reform representative democracy. Who do you believe in, the 1%? Are you on their payroll, or are you just some twisted fuck who only believes in himself?

I'm inclined to believe the latter. But you know what, I don't really give a damn.

[Removed]

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

Are you an anarcho-syndicalist? I thought you were more of a traditional progressive.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I don't think I am an anarcho-syndicalist. I consider myself a progressive.

[-] -3 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

But you agreed above with beautifulworld above. Her descritpion is that of an anarcho-syndicalist society.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

How about that. Does that one agreement make me Anrcho-syndicalist? Is it that simple.? C'mon. nothing could be that simple.. Are you trying to convince I am something I am not?. I have no interest in the label you are throwing around. I like participatory democracy, I think we can get there. I like the public controlling the means of production (the 1% have screwed it up royally) Maybe not all means, maybe some, Don't know. DON'T CARE!. You discuss labels. I prefer issues.

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

I'm not trying to label you. It's just a word. We use words to communicate. Don't get bent up about it. I'm certainly not trying to convince you of anything. Just asking the question is all. Yes, it is simple. It's not complicated. beautifulworld describes anarcho-syndicalism.

ok issue: participatory democracy. What do you have in mind? Do you prefer a representative system or a more direct democracy system?

'public controlling the means of production' - I think was already have that. Most stock is held by the general public. As opposed to the State (which would be communism). As opposed to workers controlling their own means of production (which would be socialist or syndicalism).

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Name calling. schoolyard bully tactics like your candidate Romney. You cannot stop this movement with immature intimidation. We are stronger than that, Bigger than you and your accomplices. we are the 99%! We are legion! You will be assimiliated. Support OWS. Vote out pro 1% politicians

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

I'll be assimilated? wtf?!! You are crazy. Get some help.

[+] -4 points by 67192206161 (-56) 2 years ago

You have posted this dozens if not hundreds of times, VQkag. Rest now...

"No meds. Just high on the truth. You have obfuscated much of what I've posted. I don't have to "know" everything. I like not knowing. I like not caring about some things. I don't mind contradicting some statements."

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-reality-of-power-and-the-necessity-of-idealism/#comment-746558

Thanks for admitting what we all knew, VQkag. Time to go back to your room now...

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

And once again you resort to schoolyard name calling. Obviously your arguments are too weak for civil conversation. I'm gonna stay focused on the issues. Like taxes. vote out pro norquist, anti buffet rule politicians! I guess you disagree.

[+] -4 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Your bumper sticker slogans and schizophrenic ramblings are too weak for civil conversation. But go ahead and agree with everything and anything and contradictory things. If that's what you think is helpful.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I have numerous people helping me. We call it Occupy Wall Street! We call ourselves the 99%. You should stop standing against us. If you don't stand behind us you're in our f'n way.

[Removed]

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Thats it.? I win? You give up? name calling is the measure of losing so. You got nothin huh? Oh well . Support OWS. Vote out pro citizens united politicians.

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

Sure, Mr. Bumper Sticker Schizophrenic Person. You win.

Can't argue with crazy.

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Anythng that would help the 99%. What do YOU care about? Take stand! speak up! come out from behind all the labels. Do You support OWS?

[-] -3 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

'Do I support OWS?' Whether it's yes, no or maybe so, does it matter? I prefer to discuss the issues. Unless you wish to label me a supporter or non?

You've seen earlier today, on the other thread, one of the things I care about. I care about the damaging effects of neo-liberal policies. For which you implied I must be 'conservative' (label user!). Which made no sense.

You - on the other hand, say,

"Anything that would help the 99%' - Do you really mean anything? Anything at all? Anarcho-syndicalists believe we should end our form of government in favor of direct democracy. That this would be helpful to the 99%. So since you support 'anything', that must mean that you support this.

What do you care about? You implied above that you support anarcho-syndicalism. Then you imply no. Then you implied yes again, in that you like 'participatory' democracy. Then you said 'anything'. Which is it? Take a stand and speak up.

