Forum Post: Think Carefully - Is this what you want?
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 20, 2011, 10:04 a.m. EST by sowhatareyougoingtodoaboutit
(95)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
If OWS obtains what many of its supporters are clamoring for, then we will have gotten rid of this current government and be in a full fledged revolution and possible civil war this time next year.
Is this what you want?
If it is, go ahead. I won't stand in your way.
But do you realize how drastically different your life may turn out to be? What if the revolution fails and the government wins? What if the government then started making stricter policies to hold down the rebels, therefore stealing away our American rights to free speech and press?
What if the side OWS was on won? What if they couldn't muster up a strong enough leader or an effective government? What if that led the way for a radical similar to Hitler, someone who would completely throw away all the American ideals?
What if then, to counteract either of those theoretical options, there was more violence and dissent?
Is this still what you want?
Many of you are calling for the resignation of the president and for the overthrowing of the government. Many of you should think about the freedoms you would lose in the process and the violence and hardships you would gain in the process.
Is this still what you want?
I've read several 'lists', none of them promote a dissolution of our current government, all of them promote such things as reinstatement of Glass/Steagall, campaign finance reform, (some promote) term limits.
I do think there are so many speaking that the ones we do hear are the ones that have the least support, because they are the most radical.
People gravitate toward 'bad news', while 'good news' might be nice, it's boring after a short while. So like the bad news/good news example, we may hear and read of the less drastic, we tend to remember the truly drastic.
[Removed]
and the alternative.. submit to america becoming a third world country? you think that would be any different?
You can not be serious when you describe the US as something similar to a third world country.
Do you know what a third world country is?
yes i do.. it is not currently a third world country.. but it will become one in the near future if nothing is changed. your grandkids will be living in a third world country that you do not recognize.
R u serious?
you disagree?
Yes ... Wholeheartedly
Thank you for that FOX news update, Mr. Strawman!
Is a legitimate government too much to ask for?
1.General Assembly{Community, State, National } 2.Referendums on Key issues 3.Return to Gold bscked currency 4.Cancel the Debt, public and private, Fake Money, Fake Debt..
By your logic, those people being set upon by the 1960's terorist Bull Connor and his police dogs, fire hoses and tanks in Birmingham should have just dealt with the status quo of beatings, un-punished crimes and segregation b/c when they started fighting those protesters ran the risk of things getting worse before they got better. In Birmingham, things did get MUCH WORSE before they got better-- Freedom Riders, Boycotters, even children were beaten, abused and even died to change the status quo of inequality. So if the real question here is "If change is what you want are you sure you are willing to do what it takes to cause change?" My answer is an emphatic "Yes."
Change that would include the restructuring of the current government and lead to aforementioned hardships for all?
So you're pretty much saying this...
You are willing to give up: free speech and press, the right to freely own a business without government interference, the right to decision making, relatively lower taxes to what would come out of an OWS government, and pretty much capitalism as we know it.
You are willing to give up all this for...communism?
http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=aa58
Here is a link to the history of communism, or the system of economics you want America to follow.
The current system is oppressive and drains the life blood from everyone. So let me think...do you let a bully beat on you because he will just beat you more if you resist? I think not. Bring on no internet and dissent.
AGREED.
Reply if you agree.
It's times like these that I keep remember this ol'addage "If you want peace, then prepare for war!"
[Removed]
What if we put the corruption in check and get rid of the puppet politicians, taking their marching orders from Wall St lobbyist? What if we succeed in reshaping our government in a way that it represents the actual people of this country and not just the "People Inc."?
The purpose of the revolution as demanded by OWS & Karl Marx is to create the chaos through which the Marxists can rise to power & usher in the "Workers' Paradise". This way we too can experience the wonderful "Workers' Paradises" of Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, China, Soviet Union. Places SO wonderful you are shot or worse if you try to leave.
Do I have it about right, Comrade?
Nonsense.
you will never get rid of corruption.
That doesn't appear to be what OWS wants at all as they all but ignore DC and go after select targets that cannot make laws to end the corruption; rather, OWS goes after those that take advantage of the laws DC writes. It is like going after the drug user over the drug dealer. It might make for good press, but doesn't really change anything in the end.
