Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Whenever OWS finally comes up w/ demands, you do realize that 300 million Americans AND their Representatives get to have a say, right?

Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 13, 2011, 1:48 a.m. EST by ARealAmerican (23)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

300 million Americans will determine the direction of America.

Not a minority group calling itself OWS.

so, if/when OWS makes any decrees and demands, they are utterly useless if the majority of Americans disagree.

You all do realize this...correct??

118 Comments

118 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by rohjo (92) 13 years ago

"300 million Americans will determine the direction of America" has yet to be the case. 1% does. Which is what all the fuss is about. Welcome aboard.

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

Then I suggest you and ALL involved w/ OWS just not vote in 2012.

Myself, I will.

let's see what happens...k?

[-] 1 points by Cindy (197) 13 years ago

We are going to vote but it will not be for a bought and sold Dem. Rep. or any other named group. It will be a write in for GP (General Public) or OWS. This is a revolution. Meaning a complete turn around of Power. No one has said this is easy. It is hard and there will be many who suffer. Left and Right and right down the middle. We are having labor pains while giving birth to a new found Democracy. I only hope the 1% do not decide to fight because then it will get not just very difficult and painful but bloody as well. " I promise ".

[-] 1 points by mattjiggy (31) from Durham, NC 13 years ago

If OWS truly represents 99% of the Nation, they should have no problem getting their write-in candidate elected. I'm looking forward to meeting their nominee.

[-] 1 points by joewealthyhaha (152) 13 years ago

so your threatening physical harm on the 1% people. complete lunacy. why? because they are more successful than you? by the way, i hear there are witches in Salem we need to burn -- thats how intelligent you sound. Stop blaming others just because youre not satisfied with your place in the world. you people are so stupid

[-] 1 points by Cindy (197) 13 years ago

You must have had to use both brain cells for that post.

[-] 1 points by joewealthyhaha (152) 13 years ago

run along cindy, your revolution needs you.

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

you're f*'n awesome!

[-] 1 points by MadCat (160) 13 years ago

Plus one.

[-] 4 points by rohjo (92) 13 years ago

Demands would be the death of #OWS. Amazingly, the anonymous consensus of this so-called leaderless resistance movement seems to know that.

Populists formed a third party to fight the Robber Barons. It was built by farmers going from neighbor to neighbor. I sometimes think of #OWS as electronic populism getting bodies out in public space.

I don't trust #OWS to list national issues. Then who, exactly, would claim to be #OWS? That's not its function. It simply gives license to everyone to start saying, "We're mad as hell, and we're not going to take it anymore."

Can't beat that. The longer #OWS can hang in with that, the more successful it will have been. The magic of #OWS is its power to stimulate dialogue under a simple, broad umbrella, not to manage or create dialogue.

[-] 1 points by DRMartin789 (287) from Broomfield, CO 13 years ago

Brilliantly said! :)

[-] 1 points by occupyRWC (2) 13 years ago

excellent. the recurring theme I am seeing in my interviews is this.

Im here because I can be listened to... despite the injustice, there is hope.

this is the spark of peaceful revolution that is interwoven throughout the fabric of our collective cultural history.

non-violence always paves the way for the new social order.

angry, concerned citizens join together to practice democracy.

seems to be happening with more frequency ... and this is the first time ever that it has happened on a global scale.

should be interesting XD

[-] 2 points by ConcernedEconomist (67) 13 years ago

Exactly, which is why OWS's main demand/objective needs to be something the ENTIRE 99% can stand behind, not some leftist social agenda.

[-] 2 points by fivefingers (14) 13 years ago

If OWS is successful then OWS won't be a minority group anymore. And even if OWS is not a majority, then great power can come from a minority (e.g. the Tea Party movement's representation in and affect on Congress). And do not worry about the decrees and demands... the declarations for more democracy. They will come. You could even have a part in deciding what they are if you want. Perhaps you should remember that we are part of "we the people". Do you realize this is correct?