'Public controlling the means of production' - first you say maybe, then you say you 'don't know' and 'don't care'. Do you really mean 'public' (which means public stockholders, publicly owned companies - we already have this). Or did you mean 'people', as in beautifulworld's idea, (anarcho-syndicalism) where 'workers' control the means of production. How can you have a conversation and discuss issues if you 'don't know' about some of these things and 'don't care'?

You say you support 'anything'. But you seem to be supporting everything. Progressive, radical, neo-lib, anarcho. Which is it? Those are much different things.

Maybe you are the one that should take a stand. And decide what you're talking about and what you really believe in. Instead of anything and everything, 'don't know', 'don't care'. Which is essentially nothing much. You sound very confused. Are you on any kind of medication?

[Deleted]

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

lol. ok. Just so we're clear on that. You don't know what you're talking about, you don't care and you don't mind contradicting yourself. Maybe you need some medication. Sounds schizophrenic.

Schizophrenia : 2) contradictory or antagonistic qualities or attitudes.

Get some help.

[+] -5 points by 67192206161 (-56) 2 years ago

At least 80% of your posts contain political labels, VQkag, so why do you attack others for using them as well? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, is it not? Or do you prefer double standards?

[-] 5 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

You want to get rid of pro gay politicians? That sounds homophobic. Once again you have shown your true colors and taken another republican position. Its ok. It must feel good to get it off your chest. Gay people are just like you and I. they are mainly 99%'rs who have been victimized by the 1%. Support OWS. Vote out pro 1% politicians.

[Removed]

[-] 5 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

How can I learn if I think "I know" everything?. contradictions happen. I learn by my mistakes. I don't mind. these are complicated things. Perhaps you are perfect. At least I don't threaten people, and resort to bully tactics like you and your candidate Romney. I'll stay with issues.... like gay rights. Support OWS. Vote out anti gay politicians. Yes/? No? Where do you stand on that one.?

[-] 0 points by caroga (0) 2 years ago

At least I don't threaten people, and resort to bully tactics like you and your candidate Romney.

http://pastebin.com/9bLFYdFZ

[Removed]

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Don't need meds. And wouldn't take advice from anyone who is anti gay or anti any group. I am for the 99% I support OWS and agitate for issues that help the 99%. vote out pro 1% politicians

[Removed]

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I win! You give up! We are the 99%. We are legion. You will be assimilated. Support OWS. vote out pro thrasy politicians.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

LOL - just can't help but slap the sorry bastard after awhile - Hey?

[Removed]

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Norquist politicians are the fools who signed that ridiculous pledge to not ever raise taxes. each citizen must check there own representatives record/position on this. I can't and won't do that for them. And each voter must decide if they agree with the norquist pledge. You probably don't mind since you have taken issue with my plea. Doesn't that make you republican?. not that theres anything wrong with that!

[+] -5 points by 67192206161 (-56) 2 years ago

Me? A Republican? Not if you held a gun to my head. Me? A Democrat? Not if you held a gun to my head. That explains me. And thanks for explaining you, VQkag. Good luck with your treatment:

"No meds. Just high on the truth. You have obfuscated much of what I've posted. I don't have to "know" everything. I like not knowing. I like not caring about some things. I don't mind contradicting some statements."

http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-reality-of-power-and-the-necessity-of-idealism/#comment-746558

Thanks for admitting what we all knew, VQkag. Time to go back to your room now...

[-] 4 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

I use "politicians" since you threatened to attack me remember? Your assumptions that republicans are on one side I suppose is a good measure of who is against the 99%. I will let other people decide. I avoid the party affiliation. I focus on the issues like immigration. Vote out anti immigrant politicians. Does that mean repubs?. You decide.

[+] -4 points by 67192206161 (-56) 2 years ago

You seem to forget that your posts and mine are available to all, VQkag. I am not partisan, as I know both Democrats and Republicans answer to the same global elite. Can you prove otherwise? Of course not.

I focus on what unites us. You focus on what divides us. And which party you are here to promote is obvious to most. God help the rest...

