Forum Post: Who the 1% should really fear
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 1, 2011, 11:18 p.m. EST by fabianmockian
(225)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I was reading on Alternet.org about how the 1% are increasing security measures at various locations: Heavier, biometric locks on their doors and bulletproof windows to keep out all of those peaceful protesters. While I do think that it wise for the 1% to be scared, I believe their fear is misplaced. Instead of fearing the peaceful protesters of the Occupy Wall Street movement, the selfish, greedy, self-proclaimed "entitled", "job creating", 1% should fear the movement that will come after the OWS. They should fear the growing number of disillusioned, unemployed, angry individuals who believe that might is right when their rights are trampled. They should fear those individuals who will feel that their only choices are to fall further into poverty or fight back, and if OWS fails in opening the eyes of the greedy, they should fear the fact that some will see no other recourse than to act out violently. They should be afraid of the fact that none of them is anonymous in a world where almost everything can be discovered on the internet. They should fear these things, because unlike so many other countries, Americans are armed to the teeth. The NRA and the right wing have seen to it that citizens of the United States can, each and everyone of them, own a small arsenal. If not a guilty conscience, self-preservation should be reason enough for the 1% to listen to the demands that will be forth-coming from the 99%. The 1% seem to think that they are more deserving and smarter than the rest of us, but pissing off 347 million people seems anything but. The people are giving them an "out": One in which they can continue to live their lives of luxury. Will they be smarter than those tyrants around the world, or will the choose the wrong side of history? Now, I know that some will try to say this post promotes violence, but I would refute this claim by pointing out that this post is simply meant to urge, no beg them to address these issues with the peaceful movement that is Occupy Wall Street instead of waiting for whatever comes next, as they continue to funnel the wealth of this nation into their own pockets.
The 1% has to live in fear, not only of Americans put of people they have ticked off globally. Anyone can hop on a plane. They made people into soldiers and taught them to kill innocent people and not shed a tear over it. After doing things like that, how could they feel safe? They are aware of what they had their hands in. They know of more dirty deeds they committed than anyone else. Of course they are afraid, but only they know who they should fear most based what they have had a hand in doing to them.
You are correct. The chickens have come home to roost. On my blog, I have been saying that as smart as the 1% think they are (it's as if they got their degrees from some highly advanced race of aliens, and no one on Earth has their knowledge) they did not take into account that things are bad globally. Where will they run to, once America or whatever is their country of origin rejects them. They will have to sequester themselves to their compounds and sleep in their panic rooms. In retrospect, they look kind of stupid, because they thought societies around the world would simply let them take it all without a fight. I sometimes think however that they have an ace up their sleeve, like in that movie "2012", because their thefts imply that they don't care what happens after the 2012 election. Was that movie art imitating life?
all i can say is word, OWS is a very loud symbol of civil unrest. What comes after may speak softly but carry a big stick - TR
Ah. Someone gets my point. The powers that be can deal with the peaceful protest or whatever group comes next, if they choose not to try to negotiate now.
Negotiate with what? With who? There is no list of demands, no leader, and just arbitrary, disorganized ramblings. If someone was to negotiate, who would it be and with whom would they speak? This is why there will be no negotiation, and the weather is getting very cold.
I questioned the leaderless thing and I do believe that if allowed to continue in this manner for too long the movement could be hijacked by imposters and this will be the end of it. I do believe that someone needs to step up as an official spokesperson, someone elected by the General Assembly at each Occupy Movement before it is misrepresented. As for the lack of demands, this is a tactic that I do agree with, because once the demands are brought forth, the powers that be will attack them, spreading propaganda to mislead and confuse the issues. Without a list of demands however, there is nothing to attack except the integrity of the protesters, which some of the media tries to do. I believe however that when a critical mass or tipping point is reached, the demands will be forthcoming. When enough people have been educated and insulated against the skewed views presented by news outlets like FOX and false profits like Glen Beck and liars like Karl Rove and traitors like Grover Norquist, the true voice of the people will be heard. We will regain our democracy and live as our founding fathers intended.
The integrity of the protestors is getting easy to attack, too, isn't it, with the fatal shootings, rapes, robbing, and general bad behavior in some of the larger camps. My feeling is that this leaderless movement has already been co-opted...by thugs and anarchists attracted to the chaos of the camps and thinly disguising as protestors.
If the news reports are accurate, then I would say you're correct. I actually wrote that this movement could be co-opted a while back. It was after watching what I think was an Occupy video with someone in a Lord Fawkes mask and a voice over of what OWS stood for. I wrote that it would prove very bad for OWS if one day a similar video came out and the gentle man removed his mask and it was someone that did not truly represent what OWS stands for or what it should stand for. Also, I read where the women's suffrage movement almost got hijacked when it was a leaderless movement. And what I found to be more true is that it was all semantics: They say they're leaderless and that they are only facilitators, but there were few people who got to say as much as the facilitators got to say and what they were saying too often was how the general assembly meetings were to be conducted: They would spend too much time talking about the hand signals and going over issues that pertained only to those who were occupying permanently (sleeping in the tents). I felt that they could have discussed camp stuff in any of the 23 other hours that they were onsite. Anyway, I'm rambling. Suffice it to say, I believe leaderless is bad, demand-less is good (for now)
YES! Couldn't have said it better.