[-] 0 points by antiOWS (6) 13 years ago

Not sure why you hate capitalism. It led to that fancy iPhone you are using to tweet your communist demands.

[-] 2 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

yes, I could just Stalin speaking in that post by fivefingers... what communist demands?

[-] 2 points by deldeldel (23) 13 years ago

Where did the person say a single thing about hating capitalism? Or make any communist demands? You trolls are really losing it.

[-] 1 points by fivefingers (14) 13 years ago

I think you meant "corporate oligarchy"? Or perhaps you meant "plutocracy"? Yes, I hate those. Those are what we have. I hate them because they are not democracies. They take power away from the people. You don't agree?

Alas, I cannot afford an iPhone. Also it is rude to put words into people's mouths and assume. I only speak for myself and not all of OWS. I do not want communism. I do not hate capitalism. I do not tweet.

[-] 2 points by MadCat (160) 13 years ago

I'm one of the 300 million. I live in the Midwest. I support them. I'm in touch (Locally) with others who do too. In turn we've been in touch with our so called representation.

All because OWS resonates. We aren't the only ones.

You do realize that... correct??

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

OWS is a Leftist movement of primarily Obama voters.

face facts...just because you try to give yourselves a different name and claim to speak for everyone...doesn't change the facts.

[-] 1 points by MadCat (160) 13 years ago

Enjoy your delusions I guess.

[-] 1 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

I support them and I very much dislike Obama. I'm a Ron Paul guy. I've also considered Johnson, Romney, and Huntsman.

Unless Ron Paul runs, for me it's going to come down to picking the piece of shit that doesn't smell as bad as the other piece of shit.

I hate both Conservatives and Liberals with a passion. I hate Democrats and Republicans for being sheep to the system.

[-] 1 points by deldeldel (23) 13 years ago

Just because someone voted for Obama doesn't make that person your enemy -- unless you choose to make it so. If that's the case, then you're enslaved by an ideology that isn't even your own, just some garbage cooked up by sociologists working for media tycoons. Get past the stupid narratives about Obama and socialism and the tea party and try making new friends. You're not so insecure you can't be friends with people who disagree with your politics, are you?

[-] 1 points by BevHarris (1) 13 years ago

A profoundly dangerous idea. It's the magician's trick: Don't look there, look here! While this well-funded organization places everyone's eye on the temptation of greater access to select presidential candidates, what is never mentioned is the choosing process: Internet voting, nonpublic, unauthenticatable, centralized power, and entirely under the control of whoever runs the server. This is a trojan horse and more effort needs to be invested in who holds the golden purse strings. Bev Harris Founder - Black Box Voting A National Nonpartisan Nonprofit Elections Watchdog Group

[-] 1 points by the55 (22) 13 years ago

Voting says nothing; spending your money says everything! 18-40 year-olds rep $2.3 Trillion in spending. Corporate Replacement Plan.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/dont-change-the-system-use-the-system-against-itse/

[-] 1 points by occupyRWC (2) 13 years ago

When demands are made, we will no longer be the minority.

[-] 1 points by Teacher (469) 13 years ago

But the majority DO agree with us. That's how democracy works. We the People. A real American should know that already.

Do you really think that politicians care about you or your vote when they have corporations shovelling money at them? They repay the favor by shoveling taxpayer money to the corporations.

[-] 1 points by marchhare (2) 13 years ago

ARealAmerican suggests we have a voters' strike. I agree. It is the one thing the establishment would fear the most. It would signal an awareness of the population as to the fraudulent and corrupt state of voting in general and that people no longer believe in the words of the two rich politicians who are set up to be voted for. Voting in a dictatorship is not necessary. Why then should we bother to choose which one will do us damage? It would give the lie to "democracy" in the u.s. and would throw the establishment into disarray.

[-] 1 points by smarzie (62) from Portsmouth, OH 13 years ago

The only thing that will achieve is business as usual because other people will still vote for the kinds of people we already have. We need to get the old politicians out and get people who will listen to us in office.