[-] 3 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

You don't focus on what unites us. HA! You threaten, call names, use schoolyard bully tactics and never talk about issues that affect the 99%. How do you figure that focuses on issues?....... Like energy. Support OWS. vote out climate change denying, anti alternative energy politicians.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

What labels am I using.? I prefer issues. Don't you? anarchists, neoliberals, conservetives, democrats, republicans, syndicalists, communists. socialists, I don't even want to know what they mean. Just give me an issue I'll tell you how we should resolve it to benefit the 99%. Discussing these labels, what they mean, is a distraction. No attack. Just an expression of my preference.

[-] -3 points by 67192206161 (-56) 2 years ago

"What labels am I using.?" Please, VQkag, do not insult our intelligence (any more than you always do). The vast majority of your posts assign negative connotations to the "republican" label let yet their "democrat" flip side in the two-party tyranny go free. That mandates another "label": hypocrite.

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

lol. : )

[-] 2 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

How does a society over-haul its ethos, and how did our ethos become so bad? The only answers that I can come up with is by education, and ostracizing people who spew out vitriolic speech. The corrupt corporate owned news media is what got us to this point. While we battled with each other.... they were able to wrest control of our country away from us.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

It's a good question, Odin. I think we're at a watershed period in our history and I think this will take a long time. OWS is not going to succeed at reaching it's objectives overnight.

How do you fix an education system, when truly, folks would rather be at Home Depot re-doing their counter top or at to the mall buying a new outfit than reading a book? People would rather spend time with their children cheering their sporting events than discussing literature or history or philosophy. This is the society we live in. The fixes needed are tremendous. The fact that we are talking about it is a start.

Maybe when folks see what superficial consumerism has wrought they will begin to wake up and develop lives that are much deeper and have much more meaning.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

I agree that we are at a "watershed period in our hiistory," and that we have to choose a new path. I do not have many regrets in life as I know that i have raised three very enlightened daughters who are out there in the world making a positive difference each in their own way. I can only take half credit for that though as they also had a very worldly mom (my ex) who was Zambian born of British parents, and New Zealand raised. Time heals all wounds BW. Anyway she, constantly questioned the American way of life and wondered if we had lost our bearings with the more important things in life. She was truly taken aback by all the waste, and superficiality of American consumerism. I remember that a lot of people viewed her as being cute, and rather naieve. She wasn't. She was just way ahead of her time compared to most Americans, and yes including me too. I must also point out that unlike her parents who benefited from an apartheid regime in Rhodesia, and Zambia, she is not racist at all, as inicated by the half dozen young people from all over the world who stayed with us under different exchange programs throughout the years.

Our kids were not swamped with presents at Christmas, much to their chagrin at the time. Instead we were lucky enough to have traveled abroad with them to several different countries, and they have continued experiencing life on several different continents. We were vindicated by them for their unusual up-bringing lol , as they have told me that they would raise their kids in a very similar way. That was very good to hear.

Throughout our twenty plus years of marriage, i was forced to look at life through different eyes than most people. Add to that a Swedish born dad who was not afraid to take an unpopular stand for what was right (Civil Rights), and a well educated NYC raised mom who didn't have a mean bone in her body, I was truly lucky. All that was a very healthy experience which I realize has had a lot to do with shaping the person I am today. I'll will humbly admit though that I should have read more to my kids, done more reading myself, and that I too from time to time fell into some of the pitfalls of our superficial society.

Did you say that you went to school in Montreal? Was it McGill? That is where my one of my girls went to school. She did quit half way through her third year despite having a good GP average, which was much to my dismay. She did promise me that she would finish school one day, and two weeks ago, she graduated from UAA in Anchorage near the top of her class, and has been accepted in grad school. She is currently on Adak Island, 1,200 miles west of Anchorage doing an anthropology field trip. Unlike Montreal with all the temptations, her idea now of a good weekend is to be holed up in her little place studying. lol I will be leaving for AK in early June to see two of my daughters, and granddaughter. We will be celebrating Midsummer in Denali Park. I am looking forward to it.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Sounds like a truly great life, Odin. Thanks for sharing. It is very important for us all to focus on what is truly important in life and to never lose sight of that. You have raised wonderful kids and had great experiences and look at what you do for Occupy. It's awesome.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Thanks kid.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

