Forum Post: When You Don't Vote....
Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 25, 2011, 9:49 a.m. EST by aahpat
(1407)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
You are just a willing masochist and submissive of the 1%.
You guarantee the 1% control over the democracy when you do not vote against them.
You cement their control of our nation when you do not organize against them.
You give them our nation FOR FREE, when you do not fight their subversion of our democracy.
The 1% depend on your disaffection.
The 1% require your self-disenfranchisement and disengagement from the electoral system.
The 1% win without a fight when you don't organize and vote against them.
INFORMED CONSENT How many Americans know what the Congressional Progressive Caucus is, and who are its members? Larger than the Tea Party Caucus, the Congressional Progressive Caucus get almost no media coverage. Why is that? At a minimum, the OWS Assemblies should consider identifying and endorsing Congressional Progressive candidate as a way to educate the public and empower Caucus members who have long supported principles embraced by OWS movement. Or alternative, OWS ought to consider featuring each member of Congress who is up for election in 2012, broadcasting their voting records and the source of their campaign funds. The biggest threat to the 1% are a truly educated electorate.
Absolutely! I agree 100%.
If OWS were to assert a broad affinity with the congressional Progressive Caucus as well as the Congressional Black Caucus and do so over time it would bring these people into the coverage lexicon of the media more. These would become the voice in Congress, TODAY, of the OWS. The Congressional Progressive Caucus get no media time only because they are not perceived as having a lot of support in the public. OWS can very quickly change that.
This is a really good thought. Thanks for bringing it up.
Here is a compilation of members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Congressional Black Caucus who, in 1999, voted to repeal Glass-Steagall. While I agree that the Progressive Caucus is more in tune with OWS values than many members of the Democrats and Republicans these idiots who voted to repeal Glass-Steagall should be in jail not in Congress.
Sheila Jackson-Lee
Xavier Becerra
Earl Blumenauer
Corrine Brown
Andre Carson
Elijah Cummings
Rosa DeLauro
Sam Farr
Eddie Bernice Johnson
Carolyn Maloney
James McGovern
Jim Moran
Jerrold Nadler
John Olver
Frank Pallone
Ed Pastor
Charles Rangel
Louise Slaughter
Bennie Thompson
Mel Watt
Congressional Progressive Caucus http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/
BLACK CAUCUS http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/
Rep. Bishop, Sanford D., Jr. [D-GA-2]
Corrine Brown
Rep. Carson, Andre [D-IN-7]
Rep. Clyburn, James E. [D-SC-6]
Rep. Cummings, Elijah E. [D-MD-7]
Sheila Jackson-Lee
Eddie Bernice Johnson
Rep. Meeks, Gregory W. [D-NY-6]
Charles Rangel
Rep. Scott, Robert C. "Bobby" [D-VA-3]
Rep. Thompson, Bennie G. [D-MS-2]
Rep. Towns, Edolphus [D-NY-10]
Occupation is inertia when it does not incite real social change.
Real social change comes from curing the body politic of the social disease we know as political party corruption.
Standing in the streets screaming at the walls of Wall Street is meaningless if Wall Street does not feel threatened by the ability of these OWS masses ending Wall Street's corruption of the body politic.
Will OWS cure the social disease of political parties and Wall Street?
Or will OWS scream at the walls of Wall Street like mindless banshees howling at the moon?
What ows needs is the support of the masses. They can only get it by causing huge disturbances, because the majority of the masses are addicted to a substance or passtime that does nothing but waste time and/or lose money. Social diseases need all of society to be down with the cure. Right now much of society doesn't realize it's sick.
That's all true, but this is about voting. Draw their attention to the causes, but please do not discourage people from voting. Encourage them to vote.
for who and for what?
You would want the person you vote for to be more progressive minded and of course that would be Obama. His hands have been tied on many things but at least the CLIMATE for reform is better. And that's what you want; an environment where a rising third party will have a snowball's chance in hell to develop and grow. And then work hard to make it happen. I know this will be voted down to the bottom of the page by conservatives on here. But there are many of you out there that know it's true.
"progressive", in the parlance of our times, means "progressing towards authoritarianism". And we're almost there. I'd say we've progressed enough. Let's "regress" to the age of reason and remember what individual rights are, their source, and the role of government in human life.
For whoever and whatever they believe in. Or against what they don't believe in. There is no need to tell someone who to vote for. Just don't lose your voice.
if we had votes within the ows on the values we wanted to support, i would vote. I assume this discussion relates to voting for political candidates who's actions are decided not by what they articulate before the vote, but by what they need to do to keep the money coming from the 1%, so i don't vote.
To begin finding people who can represent your views. People you feel will help make the changes you envision. Getting into the arena is crucial. That takes time, but letting it slip into the rep hands will be even more dreadful as far as I'm concerned. They are not going to tear it down and start from scratch just because people aren't playing.
if we find people who can represent our views, we will have to put them into office. when they are in office, they will be paid huge sums of money to act against or neutral to their views. politicians are purchasable. there are many men in the market for politicians right now. we are not. therefore, searching for, evaluating, finding, and voting for politicians is a waste of time.
Well, if you have no faith in anyone involved in OWS, then what is the point of even participating in that?
Try to stay off attributes of debaters and on attributes of the topic of debate. If you mean the members of the OWS who are running for office; i don't think they will end up doing what they say they will do. This isn't their fault. they could mean to, intend to, try to, but in the current state of our political sphere, in order to keep their jobs, buy their food, support their loved ones, they would have to bend to the will of the 1% who funds their actions as politicians.
So basically you think it is impossible to have any honest public servants? I disagree. There are honest people out there. However, the only way to end this cycle is to get corporate and union funding out of politics. In order for that to happen, there has to be some level of participation.
And it's impossible to 'stay off' the attributes of a person who has made a statement. They are your thoughts and without questioning you about how you derived at your opinions, I wouldn't understand where you are coming from or confirm what I infer from your statements.
question how i arrived at my conclusions. politicians might be honest, however, in order to keep their jobs and their paychecks, they act in regards to who is paying them rather than what they said they'd do, because they won't get paid to do what they said they'd do, but they do get paid to do what their monetary contributors want them to do. I feel like i've said this alot. Is there any part of the above sentence that you disagree with or that doesn't make logical sense?
That part I got ages ago, like years ago, and agree with. How not voting or participating is going to change that is what I don't get.
having less that 10% of the population voting lets the entire country know that very, very few people are still supporting the government in it's current state, that the occupy movement has spread to almost all members of society, and that we all want the system to change immediately, and that we all recognize that we have each other's support in demanding change. Had i seen that only 10% of the population voted let's say, 8 years ago, i would have looked into it wondering why. that's what we want; everyone who hasn't looked into what's going on to look into it. the occupy cities are good for that, but the media is doing a wonderful job of portraying them as useless, lost, jobless poor who just want to change the system because they're the ones getting screwed. but we're all getting screwed. that's the message EDIT: lol i can't reply anymore
where did you get those stats? are they for pres elections? it's more like fifty percent and only once in history has it ever been higher. look it up for pres elections.
