Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: This Movement Needs A Martin Luther King or A Theodore Roosevelt.......How Will You Find Him?

Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 30, 2011, 4:04 p.m. EST by puff6962 (4052)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Great leaders are not chosen, they are bred by impossible circumstances. Lincoln, Churchill, and Martin Luther King were only minor players until their times thrust them into prominence and greatness.

I have written on this subject peripherally, but the Occupy movement needs to begin filtering it's ideas and developing it's talent. Leaders must be vetted and chosen. Ideas must be refined and focused. Most of all, your tools of change must be those that exist in reality.

I cannot stress this enough. Populist and progressive movements ALWAYS fail because they refuse to unite behind a core set of ideas or work towards a shared set of objectives.

Decide on your issues, find your Martin Luther King...or your Theodore Roosevelt.....and work towards meaningful change.

The world needs for you to be successful. If you are squashed, no other movement will spring up for a decade.

If you want inspiration, read TR's "The New Nationalism" speech:


as well as MLK's speech on poverty:




Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by JPB950 (2254) 12 years ago

Not a King, You got plenty of protestors and demonstrators, maybe even a few leaders in spite of the apparent aversion to them. You need a Thurgood Marshall, someone that can use the system to force itself to improve. If you can't get good elected officials behind you or elect your own people you're just making noise.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

The first thing necessary in life is to realize that a problem exists. The next step is to analyze why it exists. Then you move on to possible solutions. Then you gauge the effectiveness of these measures and improve upon the ones that work.

OWS is still at that first step......the sheer amount of noise has prevented any transition to stage 2.

We're running out of time.

[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 12 years ago

I agree, just looking at this forum and the live feeds, interest is dropping. It may be due to the feeling that all of this up to now is just ideas, nothing concrete has been done.

There is a mechanism to get change in this country, it should be used. Up to now it's not even talked about except in terms of how corrupt it is. That system isn't going to go away though. No changes have occurred without some support from the system. That's why I reference Marshall, King made people aware of the civil rights issues, Marshall forced the government to obey it's laws through the courts. It's time, if you have the numbers, use them to vote in good people.

[-] -1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Yes, gasoline requires an engine to produce torque.

[-] 3 points by CrossingtheDivided (357) from Santa Ysabel, CA 12 years ago

Craigslist. . .?

[-] 2 points by jbell78 (152) 12 years ago

hahahaha. win.

[-] 1 points by CrossingtheDivided (357) from Santa Ysabel, CA 12 years ago

Whenever I have an unsolvable problem, or need some money, my friends always say "go to Craigslist" or "put it on Craigslist" . . .it's sort of a running gag, at least with one of them. The rest I think are seriously bad friends.

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Na, Ebay. Lmfao.

[-] 3 points by Frizzle (520) 12 years ago

The world has to many followers already. We don't need another leader that people will blindly follow like mindless sheep. What the world need is stop waiting for people to lead us and start thinking for ourselves.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Agreed, but people tend to get more done when they work together.

[-] 1 points by Frizzle (520) 12 years ago

Yes ofcourse. But that's something different then having a leader.

[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 12 years ago

The bigger a coalition is, the more diverse it is. The flip side of that is that the bigger a coalition gets, the more likely its members are to hold differing or even completely opposite views. The greater that general discord is, the less likely it is that enough people will be able to agree on damn near anything, and in turn the more discordant a movement's followers are the harder it is to mobilize that movement toward concrete systemic action.

Having a leader or a group thereof is the way that you beat that paradigm. You pick a group of however many people you want to run things and make policy decisions on a day-to-day basis, and then you agree to abide by those policy decisions assuming that they fall within reasonable, collectively understood boundaries. You then also include some means of holding your leaders accountable for the cumulative effects of their actions on a regular basis.

You don't even have to call them leaders, or even to centralize the duties of a leader in one group. Just set up a general logistics workgroup responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the protesters and massing large groups of them where necessary. Set up a PR workgroup composed of sober, articulate, clean-cut moderates who are capable of appealing to people fairly far outside our standard political and socioeconomic demographics to convince them to vote for people we trust.

Set up a political workgroup (or in fact affiliate officially with the 99% Declaration) to manage any political campaigns or primary runs attempted in the name of the Occupy movement (including the selection of candidates, but those candidates would need majority approval from the rest of the movement before actually running) that would be responsible for PR efforts, fundraising, and general campaign management. Then just give the finance workgroup a voice in and a position reporting to the logistics workgroup, and there you go.

[-] -1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 12 years ago

Ot would be better than having mindless sheep following other mindless people wouldn't you say?

[-] 2 points by Ettaariane1 (2) 12 years ago

What on earth do you want a 'leader' for. Leaders are an invention of the corrupt 1% you are supposed to be fighting. You need organisation. You need to be doing things in the spirit of the Underground movement in ww2 because this IS a war. I am in England and trying to find any positive and practical things to do for Occupy is like searching for a needle in a haystack. More has to be done than simply 'occupying' . It is great what is being done, it gives hope around the world but it won't be sustainable if practical things are not organised and all we have is retoric and arrests.

[-] 1 points by zoom6000 (430) from St Petersburg, FL 12 years ago

still as eductional platform for millions of american people,they have been told lies and deception by corporate media 24/7 and for the last 60 years.,i give some example what they tell them capitalism it means freedom soicalist it means communist pension it means ponzi scheme i could tell you long long list

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

How do you become organized without people coming together under mutual direction....in smaller groups.....or with some chain of command for the group as a whole.

Read something like the Twelve Traditions of A.A. and you will see a template for a leaderless organization:


  1. Our common welfare should come first; personal recovery depends upon A.A. unity.
  1. For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority—a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern.
  1. The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.
  1. Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or A.A. as a whole.
  1. Each group has but one primary purpose—to carry its message to the alcoholic who still suffers.
  1. An A.A. group ought never endorse, finance, or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property, and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.
  1. Every A.A. group ought to be fully self-supporting, declining outside contributions.
  1. Alcoholics Anonymous should remain forever nonprofessional, but our service centers may employ special workers.
  1. A.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.
  1. Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.
  1. Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio, and films.

  2. Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our Traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 12 years ago

HE will find us, when The Time comes ! Meanwhile, WE must continue to persevere ... fiat lux .. x .

[-] 2 points by blazefire (947) 12 years ago

boo! Quaerendo Invenietis! hehehehe lol

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 12 years ago

bl@ze : lol & Only IF there's time ! With 2012 upon us, we may all be on a trajectory where there is a 'quickening to a reckoning' and with a nod to your moniker ... ignis natura renovatur integra !

[-] 2 points by blazefire (947) 12 years ago

The pheonix! Out of the ashes.... Rebirth is upon us! Ex malo bonum! Heehehehehe! Welcome witness!

[-] 2 points by rickMoss (435) 12 years ago

This movement needs a vision - not a leader. The people need to learn to stand up for themselves. leaders can get corrupted or killed. You can't kill an Idea.

FIGHT THE CAUSE - NOT THE SYMPTOM Read “Common Sense 3.1” at (Http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

It's very easy to kill a good idea. Just discredit it, discredit it's supporters, and reward those who oppose the idea.

Read history, now.

[-] 2 points by thecommonman (63) 12 years ago

The OWS movement is two months old.

it has achieved great success in opening the consciousness of the entire world. the concept of the 99% is already etched into the History Books,

Give it some time, natural leaders will be recognized.

The Lincoln's, King's and Gandhi's did not emerge overnight.

[-] 2 points by JenLynn (692) 12 years ago

Two months old, that's a bit young to claim the success. It's based largely on the young and their attention span isn't the best. You need to get more than awareness of a problem, a move has to be made to get elected officials started making changes. Elect your own or show strength with a voting block. Time for some political effort and success.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

They must.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

There is so little time in a country that has such a short attention span.

[-] 2 points by Thinkdeer (250) 12 years ago

There is plenty of time.

[-] 2 points by WakeUp2011 (12) 12 years ago

We are ALL need to make a difference. It starts with each and every individual that is informed on what's going on and not letting the uneducated quiet our voices. Spreading the truth is crucial to creating the world we want to see. We need to wake up as many people as we can to get real change. Those that don't want to wake up can stay asleep. Keep spreading the word. Here's a start..


Research. Educate. Grow Awareness.

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 12 years ago

Agitate, educate, organise!

[-] 0 points by WakeUp2011 (12) 12 years ago

Agitate... ha ha that's funny... but true

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

The below comment is not from me, please excuse. I'm backtracking this guy and trying to clear up any confusion. Sorry.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

"You're all Winners!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Watch yourself on Seinfeld:


[-] 2 points by Pstonie (4) 12 years ago

It doesn't need a Martin Luther King, it needs so many MLKs that the scum of the earth could never assassinate all of them.

[-] 2 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Too many MLK's means that there is no MLK.

Populist movements always fail because their followers fail to unite behind a core set of views or work towards a shared set of objectives.

When everyone is a chief, nobody wants to be an indian.

[-] 2 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 12 years ago

That's true. Why not get on the chiefs' bandwagon?

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

I think people have had quite enough of being Indian in a war for a chief who promised one thing and delivered the opposite.

And somewhere between the two extremes of a supreme emperor and all chiefs, I suspect there is a ratio that would work quite a lot better than either of the extremes.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Some organization is inevitable.

[-] -1 points by ronjj (-241) 12 years ago

Good luck on that one.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Ya, Beavis and Butthead are no way to run a movement.

[-] 2 points by buphiloman (840) 12 years ago

Yes, look how well being "leader" turned out for Lincoln and Dr. King. And you wonder why no one wants the Job?