In the Renaissance when society had collapsed they turned again to the Greeks, specifically to Plato. Hopefully, this time people won't wait that long. There's always hope that we'll learn from history rather than be forced to repeat it:)

[-] 2 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

I hope we can learn from history, before it is too late.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Yes, so do I.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I know, sad isn't it. It's been hard to spend 40 years as a patriot disgusted with his country, as a democrat disgusted with democracy. Life is paradox, but once we accept this then we can begin the process of regeneration.

Nil Desperatum

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

I've learned that patriotism, love of your country, or your government, or your race, even your family, are all meaningless unless you love justice above them all.

[-] 2 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Yes, it is very sad, when for example the NDAA could be passed with almost no outrage from the people. Throughout most of our history, this could not have happened. Truly we have lost our sense of rage. It's just things have gotten so twisted GK. In our recent history patriotism has been defined as being compliant to a government that was clearly not working in the best interests of the people.

We have a lot going for us in this struggle, I know. On the top of the list is determined, intelligent, mostly young people who have awoken the rest of us. And we have the tools with social media, but we are up against a goliath in the form of a corrupt political, and financial system that has the traditional news media in its corner. They have a lot to lose when we are successful. That is why we must keep the fires of this revolution burning hot, and not get too side-tracked with things that have not worked for us for the past thirty years or more.

The true heroes of this movement are the ones sleeping in churches, assorted flop houses, etc., and eating pizza five times a week, and getting arrested for acts of civil disobedience. The people i know well meet in Union Square Park, appropiately by the Gandhi statue for their weekly meeting, after having went to school or working all day. It is beautiful. It really is, and I have so much respect for them. These are the people, more than anyone else that need our support. If we are going to build a new society, and have a sense of community, this is where we should start.

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

That's what happens when the people Unite and Vote, WE WIN!

That's why the Kings and Cons keep us divided, defeated and ignorant!

http://occupywallst.org/forum/is-ows-a-patty-cake-social-gathering-or-an-active-/

[-] 2 points by VQkag (930) 2 years ago

Agreed.

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

Let's help Wisconsin, the partisan spark that inspired OWS in the first place! Caused by voter discouragement in 2010!!

http://www.alternet.org/story/155624/koch_brothers%27_americans_for_prosperity_goes_all_out_in_wisconsin_recall--and_denies_it!/

[-] -2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I agree with you completely. That is exactly how I feel on all counts.

I just had to make this post because every time I come here I see this growing division, and I really feel that it's simply unnecessary. And it is damned counter productive!

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Agreed 100%, GK.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Thanks BW.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Why the hell are you being botted down? And, Shadz, as well? Shadz is far from a defender of the Democrats, for god's sake, quite the opposite.

[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I think thracy's mad. He seems to throw tantrums. He's been voting me down for a long time. I don't care.

We also have pro Repub. guys here that do it just to sow division, I think.

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

Hell they got almost all my brownie points!! Two copied my username ("...29" and "...lies").

http://occupywallst.org/forum/is-ows-a-patty-cake-social-gathering-or-an-active-/

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Hang around anyway. That's the best way to make the poor little cowards cry.

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

Not my first rodeo.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

LOL

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

When you said mad I thought you meant insane, as generally speaking he has no foundation in reality. Tantrums are to be expected from trashy as he don't get no respect.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

We break the two-party system by first breaking the worst one.! There is no other way, because too many Americans are dog-shit stupid! It's that simple. There is NO OTHER WAY!!!

So let's put off everything else until after the election and get out the vote to vote out the fucking Republicans! If we don't we are going to be part of the fucking pavement that those idiots are goose-stepping on!!!

THIS IS NOT A FUCKING GAME!!!

I'm not addressing this to you shadz, but speaking of venting, you just gave me one hell of a good opportunity to do it!!!