[-] 1 points by hotdoghenry (268) 13 years ago

Well that's not entirely true. It will be about 25%of the US population that will decide. That is the percentage of Americans that vote. So with the current population at about 360m, less the 100 million people will decide.

All this protest, destruction of property, waste of Tax dollars will mean nothing at he end of the day.

[-] 1 points by smarzie (62) from Portsmouth, OH 13 years ago

Unless all the protesters and people around the nation supporting them vote for the same things. I would dare to say there are millions in support of OWS and that number could certainly grow.

[-] 1 points by hotdoghenry (268) 13 years ago

They only have two choices, Obama or whoever the other guy is.

And most of these protesters are pro Obama.

[-] 1 points by smarzie (62) from Portsmouth, OH 13 years ago

Why can't we come together under a third party? A fourth party? Why does everyone think that is impossible? It is possible....if enough people want it. And the only way to show people that it's possible is to get out in the streets and tell them. Educate them. Show them they have the power to choose, they don't need to stick with the 2 party system. It can be done.

[-] 1 points by hotdoghenry (268) 13 years ago

There is no time now to do that. We have a third party, the tea party and it is aligned with the GOP.

The majority of people in this so called movement associate the government problems with both parties. Why do they do this? Because they are really left wing radicals, and they do not want to bash what they have been part of in the past. I say most because that it is not all.

Frankly if you take out the religious undertones of the Tea Party, this so called movement and the Tea party have much in common. But they will never admit that.

You don't see many OWL people calling out specific govt leaders.

I constantly call out Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd, Weiner, etc and I am criticized for it as a troll.

[-] 1 points by smarzie (62) from Portsmouth, OH 13 years ago

Well, I'm with you in thinking they're ALL corrupt and selling us out, but are you saying we should join with the Tea Party? Because there's no way I'm on board with that....

[-] 1 points by hotdoghenry (268) 13 years ago

NO I did not join the tea party at all. Yet I agree with many of their principles. They are not all corrupt. The majority of corruption is on the left. The majority not all.

When I vote for a republican, I do it on another parties line. Same thing if I vote for a democrat, I vote on another party line, that is to send a message to the party and the candidate.

The republican nominee for President will be the best choice this time around whoever it is. The real challenge is getting rid of the elite rich sum in the Senate that Is truly "Owned" by big biz! Kerry (Doesn't read the paper has it read ti him), Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, Dodd. This is the majority that controls the govt.

They are owned by big biz. But there is another greater problem everyone is missing. They, the Senators OWN their constituents! Only 25% vote, so as long as they are in bed with the labor unions, they will continue to get elected. That's the real racket!

We all need to make changes locally. That's even more important. Obama is already done!

[-] 1 points by smarzie (62) from Portsmouth, OH 13 years ago

Now see, I'm on the other side. I vote liberal and I TOTALLY disagree that the Republican nominee will be the best choice. Have you seen the lineup? NO THANKS. lol. But I agree that the Democrats have been failing miserably, as well. And that's why I don't think we should vote for either of these 2 parties and we shouldn't encourage anyone else to, either. It's not too late. We both agree we should get all these people out, so why no try? Aside from that, I wouldn't vote any of these upcoming Repubs anyway since they're trying to destroy this movement with their misinformation and scare tactics.

[-] 1 points by hotdoghenry (268) 13 years ago

This movement is self destructing.

I know this sounds crazy but I don't think you are a liberal.

Obama is a mess. He has no leadership skills whatsoever. I think he had good intentions but he had no experience. Not in business, not as a leader, not as a business owner, and not politically.

Check and see if you are a liberal.

Do you believe that everyone should pay the same rate of tax on their wages?

Do you believe that there should be no loopholes for non payment of tax both corporate and individual?

Do you believe in Free Markets without govt intervention?

Do you believe that big money lobby's are bad for the country?

Do you believe that current campaign contribution laws need reform?

Did you answer yes to all of these?

[-] 1 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

being a good business owner does not make you a good president.

Theodore, the greatest president in our country's history, never owned business.

[-] 1 points by hotdoghenry (268) 13 years ago

Doesn't make you a bad one either.