Humanity has a uncanny penchant for murdering their revolutionary thinkers.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I think we never become really and genuinely our entire and honest selves until we are dead--and not then until we have been dead years and years. People ought to start dead, and they would be honest so much earlier.

  • Mark Twain
[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 12 years ago

You might note that "humanity" did not murder these revolutionary thinkers and they did not do it while they were in the prime of their leadership role.

The battle had already been won when these events happened and in both cases it was done by the losers, not humanity. Humanity is left to praise their achievements and erect monuments. The losers are dead.

[-] 2 points by buphiloman (840) 12 years ago

WTF? John Wilkes Booth, James Earle Ray, Naturham Godse, Pontius Pilate...all the famous assassins of history....were human. It is a stark fact about humans that we tend to kill our most visionary thinkers.

[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 12 years ago

It is true a MLK for OWS would mean a dead leader I don't want that. We have enough murdered revolutionaries for a lifetime.


[-] 1 points by buphiloman (840) 12 years ago

they were pro-examples of humanity. Learn some logic.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 12 years ago

TEACH me some logic.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

"and there's no reply at all.....there's no reply at all."

[-] 1 points by kayak69 (57) from West Sand Lake, NY 12 years ago

You are right. The organizers of OWS need to take the advise of some of those who commented here. The momentum is decreasing. This leaderless movement now needs leaders. Also, what about The 99% Declaration that has been proposed? Please, Do Something!!! Don't let the voice of the people die. It's too important to the 99%.


[-] 1 points by thomasthetank (41) 12 years ago

How To Organize A Leaderless Movement:

Follow the ideas that have kept A.A. together for 80 years......a bunch of drunks helping other drunks.....without any recognized leadership or spokespersons.

Read the principles guiding their members and you will see the genius that has kept them together.


1.Our common welfare should come first; personal recovery depends upon A.A. unity.

2.For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority—a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern.

  1. The only requirement for A.A. membership is a desire to stop drinking.

  2. Each group should be autonomous except in matters affecting other groups or A.A. as a whole.

  3. Each group has but one primary purpose—to carry its message to the alcoholic who still suffers.

  4. An A.A. group ought never endorse, finance, or lend the A.A. name to any related facility or outside enterprise, lest problems of money, property, and prestige divert us from our primary purpose.

  5. Every A.A. group ought to be fully self-supporting, declining outside contributions.

  6. Alcoholics Anonymous should remain forever nonprofessional, but our service centers may employ special workers.

  7. A.A., as such, ought never be organized; but we may create service boards or committees directly responsible to those they serve.

  8. Alcoholics Anonymous has no opinion on outside issues; hence the A.A. name ought never be drawn into public controversy.

  9. Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio, and films.

  10. Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our Traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 12 years ago

People need to THINK for themselves - haplessly following corrupt leadership put us into this pickle.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Thinking for yourself sometimes engenders the humility necessary for group action.

[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 12 years ago

Agreed ;)

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

unfortunately, group action....almost without equivocation....requires organization and some leadership.

otherwise....group action can simply behave as a mob.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

Populist and progressive movements fail because they get smashed by the cops or co-opted by the Democratic Party. Want a leader? Look in a mirror maybe?

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I'm looking at the man in the mirror......


I hate all of the Michael Jackson themes that I hear from people like you. It's just tiring....and it encourages pedophilia.

Here's another one:


[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

I don't even like Michael Jackson as a performing artist let alone his personal life and I don't see what that has to do with movement building and how we all have to look to ourselves for leadership.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You may not love Michael Jackson, but you are borrowing from his hollow platitudes. Perhaps you have your own kiddy ranch in the back yard too.

Are you allowed to go to public swimming pools.....

You shouldn't be.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

I frankly have no idea what you are talking about. You seem to be alluding to some notion that OWS has something to do with child molestation. I have no idea where that is coming from. I haven't seen anything like that before, even from OWS's most severe critics.

[-] -1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Let it clink around up there a little longer....almost.....almost....almost....

Oh hell, you're being insulted for being a slogan branding little dreamer who just noticed his first pube.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

That's really weird. I have never brandished a slogan anywhere, much less on this thread and I find the sexual inuendo really strange.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Ya, I'm messing with you.

If you want to get Capone, then you have to out-Capone Capone.


This leaderless movement shit is not going to end well.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

We are not a leaderless movement. We are a leaderful movement. Everyone is a leader.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Kumbaya my lord, kumbaya.

A leaderless movement is not a movement.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

WE are not a leaderless movement, That was an unfortunate formulation which is not entirely accurate, More accurately we are a leaderful movement, That is, leadership is contingent and contextual, People step up and assert leadership when and where it is necessary and useful, What is different is that OWS tries to be ego free, It has a long way to go in this regard, but it is most certainly the most ego free movement I have seen in nearly 50 years of activism,

And what does it mean to be a leader anyway and how are leaders chosen? No social movement that I know of had a single leader, most had many, But in a sense, social movements, because they are not organizations, do not have leaders, Organizations have leaders and OWS is not an organization, It is a rather amorphous movement, The only kind of organizational structure that exists at all in OWS are the locally based General Assemblies and the working groups connected to them, The working groups certainly often have identifiable leaders as they are typically initiated by a single person,

The civil rights movement, which I lived through and participated in certainly did not have a single leader, That MLK was its singular leader was a myth that developed after his death, During his lifetime many people in the movement were quite critical of King, Those of us in SNCC and CORE used to refer to him derisively as "De Lawd" Real leadership in the civil rights movement was collective and vested nationally in what was called the "Big 6", the leaders of the NAACP, CORE, SNCC, the SCLC, the Urban League and the Negro American Labor Council and there were dozens, perhaps hundreds of unaffiliated local leaders, a situation not all that different than OWS today, The role of leadership in the student movement of the 1960s was even more defuse and similar to that of OWS, I would defy anyone today to accurately identify a singular leader of the student movement of the 1960s and how is that different from OWS?

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Name ONE leader of the Occupy movement. Name ONE person who has served as a passable spokesperson.

Energy can outstrip planning, and that is the case here.

When winter hits, the number of protesters will drop off and it will be necessary to use some guerrilla tactics.....smaller numbers, clever provocations, and plenty of cameras rolling.

That kind of stuff takes a little forethought. It may be time for each Occupy group to nominate about four or five people to start sorting things out.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

Movements do not have spokespeople, Organizations do, but OWS is not an organization, The closest thing to an organization in OWS are the various local General Assemblies that exist all over the nation, but their is no national coordination of these bodies beyond internet links. When a national action is called by some local GA, other GAs either pick it up or they don't. No staffs are sent around the nation to organize such actions nationally, They either resonate with local communities or they don't,

The fact that there are no identifiable "stars" in OWS that have both nationally recongnized names and in addition have some kind of administrative responsibility in OWS is not necessarily a bad thing, America is very driven by an ego based star mentality whether we are talking about sports, film, rock, politics or even in the academic world, Everybody wants to have a nationally recognized name as a super star and everybody is looking for a nationally recognized name in every field of endeavor, This ego driven tendency is probably stronger in the US than anywhere in the world except perhaps for the personality cults that develop around political figures in totalitarian nations, It is not especially healthy and it is one of he things that OWS is trying to change in our culture, Of course there are a number of media super stars that have identified with OWS like Michael Moore and Noam Chomsky, but these people play absolutely no role in the day to day operations of OWS or any of its decision making processes,

There are people who do that and many of them are very talented but nobody has any permanent administrative position and aad hominem or arguments from authority are very frowned upon in the movement, It is not that OWS is ego free and there have been ego based conflicts, but it is the most ego free movement that America has ever seen compared with anything that has gone before,

Some people on the media team have achieved some celebrity simply by virtue of the fact that they are put or put themselves on streaming cameras from time to time, but they hold no special administrative authority over the movement as a whole.

I do not see any of this as especially problematic and certainly not a lack of leadership, There are plenty of leaders, What there are not are celebrity leaders and there is far too much of that in our culture elsewhere,

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Explain to me how a couple of billionaires were able to help elect 150 congressmen who are now beholden to their apocalyptic view of capitalism?

Organization, objectives, and money.

The three things that OWS lacks.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

Saul Alinsky said that power flows to two poles, those with money and those with people, I don't think a lack of organization is such a crucial problem with OWS at this point and anybody who bothers to spend a day at an occupation or a GA would quickly see that OWS has considerably more organization than press coverage would suggest, What it doesn't have is people (in fact it has more money than people, but of course not nearly enough to seriously compete with the 1%).

But it is a brand new and tiny movement and you are expecting to act like a movement that is considerably larger with years of experience under its belt which is simply not the case, OWS is very very weak and very very tiny, What is astonishing is how fast and how big it has grown is such a short time. Can it keep up that rate of growth? Probably not, Will it therefore disappear? I don't think that is true either, Most economists agree that the crises it is addressing are systemic and not cyclical so it is unlikely to disappear on that account, It is also, now an international movement and set backs in one place are likely to be off set by gains in another,

[-] 0 points by timir (183) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

check related videos and find out... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8HSNeHHuQA4

[-] 1 points by tcharbonneau (1) from Adams, MA 12 years ago

try to change the world, and the world will change your mind...what we collectively need to do is unite and force a shift in consciousness. I know it sounds ridiculous due to the values we've been fed, the lives we've led is nothing compared to the human nature found in all of us that allows us to realize there is a problem and literally "do nothing" to fix it. 90% of the 99% less fortunate won't even recognize that the change needs to come from within. Survival of the fittest is a proven method, so what makes you think a bunch of bullies can't eradicate a bunch of suggestion-box-fillers? I'm not saying blow the suggestion-box up, I'm just saying ok, occupy whatever and where ever you choose, however you choose to do so. Now pick someone worth listening to, give them a soap box to stand upon and feed them your truth, let them drink from your cup of hardships, and allow one voice to be heard above all else in these groups. Nobody tries to listen to noise. It is when one sound rings out, clearer than anything else it is surrounded by, that the sound will be heeded. We all need to be heeded now. Our warnings may very well be tomorrows headlines...I feel pity for those who are in power. If these protests do go violently there is a deeply rooted passion I know I will draw upon to defend my values and beliefs. I can't imagine the love of money even coming close to the fire of disparity. apologies to those who disagree, this is my humble opinion and mine alone...