Sorry DKA, this was supposed to be a response to shadz, below.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17837) 2 years ago

I've often said the best way to look at it is vote out anyone who has anything to do with ALEC.

Whatever party they are with, get rid of them and any leftover teabaggers.

That would make for a good nonpartisan start.

Alright, except for the teabaggers, but the shits raised my taxes.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Amazon cut ties with ALEC.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17837) 2 years ago

I saw that. Now it time to cut our ties with the politicians that buy into ALEC.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Got that right every single last one of them.

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

GK you didn't reply to shadz.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Wow, my comments seem to be jumping around, or maybe I'm just getting tired. Thanks.

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

No prob hope it's nothing serious between the two of you.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

No, we get along great! Shadz is one guy that I can disagree with and still get along with. It's one of the things I like about him. I wish there were more like that.

Politics is weird (and yes, this is politics) because practically no one totally agrees with anyone else. That is why it is fairly easy to divide people, and the great thing about being truely commited to democracy. In a democracy you can disagree and still get along. The current crop of Republicans are anti-democratic right-wing radicals. They don't believe in democracy anymore. That is why I am here. They must go. That's called patriotism, but I'm preaching to the band:)

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yes this country has had enough with white collar crime and environmental monsters.

Time and long past time for change.

Power to the PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unite in common cause.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

I didn't think Thrasy was using bots anymore. But, who knows? It doesn't really matter, anyway.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

No, it doesn't.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

Demoncraps & Replicunts ?!!! I fkn H8 'em !! Thanx for the fleeting, temporary but appreciated license to vent ! verum ex absurdo ...

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Anytime.

[Removed]

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Shadz is absolutely not a defender of the Democratic Party. For god's sake, read the threads in this forum. The other people, if defending the Dems, it is because they are trying to be practical. They see that there are nuances between Dems and Reps that can affect the lives of many many real people, such as my Aunt who lives solely on her Social Security check. So quit the nonsense.

[-] -2 points by randy99 (-4) 2 years ago

I can't help you there, sister. I just shared the info.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Yes you can. Provide me the twitter link.

[-] -2 points by randy99 (-4) 2 years ago

It was posted here before but somebody deleted it. I don't know if it was the poster or the moderators.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Hmmm. Well I tell you, just because you read something here or on twitter doesn't make it true. I'll google it.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

I came up with a moniker of "watchingfrogsboil" when I google "twitter" along with all of those names. So, I'd say that's our guy. I recall seeing that moniker here before. Hmmmm. Now, who could that be?

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (34907) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

The forum site has turned off the collapse comment feature. So at least the down vote attacker (s) wont be collapsing comments and threads anymore.

[-] -2 points by randy99 (-4) 2 years ago

Based on my reading of some of their postings, the list of offenders looks pretty accurate to me. And I haven't seen any of them posting denials.

[-] 3 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Poster beautifulworld is also open-minded enough to understand WHY the good people on this forum do what they do. I don't have to necessarily agree with people 100% to understand that they have principled reasons for doing what they do. YOU, on the other hand, operate with a closed mind full of hubris.

[-] 3 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

"Tag Team Trashy Bot" &/or 'IronButtBruise Bot' ;

It really matters not a jot !

Rabid Reactionary Running Dogs that they are

They may be taken outside & .... !!

Which Archipelago will go first ?

Philippines, Indonesia or The Emerald Isles ?

Who'll do their best & who their worst ?

Who'll leave frowning & who with smiles ?

~*~

ab absurdum(b) ...

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

Shadz being on the list is completely wrong and open your mind as to why the others do what they do. They are not evil people.

[Removed]

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

EGO is the will between base instinct and social rules

[+] -7 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

Team Trashy ? verb. sat. sap. ...

[-] -1 points by beautifulworld (21346) 2 years ago

LOL

[+] -8 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Tag Team Trashy?

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

so couldnt get away could ya

[-] -2 points by llIlllllllllllllllllllllllllll (4) 2 years ago

This text is dishonest. It passes itself off as being an objective academic work, when in fact it's an entirely subject and biased piece based on a flawed dichotomy, in a word - propaganda.