[-] 1 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

I never said it did.

and if you agree with me then why did you use it as an argument against Obama being president? contradicting yourself right now

[-] 1 points by marchhare (2) 13 years ago

ARealAmerican suggests we have a voters' strike. I agree. It is the one thing the establishment would fear the most. It would signal an awareness of the population as to the fraudulent and corrupt state of voting in general and that people no longer believe in the words of the two rich politicians who are set up to be voted for. Voting in a dictatorship is not necessary. Why then should we bother to choose which one will do us damage? It would give the lie to "democracy" in the u.s. and would throw the establishment into disarray.

[-] 1 points by atki4564 (1259) from Lake Placid, FL 13 years ago

Exactly, which is why what we most immediately need is a comprehensive strategy, and related candidate, that implements all our demands at the same time, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management System of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves at $500 apiece. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:

http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures

Join

http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/

if you want to be 1 of 100,000 people needed to support a Presidential Candidate – such as myself or another you'd like to draft – at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.

[-] 1 points by joewealthyhaha (152) 13 years ago

Its a free country -- so you idiots in this room are free to be ignorant and blame others for your place in the world

[-] 1 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

I go to Georgia Tech getting B.S. in Mechanical Engineering and after I get my M.B.A., which I plan on doing before I turn 28, I will probably be making six figures for the rest of my life. I hate my place in the world. Our government is beyond corrupt. In all honesty, if they would just legalize all drugs, but in particular weed, I would just sit back and take it and just not give a shit. But because drugs are illegal I hate the government more than I hate anything else in the world.

If an atomic bomb exploded over DC tomorrow, I would send a $1000 bottle of champagne to whoever set it off.

[-] 1 points by joewealthyhaha (152) 13 years ago

wow, heavy stuff. by the way, i have BS in Engr and MBA. good luck with whatever you do.

[-] 1 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

that's pretty cool. What type of Engineering? and where from (both degrees)?

[-] 1 points by JoblessBrigade (34) from New York, NY 13 years ago

It's no different than the Tea Party assholes, a group that is there to bring the party of our choice back into line. Without this movement, there is no resistance whatsoever to the eternal greed machine.

[-] 1 points by Mariannka (63) 13 years ago

I am amased at how Occupy works. Would like to have your input on the movement to understand it better. Could you answer 10 questions, please. Happy to share results if you are interested. Please, take some time for it: Thank you! http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/Q3NF7QB

[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 13 years ago

I have read research that if everybody in America was to suddenly get up and vote in a election Democratic/Republican the democratic option would win out 5 to 1 every time. But no one votes much in our country other countries have a much higher turn out. I think that majority of the non voting is that no one believes in the two party system any more with good reason.

[-] 1 points by andrewpatrick46 (91) from Atlanta, GA 13 years ago

This is an exaggeration, but 60-70% of the country, depending the political climate, identify themselves as Democrats. A lot of these people just don't vote. Republicans have a much higher turnout.

The reason other countries have high turnout is because voting day is a national holiday and LITERALLY NO BODY WORKS.

[-] 1 points by BeautifullyGifted (2) 13 years ago

Okay people, so if you don't agree or don't like the way things are being done, lend a helping hand. Try and find ways to help organize OWS. Expand it in an organized manner. Things have to be done on a much grander scale. There has to be a clear focus as to what the ultimate goal is, the importance of that goal, and who's affected by it. Show those 300 Million Americans why they should support the cause and get involved. I'm organizing a nationwide bus ride to DC in support of OWS to flood the streets of Washington down to the White House. Anyone interested in helping out send me a message.

[-] 1 points by PeoplehaveDNA (305) 13 years ago

Here I can convince a majority of center right American's in two lines: Stop voting against your social economic class (you fatalist) and stop watching Fox- News. There you go they will come over soon.

[-] 1 points by MikeyD (581) from Alameda, CA 13 years ago

Because accepting your social position in life, begging for government handouts, and blocking out information is the best way to improve ourselves.