The drug is campaign/lobbying cash, who's dealing it?
You cannot stop lobbyists until you make it illegal. This means that you cannot stop the cash until you get government to enact campaign reforms. I can offer you a cigarette but if you don't smoke you will have no need for it.
I see the drug as the laws, trade deals and regulations that favor the multinational corporations over US interests and DC is the supplier/distributor selling these incentives to the multinationals.
"Its like going after the drug user over the drug dealer". Very good point, I haven't thought of it this way exactly but I agree. The financial sector and corporations cannot do what they do without government complicity.
Oh, please--if a homeowner doesn't install an alarm system, and his home is burglarized, who do you arrest--the homeowner or the burglar? Laws don't stop crime, nor do they stop corruption--they merely dictate what's legal and what's not. If the laws aren't enforced--and that's exactly what you're advocating when you tell people to leave the lawbreakers alone and to go after the lawmakers--then crime and corruption carries on unabated. Furthermore, if the lawmakers actually DID pass draconian securities laws, you would be the FIRST person to complain that such laws were "bad for business." The bottom line is, you want Wall Street and big business to be left alone, at all costs....
Didn't you hear what Obama has said? He said that what wall st. had done may have been immoral but it was not 'ILLEGAL! It is deregulation that has allowed what was previously prohibited behaviour to become the status quo. So you do have to go to the law makers before you can go after those on wall st. as law breakers.
I couldn't care less what Barack Obama has to say! The president of the United States doesn't decide who gets prosecuted and who doesn't--the Justice Department does. And I hate to break it to Barack Obama, but PLENTY of what Wall Street has done over the last decade has been illegal, regardless of how much he may want to paper it over. Give me a break....
And what does the Justice Department have to prosecute on if what they had done isn't illegal? Again you need the laws before you can prosecute and since deregulation much of what was done was not illegal. Indicate what laws they broke, go ahead and knock yourself out. They tried to bring charges against Goldman Sachs and the case was dismissed. Where do you want to go from there?
lol....You can't debate against that level of intelligence.
This is why OWS exists--to take such matters into our own hands.
And how do you expect that to happen without the rule of law being dispensed from the Justice Department? In other words, how are you to bring those responsible to justice if the laws are not there to convict them?
Well, the politicians do whatever they have to to get paid, while the Wall street Lobbyist will pay whatever is necessary to get what they need done.
It's similar to prostitution. Like any good cop will tell you, go after the client and the prostitute is out of business. But if you go after the prostitute (shady politicians) the client (Wall St. lobbyist) will simply find the next politician to entice into prostitution, and pay to do…whatever. Simple.
Going after drug users and illegal aliens haven't stopped the those problems. Going after those that sell what others want get the best results. Stopping those that make the actions of the banks and corporations legal is what is needed. Wall Street will never change their ways knowing that DC has their back. The bail outs proved that. They can run a firm into the ground, steal money and literally destroy the economy, but hey, no harm, no foul, Uncle Sam will be there to fix it while screwing us all over. Wall Street only takes advantage of the system DC has put into place to favor DC. That is where the corruption starts and only there can it end.
"Going after those that sell what others want get the best results."
You are right. And in the relationship between Wall St. and Washington, and this is a very important concept to understand.
MONEY is the drug and INFLUENCE is the currency.
Wall street generates illicit MONEY, like drug dealers generate crack. The addicts (politicians) have influence and power, they would trade that influence for MONEY quicker than a crack fein would rob his own mother.
Getting rid of the Supplier, gets rid of the Addict.
Power is the drug. Economic power (money) is only equitable to political power (the legal use of force and/or coercion) because of the commerce clause, which grants to congress absolute power over commerce. Get rid of the commerce clause and you get rid of the incentive to purchase a legislator. Economic power will no longer be equitable to political power. Get rid of the government's ability to regulate the value of currency and you're left with currency which must be backed by and exchangeable for actual goods. This gets rid of (legally) illicit currency. Add a clause stating the sole purpose of government as the protection of individual rights and you take away the supreme court's power to violate individual rights. Add a clause explicitly declaring the right to life and you secure the foundation of ALL rights. This is the platform I would like to see a candidate for ANY government position run under.