People have been voting 'against' what they don't believe in for decades. The problem is that nobody who has anything to offer seems to be running for election.
That is true. And a good part of it is because only the right-wing has been articulating a set of values for politicians to adopt. So that is what they adopt.
The OWS is articulating a set of social justice values and if we work at making politicians learn these values some of them will adopt these values to win OWS votes. But OWS must make it clear that there are real votes behind these values not just a lot of loud mouthed crazies standing in the streets.
Okay. For me they offer a chance for my ideologies: freedom of choice for women, gay rights, etc. I do not want things that my grandmother fought for (peacefully) taken away from me.
You are right on! Some folks actually think sick is healthy!
I agree. And the American people also want action which is why OWS has the massive public support that it has. Translating street action into political action will increase respect and support for the OWS priorities across a broader strata of Americans.
If we don't support politicians we like we can at least attack politicians who we really dislike. I have been doing this with the current members of Congress who, in 1999, voted to repeal Glass-Steagall. that repeal did more to cause the collapse of the American economy than anything. Here is a list of those current members of congress who screwed us:
The congress that Crshed America http://home.ptd.net/~aahpat/aandc/congcrash.html
If your members of Congress and/or senators are on the list I strongly encourage you to use this information to write negative letters to them and to the media in your state. Especially columnists who might sometime use the information against them in election columns.
don't waste your time with purchasable politicians when you don't have enough money to buy your own.
Don't waste your time period. Because unless this gets political PDQ, you are wasting your time. There is no way around it.
So you are capitulated to the status quo.
I am not. I have posted many alternatives on this thread to the bought and paid for duopoly. You are too myopic to read.
just read the other posts. took a few quotes, hope you don't mind the lack of context. It should be okay though, since they're all on the same topic.
"I agree that we need campaign finance reform. But I don't think that we can[t] get it until we change enough of the politicians in power so that they are willing to reform campaign finance. " Politicians want to keep their jobs. They are paid the highest by the 1%. they act in the interest of the 1% so they can keep their jobs; changing any number politicians won't make campaign finance reform happen.
"What most people do not understand about the political corruption is that the corrupt only hold a winning margin with their corruption. they do not own the entire system. Part of that winning margin is their dependence on disaffected people like you to not vote. Every person like you who gives up on voting saves them the hassle of buying a vote to counter you. If enough of the disaffected were to unexpectedly vote they would not have enough bought votes to retain their slim winning margin." nobody buys votes. the rich buy politicians. voting is a choice between politicians. politician A and politician B are my options. politician A and politician B are paid by the 1% and act in their interest. that's why I choose not to vote for politicians A or B.
"The ONLY count that matters to the parties and Wall Street is the electoral count" incorrect (partially. i can't speak for wall street, but i think they are irrelevant to this). the only count that matters to the parties is the dollars in campaign donations
"They own the parties but we still own our votes." our votes are useless if they own the parties, because votes choose between parties which are both owned. (beating a dead horse)
So then you are only here to discourage others from trying to fix that which you have given up on.
Stop wasting my time.
i don't know where you got that. I'm here to encourage others to send the message that nobody needs to vote by not voting (they'll show how few people voted after the fact). I haven't given up on it. I think it needs to be fixed. Logic says it's useless, so it needs to be changed.
I don't know if you've noticed but electoral politics has been utterly useless for decades. It hasn't changed crap. You complain that hitting the streets is useless, when in fact that's the only thing that's ever changed anything lately. The whole tenor of public debate is already changing in a way voting hasn't been able to do in a very long time.
I never said hitting the streets is useless. Hitting the streets, developing a powerful political momentum by that action and then doing nothing with it is useless.
If street action does not translate into electoral change it is no more than petulant children screaming at the top of their lungs until all of the adults leave the room to get away from them.
At the moment, voting is utterly useless in bringing about electoral change. Who says nothing will be done with it? Things are already being done with it, look around, the political landscape is shifting a bit already.
Non-endorsement is a good tactic and it's been very succesful to this point. The point is to shift the debate. Then good candidates will emerge all on their own, without OWS ever having to endorse anyone.
That is too idealistic and too much like an excuse for doing nothing.
Voting is useless only because those who have corrupted the process have brainwashed you into being disaffected. When you don't vote they win.
It's not idealistic, you just don't really comprehend how political leverage works.
I'm not "disaffected" or "brainwashed". I'm not some student radical. I voted for decades. When I voted, they won. Every time without fail. You may say I voted wrong or whatever other logical twists and spins you want to try and put on it, but the facts remain. If anyone's brainwashed here, it's you, with the silly myth that democracy is merely an election, the one the media endlessly repeats and hammers into your mind with sheer repetition and here you are repeating one of their favourite talking points verbatim, like a tape recorder. The Soviets had elections, they were mandatory! You went to jail for not voting. They had a good reason for that, it legitimized the system.
Elections do not a democracy make. It is broader than that. They are only a tool for exerting political leverage. When the US had its revolution, did they vote the British out? They did have voting in the colonies, you know. You're mistaking the process for the goal - even though the process has been utterly subverted and can't serve the goal by any means, you just can't let you go because you can't distinguish between the two. That confusion has been deliberately encouraged.
It is not useless. Whether republican or democrat, we all have strong beliefs in one thing or another. Not voting leaves it open for whoever is in office to make changes to things you may have fought for in the past, such as Roe V Wade. There are many things worth voting for. Or against. Just because there are bigger issues you may see at stake right now, does not mean there are not other very important issues/rights we must protect.
Yes, it is useless. Look around. Wake up.
Sure there are things worth voting for. All the candidates are willing to toss you a few single-issue crumbs to get your vote, and they even follow through once in a blue moon, in as half-arsed a manner as they possibly can. But the whole thing has become theatre, bread and circuses.
Roe v Wade is a good example. What does the state honestly care about whether abortion is legal or not? It doesn't. That's one of the things they throw out there to divide and conquer, is all that is. It's like tossing a grenade. Squabble over that, the state says, but stay out of my business - out of my wars and exploitation, I'll never let you vote on that. And it doesn't.
I've been awake. You see futility in voting. Then don't. I've said my piece on this issue.
Lupe Fiasco, the guy who donated dozens of tents and a stereo to the protesters said on live television to not vote...
Fortunately most people think for themselves rather than blindly doing whatever they are told to do. Otherwise there would be no OWS.
Well, then, when Lupe gets some chick knocked up, he can forget about pro-choice, because not voting will only let those who DO vote control things.