It's a small wonder why those people would be beefing up security! What with all of these "peaceful" protesters running around talking about finding where they live and being armed to the teeth. This kind of rhetoric does nothing for the movement or your image and is counterproductive at best. If there is more violence or threats carried out against these people, then this movement will lose what support it had left amongst average Americans and you will get nothing accomplished.
I think you missed the point of my post. I am not endorsing violence, because I think a peaceful protest has more of a chance of getting things changed. My point was that, if the rich refuse to deal with peaceful protests like OWS, they will have to face different tactics from people with different agendas. All of the dictators faced with the Arab Spring had a choice. Those who chose to face the inevitable end to their reign are still alive and though many on this site will try to say things are different here, let's remember the events in Oakland on Oct 25, 2011. How long will people put up with the elite sending in police to brutalize peaceful protestors and how long before the police realize that they too are being brutalized (financially) by the elite? As for the military; as our soldiers return to America and find that they face foreclosures, homelessness, unemployment at the hands of the elite will they choose to turn their weapons on other U.S. citizens? And one last point. Your claim of "peaceful" protestors running around talking about finding where they live and being armed to the teeth." would not even have been necessary had to protestors not been attacked by the police. Why would violence even come up if both parties agreed to sit down and talk about possible resolutions to the problems that face so many Americans? The elite escalated the violence in response to peaceful protests that hope to address the economic onslaught against Democracy and human rights.
"For those who pursue violence to oppose my legal rights, they will receive that which they seek to give." Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
That sounds like a line from a Hip Hop song, but it still misses my point and it makes little sense. I will try one last time. There is no need to respond to this post. I am opposed to violent means for philosophical, moral and logical reasons. I believe and hope that OWS will remain non-violent. I was merely pointing out that the 1% should deal with the peaceful OWS movement, because they might not like whatever comes afterwards if they squash the PEACEFUL Occupy Wall Street movement. Good luck and goodbye Munny
If there was a peaceful occupy movement, then I'd be more inclined to agree with you. As far as the quote, read some history.
Please elaborate and educate, because I've seen the vidoes of Oakland and I didn't see any protesters provoking the riot gear police in any manner when a flash bang grenade was used against them while they were trying to remove the ex-marine from the chaos. I wonder if you were this vocal about the TEA party rallies where some of the TEA partiers were carrying guns in plane sight. http://www.examiner.com/pasco-county-independent-in-tampa-bay/tea-party-protesters-bring-their-big-guns-to-protest-rally
First of all there is no such thing as an ex-Marine. Two, the Oakland mob was increasingly aggressive and antagonistic towards the police, media, and average citizens during their occupation. Third, the mob defied a police order to disperse because they did not have a permit to be "protesting" where they were. Fourth, there were reports from people on the ground and in the mob that occupiers were throwing rocks and bottles at police. And finally, when the Tea Party has an event there is always a permit and all activities are entirely lawful, including their arms possession which is protected by the 2nd amendment. I realize that you may be from NYC, but throughout most of the rest of this country it is perfectly legal to carry a weapon, and entirely possible to do so without becoming violent.
You assume too much, your claim that there are no ex-Marines is stupid, because you know what is meant by this term. What I saw in the Oakland video, whether the mob was being antagonistic or not, still did not justify the policeman throwing the flash/bang grenade into the crowd that was only attempting to remove the injured "Ex-Marine" from harms way, or are you saying that the police should be allowed to harm people who are posing no threat to them? Should they be allowed to shoot people in the back? And, what if people who's rights are being trampled aren't allowed a permit, should there never be protests in this country. Did the founding fathers get permits? And, if they didn't, does that make them wrong in your narrow opinion. In a country where the laws don't represent the people or are immoral, should those laws stand?
There's some CEO I read that currently is building a wall/fortress around their house. Can't remember which one it was.
I hope they stock up their fortress with enough food to outlast people's memories.
How many Americans do you think will take jobs as modern day Pinkertons?
It seems like a lot of the police around the country would.
hey man, most of the people down at OWS gotta fear those people to - you think you're gonna drum circle the guns out of some far right wing nut job whose armed to the teeth? If there is ever an armed resistance in this country, it will be a right wing militia, the types you find in the backwoods of Washington State, Idaho and Mississippi...goof ball college kids can roll joints, but can't load a gun
Stereotype much? Watch a movie called "Sir, No sir". The military in this country have not been as lockstep throughout history as you believe. It's just that the propaganda put out there by our government has pulled the wool over your eyes, including the bull crap out of Hollywood: Rambo's speech about being spit on when he returned from Vietnam was directly from the lies put out to cover up the truth about the sentiment of Americans towards the veterans of that war. Educate yourself before showing your ignorance.