You state that "Power is the drug", in my previous simile? I maintain that MONEY is the drug, the product, that in which Wall St. conjures up in Derivative fashion, by the TRILLIONS. This is what the politicians are addicted to, and trade influence to get, the endless river of cash. YES, there are other industries where the addicted politicians can get a quick money fix, tobacco, oil. And yes, politicians high on tobacco and oil profits will write laws that will do us harm. But those Washington crack addicts tweaking on Wall Street cash will bankrupt us all.
Who needs power when money will buy you all the power you will ever need?
Do you understand why corporations buy legislators? It is for the power of those legislators. It is for the power of the commerce clause; the absolute control over commerce. Everybody needs (what) money (is supposed to represent). There are those who earn their money and those who do not. The latter category consists of people who peddle political influence in exchange for cash. The cash wouldn't be there if the power weren't there.
You will NEVER have politicians in the most powerful country on the planet who are not powerful, that power will never be taken away, it exist in the ability to allocate trillions of dollars annually and pass (or not pass) legislation that directly or indirectly effects how business is conducted. This function of government is the "Power". The power to regulate business is what ALL lobbyist seek.
You can't change the basic function of government, but you can change how that power is bartered and sold. Again this will have to happen on the side of the lobbyist, Why, you can't diminish the power that is intrinsic in the very basic function of government. You can and very easily stop lobbyist from influencing how that power is implemented by STOPPING the river of cash (in this case) from Wall Street flowing in.
Regulation of activities required in order to live as a human being is not a basic function of government; it is a basic function of criminals running a protection racket. Government is, by definition, the organized use of force and/or coercion. The point of the constitution was (on the surface) the establishment of a government of limited power. The power over the lives of others is not a legitimate use of force and should not be a power granted to government. You can stop lobbyists from legally influencing government. But the problem is not that one person or another is using that power. It's that the power exists. Since it exists, whoever can use it will use it. If it continues to exist, lobbyists will move out of the lobbies and into the congress directly.
I am glad you realize this. Few do. I advocate the abolition of the commerce clause, as it is the incentive for corporate control of government.
Hell, you could repeal the 17th Amendment as well since that opened the Senate to outside corruption. When the Senate was selected by the state legislatures, there was no need for political contributions from entities outside of their home states and much less incentive to pass laws that didn't benefit their home states.
Yes, that would help. But what would cut off the problem at the source is the abolition of the commerce clause. Without that, there's no incentive for corporations to control government.
If the commerce clause was enforced as intended, it would be fine, but ever since Wickard v. Filburn (1942), the government has been give carte blanche to run wild controlling economic activity in the US. I don't get it, the Federalist Papers detail what the governments authority is in the Constitution in a plain manner, but the SCOTUS seem to ignore those essay's as they would limit their ability to inflict their partisan goals on the US.
Sounds like you do get it :)
Also, in Lopez vs. United states (1995) the SCOTUS ruled that congress had the power to regulate 'channels' of commerce, 'people and things' which moved in those channels, and things which 'significantly' affect commerce. No definitions were given for these terms, of course.
Furthermore, I don't think that government (which is, by nature, the organized use of force and coercion) should be involved in free trade. The aspect of force negates the aspect of freedom. If there is no free trade, there is no economic freedom. If there is no economic freedom, there is no freedom. Your ability to provide for yourself is determined by the edicts of government, rather than your own ability.
Dude this is a freaking moron's daydream from it's outhouse loading up on bunk weed and 20 year old Playboys - Is this you not getting a life? Yep!
peace
AtromicZ...
No, this is what I want:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/make-a-stand-join-the-clan/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
Once the transportation of food is shut down, which it would under any time of massive civil insurrection, you would have all out chaos. Violence and looting would occur all over the country, and people would start getting shot at a very high rate. Glad i am armed with lots of ammo and live on an Island i can defend. And fish and water are plentiful.
to poster: no transition regarding these matters will be smooth.. it is up to each individual to decide whether or not they are focusing on short-term localized solutions where the only major player is one's self... or the long-term goals of making the world a more stable place for everyone. It is obvious you will not trade your short-term freedoms for long-term justice. You are afraid of the necessary actions that must be made.