[-] 1 points by Puff6962BorgTroll (28) 12 years ago

You can find him under the Brooklyn Bridge, sniffing a rag soaked in gasoline.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

That's rather morbid. I guess in this economy, nobody can afford good glue.

Mark Twain once said, "I think we never become really and genuinely our entire and honest selves until we are dead--and not then until we have been dead years and years. People ought to start dead, and they would be honest so much earlier."

Wouldn't you like to be honest now?

[-] -1 points by Puff6962BorgTroll (28) 12 years ago

If I type, "I am a Liar", did I just lie when I typed that?

Mark Twain did not publish the first volume of his autobiography until November 2010, the 100th anniversary year of his death. So I don't have to tell the truth for another 100 years.

Or as Ben Franklin said, "A secret is best kept by 3 men if 2 of them are dead."

Russ Feingold is a Jew. Jews are not loyal Americans because their first loyalty is to Israel. I'm a very strict Dowd.

Why did Adolf Hitler commit suicide? He got the gas bill.

How do you drown all the Jews in your neighborhood? Superglue a penny on the bottom of your swimming pool.

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Ouch. My wife is Jewish. Perhaps you should provide your own threads for this venom.

I thought you were a nice troll.

[-] 0 points by Puff6962BorgTroll (28) 12 years ago

Ah, so you are trying to enrich her family by advertising all this Russ Feingold propaganda. You see, I have uncovered your insidious hidden motive. Is your wife a cousin of Feingold? Borat was right.

I'll bet you like to play this game too on Christmas?


Can Russ Feingold play this game?


[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I think it is fair to say that you are being offensive.

Feingold is perhaps the most ethical and progressive leader available to take Occupy mainstream.

Why would you care that he is Jewish?

[-] 1 points by Puff6962BorgTroll (28) 12 years ago

Because any group that goes around claiming that they are god's special "chosen" people, are a bunch of assholes.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago


skin heads?




[-] 1 points by Puff6962BorgTroll (28) 12 years ago

Yes, you got it.

Oh, what's this? Seems like the Rabbi Watch website has been taken down again. It's a constant battle to keep it operating. Maybe you should change the name of Feingold's religion to "Sandusky", or maybe merge it with the Vatican?




[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You should have masturbated more when you were young.

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 12 years ago

Our "savior" is a black atheist vegan women who rescues animals and plants trees. That is my vision!

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 12 years ago

Oh and she's a lesbian too. With a birth defect.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

At least you are thinking along the right lines.

[-] 1 points by BlueRose (1437) 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by Puff6962BorgTroll (28) 12 years ago

Theodore Roosevelt was a mass murderer who killed thousands of innocent people in Cuba and the Philippines. MLK was a total failure. Just look at any of the dismal economic statistics about African Americans. 45% of African American pregnancies end in abortion. Black people are committing mass suicide.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Thank you for keeping this topic active.

[-] 1 points by imhotep3223 (81) 12 years ago

" If you can't get good elected officials behind you or elect your own people you're just making noise". And you put a good man in office and he will be dead in 2 months or become a Sarah Palin/ Ron Lawl.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You're saying that RonPaul is really Sarah Palin in disguise?


[-] 1 points by imhotep3223 (81) 12 years ago

Lol, very funny. Nope two examples of mainstream politicians, that stuff their pockets with cash.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 12 years ago

There are Americans who could achieve that quality of leadership but OWS has this aversion to discussing leadership. That effectively curtails any leadership development or recognition.

I understand why this is so. Many OWS people feel really betrayed by having supported Barack Obama. The Democrats, generally, have a lot of trust to rebuild with social justice Americans. While the Republicans are evil and the third parties are just branches of the two parties.

But there are individuals, especially in the Democrats, who have been marginalized by the party leadership powers because their values basically coincide with OWS values. I think particularly of Elizabeth Warren and Russ Feingold. Especially Feingold.

All that is needed is to get these folks on stages and support them whether they want it or not. Draft them by promoting Write-In campaigns for the primaries. Encourage them by writing letters to the major newspapers quoting them and appreciating their values.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Warren is already running for the Senate. Support her in Mass. and flex your muscles.

In the meantime, let's get a Pledge set up with the top three objectives of OWS and start having primary contestants sign.....or refuse to sign.

Then, you simply pester the shit out of those who won't sign and you're off to the races. Beautifully simple.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 12 years ago

I have already sent Warren money for her senate campaign.

I encourage people to use her for a Write-In for president in the Democratic primary to send a message to the Democrats about the economic justice issues as well as their no presidential primary bullshit. Warren is hated and feared by Wall Street. A strong Write-In campaign would, even without winning any primaries, send a clear message to Wall Street, Congress and the two parties that Americans are really pissed and the values that she represents are what we are pissed about.

  • Reinstate Glass-Steagall

  • Overturn citizen's United

  • End corporate corruption of congress.

[-] 1 points by TheTrollSlayer (347) from Kingsport, TN 12 years ago

I agree myself that the movement needs leadership. Many have joined in and supported this movement and they see that both parties are the problem and they're tired of it. This movement gave people who have long been fed up with corrupted government deteriorating this country like it has, something to be part of, a way to voice how we the many have long been fed up with whats goes on in government and demand that it changes and serves the people as its suppose to. Look at the crowds during the main protests, people of all ages, professionals, tradesman, business people, veterans, common people, etc and read of who all supported this movement. There's a need to be those to speak for the many who have joined in that we want a government that works for the people, not for the special interests.

[-] 1 points by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ 12 years ago

But chosen by whom? If shadowy forces behind the curtain of censorship make the choice, I can assure you that choiice will fail. The choice, if one is made at all, must arise from the protesters themselves and not those who hide in the darkness.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Russ Feingold.

[-] 1 points by whisper (212) 12 years ago

A leader will emerge but He/She will not lead OWS.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Tell me more swamie.

[-] 1 points by whisper (212) 12 years ago

OWS will cling to its 'leaderless movement' philosophy. The group that the leader leads will not be a part of OWS. Those that follow (and even the leader) will very likely have, at one point or another, identified with OWS or otherwise engaged its members.

[-] 1 points by jbell78 (152) 12 years ago

The number of people clinging to the idea of popular movements needing no clear-cut goals nor leadership is ultimately smaller than even the 1% they persecute...they just happen to make the most noise on these forums. Whether you're a leader or a follower yourself, everyone knows that in time leaders will emerge no matter what. The only question is - will OWS piss away its chance to make it a democratic & transparent process or will they sit around dissuading real leaders until power has been usurped through force/money or the movement dissipates entirely?

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Russ Feingold.

[-] 1 points by CentristFiasco (60) 12 years ago

I've been saying this for months and I even created a proper declaration for this damn movement to unite people for a common goal. I've emailed occupy camps and contacted them and no response. This movement is a complete joke that just wants to disrupt and not say anything.

Take a Look at the Declaration: http://www.scribd.com/doc/73304557/Declaration-of-Independence-for-the-Occupy-Movement

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I'm less worried about declarations and more focused upon strategies.


[-] 1 points by sinthytechstudios (22) 12 years ago

You can not wait for a leader you have to lead yourself, you all have to step up and think for yourself.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Yes, but what allows a chorus to voices to sound so good.....some coordination. Take those same voices and put them out of rhythm and you have.....noise.

You associate any form of organization with totalitarianism and that is simply a facile argument.

[-] 1 points by RockyJ (208) 12 years ago

We have ourselves! MLK was from a different time & generation with a lot different issues. BTW (though I love him) he's dead. Why are so many people dead set on having a f-n leader? Where has a leader gotten us? As long as we keep putting them up on pedestals we'll always be disappointed! We thought Obama was our new leader & boy we were fooled again! WHY can't we be the change we want to believe in...TOGETHER? The hive mind f-n rules! A leader can be corrupted & stray away for their values & beliefs so easily while us idiots go on believing in them they're off getting blow jobs, making closed room deals & signing our lives away!
We NEED to be the leaders of our own destiny!

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Study every progressive movement in history.....those without good leadership and a resonating message are doomed.

It is arrogance to presume that a movement without some ability to focus will accomplish anything. The most telling example is the student protests of the 1960's and early 70's. A lot of noise and the backlash of moderates and conservatives against the counterculture gave us Richard Nixon and eventually Ronald Reagan.

If you can't circumscribe a movement within a shared set of values and objectives, then you do not have a movement.

[-] 1 points by simplesimon (121) 12 years ago

But Martin Luther King is dead. I think he is in the ground somewhere in Georgia. Even if you dug him up he wouldn't do you any good. He can't talk or anything anymore. Please don't go looking for him. I think his family would be mad about that.

[-] 1 points by KofA (495) from Muenster, TX 12 years ago

I've heard scores of times how "leaders get assassinated", and that is why we don't have any...

The ignorant thing about that statement is that martyrs are GREAT for movements, as are spokespeople, ACCOUNTABLE leadership, and organizational structure...