Primary elections always have very low turnout. This is how the Tea party was able to get so many people elected. They understood this and used it to their advantage.
OWS has wider support in the public than the TP and we could muster a much larger turnout in the primaries if we got active ad organized ourselves NOW! We could take over the Democratic Party, take it away from the right-wing corporate whore who control it today, if we put our minds to it.
very true
not only vote but participate in your caucuses to really get things done
DON'T VOTE! (It just encourages them).
Kidding but love that, and there is wisdom in it. I plan to write in "None of the above" or vote 3rd & 4th "party" candidates. I am also vowing NEVER to vote for ANYONE who takes corporate bribes. Seriously.
Just refusing to vote for candidates with corporate money would do it.
Find local people you trust to draft who are not corporate and Wall Street whores. then promote those good Americans now!
"NOTA" is a last resort rather than voting for a duopoly Wall Street money whore.
Its much better to find alternative candidates, NOW, and start promoting them for WRITE-IN in the primaries.
I plan to Write-In Elizabeth Warren for president in the Democratic primary. Wall Street hates and fears her.
right on! Spread the Gospel!
The United States election Project: http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm
Includes voter turnout for all modern national elections going back to 2000.
2010 general election turnout 41.6%
2008 general election turnout 62.2%.
This is the percent of voting eligible Americans who still believe in American democracy enough to actually vote.
People who discourage voting while at the same time claim to represent the views of 99% of America:
In the last presidential election year, 2008, 62.2% of the eligible American electorate disagreed with you by voting.
When you denounce voting and American democracy you are only representative of 37.8% of eligible American voters.
it's not the casting of the votes, it's the counting of the votes. putting aside corrupt mythology your only choice is dumb or dumber. only the 1% reps get on the ballot.
Which is why I advocate bypassing the ballot access corruption that the two parties impose at the state level. Write-In is highly discouraged by the parties because it could, if used creatively and in force, completely neutralize the entire two party duopoly and the billions of Wall Street duopoly dollars.
I am not advocating simplistically playing the same tired old two party game. I want to change the game altogether by mass use of the mechanisms that the parties are required to leave available but really fear ever being used by the people.
the parties will try to refuse to even count Write-in but if people were to make a concerted program of using it, even or rather especially for candidates on the ballot that they like, we can force them to respect Write-In. Can you imagine what would happen if OWS people made an effort to Write-in a good progressive Democrat candidate who is on the ballot. The Democrats would be forced to count all of the Write-in votes to get that person the vote needed to be elected. So Independent Write-In's would also have to be counted.
There. That is how to undermine their subversion of the Write-In option.
Creative new ways to use the existing system is the best way to get new people who we want in office. People who agree with us about campaign finance reform.
A vote not cast, is a vote for the Republican party.
America has a Two Party System. One party is clearly on your side, the other party thinks you’re and Anti-American mob. At some point in time you’re going to have to pick one. Choose wisely, your future is at stake.
Hi aaphat, Agree. Best Regards, Nevada
Ignore this asshat, I'm convinced it's running for congress or senate to get into the club of corruption and the lifetime pensions/benefits.
Denunciation and personal attacks are not rebuttal. They are the fetid effluent of a butt head. A juvenile who has no concept of adult behavior.
[-] aahpat 6 hours ago
"Silly load of crap."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd-SLRyuRq0&feature=relmfu
vote on that
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbp6umQT58A
and that too!
In a one-party state with two factions/wings, voting is completely irrelevant. All it does is legitimize a bad situation. The Soviets used to force people to vote, it was mandatory. Why do you think they did that?
Boycotting the vote til we're offered something reasonable seems perfectly valid to me. Electoral leverage doesn't work anymore because of institutionalized corruption. You're given a choice of a few candidates all of them already bought and paid for. What does it matter which one you elect?
boycotting the vote until your offered something reasonable will leave you blue in the face waiting. It will never happen. You have to participate or they simply write you off as choosing not to participate.
Electoral leverage does not work because you don't know how to use it. And your not willing to learn how to use it.
What most people do not understand about the political corruption is that the corrupt only hold a winning margin with their corruption. they do not own the entire system. Part of that winning margin is their dependence on disaffected people like you to not vote. Every person like you who gives up on voting saves them the hassle of buying a vote to counter you. If enough of the disaffected were to unexpectedly vote they would not have enough bought votes to retain their slim winning margin.
They win because you don't vote against them.
They win because you leave only their supporters to vote.
They win because you are not creative enough to get around their corruption. To bypass their con game.
If a significant percentage of Occupy supporters all worked to remove any incumbent from office who has signed the Grover Norquist pledge never to increase taxes, there could be significant movement in the government in a short period of time.
The super rich are protected from having the total tax system become progressive, while services vital to the middle class are slashed, by this fealty to a lobbyist.
Here is using the democratic system for our social justice purposes.
Have a bunch of OWS people register Republican in the primaries where some weak tea party people are trying to hold onto their seats won iin the low turnout 2010 off year election. Then vote against the tea party candidates in their own primaries.
A lot of people don't understand that the tea party took those seats in 2010 in an off year election where no more than 35% of eligible voters voted altogether. So many of them won with no more than 15-20% even of Republicans voting for them. At most. These people are very thinly supported and have little Wall Street support because they are mostly out in the boonies of the mid-west or rural areas.
We have the power, if we organize, to take out some of the blue dog Democrats this way too. A lot of them win in thin elections and don't expect opposition. A strong primary opponent supported by the activist voters of OWS could change the scene.
OWS represents something that the parties have not seen in decades, dedicated social justice activists. these are the Americans who, decades ago, were the electoral foot soldiers who the Democrats depended on to get out on the street and get out the vote. But the Democrats turned to the right and lost these ardent Americans. Now, for the first time in a long time OWS is activating these people again. Not for the Democrats but for social justice. OWS supporters have always been a power in American politics. They simply have been disaffected from participating by the right-wing Democrats and Republicans. this is why I feel so strongly about getting OWS to participate. We have the power we just have to use it.
Very interesting idea!
Thank you for thinking about it seriously.
boycotting the vote until your offered something reasonable will leave you blue in the face waiting. It will never happen. You have to participate or they simply write you off as choosing not to participate. Electoral leverage does not work because you don't know how to use it. And your not willing to learn how to use it.
My personal experience in life says something totally different. I don't know how to use electoral leverage and I'm not willing to learn? What the hell do you know about me? I voted in every election for over 30 years - even municipal elections (actually I still think municipal voting is worthwhile and encourage people to do that, but thats beside the point).
Guess what, I am blue in the face, not from holding out and not voting, but from voting and waiting for it to have any effect at all. You can't bypass their con game, Lord knows I have tried. In the real world, at least under present conditions, all these high-minded ideals about voting, fail. They fail completely.
