Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: This time, next year. August 2013. Will democracy be thriving?

Posted 1 year ago on Aug. 8, 2012, 10:57 a.m. EST by alterorabolish1 (569)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Unless there is real progress from social movements, the corporatists machinery will continue to be in power, a very likely scenario. As a long time politics watcher, I have finally become cynical of trying to work within the system. Voting for Obama with his hope and change we can believe in finally helped me realize the system is designed to run in certain ways and me and many others had been deceived to believe the system was still secure. That equality and justice would be upheld by this nation. Now it's apparent the system is on autopilot for the corporations benefit.

It's very clear to me that the dems policies and words, (and some deeds), are better than the repubs. There are many bright people who think our problems stem from entitlements and dependency, but I believe they've been deceived, sheltered from both the reality of the suffering, and the evil greed of the rich. Incredibly, they look forward to voting for repubs, believing this is the best path for our nation.

What if the dems triumph? Will we see small amounts of progress and let our hopes get up again? At least the repubs aren't in power bringing horror stories. Like Bush's 8 years. Obama in his 2nd term will be able to get more done and get us on the right track.

If the corporatists have their machinery running as I believe, there will be very little positive changes compared to the already in place plundering of our nation, regardless of who gets elected.

This is why I don't want to continue working within the system. It's set up with sophistication to allow insignificant changes but not the important ones.

Working outside the system is happening now but by many small groups, none big enough to rock the boat. We must realize that even tho the dems are better than the repubs, we should act as if both would lead us to ruin.

The word...LOVE... from millions who are getting their chance to vote would be a game changer, possibly inspiring other millions to come out and vote.

8 Comments

8 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by shadz66 (18128) 1 year ago

"Mitt R-money Catastrophe : Barack Obomber Disaster"

Thanx for your excellent 'cris de coeur', which really resonated with me.

respice, adspice, prospice et amor vincit omnia ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (34914) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

aljazeera - Huh - interesting program.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (18128) 1 year ago

'Cornel West' is probably also worth mentioning in terms of the appended video !

fiat lux ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (34914) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Sure. There were some very good points made - toothless health care that leaves the foxes in charge of the hen-house. The Bailout of wallstreet and the abandonment of the people by government. The new watered down financial reforms instead of reinstating Glass-Stegall. But also some obvious bias as well from the program - which is understandable.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13324) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

What you suggest is one option.

I prefer a two pronged approach - one that works at the ballot box, and another that works on the street, agitating for sweeping economic change.

IF we do not vote against that candidate who is clearly opposed to economic reform, it becomes as if we voted for him.

If, by our omission, that candidate who will most predictably oppose economic reform wins, then this becomes a road block to our own efforts on the street, as we agitate for those reforms.

We must end

  • corporate finance of our electoral campaigns
  • unregulated banking and investment
  • too big to fail institutions
  • the ideology of neoliberalism

If we can to this much - who is to say we cannot have direct democracy? I do not claim to be entirely in favor of the concept - I'm not at all convinced that it is a viable method of running a national government - but never the less -

If any movement can be built that can accomplish that short list above, who is to stop it from accomplishing anything that has been decided by consensus?

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

It's difficult to argue with your idea of the two pronged approach, and by our omission allow the candidate that would do the most harm to win. We could unintentionally make things worse. The lessor evil is better.

The big picture I see is scarier than that. The corporatists have successfully gained control of both parties, indeed all of Washington, guaranteeing their power, because it doesn't matter who wins the elections. This allows them to throw bones to some groups fostering the illusion that policies and elections actually matter. They remain in control however, and not only will we be frustrated by their actions and inactions, the plundering will continue.

Revolution is thrust upon us. All we need are the informed masses and democracy.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13324) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

I think the big picture is a lot more complicated than you suggest.

The XL Pipeline is an example - the President denied a permit to build the whole project in Jan - he had wanted to wait until an environmental review was complete but the repelicans insisted he decide then, and so he turned it down.

In March he approved a small section on the southern end of that pipeline - located in Texas and Oklahoma. These areas aren't environmentally sensitive, they have large oil infrastructure like pipelines already, and they have populations that support the project, both at the cultural and the political level.

Approving that portion of the project also blunts criticism from repelicans insisting his policy of denial of the pipeline results in higher gas prices.

Such repelican charges are without merit, as the Christian Science Monitor article demonstrates.

“The firms involved have asked the US State Department to approve this project, even as they’ve told Canadian government officials how the pipeline can be used to add at least $4 billion to the US fuel bill,” Philip Verleger, president of PKVerleger LLC, a Colorado consulting firm that specializes in research on oil market economics, wrote in a Minneapolis Star-Tribune commentary last March. - from page 2

The point is that it is complicated, and often the issues can be spun either way.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by alterorabolish1 (569) 1 year ago

I don't blame Obama as much as the corporatists machinery in place. The suits in Washington do what got them there in the first place, make sure there's more of the same.

[Removed]