[-] 1 points by BillNC (4) from Charlotte, NC 13 years ago

Just a thought... Why not hit them where it really hurts. What would happen if the working class suddenly turned off the flow of capital into Wall Street in the form of 401K deposits for a month?

[-] 1 points by FuManchu (619) 13 years ago

Interesting you bring that up. A lot of people have started taking out their 401k early on. That is a crash that is coming soon.

[-] 1 points by BeautifullyGifted (2) 13 years ago

That's exactly what I say. I want to initiate a nationwide boycott of certain industries and companies that have done more harm than they've done good.

[-] 1 points by BillNC (4) from Charlotte, NC 13 years ago

Just a thought... Why not hit them where it really hurts. What would happen if the working class suddenly turned off the flow of capital into Wall Street in the form of 401K deposits for a month?

[-] 1 points by hairlessOrphan (522) 13 years ago

Yes, we do. So you can relax. No need to worry; we're paying attention to that.

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

Yes, it will be interesting to see if OWS, w/ their Moveon.org, Soros, Van Jones, MSNBC, Olbermann, Moore, SEIU and Union support can convince a majority of center-right Americans to join them.

ain't gonna happen...since we see OWS for what it really is.

[-] 1 points by hairlessOrphan (522) 13 years ago

No, you don't. If you looked around honestly, I guarantee you would find Americans you disagree vehemently with among the Occupy supporters. And you would find Americans you agree with, too. Because there are liberals, conservatives, independents, whack jobs, conspiracy theorists, pragmatists, globalists, particularists, and at least two clowns all here.

There's a lot of discussion about what they all have in common. I'll be honest with you: it's not fully-formed, yet. But there are a few threads bubbling up to the surface.

Now you have a choice. You can make your assumptions, and just fall back on your disdain. That's fine. Or you can look around and see for yourself. Up to you.

But before you decide, let me ask you one question: are you frustrated? Are you angry with what's going on in our political system? I don't know, maybe you're perfectly happy with the status quo. If so, this isn't for you. But let me assure you that, if that's the case, you're the minority this time around.

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

yes, there are ppl of all stripes and political ideaologies in OWS...I know this.

And that is why it cannot make any concrete demands.

  • The Left in OWS want Bigger Govt (Obama)
  • The Right in OWS want Smaller Govt (Ron Paul or Republicans)
  • And the small fringe want Anarchy or Communism

OWS will be unable to make any real demands or present any solutions without alienating the other groups within it.

[-] 1 points by jmcdarcy (158) 13 years ago

I actually think this is a fairly astute comment. But it doesn't mean that protest in and of itself can't affect change.

[-] 1 points by DRMartin789 (287) from Broomfield, CO 13 years ago

Protest, in and of itself, often convinces politicians who know what to do, that they have the support to go ahead and do it.

[-] 1 points by jmcdarcy (158) 13 years ago

I suppose that's also true. Here's the issue maybe. I posted a thread with what I thought to be the causes of the financial crisis. I was corrected by a former wall streeter. Of course, due to the complexity of the issue, I was still confused as all hell. I researched more and more about MBS and CDS and over aggressive lenders and repackaged securities which were made to look less risky than they were. I don't know if ANYONE fully understands what the hell is going on. Our financial system...banks, financial services, fannie may, freddie mac, the fed are the most powerful institutions all interconnected. They have become the 10 headed hydra which threatens to destroy the whole country. The average person is getting fired and kicked out of their home and they can't get medicine for their dying grandma. We don't have the time to figure out exactly what the hell is wrong with the system. We just know that the system doesn't work and something has got to change. But to be fair, I think the government is totally backwards these days and they've built a monster of a financial system, and I don't think they have any clue what to do either...they certainly can't pass a referendum on themselves.

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

@jmcdarcy I think that's a fairly accurate description - things have gotten so complicated it's extremely difficult for any one person or groups of people (i.e. elected representatives, and in particular, heavily biased ones) to untangle now. And so, the status quo wants everything to stay the same.