Please don't forget that we ALSO vote with our dollars (see http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-power-of-the-people/ ).
We compiled some shopping guidelines under a forum post here and hosted them at http://bit.ly/DoYourBit where they are widely accessible and can be shared via social networks. Please read the guidelines and, if you agree, spread the http://bit.ly/DoYourBit link as far and wide as possivle using e-mail, twitter, facebook, etc. We need a LOT of people on board if we are to have an impact.
Note there are no ads at http://bit.ly/DoYourBit, and I do not receive any reward other than the satisfaction of helping Americans use their economic power to change America.
I could not disagree.
Changing purchasing patterns of Americans tells the politicians that people really want the changes we are demanding.
Yep, and POLITICAL power is only one of the tools the 99% can employ. The OTHER form of power available to the 99% is their ECONOMIC power. They can "vote" for what companies support their values every time they make a purchase.
Your last point about not organizing is the shift OWS and the NYCGA seems to be having difficulty accepting:
Your top priorities differ from her top priorities differs from his top priorities, and differ from my top priorities. Therefore the priority is to hold a National General Assembly (NGA) where a list of top priorities can be hammered out coming from the roots, what I call the congressional District General Assemblies (DGA's) or 'spokes councils'. The final 'official' act of the NYCGA is to announce the NGA.
OWS exercised its 1st Amendment right to peaceably assemble.
OWS MUST exercise its 1st Amendment right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
This is the one thing 100% of Americans will understand
NGA NOW all roads lead to Philadelphia July 4th, 2012
I agree.
I think that some groundwork can also be laid going, into Philadelphia, to assert political power for these priorities. Asserting political power now will encourage politicians to add the priorities to their platforms in an attempt to entice our votes. Getting our priorities into the system is what we want. I think.
By July 2012 most of the primaries for congress will be over and none of the politicians will have had the benefit of learning our positions.
If the politicians don't hear it from us they won't hear it from anyone.
One simple act is required from the NYCGA. Announce the NGA and outline the itinerary leading up to it. This is the only thing Washington and especially Wall Street doesn't want to hear. This announcement could be made today, it would be the shot heard around the world. Every member of congress would feel like a deer in the headlights. They'll be falling over themselves to address our concerns. Yea they might betray us one more time but you know, it's that whole 'we do not forget' thing in 2016 ; )
And that may be OWS's permanent seat at the table. A congress that doesn't listen to the 99% is a congress that will be voted out in the blink of an eye by the tsunami. The petition for redress and the consequences from ignoring it may be enough to preclude having to bother with forming the 99 party. I'm AOK with that too, for I HATE POLITICS lol
Come on OWS get it together. Come on NYCGA do the right thing.
Have you ever actually been to an NYC GA? Have you ever seen what a tedious process it is to get anything past the GA? Personally I think the GA is wonderful, but people are full of great ideas with absolutely no clue as to how to actually get them implemented by the GA.
I attended my local #occupy GA. I would describe it as completely unproductive but that doesn't mean it was a waste of time.
You paint a picture of a GA in gridlock and producing little or nothing.
We are all thankful to NYC for leading the charge but it is coming clear that the blood of OWS is pooling in the hands of the NYCGA
NGA NGA NGA...
OWS is a very, very new social movement. It takes a human baby 9 months to be born from the point of conception. Using that metaphor OWS is not even out of the womb yet, much less in its infancy. It has a lot to learn and a long way to go. Patience is a revolutionary virtue.
The mother of all movements isn't looking very well. I hear there is a good hospital in Philadelphia where she can give birth ; )
Yes, yes, yes.
This is what is needed to give existing politicians alternative platforms to the party dictated positions they have no alternative for today. If they have it now, going into the primaries, then they can assert this alternative to the party hegemony. And others who might be inspired to compete with the status quo candidates will have something to say that is different from what the parties and Wall Street want them to talk about.
People are not dying to vote.. they're dying because we're continually voting in the kind of merciless powerhouses that are responsible for most of the misery in this world. A vote for this government is putting the power in their hands again.
If we make a very public record of the number of people who are unwilling to vote - i.e. voting for OWS within our own system, then for the first time the government won't be able to claim that they were voted in by the people.
Let's say we represent 30% of the population right now.. us and supporters.. and I actually believe the numbers are much higher. If we go public by stating our names and in support of OWS building a new system of government, the world will know that a good chunk of our population is no longer participating in the system that has become the power hub of the 1%. This could be a very powerful thing. If we just play into their hands again.. we'll be working for them for the rest of our lives.. instead of working for us.
Also.. this number is certain to grow.. just imagine if by September next year.. half the population refuses to vote! We would be the hub of power and would grow.. we would be the change we want to see.. This is a huge opportunity for us.. I really hope everyone sees that. It's so important.
Bullshit and sophistry. Rationalizations for defeatism.
The ONLY count that matters to the parties and Wall Street is the electoral count. You refuse to vote against them so all that they count is their willing sycophants. You lose they win. By refusing to vote you are as much a willing participant in their corruption as they are.
People around the world ARE literally dying to vote. You think not voting will make a point? You can bet your ass those elected WILL be representative of the people who did vote, because I assure you the teapartiers will be exercising their voting rights.
I find our elected officials incompetent to govern. They need some incentive that will mean something to them instead of putting funds at risk that will cause harm to those persons and institutions who can least afford such loss. I suggest that these officials’ pay and/or benefits be cut if and/or when they fail to do their job. As it is, party “a” threatens to harm parties “”d” through “z” if parties “b” and “c” can’t come to an agreement. It makes no sense whatsoever to threaten Congress with cuts that will not have any impact on them directly. Our Constitution establishes the type of government we are to have. We do not need to establish any “sub” groups within these institutions. They are all responsible collectively to govern and if/when they fail to do so they are all liable collectively. The “carrot and stick” method only works when the carrot or stick is guaranteed to the same one. These officials have received their carrot upon being elected as they shall receive full pay and full benefits for the rest of their life even if they only serve one term. I say put all options “on the table” including their lifetime pay and benefits. I’m of the position that such a “stick” would cause these officials to get their head out of the clouds and their feet on the ground.
I strongly disagree. I think the occupy movement has to take the vote back by boycotting the vote and demonstrating that we know this government is corrupt and not working for us no matter what flavor we choose. It's all run by the same people and we need to learn this lesson now if we're ever going to extricate ourselves from this trap.
"take the vote back by boycotting the vote"
Oxymoron.
Boycotting the vote? That's just what the right is hoping will happen. People literally dying around the world for the right to vote and this is what you have to say? Find people to represent your ideals. Copping out does nothing.
Wrong, you give them implied consent to continue their fraudulent and criminal actions against all persons, unknowing of the actual game.