That said, I don't think we necessaruly need 'one' leader, but rather rotating spokespeople, willing and able to make clear concise statements directly to the media. IMHO

[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

By the way, I was one of the few who hit zuccati park and said "I am the natural Occupy Leader" And everyone ignored me. Has ANYONE ELSE STOOD UP and said they want to lead this entire thing? I tried to start an Occupy 3 weeks before 9/11, with posters in hand, all about economics and money. I was 10 years too early. In dollars I am the single biggest victim of corporate greed. For the past ten years my life was stolen from me. I have integrity, I don't steal, I am charitable, and when I stand for something, I don't budge. I started Occupy1.org - though its just a page now, its meant to bring all the Occupy's together. My slogan in 2001 was

One World

One Economy

One Internet

One Plan

i wrote a book about the new global economics of the Internet.

I formed the idea of the Internet Agency of Economic Justice, over 5 years ago, that is intended to arrest some of the crooks as Michael Moore suggested.


In my school days I was Athlete of the Year I was chosen number one on ideas at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School in 2002 - it's all online.

I have been waiting for this my entire life.

I have always been a leader throughout my life. Like at the corporate level. I was a smart guy hired by corporate think tanks, to lead the think tanks for the largest corporations in the world. Not many people have been on this inside of so many large corporations. I know how it all works. I was there.

Whenever you all want I am ready. I would also like a council of 12 others.

And by the way, I ain't no MLK, but I can competently lead all of Occupy. And I am bi-lingual (french)

I am also a professional stand up comic, an excellent public speaker. I can deliver speeches in french and english.

Let me know when you all are ready. I'm here. I have been here for a long time.


[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

The problem with One ............ arguments is that the world is not one, the economy is not one, the internet is not one, and there is no one plan.

Those arguments are based upon better instincts, and it is the better instincts of man that will drown a movement in useless platitudes and competing factions.

"People react to fear, not love. They don't teach you that in Sunday school, but it's true," Richard Nixon.

[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

Your idea is not factual. The world is obviously ONE. That is a fact. The economy is now one global economy - you can read this all over the place. If you understand economics, you realize that the economies of all countries are tied together. The Euro the dollar, the currencies, etc. Ask any knowledgeable business person or economist - there is one global economy now. That is a fact. People can deliver pages and pages of FACT that support that we all live in one Global economy.

The Internet is obviously ONE. Right now, there is ONE Internet. How can you think there are more? Maybe there will be another Internet in the future, but today, we have ONE Internet. You didn't know that?

And today, there is ONE PLAN that is in motion.

And that ONE PLAN is run by corporations and govt.

And we need to change that one plan to a better plan. And that's what Occupy is all about.

Do you understand now?

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You sound like a Dr. Bronner's soap bottle.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

It seems to me that you have never been to an occupation or a GA or you could never write such nonsense. First of all, while it may not have been your intention, it seems extremely arogant to me, like you are lecturing a bunch of school children. These are not children. The average age of an occupier is 33. Most are college educated and many have graduate degrees. Many are extremely well schooled in the history and theory of social movements.

OWS is not so much leaderless as it is leaderful. Everyone is encouraged to develop their leadership skills while at the same time leaving their egos at the doorstep.

As for issues, OWS has issues. In its earliest days it put forward the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City, which at 600 words is one of the most suscinct and coherent political documents ever produced in this nation.

Whatever your ideas, you get a hell of a lot further in this movement if you don't come off like you are lecturing people or pontificating.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

OWS is an isolated movement that does not exist in the milieu it will require for viability. You guys are all geared up to convert each other that you really haven't focused on the demographic that you must pierce.....mom and dad.

If you can pluck mom and dad away from Fox news then you are projecting the proper message. If you can get mom and dad to attend meetings of the Progressive Party (that is what you will be calling yourselves in about six months), then you have arrived.

If you can't do those two things, then you will go the way of every temporary populist movement in this country (and there have been many).

If you don't wish to feel like you are being lectured, then don't read the fucking posts. I think as I write and, honestly, I really don't give two rats' asses whether you like it or not.

I've not seen a single item from the GA that looked like it will sway mom and dad, so the GA is going down a winding path that will lead nowhere. Perhaps, you should scout ideas here and lend them to the GA. My Lord, you're already using acronyms.....and the revolution is only two months old.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

The essence of democratic politics is to try to win people over to your point of view. That is not easily accomplished if you insult them.

I think we are really having trouble communicating. Essentially, what I was saying in my previous communication is that I thought you were being condescending and while that doesn't work to communicate with most people, it is especially ineffective at OWS given its democratic ethos. Your response, it seems to me, was to become even more condescending. Obviously my approach is not working with you which may indicate a shortcoming on my part in terms of my ability to communicate.

As a matter of fact the average age of an occupier is 33. Hardly a "kid." Many of them are parents themselves. I myself am 68, at the high end of that spectrum. My mom and dad, as you put it, have long passed on.

I strongly doubt that the occupy movement will be entering the electoral arena in any way within six months, so it won't be a party of any kind, progressive or otherwise. It's commitment is to direct action. If you had done your homework on the history and roots of the movement you would know that the initiators of the movement are strongly influenced by the anarchist intellectual tradition and not particularly interested in electoral politics.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

The initiators of the movement are influenced by the anarchist tradition.....great, a movement organized by anarchists. Isn't that something of an oxymoron?

If you are truly 68, then you must surely have realized that this movement of 23 or 33 year olds has been on life support from the time the first reporter arrived and asked the protesters for their issues and objectives.

If you are truly 68, then perhaps you can tell me what the student protests of the 60's and early 70's accomplished?

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

a movement organized by anarchists. Isn't that something of an oxymoron?

Only if you have no knowledge or understanding of the anarchist intellectual tradition. Anarchism is opposed to the state, not organization per se.

My perception is that while passive popular support for the occupy movement may well be waining, the activist base all over the world seems to be growing and consolidating itself.

I think the occupy movement is considerably more politically mature than was the student movement of the 1960s, especially in its later stages. While the 60s student movement was truely a mass movement (it did after all, successfully shut down virtually the entire university system in the nation as I recall in the Spring of 1970). However, it was never really successful in reaching out beyond its student base.

In contrast today's movement is much more mature in many ways. First of all, most occupy activist are distinctly older than college students by more than a decade, though college students are beginning to identify with the movement. More importently, very early on the Occupy movement was able to build an alliance with organized labor. In contrast there was not only no alliance between the student movement of the 60s and organized labor, but on the contrary, real hostility.

In terms of failure or success, most social movements fail. As the great German revolutionary Rosa Luxemburg said, the revolution is an endless series of defeats followed by one victory. It is to be hoped that we learn from the mistakes of the past and the Occupy movement is much better equipped to do that than was the student movement of the 1960s, which was, ironically, rather anti-intellectual. In contrast most of the key activists in the occupy movement are extremely well read and a People's Library is an essential component of every occupation. Bloomberg's destruction of the New York People's Library resulted in the destruction of literally hundreds of priceless and one of a kind books.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

And, of those movements that succeeded, did they have an effective message and effective leadership?

[-] 2 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

Why the combative tone? Are you supportive of OWS or aren't you? If you are supportive of it, wouldn't it be a good idea to learn about it? Even if you think you have invaluable advice to give, wouldn't it at least be useful to know how such advice is most likely to be taken most seriously?

After a life time in the labor movement, frankly I approach the Occupy movement with considerable humility. In two months these not so young amateurs have done more organizing than all the so-called "professional" organizers in most unions have done in the last two decades. It is true that labor and other social movements have an infrastructure and resources that are very useful and even essential to OWS, but in terms of organizing and imagination OWS has left the older organizations in the dust, and they know it.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I apologize for the tone. So many people on this forum believe that something can get done with an amorphous collection of voices all saying something different.

I understand how power is wielded in Washington and I have been anticipating how the Right will try to defeat OWS.

I don't mean to be harsh, but I do wish to inject some urgency into the maturation of the OWS message.

People in the park are great.....but I want the movement to mainstream and into family discussions. I think it is necessary for OWS to have a very rational and intuitive set op propositions that are vedy popular but are an anathema to the Right, Fox news, and talk radio.

Occupy wallstreet must be seen as a very cautious group who only want to promote the most plausible of solutions.

Your opponents must overwhelmed by the preperation of your message and your ability to debate it.

[-] 1 points by RedJazz43 (2757) 12 years ago

I think part of your concern is a real misunderstanding of what OWS is really all about as a movement. It really is profoundly committed to what it characterizes as "horozontalism" as opposed to the hierarchy of more traditional organizations. it's not so much that railing against the horizontal organizational form will be ignored. Rather, the horizontal structure of the movement actually prevents such complaints or advice from being heard.

By no means is there no organization. It is just that is is so different from the kind of organization that nearly everyone is used to that it is hard to recognize it as organization at all. I was there on day one. Literally within three hours food appeared to feed the masses, like Jesus and the fishes. A media team organized itself and began streaming on the web. Within a week a library was organized. And that's just about day to day stuff at the encampment. Within 3 days they had begun systematic labor solidarity work. Their political work has been exemplary.

But here's what would happen if you went to an occupation and started talking about your ideas. People would say, "That's very interesting, why don't you start a work group and get it going." To which, you might reply, " I don't have the time." To which they might say, "A lot of people are in that boat. You could go to this or that work group and see if somebody else might pick up on your idea, or just keep talking it up. Maybe it will resonate with somebody."

The point is, everybody is expected to take responsibility for their own ideas. And it's not that there is no leadership. It's more like things are not so ego driven. At one moment and in one context somebody might be taking a leadership role and a little while later that leadership role might pass naturally to someone else. I actually think this is a much more mature and less ego driven notion of leadership than has existed in the past where radical organizations have tended to model their organizational structures on the very institutions that they were trying to challenge.