But a form of Direct Democracy could untangle the mess, and pretty fast, and the result would be more sustainable. Without severe shocks? No, but at least the U.S. would finally be headed down a stable path rather then self-destruction and chaos.

[-] 1 points by jmcdarcy (158) 13 years ago

I agree. Have you heard of Americanselect.org?

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

thanks for the link. Much snazzier site than mine (/ours) - www.ospoliticalframework.wordpress.com To be honest, lot's of kind of 'big' names behind it, means lot's of money, means... just how I see it.

Question: If Americans are "deciding the issues" why the need for a president or elected representatives?

Why not just continue the discussion/contributions on the internet (i.e. 100% Transparent), create an official .gov website (using open source programming), and then actually vote openly (registered voters under full legal names for anyone to see) on the issues ourselves? No sense in going half way. So much cheaper, think of how many salaries and benefits we could cut out, how much smaller we could make government...

br, Michael

[-] 1 points by jmcdarcy (158) 13 years ago

Seems ambitious. For now though, doesn't americanselect.org seem like a step in the right direction? Remember, we need to get a foothold in the gov. to make change.

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

Sure OSPF is a leap, but going half way just won't cut it - like being 1/2 pregnant. Americans Elect is still well contained 'in the box'. That why this physical revolution is necessary to 1) call attention to the many severe imbalances, 2) eventually replace a system that is beyond repair and patching with a genuinely sustainable system.

The U.S. needs 'shock therapy', what lot's of economist recommended to the former Eastern Block countries (and has worked wonders for Poland).

Also, no mention on Americans Elect of how the technical voting process would take place. If electronic, and if kept by secret ballot voting, it will be hi-jacked eventually, guaranteed (or maybe that is the intended purpose).

All these point are covered in OSPF (be sure to take more than a superficial look around) but most importantly, being Open Source in nature, there are many 'blanks' to be filled in by citizens in the OSPF Sections.

Here's a hint for Americans Elect - probably not too good to have a direct list of Corporate Board member, former FBI/CIA directors, JP Morgan Managing Directors, and tons of other Investment and Asset Management companies so visible if trying to gain the confidence of average Americans that feel disengaged from 'the system'. But, if seeking to just give a little confidence to the well to do Americans (not necessarily the top 1%) who are not interested in seeing the system change fundamentally causing havoc on their secure jobs, savings, life's plans, inheritance, etc., well then, yes, Americans Elect has created a wonderful webpage that squarely hits their core market.

br, Michael

[-] 1 points by jmcdarcy (158) 13 years ago

I looked at OSPF in more detail. I like that you're thinking big. This is a good thing. I disagree that this is the way to go though. I have hear of better suggestions such as a constitutional amendment making it illegal for companies to contribute to candidates. Here's what I found on Americanselect.org

"He states that the major donations are technically low-interest loans, the bulk of which the organization says it intends to pay back as it widens its contribution base so that no single individual will have contributed more than $10K. At their website, Americans Elect states that they are a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that is funded by individual contributions. AE claims that none of its funding comes from special interests or lobbyists.[10][11][12][12][13]

The group has been criticized for failure to fully disclose its funding.[10][11] Elliot Ackerman said that it is up to donors to determine whether they want to be identified and defended the group saying, "I think that's an unfortunate testament to the status of our political landscape that people feel uncomfortable about disclosing the fact that they're supporting an open nominating process." However, Fred Wertheimer, known for his work on campaign finance reform, said, "They must be trying to hide from the public who their donors are. This is a very strange way for a group to act that is complaining about the state of American politics".[14]"

I don't blame you for being skeptical. But even you must admit that this is different from anything we've seen before. In making any drastic change in government, in between steps are required. Of course you could argue, quite effectively, that governments may never leave the in between phase.

But look at it this way: The parties are like powerful armies that stand in the way of our objectives. There is no way they are going to give up power. We are small and weak right now because of the lay of the land (the lack of just laws with regard to campaign financing and lobying). But if we can exploit the weakness of the big armies, we can win. Their weakness...their enemies. If we can get another party involved, it may just be a tipping point to weaken the current rigid government structure. When it is weaker, we may have a better chance to infiltrate.