You even condone it.
Constitutional Convention and separation from the Incorporated UNITED STATES. Simple.
If you vote for bad people. I didn't say that. It is a bad assumption that you are making and inserting into what I have been saying all along.
You are voting in a system that is not the same as what originally stated with The Constitution for the United States of America.
You are voting in a system that you know is blatantly corrupt and unjust. You may not know why, but, you know it's bad wrong.
You are voting in a system operating out of an Incorporated District Of Columbia under THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
It is not what most seem to think it is.
http://www.usavsus.info/
Excuses and rationalizations for failure. Pure defeatism.
Nothing that you write will ever change any of it.
Why do you bother?
why do you persist in perpetuating something any reasonable man can see and clearly know is wrong?
Because your too ignorant and myopic to offer a rational or even viable alternative. You are subjugated to the success of the status quo. I am willing to work to make something actually change.
Absolutely not!
You are too stubborn to consider the actual reality.
The Incorporated UNITED STATES OF AMERICA enslaved everyone.
UCC1.
Learn. You really have our positions quite reversed. You subjugate yourself by implying the current system can be repaired. It cannot nor can I force you to be open as to why this is true.
Silly load of crap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uliLfykURYo
I don't need your anti-democracy hate America ideology and excuses for inertia.
Good, YOU VOTE for those that you know, with absolute certainty, go to DC, and according the very Legal Document you wish was the law of this nation, commit treasonous act after treasonous act, with continued immunity.
and you do these things every time you vote, everyone knows that voting is wrong when you have to make the choice of 'which one is going to screw us with a smaller one and not as deeply'
Agreed. Some people will use this movement as a cop out to not go to the polls, which is a defeatist attitude. Voting is a duty not just a right. There will be no major changes unless you, as a US citizen, participate. The system is not changing anytime soon, so you can either let people whose ideas you don't embrace run the nation or you can get out there and participate. Believe me, they are hoping you don't participate. Only half of US citizens vote - are you one of those who doesn't vote?
When you do vote - you're responsible for the system created by the people you endorse.
Yes. So?
So, that means you're accepting the system as it is. On that note, it seems somewhat hypocritical to protest.
Not true.
OWS Does not have an agenda.
OWS has a manifesto. A statement of principle.
An agenda is a statement of how to achieve the goals and aspirations of a manifesto. An agenda is a timeline and declarations of political tactics to achieve the manifesto.
America's original revolutionaries published the Declaration of Independence as a manifesto to incite people to action. They then organized a Continental Congress to plan a political and military agenda for achieving the Declaration.
Well I agree with you and I only wish I had articulated that statement as well as you just have. One can argue however that the general assemblies are akin to the Continental Congress.
general assemblies are akin to the Woodward Tavern. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Resolves
The National General Assembly is akin to the Continental Congress
OWS not = to Arab Spring
The Arab Spring movement is a pro-democracy movement working to clean up the corruption in their governments with democracy.
OWS insists on being a non-participating-democracy movement refusing to get involved in fixing and cleaning up American democracy.
Well I agree that OWS is not an arab spring but tell me what do you suggest when the 1% buys off both parties so that it doesn't matter whom you vote for? Its a rigged democracy when you only have two parties controlled by the same interests.
Participate and organize in the electoral process outside the box.
I have written specifics elsewhere on this thread. I don't have the time right now to repeat it over and over.
Your rigged democracy attitude is the most successful aspect of the rigged system. As long as you remain disaffected the parties and Wall Street are guaranteed to win since you refuse to even try to fight them for our democracy.
Its not a refusal to fight, its figuring out how to fight.
This entire thread is about talking up ways to fight back and take back our democracy. All that you have offered is denunciation and defeatism. Not solutions.
The solution I believe is forcing one change on the system and that's election finance reform. You cannot change laws or reinstate regulations or stop the revolving door between washington and the financial sector until you can stop the buying of public officials. Unfortunately many in OWS are not interested in addressing one goal and then strategically working on the rest of the agenda.
I agree that we need campaign finance reform. But I don't think that we can get it until we change enough of the politicians in power so that they are willing to reform campaign finance. Too many of the politicians who would have to agree to reform are beneficiaries of the corruption.
I wrote more about this yesterday on my new blog:
Liberate American democracy http://liberate-american-democracy.blogspot.com/
"Campaign Finance Reform – The Impossible Dream"
Yes too many, but its also a reality that Washington has a way of flushing out those who are not approved by the elites
My thoughts too - Good Post!! :)
You find people to represent you. You don't have a defeatist attitude. You don't just sit on your butt on election days.
But progressives did find people to represent them. People voted for Nader, they even voted for Obama when they thought he would bring about a certain degree of change. People are considering R Paul. Its not finding someone to represent you its finding someone who can break in and once they do work for your interests without selling out.
Then keep searching. Obama did what I mainly wanted him to - getting those kids the hell put of Iraq. I shudder to think what would have happened had I not voted. No, he's not perfect, but the Republicans are blocking him at every turn.
His timeline for the exit of Iraq was exactly the same as that of Bush. Meanwhile there are still 39,000 troops still stationed in Iraq, all other coalition troops have withdrawn.
So what are you going to do about it? Not vote? Not find people to represent your views? Give up? There are many ills in our system, but unless you think you're overthrowing the govt tomorrow, not voting does nothing. That anyone would argue against voting is just absurd. That's what this thread is about - the need to vote, not the many other issues.
I never said not voting is an answer nor that one should over throw the government. I am saying there isn't one person out there that I would consider voting for except perhaps R Paul but there is much of what he says that I disagree with. I just find him honest and consistent which is refreshing.
I doubt you could handle the actual truth from mr paul.....
http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/#comment-404410
go on his site, look through Mr Paul's forums
http://www.dailypaul.com/45521/strawman-ucc-1-has-anyone-tried-this-and-is-it-true
How do you mean FrogWithWings? I disagree with R Paul on many fronts but there are some issues where I agree wholeheartedly. What truths do you think I am not taking into account?
I think he would advise any and all to file a ucc1..... for starters
Then I hope you vote for him. There are no perfect people, nor perfect candidates. Personally, I can't vote for him because I am strongly pro-choice, but I will be voting.
I too am pro choice.
Hey, see there. People are using their right to vote by voting this down! Voting can bring your own points to the top!! Proof that voting does work.
Thank you! Seeing people around the world literally putting their lives on the line for the right to vote and then seeing so many people in the US who don't even participate in their democratic right makes me sad and embarrassed.
[Removed]
Which part of 'Wall Street owns all of it, including the Supreme Court' don't you understand. It makes no difference who you vote for!
Wall Street owns your vote?
You have to vote for their parties or nothing?
That is how they want you to be. Surrender to their control. Vote as they dictate or don't vote at all. Either way they win. Thanks to you.