Having lived through the civil rights movement, I think your conception of MLK is somewhat distorted by the patina of time. Back when he was alive he was not nearly so lionized in the movement as was the case after he was killed, especially by the more radical sections of the movement such as SNCC in the south and the CORE chapters in the north where we used to call him "De Lawd." There's nothing like an assasination to buff up your image.

The "leadership" of the civil rights movement was always divided. Even the March on Washington, 8 years into the movement, was organized by what was then called "The Big Six" It included the heads of the NAACP, the Urban League, CORE, SNCC, the SCLC and the Negro American Labor Council. King was only one of those six. While the top leadership in 5 of those 6 organizations was more or less permanent, the top leadership of SNCC turned over annually. There is no evidence that a permanent leadership is somehow better. Indeed, there is considerable evidence to suggest that the opposite is true and labor union democrats spend years trying to depose entrenched leaders. And when they are successful, if they end up putting in a new guy who quickly becomes just as entrenched, they quickly discover that they really haven't won much.

Our major project now I think is movement building and that's not about how much support polls say we have. Genuine active support is much more difficult to measure than the passive support recorded in a poll, but for a social movement I think it is much more important. There is every indication that it continues to grow.

There are many reasons why I think the occupation movement will sustain itself (understanding that nothing is guaranteed). One is that the crises it is addressing are real and don't appear to be disappearing: unemployment that is realitically near Depression levels and actually at Depression levels in some demographics; a continuing mortgage crisis; education debts beyond the capacity of many to pay back; an environment that is quickly becoming unlivible, ongoing racism. On top of that it is a world crisis. The same disparity between the super rich and everyone else that we see here in the US exists in virtually every other nation, which is why occupations spread so quickly around the world. That is another reason why the occupation movement is unlikely to go away. It is so widespread. Not only in the US, but around the world. If it wains or is defeated in some locality a spark somewhere else is likely to reignite it.

On top of that, the very lack of an identifiable leadership is actually one of the great strengths of the movement, not a weakness. There is not a "head" that the authorities can go after. Everyone take what responsibility they can, when they can.

The political composition of the activist base of the movement is quite interesting. At its core, the initiators of the movement are really quite radical, especially influenced by the anarchist intellectual tradition but also by other streams of radicalism. The base tends to be much more liberal but also less coherent politically. For example it is the liberals at the base of the movement that have been most consistently arguing for the adoption of specific demands while the radicals have opposed it. The problem for the liberals is though that they can't even agree among themselves on what appropriate demands to raise, much less be able to present them in a coherent way to a skeptical GA.

Ironically, the radicals tend to be much more patient and tend to view this as a very long term struggle, one that will take at least years, probably decades and perhaps several lifetimes. Patience is a revolutionary virtue.

Personally I think both of these tendencies are essential to the survival of the movement. As we used to say in SDS, we need liberals for their relevance and radicals for their vision (though I tend to identify more with the latter).

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I'll take that as a "YES."

[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

Click on red pill Download brochures


[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 12 years ago

No they need something better than a leader they need a good media organizer and common unifying demands for the 99% percent.

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I would like the media organizer job.....of I could be Rasputin for whatever leader you select.

[-] 1 points by anonwolf (279) from West Peoria, IL 12 years ago

That's better. Got a little crowded here for a moment.

[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 12 years ago

There shouldn't be a leader just someone that can manipulate the press more your up for that?

[-] 1 points by barb (835) 12 years ago

Once those natural leaders emerge they will be slapped with a $10,000 fine per I think the Richmond Act. I don't know I read this on another forum so I don't know if it is true or not.

[-] 1 points by locke2 (1) 12 years ago

Those leaders everyone has described fought for worthy causes; history will look back upon this as an ineffectual 'revolution' that bore no fruit.

No goals have been stated other than something to the effect that everyone is upset with the status quo - we live in an age of prosperity never before witnessed in the world and have hit a slump in the form of a recession. Our system is not flawed in its substance, it just need needs some adjustments.

What are you really upset about? You went to schools you couldn't afford, can't get a job to pay back your loan and the government isn't helping you enough? Invest in yourself, work instead of protest. It's out there for those with marketable skills and the will to actually do something.

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I agree with much of this, but there are very real things that need to emerge from the noise so that this movement can effect meaningful change.

--Get big money out of politics

--Make all lobbying activities public information

--Enact the Buffett trade policy

--End the Bush Tax Cuts

--Bring back the draft or require a year of national service

--End the electoral college

--Require the minimum wage to be a living wage

--End quasi-slavery in the form of illegal immigrant migrant farm labor

--Provide extensive scholarships for higher education in engineering, math, and the sciences.

--Allow more generous restructurings of student debt repayment

--Provide some remedy for those underwater on their mortgages

--Enumerate a constitutional amendment making basic healthcare a right

--Similarly, enumerate on affirming the right of collective bargaining.

--Return the estate tax and a progressive tax structure.

I could keep going, but you get the idea.

[-] 1 points by anonwolf (279) from West Peoria, IL 12 years ago

Ugly. \/

[-] 1 points by lovdotsprite (1) from Topeka, KS 12 years ago

For all those who been looking for a solution to an end to OWS and an end between the gap between the rich and the poor I have a solution. It is radical and all the well off will be against it, but I believe it could very well be a sound theory. We need a new belief. America has gotten to a point where we have let our ancestors down. We came here to escape the tyranny of the kings and queens to only spread the tyranny amoungst ourselves. If the movement is to succeed it needs more than just being recognized. We need complete system reform to save america. Please glance at the material and send the link to friends. It can end Wall streets tyranny and save america. http://hubpages.com/hub/The-card-system-an-economic-hope

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Why not just go back to the wisdom of the 1950's and 60's.....back when excessive greed was a bad thing and conservatism meant paying your fucking bills.

The only new thing in the world is the history that you don't know. There is not time for a new ideology. Instead, we must rely upon what historically worked.

Read the fist 150 pages of "Conscience of a Liberal" by Krugman and learn about how the middle class was born. The solutions are quite simple.....but the opposition is not.

[-] 1 points by yarichin (269) 12 years ago

Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, John Lennon, and even Larry Flint, are all examples of what happens when someone steps up and leads the people against greed, oppression, and injustice. Only Jackson and Flint survived their assassination attempts. So, anyone want to throw in their hat? Wanna lead? The health benefits suck.

[-] 1 points by MaryS (529) 12 years ago

OMFG. Please take Larry Flint out of that list, yarichin.

[-] 1 points by yarichin (269) 12 years ago

Larry stood up for free speech and was nearly killed for it.

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I think the key is to get the people with the guns behind you in your cause.

Americans aren't necessarily violent people, they're just good shots.

Maybe you guys should occupy a tree stand or start wearing camouflage......can you imagine OWS joining forces with the National Rife Association?

[-] 1 points by yarichin (269) 12 years ago

The second amendment was put there so all the other rights could be protected without help from a corrupted system.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Sure it was.

[-] 1 points by OWSWhat (66) 12 years ago

All this movement really needs is to "put a cap on it" and that is already happening bye bye loons

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

What a creative little drip of humanity you are. When did you lose you innocence? If you are such an opponent to what could emerge from this disorganized movement, then why would you waste your time here.....go live your life. Perhaps you are just a little lonely and you wish that things could actually be different.

Or, perhaps you are just a prick.

[-] 1 points by genanmer (822) 12 years ago

Find the dreamers

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 12 years ago

While the 'we are leaderless' drum has been played loudly, and there is no single figurehead at this time, I think all eyes are on the NYCGA. That's where the movement emanated from, that's where this website and 'official statements' like todays vision statement appear. Like it or not NYCGA is the de-facto leader. The conundrum is that this gives the appearance of an oligarchy and for good reason. NYCGA is the 1% of OWS/99%. The only solution is to renounce this unwelcome position by announcing a NGA, the National General Assembly, with a process for electing delegates to the NGA that satisfies the vision statements 'Unity' clause and 'Fairness' clause. NYCGA should adopt the working group on the 99% Declaration proposal, NOW.

[-] -1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Ya, I've seen that website and forum....kinda sucks. All these guys want to do is occupy this or occupy that.

The reality is that all occupation demonstrations end and their message ends with them. Along the way, the narrative only becomes how the occupiers will be removed from their location. Nothing gets accomplished.....the message floats away like a fart in the wind.

It would be much more effective for THIS forum to place about 10 good ideas up there and let people survey them......then focus on the five most important.

[-] 1 points by Occupyalife (-7) 12 years ago

You are a worthless piece of shit. Sucks to be you, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Are you still smattering from your bitchslapping, little man?

It's better being me than you will ever experience. Wrap your mind around that....of course you're used to wrapping something of yours around a lot of things now aren't you little man.

Pawn of the oppressor.

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

ows does not need leaders, it needs to buckle down into the homework of a concise message, evolutionary solutions for each and every major social problem.

There are evolutionary leaders out here, but people aren't bothering to pay attention on the one hand and we don't want to be THAT kind of leader on the other.


I have been active here since the very beginning, and since the very beginning I have been trying to make some core points. These points clearly have not been digested or fully understood by the mob, and so I'm going to try to make a further attempt here again.