All I'm saying is we can't do it all on our own. Although Americans Elect may or may not be an honest company...there's a chance that they may be! And there's 2 million people on board already! They're legit. I think it is important to remain resolute on our position to eliminate corporate involvement in politics. But what is better? A movement which falls by the way side? Or a REAL chance at progressive change based on a totally new idea that nobody knows if it will work or not?

[-] 1 points by hairlessOrphan (522) 13 years ago

There is at least one demand that is gaining steam among all of those stripes: separate money from governance. Restore the government's focus to governance, and not fund-raising.

What do you think? Something you find acceptable?

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

actually the issue should be Separation of State and Politics (separating State and Corporation is not an issue for discussion, it's the absolute minimum that needs to be done immediately).

Really, 'politics and politicking' needs to be filtered out of government, that's how it gets bloated and big (and how eventually individual citizens get 'removed' from the process, replaced by larger organization, lobbyists, corporations, etc.). The core government administrative unit should only be:

1) An administrative framework for issues 2) Non-Decision making 3) Enforcement only of citizens‘ decisions 4) Absolute minimal in size 5) Harnessing cost-effective technology (i.e. internet)

Once you have this, you have a chance at fiscal stability (surplus budgets only), and only after this (or, a strong foundation to the building), can you start to even think about the REALLY important issues: 1) Social issues (health care, welfare, other social support) 2) Environment - sustainable strategies 3) Science and Technology - to get ahead 4) Culture, Arts and Sports - a sign of genuine balance etc. (or, all the load bearing walls and roof to the building)

br, Michael

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

yes...but there's a catch...to change the system will require Politicians who will legislate those changes.

  • The Left believe their politicians can do it
  • The Right believe their politicians can do it

back to square one.

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

yep, a catch-22.

Example: The 'SuperCommittee' is doing exactly as the committees in congress did: NOTHING. Next will be a: 'SuperDuper Committee', followed by a 'SuperSuperDuper Committee' (or is that 'SuperDuperDuper Committee? I forget already, the playground was so long ago... :-)

so, once again, the loop needs to be broken - Direct Democracy, or, 'Eliminate the Middle Man' (i.e. bottleneck), here's some suggestions: http://ospoliticalframework.wordpress.com/goals/

[-] 1 points by DRMartin789 (287) from Broomfield, CO 13 years ago

The Left believe their politicians can do it if they have the power. Since 2006, they haven't had the power.

The Right believe they can block the left from doing anything. They're right. They can. They have. It's called the "filibuster".

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

Where do you get your info...are you even aware of the facts?

  • The Democrats fully controlled Congress from 2007-2010
  • Obama has been President since 2009
  • The Democrats controlled Washington fully for Obama's first 2 years
  • During that time, they passed ObamaCare...which created how many jobs and did what to help the economy???
[-] 1 points by DRMartin789 (287) from Broomfield, CO 13 years ago

Are you aware of the filibuster?

[-] 1 points by hairlessOrphan (522) 13 years ago

As the demand gains steam, we are going to need to work out how to do it, and the most observant of us know it's not going to happen in one election cycle. So, yes, a strategy needs to be worked out. And our best weapon - if we can rally it - would be a critical mass of voters, from all political stripes. That's the first and most important resource.

Maybe I'm getting a little ahead of the movement, here, but I just ask myself, "Is that something worth working for?" It might not work; I'm an optimist, but I'm not a liar. But I think it's worth trying for.

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

I'm far from the optimist you are.

I'm clearly in the camp that we need to learn from the IT world, specifically, Open Source - Open Source is when anyone who wants to contribute to a project can, with only a supervisory committee watching to make sure all changes submitted are improvements, rather than drawing it backward (see Canonical / Ubuntu - http://www.canonical.com/)

If we run government like an Open Source project, we no longer need congressmen/women. And a huge benefit is that millions of people could each spend just a little bit of time and we would have a much more balanced, sustainable end result. But, most, most important, we can have lots of various solutions running simultaneously, i.e. flexibility, which is very, very, VERY important in a highly polarized society (i.e melting pot of the world), or these conversations will ALWAYS end in deadlock. It's completely futile trying to find ONE answer and force it on everyone, that's called Utopia, or robot-land.