What a defeatist attitude.
Given the fact that the 1% has two political parties and we of the 99% have no serious political party that we can reasonably call our own, what in the world is there to vote for in THEIR elections. We have our own institutions, They are called General Assemblies. If there is not one near us our job is to create one, not vote in the elections of the 1% for one of the candidates of the 1% to serve in one of the institutions of the 1%.
You are simply deluding yourself. The general assemblies mean nothing if they do not translate into political actions that the two parties and Wall Street cannot control. At this point that is not happening.
You lock yourself into the structures of the two party hegemony and then moan about being powerless.
They own the parties but we still own our votes. We can lock ourselves into their political use of our votes or we can liberate our votes and direct them Independent of their compartmentalization of the body politic.
True but that takes a lot of money. It takes money to create a platform and galvanize enough votes for a viable candidate. Just look at what happened with Ralph Nader.
No it doesn't. that is what Wall Street and the two parties want you to think.
Did it take a lot of money to get the OWS out in the streets initially? No.
Does it take a lot of money for OWS to use social media? No.
Does it cost a lot of money to find people you respect and promote them on social media and in local news media for public office? No.
Does it cost any money to Write-In a candidate of your choice rather than organizing a political party campaign that is restricted to the expensive and subverted ballot access system imposed by the parties and Wall Street? No.
Well out of curiosity whom is it you respect and trust enough to promote for public office? Assuming they would be willing to take it on. I can think of no such person. We can choose a candidate we like but we cannot protect them from the media onslaught and attack that would draw the majority of americans in opposing them, not to mention keeping them from being assassinated by the establishment if their proposals are populace and radical. Americans don't really have much time for third party candidates
You should read this thread.
I personally plan to change my registration to Democrats for the primary and Write-In Elizabeth Warren for president. Wall Street hate and fears her. that is the best reason I can think of to draft her.
Others have posted the fact that the Congressional Progressives Caucus is larger than the tea party aucis in Congress and they are already elected. they actually share many of the OWS values. OWS support for them, NOW, would increase their profiles in the media for the primary elections. I also like the Congressional Black Caucus who also share many OWS values.
Congressional Black Caucus (43 including many also in the Progressives Caucus) http://thecongressionalblackcaucus.com/
Congressional Progressives Caucus (76 members already elected in Congress) http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/
I would not blindly support any of these people but its a start. I would not support any of them who are on the list of members who voted for the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999.
The tea party caucus has 29 members. The Progressives and Black Caucus have at least three times that already elected and in Congress. this is the kind of power that we could be seizing, RIGHT NOW, if we organized around it.
I LOVE Warren! But I fear she is a lamb for the slaughter, she isn't ruthless enough, the fear her because she is incorruptible and there's no guile in her, but I think the sharks would eat her up. You need someone who has her qualities but can also play hard ball.
I was truly impressed when I saw her testify in Congress a couple of times. No shrinking violet.
She is running for the senate in MA. and I hope she wins. She would be a powerhouse. I am doing the Write-In as a political statement. Giving the finger to the Democrats and Wall Street.
Yes I know she is running and I also hope she wins but I still think she is going to face off with a torrential opposition and I only hope we are all there to support her if she does, but I once noted that when she was ousted by the Obama administration because of Republican disapproval that no one from the public reacted. There were no phone calls of disapproval and immediate reaction to let Obama know that you keep her or else. It was a sad and frustrating moment for me.
But there was and is a reaction. there were lots of people really pissed on the mass media forums. I know that I and others did write to the White House and denounce them for it.
And, I am sure, it was one of the many accumulated things that finally incited an action like OWS into being.
Just because it was not singular and massive does not mean there was no reaction.
Well, I hope you are right because I believe Warren to be a fine lady of integrity and I would love to see her in a position where she could represent the american people.
So just give up. Sit and watch it crumble. You can say, well I carried a sign. Wasn't that enough?
It will crumble anyway. There is no stopping this countries economic demise. But acknowledging that the political system is rigged doesn't mean one has given up. You have to acknowledge the impediments to change before you can address means of action.
I'll let your comment speak for itself. Enjoy the show.
Well its like listening a Greek citizen saying that they don't want to leave the EU but they don't want the austerity package, that they believe the problem is one of leadership, when it really doesn't matter whom the leader is because they will eventually default if they stay and will have to go through austerity and a purposeful default will lead to a period of extreme austerity. There is no way to escape the economic crises once you've amassed an enormous debt.
Yes, we all agree and get all that. This is about voting. We can find all kinds of issues and make all kinds of analogies, but unless we participate in a system that is not going anywhere any time soon, we are spinning our wheels.
You cannot ask people to participate in a corrupt system, you can only ask people to change it and the system if resistant to change. There are a lot of people out there who participated in the system when they voted for Obama, they believed that he would bring some meaningful change, live up to his mandate and it didn't work.
But who do you ask to change it if not people you elect to represent you? It's not going to change itself. Involvement is inevitable if you want change.
Again wasn't that what was happening when everyone went out and voted for Obama? Wasn't he supposed to represent? No one thought 8 years of Bush administration policies were going to end with another Republican so they voted for Obama, the man of "change" and "yes we can" and all we got was bubkis.
He might not be our dream Pres, but I'd choose him over McCain and Palin any day. The man of change has been blocked by the Republicans at every turn. He has tried.
Urgg. I think your being a gentleman or a lady, far too generous. I think Obama sold out far too early and there was no reason he need be blocked by Republicans when Dems held the house and congress not to mention the White House.
a lady. perhaps I am. nonetheless, although I'm not so agreeable to the idea that he sold out (we'll leave that one), I'd have died if I had to hear Palin one more second. I just hope OWS starts participating on some level. Not endorsements, not being co-opted, but it has to get politically involved on some level I think. okay. I'm done for now. goodnight.