  1. Merely protesting in the streets will not bring change. In fact merely protesting in the streets is in fact a means to the end of avoiding the real work of a revolution, which consists of the evolutionary solutions, answers, problem solving process, and new political alignment we create.
  2. This forum is absolutely disorganized. It won't be read by most people and it won't and can't function as a core organizational system.
  3. Back at the very start of this, I petitioned the admin to add multiple sub forums and a wiki. Multiple sub forums were promised but have never arrived. I think that this tells us that the intention actually of this forum is message control and containment. The entire purpose really of this forum has always been to keep us spinning in disorganization. We are hanging out on a forum that expressly exists to actually keep us confused and disorganized.
  4. The real work of a revolution isn't going to happen on forums, it needs to happen in a much more organized fashion using collaborative software.
  5. The assorted other details about how to collaborate, how to work open source direct democracy, how to focus in on science instead of isms, how to become hyper rational about this, are details which are essential and crucial, without which we can predict the movement to fail.
  6. Technically speaking we are not 99 percent, we are one tenth of one percent attempting to represent the 99 percent. Our core mission must be to communicate to and with the 99 percent, and get them to join us. This forum will not accomplish that and neither will any of the other main websites.
  7. You can follow other people out to other wikis and other websites, where they will try to get you to get involved with what they want and their program, but frankly speaking, there is no other website and no other operation out there which understands the complexities involved with meaningful organization. In short, everyones being led to get involved here there and everywhere else, scattering the movement in directions which ultimately do not gain us critical mass, criticial momentum, or critical systemic lucidity.
  8. I have managed to get a wiki put up and have already put on that wiki evolutionary details which make it more organized than anything else. I can't do this alone. There are 10 or so wikis now out there, most of which were created in response to my pleas for a wiki, and several of which are in domains owned and operated by some corporation, (wikia, etc) And which we can thus assume will simply be closed, shut down, or deleted if they become useful to the movement.
  9. Probably at least half of the invites you have to go participate at some other site are people who are scamming everyone to waste time and energy, distort the movement, co opt it, and etc. When you walk off into a closet ask yourself how you know that the closet isn't created by some fed, or by some republican, or by some democrat, in order to sway things in their direction.
  10. The only meaningful strategic option we have for real change in this country is to create a new third party, and take every political office in this country.
  11. Once that is done, we can have an article 5 convention. If we have an article 5 convention before getting rid of the oligachs, that just opens the genie from the bottle for them to abuse that process with their corruption and evil.

For these reasons, I beg of you to please immediately join me on the wiki. We need to have all of these details and all of these ideas put together in an organized fashion, rather than posted in a long scrawl which will never be read.








[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Third parties never work. They effectively elect your enemy.....remember the Green party in 2000. Thanks a hellofalot Ralph Nader, you gave us George Bush.

I'll reread all of this after I respond to all of these messages.

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

Third parties do sometimes work and can in theory work. If we do the work of doing the work instead of cop out and run away from the work, winning would be inevitable because it would cause a paradigm shift that would make both old parties ideologically obsolete.

I'm sick and tired of chit chatting and arguing with people who really have no clue what they are talking about.

I;m giving the actual solution, you are replaying old movies of things that happened in the past and trying to make useless and irrelevant and moot comparisons while you argue for staying stuck and under the thumb of fascist oligarchy.

Hi. NEO. I'm morpheus. WAKE UP TIME? simple question, yes or no, will do, i have the next person to move on to.

do you want your civilization to die because of the evil and fascist corruption? or are you willing to take on the REAL WORK of an actual revolution?

I'm tired of hearing so called ows representatives putting it off.

There is only one path of right action and that path is to generate a complete political platform, cover EVERY LAST ISSUE and then form a third party and then begin process on an article 5 convention.


[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Third parties ONLY work when a dominant political party fragments. The largest fragment will attract followers previously described as independent and also some previous followers of the other major party.

In this manner, it is immediately viable as long as NOTHING remains of the old party from whence it came.

The best example is that of the Republican party prior to the Civil War.

Trying to create a third party from scratch is a fool's errand. It can't be done in America and, I am sorry to say, will only strengthen the Republican's dominance in Washington.

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

I'm sorry, you saying so and history being like that don;t make any meaningful limitations on what CAN happen, and you otherwise don't know what you are talking about.

Failing to create a third party leaves us only one option; what kind of fascist dictators we pick.

You are simply wrong, repeating their programming, and inhabiting the mental cage and fighting for it which they created for you.

A third party COULD work, the question is only what would it take and what are the conditions under which it would have to work?


Fortunately there are formula level science answers to those questions, thus evolution is as simple as stop being ignorant; en masse.

Occupy education. if everyone does it, it delivers a revolution in under two months. if you think ANYTHING else will work, your kidding yourself, martial law is in a few months from now and they will kill almost everyone to depopulate and then chip the new reprogrammed slave caste.


[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

No, ignoring the third party option means that you work your ass off to push a constitutional amendment banning corporate contributions to campains, 527's, and PAC's. All lobbyist activities would be required to be public information. At the same time, you concentrate your political muscle and take over the primary process for Democrats running for Congress.

The primaries are where a vocal and disciplined minority can have exponential effects......look at evangelicals and GOP primaries as a bad example.

If you ignore what your youthful idealism tells you should be the solution and, instead, listen to what old age and experience has shown me to work, the we will both get the final result the country needs.

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

Ignoring the third party option firstly does not involve us in generating a platform, secondly, you push a constitutional amendment and a bunch of corporate oligarchs amend however they like...without any serious heat from you because all you can manage is to pick pepsi or coke flavor oligarchs, you have thus no real actual pragmatic PLAN to make this happen just pipe dreams disconnected actually from a path of right action.

My youthful idealism? Excuse me? I have been working for evolutionary social change for twenty years. If you ignore your ignorant mental cage con scammed fucktard dupes divide and conquer matrix meme, and actually go with what makes SENSE....

Old age and experience? My ass. Ignorant BS. I have EXPERT knowledge in 20 different sciences and a 180 IQ on top. Shown "you" to work? Excuse me?

Bluntly, you are not in a position to advise this movement and there is not one good reason why we should actually listen to such advice.

Your advice is dead wrong, your argument is full of holes, and what actually must be done to actually make a revolution happen legally, instead of a useless protest movement with no actual real traction- is for us to form a third party.

you have no business trying to play one up "wiser than thou" with me. None at all.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I have never know a wise person who divulged their IQ.

I would ask that you show me a political party in American history that did not come about as I described.

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

i would ask that you explain to me what that has to do with anything .

first, approval of congress is at an all time low- 9 percent.

Second, approval of the parties is also at an all time low.

third, the narrative of the parties is suddenly shown to be merely a narrative. The bubble has in fact been popped. you miss this.

fourth, occupy movement is already the fastest growing viral social movement in the history of humanity ever. It already has more participants world wide than there are residents of the USA.

fifth, 50- 60 percent of the population is ALREADY SYMPATHETIC to occupy movements general direction and goals.

Sixth; 30-40 more percent could almost certainly be convinced by a paradigm shift and

Seventh; The time is ripe for a paradigm shift

and eighth;

Every other third party so far has been merely a divide and conquer sheeple herding con scam. Ideology driven, not science driven, all it takes is a science driven and fact driven awakening and ALL of the OLD BS becomes TRANSPARENTly FOUL to EVERYONE.

101 conditions are completely different right now than they have ever been or likely ever will be. Don't be foolish. This is the wave; and its going to come.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

The counterculture and student protests of the 60's had much greater participation and organization than OWS and......produced nothing.

That's not entirely true.....The counterculture produced a backlash by moderates and conservatives that gave us Richard Nixon and, eventually, Ronald Reagan and, eventually, George Bush II, and so on and so on.

Failed movements often strengthen the forces they fail to overcome. If the occupy movement does not focus quickly, it will not be seen as anything more than a group of radicals in a park.....and the Right will again be emboldened.

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

greater how? no internet. Nobody i know out there trying to explain to the crowd actively like i am how to have a science centered revolution, and thats 50 years of science progress ago.

You only imagine theres more involvement, if you actually look at numbers, ows protests in two months as a count of actual protest hours already dwarfs all of the 60s, as a count of simple number of active participants also dwarfs the 60s and in terms of alreayd having created an international movement, has done what the 60s didn't manage to do on twenty counts- and all under 3 months.

occupy movement already makes the entire 60s decade look like a bunch of well... hippies.. milling around aimlessly...

And already outnumbers and out manpowers the entire generation.

Again, stop and take stock of whats actually going on.

there are twenty cities with 10 thousand protesters IN EACH CITY and thats JUST INSIDE THE USA.

There are to include occupies such as SBs thousands of occupies in the USA.

The sixties movement did not splinter into sub groups in anything near that amount of time.

Occupy movement also benefits from simply now having the hippies for parental units instead of toxic system zombots, like they had for parents.

On every last meaningful front, Occupy is well ahead of the Sixties and has outpaced the entire 60s social movement and done so in only 90 days.

Have you seen todays news? 2 or 5 states are pressing charges against big banks.

thats the 60s response time to core issue happening not in years, but months. It took a whole decade to get federal or state relief on those things, this is happening LOTS faster. "The age of information." Maybe you failed to understand this. THEY lived in a MONTHLY news cycle. WE Live in an HOURLY news cycle. Everythings going to happen MUCH faster.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Name ten politicians, religious leaders, economists, or business leaders who have aligned themselves with OWS.

I would, again, ask that you show me a political party in American history that did not come about as I described in my prior post.

[-] 1 points by MaryS (529) 12 years ago

A third party might work now because the environment is different. More people want it and are not afraid of making drastic changes to their precious 2 party system. We are ready for it, a third maybe a fourth party. Just not some goofball who would destroy what little bit of progress we've made.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I'm sorry, but that will just elect Republicans.

Democrats and independents would be divided whereas the Republican coalition would not.

If you want to effect change, then work within the Democratic party.

Sorry, but that is the way of the world.