OWS. Here's the plan: SHMITA (מיטה), in the Year of the Jubilee, as referenced in the Torah; Relieve all debt, neither purchase nor sell any product of service for one year and let the poor have free access to food. All old contracts are void, any new contracts shall not be made until after one year of rest and any new agreements made after the sabbatical year shall only be valid for six years. Simple economics. God as the economist. Look it up
Awesome! I love theocracies almost as much as I love communist, totalitarian, authoritarian, dictatorship regimes!
That was sarcasm.
Relieving debts won't solve the problem, idiot. The honest people who trusted those they lent their money to will just lose money.
And this seems just about right that poor, uneducated people would be looking to "God" at a time like this.
People like you are why we have laws in place forbidding the church and state as one entity.
Go read your Torah and think about what you actually just said. You are pressing for the destruction of all modern industry and wanting to go back to a time in history where people didn't have any of the freedoms we have today.
Now that I know who you don't like, Who do you love? Your cards where shown with this quote, "You are pressing for the destruction of all modern industry." Yep.
"Relieve all debt, neither purchase nor sell any product of service for one year and let the poor have free access to food."
Buddy, they're your words, not mine.
[Removed]
What kind of life are we going to have after the global financial cartel collapses the economy again, after the internet is shutdown under government control (SOPA), after Israel and the US nuke Iran, after the seas are fished empty and the planet polluted beyond habitability?
Is that what you want?
So you are advocating for the destruction of this country and its ideals in the process?
Great, I'm going to love communism.
You won't get communism, you'll end up with fascism.
Hmmmm, when did that happen again? I must have missed that part.
It hasn't happened - but will when OWS gets what it wants.
Look at their list of grievances and tell me how all that will be possible without higher taxes and a more centralized government.
And tell me how this current form of government and economic policy is putting you at risk for the following: starvation, violence, rape, repression of the rights to speak, vote, or follow your religion, or genocide.
Capitalism and the form of government we have is to prevent people from all these things. It's doing what I would call a fairly good job.
Are you willing to sacrifice those things because of "corporate greed"?
I agree that the system needs to be somewhat reformed, but I don't agree with the way OWS plans to reform the system.
Think about this: to the rest of the world, America is the 1%.
That's right-It hasn't happened. Could you cut the drama queen act? This isn't destroying the government or capitalism.
How does stopping an illegal foreclosure process harm you? Huh? That is right, it doesn't. If homelessness and what amounts to theft harms your "ideals", then you need your head examined.
How does taking our food out of the hands of Big Agra and putting it back into the hands of our farmers harm you? That's right-it doesn't. So, if supporting your local farmers and helping them/allowing them to grow healthy food harms your "ideals" then you need your head examined.
How does not sending our jobs overseas harm you? That's right-it doesn't. Sending jobs overseas or even an influx of immigrants lowers wages "deliberately" in the United States. If screwing Americans is your "ideal", you need your head examined.
Funny, I don't see a media oligopoly as an American ideal. Why do you?
Let me make myself clear. Capitalism is not to here to prevent people from all of these things. Capitalism does not give a gosh darn. This is why, we the people utilize government to make sure that capitalism doesn't run over people. You know, when they aren't busy being bought and sold for the corporatists.
Go to the homeless tent cities and tell me that it is a "fairly good job". Go to the mentally ill that are homeless and tell me that it is a "fairly good job". Go look at the medicaid divorces and tell me that it is a "fairly good job". Go look at the unemployment rate and tell me that it is a "fairly good job". Go look at the jobs that have been/are being sent over seas and tell me that it is a "fairly good job".
Think about this: this is the god damned United States of North America. Sit up straight and act like it.
[Removed]
[Removed]
[Removed]
They cannot grasp an outcome. This isn't how these people think. It's exactly what the puppet masters have envisioned.
This is no different than the Flatulent Brotherhood during the European black death.