I agree I want us to participate, but I want us to participate from the ground up. what I mean is that right now the movement is mired in partisanship and labels. "I'm LIberal", "I'm an anarchist", "I'm communist"....socialist, vegetarian, I hate this injustice and that injustice and we will march against police brutality one day and then tuitions the next and then protest war and then this and then that....what have you. We shouldn't bring any of those labels nor those agendas to the table nor the forefront. Our personal vision of the world should be besides the point. We should unite under a banner which is OWS (if we are to be inclusive and not divided by our own particular political slants). And OWS is here to address...what exactly? Election finance reform? Glass-Steagall? A new political party that addresses financial corruption? Vote Eliot Spitzer for president? Worker's rights? Whatever! We should be under one banner that cannot be splintered internally nor externally, something we can all agree on is a particular target for change and invest all of our energies into that one message. This the american people can participate in because we are no longer an anarchist, a marxist, a libertarian, a democrat, or whatever. Right now any meaningful message is being lost because each person is focused on their individual message...that cannot call itself a movement. We cannot be everything and anything for all things. As long as we represent ourselves as a group of disparate people with differing ideologies on a variety of issues we cannot be effective. This doesn't mean we abandon the massive amount of detailed issues we care about, it just means we all agree to address a particular goal until it amounts to actual change, then we can hit our next target. We have to be one thing and one thing alone, OWS. And OWS has to represent and focus upon one agenda and one agenda alone, its obvious we all care about equity and justice and want to be rid of corruption. Its obvious we all love freedom that allows us to survive, grow and thrive but what we need is one focal point that not only those involved can rally around but the bulk of the american people. Not a long list of wants and desires that will never be met but one demand that cannot be ignored because it galvanizes the entire nation. The entire nation cannot be represented by a 'tent' of diverging groups unless its under one flag and that flag represents one road. If we are serious then we are not simply interested in our own personal visions of the world but what we would like to achieve for the entire country, if this is true then we have to put our labels aside, our left vs right paradigm aside and focus on ONE meaningful goal and then get that message out and strategize tactics to meet that goal. It can, as in Egypt, encompass an entire nation but only if we are not 'of the left' or 'of the right' or 'in the middle' or care about this one day and that the next.
Now watch how this proposal get's shot down because its asking people to put their labels aside and their personal ideology aside etc etc etc.
Perhaps, one day OWS may choose to participate in the electoral arena. But right now is is way too premature. The OWS is not even out of the womb, much less in its infancy. The quickest way to its demise would be premature engagement in the electoral process, particularly as the Democratic Party has been the grave yard of every mass movement since the days of the Populists more than 100 years ago.
That is silly.
OWS needs candidates as much as it needs an agenda.
And it needs a political strategy that the two party hegemony and their Wall Street slave masters can clearly see as a viable political threat to the status quo. Not in twenty years, NOW!
OWS has an agenda. The movement is the agenda. We are the agenda. If you want something more concrete than that look at the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City, the only official political statement yet passed by the NYC GA, available at this website and elsewhere on the web. Ore look to the cover page of this forum where it says, "we don't need politicians and we don't need Wall Street to build a better society." That strikes me as a clear enough position, whether anyone likes it or not.
If you do not, with political action, threaten the political control by Wall Street of the two party system they will never see a need to recognize, accept or even capitulate to your agenda. they will always laugh at the agenda. It is worth no more than the pixels that render it on the monitor.
Though it is primarily a social movement, OWS is political. It's just not electoral, nor should it be at this early stage of its development. The movement will either grow or it will die. If it grows sufficiently it will not have to worry one whit what the two parties of the 1% say of do. If it doesn't grow it still won't matter since we still don't have any control over their parties or their institutions, nor should we, after all they are their parties and their institutions, not ours.
Delusion.
Excuses to ignore the status quo that the movement supposedly organized to fight.
Rationalizations for inertia.
And very childish.
I would hardly call the occupy movement inert. OWS in New York calls an action virtually every day, usually more often. In California they are calling for a shut down of the entire U of C system on Monday and a shut down of all west coast ports on 12/12. In Tahrir Square (yes, we are an international movement) we are engaged in pitched battles with the police and the military. Hardly inert.
Puffing out your chest and screaming at the walls of Wall Street is not action. It is little more than a child stamping their foot in a tantrum.
DO NOT compare OWS to the Arab Spring. The Arab Spring is a pro-democracy political anti corruption movement. While you insist that OWS is nonpolitical. There is no comparison. And it insults the integrity of the Arab Spring to falsely make the association.
oh please I am happy that some people in America are waking up Of course other people around the world are horribly oppressed and trampled upon. Why are you making this a pissing contest? Change doesn't take place until we demand it and fight for it here in America and around the world
OWS is neither demanding change nor fighting for change if it does not assert the political power inherent in its numbers and sympathetic supporters.
this is just the beginning wait and watch
"wait and watch". Inertia rather than action.
Seize the moment. OWS has momentum now. That momentum is failing because of the lack of an agenda for seizing the moment.
If you are paying any attention to the news you would know that we are way past the Arab Spring in Cairo. We have visitors from Tahrir Square come and visit us at Zuccotti Square. They are in solidiarity with us and we with them. While they freely acknowledge the profound differences between our two cultures, they also acknowledge more similarities between our two occupations than many liberals would suggest. Our occupations in the US are not mere temper tantrums, they are practical models of how we can and might run society without Wall Street, without their political lackies and without their state.
And what are they saying about voting? Are the representatives from Egypt suggesting you don't vote?
No but they did say that we ought to reconsider our position on nonviolence.
No reply button below, so will put this here as response to your last post. I certainly do not think OWS needs to go away, even if I do not wholeheartedly agree with some of their tactics. I am a democrat. that does not mean I would never vote outside my party (although I only have once). There is no need to align yourself with a party. Frankly, I think the Republican Roemer is more in tune with the OWS movement than any other, but we don't hear much from him. I do, however, think OWS has to get political - even if it involves adding their own candidate to the ballot (although I still think that is a bad idea). The point here is that voting is imperative if you really want change. The system we have in place is not going anywhere. There will be no violent overthrow of the govt anytime soon: the only way to make change is to work within the system.
In response to the Egyptians urging violence, I still do not see to what end this movement would need violence.
I'm a democrat too. So is virtually every other OWS activist. But we are most certainly NOT Democrats (case is extremely important in American politics) and if there is anything that would destroy OWS it would be its attachment in any way to the Democratic Party and institution which has been the grave yard of every popular mass movement since the days of the Populists more than 100 years ago.
I think the Democratic Party is a greater danger to OWS than any of the other real dangers: cops, cold weather, the black bloc, the Republican Party or anything else because of the way it would hamstring and cripple the movement. For evidence of that all you have to do is look at what happened to every other mass movement after they attached themselves to the Democratic Party. No thank you very much.
Besides the grievances outlined in the Declaration of the Occupation, OWS is for three things: democracy, nonviolence and revolution. That should be apparent to anyone who bothers to actually read what this website actually says as opposed to what folks who drop in and write messages on the forum say.
Despite the fact that the movement is correctly committed to nonviolence, very few people are absolute pacifists and you don't have to be a police agent or a provocateur to think about self defense when a cop is kicking the shit out of you.
To what end?
Obvioiusly the Egyptians are coming out of a very different culture, but for the most part they don't seem to get the idea of not fighting back when attacked. What is more important is our principle of mutual solidarity.
Obviously, some people like yourself think that electoral politics is of cardinal importance and would like to see OWS get involved in electoral politics and particularly (I think) working for candidates of the Democratic Party. I certainly think that people who have ideas, any ideas, including that one, should fight to try to get their ideas implemented, but I don't see it happening and from my perspective for that particular idea right now, that is all to the good.