[-] 2 points by MaryS (529) 12 years ago

I wouldn't vote Republican or Libertarian if you beat me with an iron pipe. I voted for Obama and will again. That is what I mean when I say the most progressive person. (available) . But if someone Independent with some sense comes around, and enough people are behind him /her, then I could be persuaded.

[-] 0 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

OWS needs leaders. OWS has leaders now - they just remain kind of hidden. Want to have a better forum and get ideas going better? try H2O rotisserie software downloadable at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School.

I am one of the few that will bring change, with or without Occupy support. I will be making the arrests that Michael Moore suggested.

100% Consensus is a hugely powerful tool. One that can change the world. and it should be used, but not all the time for everything.

I have suggested one of the best ways to actually start making a difference in wealth distribution - and its too complex or too subtle for people to understand the huge changes it can make for occupy - but so far - no one cares.


This site, if built to do wealth distribution like I hope, will be one of the quickest ways to actually BEGIN to solve the problems that has created the Occupy movement: money for people.

Yet, people like you, it seems, has other agendas, or egos, or who knows what.

But I agree with you that the best ideas and directions are not surfacing to the top.

It's a shame, because with the RIGHT leadership, and with the right SPEECHes that DONT use the annoying "human mic", things can change by gathering all of Occupy support for "money actions".

People use the word "direct action" to mean doing something. What should we call actions that actually get more money to the 99%? So I called it money actions. And I don't mean protests, I don't mean occupying places, I mean actions that will result in millions of dollars going to some of the 99% -

I have architecture, and plans that will do that - get millions of dollars distributed to the people of Occupy and other 99% people.

and I think http://www.occupyvideo.org is the easiest and best way to start.

But I can't get anyone on board. Whatever - if no one actually does anything except protest, what's the use?

What do you think Occupy should do to actually get money going? And I don't mean asking the govt or corps for money - I am not interested in those kinds of things.

What can Occupy do to get money to "the people"?

I have answers and a five year plan.

What would you suggest to get money to "the people"?

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

you just wrong about leaders. yes they do emerge no it is not desirable to feed into that, in fact what really needs to happen is vigilance towards horizontal organization. Your video site seems very well thought out such a thing is needed but i get errors trying to get near it half the time ... something being blocked or something not quite right.?

This is a great idea esp since youtube is being controlled... yet other people have generated assorted live stream sites.. so i guess.. the question is what yours has to offer above theirs?

I have a detailed plan, getting money moving is really about getting ideas moving ; where the paradigm shifts there is money to be made.


[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

Please keep me posted on the errors. I have been hacked a lot, and I can never tell when I am getting hacked. Because they always let in my ip address, but not anyone else. So I never know i am getting hacked. The billion dollar guys have hired a serious team to keep me down. They think I don't know it. I know it, but I can't do a whole about it. MAYBE with some Occupy help I can get the hacking to stop. I will send you my email address on a private message, and please send me screen shots of what's happening. Also - they read everything I write on these forums. So maybe, they will let you in, and me in, and then no one else.

I have no problem running a horizontal organization. Usually I am "the buck stops here" kind of leader. When there have been huge problems no one else could solve on my teams, like logic, or code, they would come to their leader, and I ALWAYS got to the bottom of the solution - please email the screen shots.

Can you help me by contacting others to get this OccupyVideo.org started?

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 12 years ago

I have already brought some of your points up in other forums.... I think your doing great!

[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

Thanks for the inspiration, I need it, I feel I have typed so much this week and I thought I got nowhere - maybe not, maybe I am making headway.... thanks again!

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 12 years ago

The ONLY type of beginning that exists is one that continues...;)

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

all i can do is what i am doing on my site. if you come work over there and it takes off, then people may come to your site.

[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

OK - I will try - but it's funny. All of us are doing the same thing: "all I can do is what I am doing on MY site" That's the problem - all of us are all over the place. I will check your site out....

If we all worked together, and worked on one site at time with lots of us working together, and then did that, together, for each site, maybe we would all get somewhere.

i will check out your sites. thanks for helping!

[-] 1 points by blazefire (947) 12 years ago

Thats not true! We're connecting all over the place! All our sites! And all of us! The proof is in me reading this very thing.... a no-one and a someone.

[-] 1 points by chaires (17) 12 years ago

all of the non violent revolutions have been organized and run with the books of Gene Sharp- the Arabic version was used in the Arabic spring- on ows's web page is a free copy of from dictatorship to democracy- dr sharp is already the leader of all the freedom movements-- - with the use of his books. everyone is there own leader. how do i say this- THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THEN THE SWARD! training web page http://tinyurl.com/7rvpv43

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Ya, I did a whole forum topic on Dr. Sharp....I think it's titled, something about, Advice from the master....

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

First Power, Then Change.

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 12 years ago

They're dead. Done. Over!

[-] 0 points by RussellFeingold (55) 12 years ago

Russ Feingold !

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

It would also be good to have a knuckle grinder like LBJ. Someone who simply can get things done.

[-] 1 points by gsw (3410) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 12 years ago

Energy, inspiration: Just a thought: why not "New Years Eve: Occupy your state capital" (or some other dates) celebrate the movement's success to date, have a food-drive, register voters, and let the state legislators know we're going to work in the system, not just be a group of philosophers and "occupiers" not to downplay the good of the occupiers who have worked tirelessly to shed light on these issues and bring them to the public consciousness and discussion. It seems to me, as someone looking from afar, some positive steps need to begin, which can also shed light on some of the problems we as citizens need addressed: growing income inequality, widespread poverty, oppressive tax structures, and maybe even games-playing by some on congress and legislators who don't really care to confront the many issues. For me I think we've gotta get involved, and push these issues in the system we have, cause the movement is getting branded a bit as "littering, substance using, property opposing, modern lefties" OWS needs to stress it is mainstream, as well as open to all voices, but above all, willing to work for change, not just theorize and hope. The movement has energy which ought to be positively channeled and maximized: do some real good for the "99 percent" poor: clean up neighborhoods, provide hot meals to needy kids; organize tutoring and mentoring participants, identify favorable politicians and take steps to assist. Seems like the country respects does, not talkers. Some of the people (myself) may soon be craving a bit more leadership and direction and positive pr.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

I think that the first step is to define who is for us and who is against us:


[-] 0 points by timir (183) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

you better begin your post like this: Who want to pass away in world history like JFK or Malcom X. Because if you right you die

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

"I think we never become really and genuinely our entire and honest selves until we are dead--and not then until we have been dead years and years. People ought to start dead, and they would be honest so much earlier."

Mark Twain.

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Not another Theodore Roosevelt, please.

Noam Chomsky on Teddy Roosevelt's Racism and Imperialism in Mexico and Panama

Theodore Roosevelt was a shocking racist. I don't use the analogy lightly, but it's a fact that you have to go to the Nazi archive to find anything similar. So, here's a couple of his examples about "our little region here" [Latin America].

Roosevelt wrote:

Quote: The expansion of the peoples of white, or European, blood during the past four centuries which should never be lost sight of, especially by those who denounce such expansion on moral grounds. On the whole, the movement has been fraught with lasting benefit to most of the peoples already dwelling in the lands over which the expansion took place. That's despite what the remnants of Native Americans or Blacks or Filipinos or others might mistakenly believe. Actually, genocide denial has been a leading and highly valued feature of the intellectual and moral culture in the United States and remains so right until the present.

With regard to the conquest of a half of Mexico, Roosevelt explained:

Quote: it was inevitable, and in the highest degree desirable for the good of humanity at large, that the American people should ultimately crowd out the Mexicans from their sparsely populated northern provinces. Roosevelt continued:

Quote: It was out of the question to expect Texans to submit to the mastery of the weaker race. And, of course, stealing Panama from Colombia was also:

Quote: in the highest degree desirable for the good of humanity . I won't go on with Teddy Roosevelt, whose statue graces Mount Rushmore.

Quote: The power, position and prestige of the United States had been challenged by another state; and law simply does not deal with such questions of ultimate power—power that comes close to the sources of sovereignty.

-Dean Acheson, Secretary of State Last edited by Horhey; 06-11-2010 at 10:54 AM.

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

Maybe they were the victims of abortion so they aren't going to show up.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Can't tell what you are responding to.

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

The OP.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 12 years ago

I think Jacqueline just beat the living crap out of him the alley out back because she KNOWS he was a government operative who was just pretending to be a Martin Luther King in order to infiltrate and destroy the movement. If the body is gone.....we'll know she's right.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago


[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 12 years ago

Oh. You have yet to have the honor of meeting, and conversing with Miss Jacqueline. You lucky bastage.

[-] 0 points by fjolsvit (957) from Washington, DC 12 years ago

You need a clue.

[-] 0 points by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ 12 years ago

There is One, but like He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named in the Harry Potter books, his name cannot be mentioned. Now we learn that he is the object of an assassination plot, as was Dr. King. As the current corrupt regime in America becomes more and more desperate, we can expect that the worst is yet to come. BOHICA!

[-] 0 points by Hobohemian (260) 12 years ago

I'm sure many people have told you, but leaders can be killed and co-opted. It's one thing that makes this movement different from other movements. I don't believe in the goal of anarchy, but I think that methods of anarchy such as leaderless organization, direct democracy, can be useful in an emergency. I saw how useful they were on some of our marches in Occupy Oakland. We could out group-think the cops, surprise them, use GA with straw polls and the human mic to out-flank them. They never encountered a peaceful protest before that didn't just march from point A to point B.

The problem with MLK Jr. is that they fucking killed him. They fucking killed Gandhi. They killed 1000s of other leaders whose names trip off the tongue of activists and are forgotten by the masses. There's some truth that leaders provide inspiration, but they also provide a focus for the destructive forces of hatred. If we are the 99%, let us be that and not be some leader's vision.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

OWS lacks any form of a filter in which to identify it's Gandhi or it's MLK.