[-] 1 points by socratease (11) from Wurtsboro, NY 13 years ago

You have every reason to be nervous about OWS, but once you see how many people this resonates with, there will be nothing that you can do to stop it.

[-] 1 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

cool...if you think you can get 150+ million Center-Right Americans to join your Moveon.org, Soros, Van Jones, Michael Moore supported movement...good luck!

see you at the 2012 voting booths

[-] 0 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

thanks...a non-scientific poll that anyone in the World can vote in (even non-Americans) and which can also be "gamed" by IP spoofing...yea...that's representative of NOTHING.

[-] 1 points by michaelfinko (71) 13 years ago

I agree with you, but it's a step in the correct direction. You don't learn to run before you learn to crawl.

Key for any form of Direct Democracy in electronic form over the internet - 1) when just commenting (i.e. no voting) can be done anonymously 2) when actually voting (i.e. impacting the lives of others) it needs to be done ONLY under full legal names (preferably on an official .gov site run on open source) just as current senators/reps are required to do (in no time, there will be 60 million aps written where any citizen can verify all the stats - total registered voters, voting statistics (left, right, center, whatever), voting history of specific individuals, etc.)

br, Micheal

[-] 1 points by RichardGates (1529) 13 years ago

don't be mad. believe it or not, this protest is for your good.

[-] 0 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

.99*300 million = 297 million....that's greater than 50% right? Wait, can conservatives count?

[-] 1 points by ConfusedSceptic (80) 13 years ago

Wait... you're saying you already have 297 million votes? Then why in the blue blazes are you protesting? You frackin' OWN this government, and come next election day you're going to get everything you ever wanted, just like santa claus, the easter bunny, and the birthday fairy all rolled into one.

[-] 1 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

Yes we will :)

[-] 1 points by ConfusedSceptic (80) 13 years ago

Well, I WAS being facetious there, but whatever floats your boat.

[-] 0 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

So simply saying OWS is the 99% makes it so?

I love that concept!

I'm an all powerful God who can smite you with my lightening bolts...it's TRUE...cause I said so!

[-] 1 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

GOP knows nothing about truth. Truth is that they are obstructing the recovery by filibustering or voting down every bill so that they can score political points. It's the party first and the country second to them.

[-] 0 points by ARealAmerican (23) 13 years ago

I'm seem to recall during Obama's first 2 years and Dem control of Washington, them pushing through a massive Health Care Bill.

And that did exactly what to help the economy and jobs??

[-] 1 points by TruePatriots (274) from San Diego, CA 13 years ago

It isn't even in effect till 2014. So, yeah good shot at trying to make a point but alas like all the GOP talking points it holds little substance. But, that's pretty much all that they passed because of the obstruction. I wished they had used the nuclear option more but alas they wanted compromise. They weakness is compromise.

[-] 1 points by hairlessOrphan (522) 13 years ago

You know what, to both of you: the policy disagreement shouldn't be hashed out with a fistfight. It should be hashed out with the system of governance designed specifically to hash these things out: democracy.

So I'm just going to throw this out here and walk away: Why isn't democracy working? Why are we always resorting to shoving each other in the streets, instead of living by the system we have been advocating to the world for two centuries as a civilized alternative to tribal warfare? Could it be something is wrong with our democracy? Have we lost faith in the political system? Is it something we can fix?

[-] 1 points by ConfusedSceptic (80) 13 years ago

Honestly, I believe that it's because people see the system not giving them exactly what they want, so they immediately scream that the system MUST be broken and that it must be reformed until it is fixed (i.e. letting them have their way). Compromise, though very prominent in several of the president's speeches, (and ONLY his speeches) seems to be an almost otherwise forgotten concept in this country.