Who says your group which wants to co-opt OWS and prone the political approach are realists, while the anarcho-syndicalists who started OWS are idealists? You offer no arguments to show this, and many arguments point to the contrary. OWS made the decision to be an apolitical protest for a reason. They claim the government cannot be fixed from within. You completely ignore this argument. If they are right, then they are the realists and your group are the idealists trying to fix a broken system with the same old flawed methods.

Further, the dichotomy of realists vs idealists is false and tainted with subjective pejoratives. A realist sounds positive, while an idealist sounds negative. It points to the idea that the idealist can never achieve anything, but the realist can. A type of doer vs dreamer dichotomy. In practice, nothing is ever so simple and this is why your whole article is flawed and useless. The anarchists have done a lot already. They have managed to start one of the biggest protests this century. That is very real.

In addition, the dichotomy is flawed because something can be real and ideal at the same time. It's not either/or like your false dichotomy implies. In a true dichotomy, both sides can never be true at once, i.e. something cannot be at once black and at once white. When both are mixed, we get grey. Black/White is a true dichotomy.

An anarchist could easily write the absolute opposite of what you wrote; that is, the anarchists as the realists and your group as the idealists. That alone points to how flawed your article is.

If you want your article to have real worth, if you don't want it to read like a lame piece of propaganda from the pro political camp, you'll have to provide strong arguments as to why you see the anarchists as being idealists and your group as being realists. You'll also have to provide some arguments as to why you think we should consider the dichotomy of idealists vs realists as having any worth.

Now, may I ask - If OWS, an apolitical protest, is not the type of protest you can support at this time, why do you simply not start a political protest of your own instead of trying to co-opt OWS into the political protest you claim would be better suited to attack the current problems in America?

And, please, try to use arguments to defend your position (That is, if you are serious about your text). I say this because I have often seen you backhand those you disagree with by calling them trolls instead of confronting their arguments straight on like a man. It would be sad if you did this this time for I believe my arguments are quite strong and it would only give me credit if you aren't able to counter-argue, but are only able to cast ad hominem.

Your friend, the seeker of truth, Thrasymaque

P.S. My new forum username is designed to be sockable. If you want to bash me with lame insults, first respond with strong arguments, then create a sock puppet using the i/l trick and you can put words in my mouth like never before.

P.S.S. I'll add that your text is overly romantic, especially the last line. If you want to write an academic text, please stay away from such grandeur of emotions. Did you ever study at university? You should learn a few things about writing essays, and about being objective.

[-] 3 points by shooz (17837) 2 years ago

I agree with this article and I have no problem with this forum attempting to make it so.......

You may hate me, but I don't hate you despite your propensity for cowardice.

http://occupiedmedia.us/2012/05/a-few-good-democrats-are-not-enough/

You have done nothing but destroy truth.

You wouldn't know what it was if it bit you like snake.

So Mr. former botman. why don't you put your skills to work to help rather than divide?

Progressives have supported OWS since it began, they have the only press that still does.

Will you really throw us out with the bath water?

Or will you show enough chops to co-opt us?

I realized many months ago that this forum will never co-opt OWS, yet the current bot runners seem to think so.

And they are pure cowards.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by llIlllllllllllllllllllllllllll (4) 2 years ago

I am not using bots, someone else is. You are the one dropping lies like an American bomber drops bombs, not me. I provided strong arguments in the text above. I believe people trying to turn OWS into a political protest is a big problem.

[-] 2 points by shooz (17837) 2 years ago

I'm not dropping any bombs, you are.

You love the cowardice that bots and sock puppets allow you.

Tyranny I say that is!!

You endorse the bot use...................\

Tyranny I say!!!

Plus you also were cowardly enough not to read, or comment on the article provided.

An article published in The Occupied WallSteet Journal.

I like and trust that source better than your rhetoric.

If you're such a great programer?

Stop the bots.

Like or not OWS is and has been political from the start.