I hate to say this, but what OWS needs is not a Gandhi, buy a Lyndon Johnson....a realist, idealist, bare knuckle brawler who knows how to navigate the system and apply leverage at just the right spots.

Otherwise, this movement will go the way of Justin Beiber.

[-] 0 points by Hobohemian (260) 12 years ago

I barely even know who Justin Beiber is. He's just as real to me now as he ever was. I heard that Hanna Montana is pro-Occupy, she did a song about the 99% or something like that. Swear to god (well, I'm an atheist), I heard it on DemocracyNow.

Lyndon Johnson? He was the typical shitty Democrat, dropping bombs on innocent women and children in the name of "democracy" when he's really serving this nightmare version of capitalism we've constructed.

But you were making a broader point... what you don't get, is that we are all leaders at Occupy. Each of us is doing something, each of us has a personal focus and in the group we form consensus and bring those viewpoints to a collective focus. Like, my contributions so far have been largely in encouraging solidarity and co-ordinated actions with Veterans groups for peace and with groups made up of immigrants who are concerned about U.S. sponsored groups engaging in civil rights and human rights abuses in their native countries. We need to realize as a movement that the struggles of the 99% all over the world are the same as our struggles -- the evil shit that the U.S. government has been doing to so-called "3rd world" countries for decades is the same insidious shit they are doing to us now, ever since 9-11: everything from psych-ops and oldschool infiltration/provocation, surveillance and wiretapping, and now the latest twist just this week out of Congress is -- Chirstmas present for fascists! -- indefinite detention of American citizens without due process. We are giving up the ghost.

"Go the way of Justin Beiber"? Only if the whole damn country goes away, and in that case we will probably eventually get conquered by some foreign power sadly. Because if we allow the rot to keep growing from within, it will eventually collapse and we'll lose everything. In fact, that is the goal of neoliberalism and all of our Presidents since Eisenhower have been neoliberals as far as I'm conerned. Including LBJ. There, rant over.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Why would a foreign power conquer us when they can buy us?

Neoliberals? What the hell is that?

[-] 1 points by Hobohemian (260) 12 years ago

Neoliberals are those who believe in establishing world peace through world silence -- one market, one currency, it's not something where I'm wedded to that word, but it seems like it fits.

Somebody's already bought us.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 12 years ago

This movement needs a communist sympathizing/plagiarizing/fucker of white prostitutes?

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

So much energy wasted. Your family tree must be a straight line.

I have always wondered if the Civil Rights movement actually changed the way people thought or if it simply caused people to hide their prejudices.

A scab on humanity like yourself just saddens me. It would have been better if you had simply ended up as a stain on your parent's sheets.

[-] 1 points by Restorefreedomtoall1776 (272) from Bayonne, NJ 12 years ago

So u would assume Divine Powers and choose those who should be born and those who shouldn't? I'm not that wise and u aren't either. I only assume that since YOU were born, there must be a purpose for u in the Divine scheme of things.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Just keep practicing your goosestepping.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 12 years ago

Can you disprove what I've said? But never mind. You have been subject of years of propaganda. Piss off dumbass.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You didn't say anything and I would rather try and have a discussion with my kitchen table than to waste time with a small fry like yourself. Go play with pee pee little man.

Wouldn't it just blow your mind if you really didn't exist. Perhaps you did end up just as a stain on your parents' bedsheet.....then you got washed away when your lazy mom finally cleaned her sheets.

Goodbye little man.

[-] 0 points by MVSN (768) from Stockton, CA 12 years ago

Good bye brainwashed ass bandit.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Yes, out with the wash you go.....along with all of the other filth. Poor little sperm stain, won't any of the little neoconservative girls talk to you?

Good thing you always have pee pee.

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 12 years ago

Not here.

[-] -1 points by SpartacusTheSlave (60) from Las Vegas, NV 12 years ago

Yea, and the Occupy Leader will get a bullet in the head, just like MLK. Why should we imitate the past? Fuck the past.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You're a violent little masturbater now aren't you?

The past is your guide to the future. Ignore it at your peril.

But, you will never matter much, so just ignore it. Who would notice if you made sense anyway?

[-] 0 points by SpartacusTheSlave (60) from Las Vegas, NV 12 years ago

You miss my point completely. I'm saying that the assassins of the 1% will immediately eliminate any Occupy Leader who emerges.

I worked in Moscow after the fall of the Soviet Union. I worked in Johannesburg before and after the election of Nelson Mandela. I've worked all over the Indian subcontinent. I work in Vietnam now. I've seen my fair share of revolutions. Nothing ever changes. Humankind just keeps repeating the same mistakes over and over again. It's time to break out of the old cycle. It's time to invent a new paradigm.

You New Yorkers live like cock roaches, with 20 million people living on 24 sq miles, and think like cock roaches too.

[-] 1 points by joe100 (306) 12 years ago

You know the world - most of these people do not. And yes, I want to lead occupy and yes, if I do, there is huge risk. But I am ready and able and probably the most qualified to lead the entire Occupy movement - did anyone else say that? I don't think so - there is only me who says these kinds of things.

I am neo.....


[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

So, you've seen a lot of history and probably learned from your experiences. I would think that you would be one who would strongly encourage the OWS people to learn the lessons of history......

Also, I don't live in New York. Too hard to get a Town Car.

[-] -1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago

well, well, why not you?

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve.

I will be very happy to be made Emperor if the Libertarians have their way, but for the occupy movement, I would like to attend any meetings and serve as a strategist.

I think it would be great if I could scratch out enough time to help author a Occupy Manifesto. Of course, that last word may best not be included in the title, but it would be a rather simple work detailing how we got to where we are and where we need to go.

Libertarians, no matter how much I disagree with where they want to take this country do have certain points, individual responsibility among them, that should be part of the principles of the Occupy movement. However, what Libertarians fail to grasp is the nature of our interconnectedness. Therefore individual responsibility must be wed to a society promoting the benefit of all. This duality has always existed in America, but ideologies always tend to preclude one half of the duality in their calculations.

Neoconservatives are a different group entirely, they have no good ideas. They were designed as a movement to gain power and that is all their ideas are good for. I only want to shame the little bastards for what they have done to this country.

And Liberals have a lot to offer. Of course, the modern definition of a Liberal is anyone who disagrees with Fox news. So, there is a lot to work with. But, Liberalism must be strictly wed to good government and that means streamlining programs that work, getting rid of those that don't, and shrinking government while at the same time making it more effective. That requires expertise and very practical minded people.

We have a long ways to go.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago


You Visionary!

Neoconservatives are a different group entirely, they have no good ideas. They were designed as a movement to gain power and that is all their ideas are good for. I only want to shame the little bastards for what they have done to this country.

And Liberals have a lot to offer. Of course, the modern definition of a Liberal is anyone who disagrees with Fox news. So, there is a lot to work with.


; D

[-] 0 points by Occupyalife (-7) 12 years ago

Old hippie fuck I need your help. Need help making a t-shirt. We need to draw a picture of Zooccotti Park with a cage around it. Here are some ideas: Draw a hippie climbing the cage like a monkey and throwing shit. Draw a hippie rolling in mud and shit like a pig. Draw a hippies fucking like dogs. Draw a picture of a hippie eating peanuts like a big fucking elephant. Draw a hippie as a lazy fucking Ape doing nothing.

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago

[-] 0 points by Occupyalife (-7) 12 years ago

Your bowel movement is over! Ha ha. Time to wipe and get off the pot. What a bunch oh dumb fucking hippies, ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

You got beat up a lot when you were a kid, now didn't you? Was daddy a little too rough with you.....did he make you cry?

Everyone knows that conservatism is linked to two things, authoritarian upbringings and lack of good sex.

Perhaps you just haven't found the type of sex that you need.....You really seem to have a thing for monkeys, pigs, and apes. I'm thinking that you need to adopt a sheep from your local slaughterhouse. Why don't you call her Aynny Randy. There, that would solve your problems....at least your hands wouldn't be so chaffed.

Why do Scotts wear kilts?

Because sheep can hear zippers.

You must be Scottish little man.

Oh, you tried sheep and they just didn't do it for you? Well, perhaps what you need is to try a female sheep next time. I hear there are some really dirty little Republican sheep out there.

Good luck with all that little man.

[-] -2 points by Barkode (105) 12 years ago

it’d be a piece of cake for me to “Find Him,” my scope never let me down ..

[-] -2 points by whofarted (1) 12 years ago

Well, let's see... I know! First, find somebody who actually does something...

[-] 1 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

It is a strange paradox when one is unable to do things unless he is a leader and one cannot be considered a leader unless he has done something.

How do you solve the paradox?

[-] 1 points by chinacat (1) 12 years ago

Well, that is a paradox, now isn't it? It's kind of like trying to describe 'what is the End?' - because well, I don't really think that the end can be assessed as of itself as being the end because what does the end feel like? It's like saying when you try to extrapolate the end of the universe, you say, if the universe is indeed infinite, then how - what does that mean? How far is all the way, and then if it stops, what's stopping it, and what's behind what's stopping it? So, what's the end, you know, is my question to you.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

It would be like me asking you, "have you ever given all the head you wanted?"

There is no correct answer (hopefully).

[-] 1 points by WeMustStandTogether (106) from Newark, NJ 12 years ago

You solve it by using holography.

[-] 0 points by puff6962 (4052) 12 years ago

Or, you find people who have done great things and attract them with your great ideas. They will bring with them something that nobody in OWS seems to know.....how to actually get things done in the current system and against the current opposition.