I also don't see OWS going anywhere or disintegrating or anything like that any time soon. Not only are there hundreds of occupations and GAs all over the nation, but it is an international movement. Once occupation may faulter, but new ones are arising every day and there are so many that it is hard to envision the whole movement collapsing any time soon. Beyond that the issues they are addressing are objectively real and as long as they exist I don't see the movement disappearing no matter how viciously it is attacked.
well look were peoples priorities are they will line up outside of walmart for days to be trampled on like animals for 10 tv sets but ask them to wait in line to vote for issues more important for their lives and the lives of their families.
The 1% thank you for your disaffection. It keeps them in power.
Disaffection spreads like a pustule oozing rash out from the social diseases of the two party infection of America's democratic body politic.
Why do you allow what others do or don't do dictate what you do? Are you a robot? As long as you don't vote they have no reason to either. Then the parties and Wall Street win without even trying.
Sorry, I don't wish to 'participate' in a system in which the very act of participation is the deferral of my ability to think and act for myself into the hands of so-called 'representatives.' Political mediation is not social engagement, but the valorization of passivity.
[Removed]
so....is it the lesser of two evils? Some folks aren't given much of a choice being that the majority elects either a republican or democrat...if you don't go with either of these political ideologies you are left out in the cold....you could play spoiler and vote for someone out of the loop (Ex. - Nader) but in the end it will be a democrat or republican....just two parties to serve a large population....not good enough if you ask me....
nope, either choice, when voting in this alleged democratic republic, are equally evil. sometimes, one side is slightly less offensive and more beguiling.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/interesting-read-about-the-constitution-and-corpor/#comment-404410
Sure, there is a lot of garbage in the political party pipeline. We need to be creative at changing that.
If a hundred OWS members in each congressional district were to send copies of the OWS statement of principles to their members in Congress and to candidates for Congress these politicians would see that as representing thousands of people. Politicians see every person who is willing to put out the effort to write to them as representing a thousand like-minded people who were not up to writing. As a hundred like-minded constituents who do write represents thousands of like-minded constituents. Lots of voters.
So this is working to change the mindset of the incumbents. We can do the same for the challengers who run against them in the primaries and general election. They really pay attention to people who are activated enough to express themselves in letters to the politicians and letters to the media. Get a hundred people out in front of a Congress critters office and they will pay attention to your values.
Sure its not fun having only Democrats and Republicans to choose from. The lesser evil choice. I decided long ago that I will never be voting for winning politicians who share my social justice values so I settle for voting for politicians who share my values knowing that I have expressed my values by my vote. Then if politicians want to WIN my vote in the future they know to reflect and respect my values.
I do Write-In voting to express myself. When there re no candidates I like I will Write-In "End the Drug War" or whatever. Or, as in the upcoming Democratic primary, I will Write-In Elizabeth Warren for president because 1. I really dislike Obama, 2. I dislike the Democrats not offering a contested primary and 3. Wall Street really hates and fears Warren so Writing-In Warren makes a statement to Wall Street and the parties.
The point is that it is your vote. Use it as you want to not as the parties and Wall Street pigeon hole you into using it.
This is the most important post on this site right now. Political action is the only way to go from here. None of the changes OWS demands will ever happen by holding up signs and sitting in parks. Just pointing out that someone has a flat tire does nothing to get the car back on the road.
"Then keep searching. Obama did what I mainly wanted him to - getting those kids the hell put of Iraq. I shudder to think what would have happened had I not voted. No, he's not perfect, but the Republicans are blocking him at every turn." there are two problems with "fighting" via votes. every politician we put in office will want to make money. By doing what a member of the 1% wants, they make thousands of times as much money as they could ever earn catering to us 99%. We will never elect a nonpurchasable candidate, because that's imaginary. What we need is a recognition of what's really happening. we sit in the streets and don't vote so that more people see that something is wrong with the country, that the status quo is unacceptable.
Then work to get money out of politics. Holding up signs is not going to make that happen.
in order to get money out of politics, we need all of the 99% to be ready and willing to enforce a change in the system. We need all of them because the system by which we interact needs to change, which is important to all of us. We also need all of them, because the less of them we have, the more of them there are that can be bought off to fight against us(policemen/politicians/etc) HOLDING signs up works towards getting the message out that there is something wrong, that change is necessary, so that we can gather more of us together.
No doubt, but that voting is even being debated is ridiculous. While some are just holding signs and not voting, Republicans will be digging in even deeper, making the battle even more uphill.
debating voting is ridiculous. it shouldn't even be considered. "republican"..parties are irrelevant here. parties only exist to make everyone think that there are two sides to change, and so that they argue with each other rather than unite and actually change things. regardless of party, your politician will be bought. We don't need to worry about anyone digging any deeper, we just need to worry about rallying everyone we can and coming up with the changes that will reinstate the values that are most important to the majority of us.
Not clear what you are saying here. Rallying them to action to reinstate the values, yes? What action shall they use?
i meant rallying citizens to let the government know that we are a massive majority and that we need to completely change the system because it's incompetent
I never go to the polls. Why? No one of candidates no says of Truth. Why? It's i do not know. But i know what is Truth! Nardialog.
Well then you can't complain if you don't like what the outcomes are.
We have to do the best with what we have right now
Until we somehow replace it with something better
And if you won't even take time to vote I can assure you that you won't get involved in any other democratic process either.
In any other process - just will not. Only - Nardialog. Becouse, any other process - not is democratic.
Did you come here from another country? Or do you live elsewhere? I cannot imagine anyone using their energy to come to the USA and not participating. What would be the point of being here?
I am Russian, and I live in Russia. And, do not want to go anywhere from Russia.
Okay, well that makes more sense I suppose. I can only speak for my country.
Okey )
But I'd love to go to Russia! Добрый день!
Always - Welcome! Sincerely!
спасибо. Приходите к нам тоже.
Thanks )
you have owners http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI
The votes of the population actually has very little to do with who is elected in the 1%.
As long as you give the 1% the exclusive right to win by your not voting they will continue to win. And they will thank you for not voting.
Where do you get that? The popularity vote does absolutely nothing to do with who gets elected.
Blah, blah, blah....
Defeatist. Wall Street thanks you for your deciding to not vote them out.
I hate the term but if I had to give the term to anyone I would say you are a troll. I am not a defeatist. I just think that when I want to do something I go out and do it. If I want to put something in the public eye I go and do it with or without the backing of anyone else.
Quite a dizzyingly circular paragraph that actually says nothing about either the topic or anything else.
Actually I'm saying if I want something I go and work for it instead of being a pussy and standing in a sea of faces. Linear enough for you?
A troll would be discouraging people they know usually vote Democratic to vote.