Or are you in denial there too?

[-] -3 points by llIlllllllllllllllllllllllllll (4) 2 years ago

Again, I am not using bots, someone else is. You can confirm this with jart. Unless you have evidence for your claims, you are simply another lying conspiracy theorist.

OWS is not a political protest. The fact that you don't understand this speaks volumes. Read the first page it clearly states - "We don't need Wall Street and we don't need politicians." If OWS was a political protest it would make political demands, and have candidates or support one of the existing parties. It does not. It is ANARCHISTIC. It wants to overthrow the government, not work with it.

You are the one in denial my friend. That, or you simply haven't read much about OWS.

Why don't you ask jart if this is a political protest. You might find her answer surprising.

Man, you're like a theist at an atheist meeting trying to convince the atheists that their meeting is about God.

If you're such a great programer? Stop the bots.

I could if I had access to the site's database and server. I don't because I'm not one of the site's founders. Stopping bots is not that hard, you need to write scripts that analyze how fast actions on the site are being taken. Bots work much faster than humans, so you can tell them apart from their speed. Unless of course, the programmers are smart enough to make the bot purposefully slow so that it imitates a human. My bots were like this.

[-] 4 points by shooz (17837) 2 years ago

You are an admitted conspiracy theorist.

I never said that.

I said you did use them and that's cowardly

You ignored most of what I said and repeated yourself. That makes you a spammer too.

I said you support bot usage.

I said you support sock puppets.

I also said that's the work of cowards.

I still believe that's true.

I guess you're not such a great programmer after all.

You're just a coward.

You still didn't read the article.

[+] -5 points by llIlllllllllllllllllllllllllll (4) 2 years ago

I said you did use them and that's cowardly.

That should read, you did use them and that WAS cowardly.

I said you support bot usage.

I certain cases yes, just like I support civil disobedience in protests in certain cases.

I said you support sock puppets.

I do for a clear reason. I believe posts should not be judged by the proposer, but by their arguments. My goal is to use so many sock puppets that people are forced to attack the arguments because they no longer know who the proposer is (which should never matter anyhow).

I guess you're not such a great programmer after all.

I never claimed I was.

[-] 4 points by shooz (17837) 2 years ago

Now you want to be the grammar police too?

You still ignore the article.

You are a coward, and a liar..

Nothing more

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

I automated physics lab and create a program that could be extended by module

with clear instructions describing each step of the program and how it worked

so the program could run after I left


Finn gLee

"When the students no longer need you, you've done your job as a teacher"

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Bullshit

[-] 0 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Bullshit

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Just can't resist the temptation to vote yourself up and others down with your sock puppets can you.

Pathetic.

[-] -3 points by llllllllllllIllllllllllllllll (-32) 2 years ago

I don't vote myself up GypsyKing. Others do. Not everyone disagrees with my comments, and if you read this particular one you would see that it raises very strong arguments, arguments you have failed to counter-argue. The only thing you can do is use ad hominem, and that is because you are desperate. If you had counter-arguments, you would write them down for all to see.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

It must be tough juggling so many invented personalities. I think you need to take a break.

[-] -3 points by llllllllllllIllllllllllllllll (-32) 2 years ago

Troll tactic #1 - ad hominem instead of a proper discourse.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Well, one of us is getting desperate anyway. Christ, you do go on for someone who has said this forum is irrelevent.

[-] -3 points by llllllllllllIllllllllllllllll (-32) 2 years ago

Troll tactic #1 - ad hominem instead of a proper discourse.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Bullshit

[+] -4 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

An interesting post, reading which nevertheless invoked the memory of the appended article, by way of context and realisation of exactly what is at stake at this time and how & why OWS exists :

multum in parvo ...

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (18071) 2 years ago

Further to your Video, an article :

e tenebis lux ...

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Thanks, that was great!

[+] -5 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

That was a VERY good post.

[+] -6 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Yes, the issues we are fighting transcend and must transcend all this stupid fighting over process. That isn't what matters, what matters is the transformation we must get past our egos to achieve:)