Funny thing about the replies below that claim that discussing possibilities is the same as wishing for them, is that the trolls have been saying from day one, and the internet is littered with their droppings to prove it, that they can't wait for us to riot so they can see us crushed as we deserve, but that they are the civilized ones. While if one or two mention what could happen YEARS down the road if dissent is ignored and the only options are revolt or surrender, we are calling for violence.
As to those who simply say Americans will never do so, I left the answer to that elsewhere in this thread. But to those who think revolt could never succeed, I must defend the good men and women of our military, since them turning against the people is in fact the only thing that could defeat the people, should it ever come to that after ALL OTHER OPTIONS have been exhausted. It is the key element where the elites f*d up royally, for any who think they had in mind that they would crush any dissent that arises, -- thinking they can use the U.S. military against the people when the people's cause is just.
Those who claim OWS is violent because of a few incidents are grasping at straws to discredit what they don't understand or even what they have a stake in seeing fail, but the facts are clear-- for a movement larger than any before, with more hours logged on the street and occurring in every state, as well as around the world, there have been incredibly few incidents of violence, and most of them can be proven to either stem from the authorities actions (bringing addicts to the camps and dropping them off, not allowing bathrooms be set up then complaining over a relatively few incidents where people had to go before the could reach one, infiltrating the crowd with police and hiring thugs to start violence --and in Oakland we are getting wise and filming them so we have the evidence of it and soon enough through u-tube more and more will see for themselves). And even then, while most Americans were not happy with the rioters in Oakland, they don't deny that this was the vast minority as it happened AFTER the thousands of peaceful protesters left, AND they were less happy with the OPD critically injuring peacefully protesting soldiers. The rioting could have seriously damaged the occupy movement, it did little damage because the OPD even then managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by beating down a peaceful soldier blocks away from the people who were rioting, and then leaving him writhing in pain for 18 hours before getting him to a hospital to fix the spleen they lacerated in the course of beating that lone, unarmed, and peaceful US soldier. Ooopsie.
So if we are not violent, and don't become so unless in the face of overwhelming provocation, and if the issues we are clamoring about are just (and poll after poll indicates that the majority of citizens, OWS supporters or no, feel much the same about many of the core issues), then elites thinking they can stem the tide with Military are arrogant and out of touch. Nor will it turn violent soon. Rather it will swell and swell, and only after lots of evading the calls for justice and mistreatment of protesters will things possibly get ugly.
But unlike the police, who are trained to think of the citizens as the "Them" to their "Us", the military has been sic'd after brown people of differing cultures and languages. And even then, we took it so far that many ex- military are among the loudest voices questioning the motives/methods of the wars of the last decade, and even those not questioning out of duty or loyalty or even conviction, their loyalty is to their brothers in arms not to the commander in chief or the commanders on Wall street. When has the U.S. military ever turned on the citizens to give people reason to think this is inevitably how they will respond? People who think so must not know as many soldiers as I do. They love America (the dream and the people, not the patch of dirt and definitely not the suits in congress and wallstreet) too much to act so un-American.
People seem to forget that for 30 years, the military has recruited almost exclusively from the bottom rungs of the 99%, next from a much smaller number of middle class volunteers, with only a very few among the officer class are from the top 25% -- and almost none from the ultra rich. And then, after sending them to wars that were questionable at the least, and doing shit like giving contracts to their buddies which left many of the soldiers with defective armor ALMOST FOR THE ENTIRE WAR, the government brought them home and treated them like shit. Yes they have VA and GI bill, but they are not the same thing as they used to be, and what does the GI bill matter when there are no jobs even after school.
This is the force they think they can use to beat the American people into submission with? ROFL
Cont below...
Cont ... And those who point to Katrina don't know that they got the military to cooperate against the citizens in the initial confusion of a major disaster, for one week and in a situation where the soldiers weren't put into a position of actually fighting their own people, because the people were not in revolt and were obedient. They also don't know that a surprising number of military even then, disobeyed orders and refused, and that even the limited actions of Katrina were so disturbing that this is what started the Oathkeepers and their promise to never turn against the just citizens of the US.
IF the citizens eventually revolt, it will only be if waves of ever larger peacefully demonstrating citizens are completely disregarded and mistreated over the course of years. IF this occurs and they try to use the Military to end the just demands of the people, they will find themselves with less than half a military (maybe 30-35%) and those confused and not fighting with confidence and high morale. IF they realize this and try to hire foreign mercenaries, they will find themselves out almost the entire military and will force even the people who were hoping the protesters would just shut up (like the trolls in here) to choose the people or to fight with foreigners.
They can ignore OWS, but the injustice runs deeper than that, if it does not go away, neither will the dissent, even if by then it does not bear the name OWS. It will take a long time before dissent turns to revolt, at which point they will be screwed. If they treat dissent like revolt and try to pre-empt the people, all they will do is speed up the process, in which case they are screwed earlier. Will it suck and hurt the people, yes. But at that point so will just rolling over and giving in, and so the people won't.
Does everybody no matter pissed off hope to God it never comes to this because it is better to solve these problems without the kind of suffering that will occur if things spin out control, Yes. Does it mean that not pretending that we don't all know where this could end if the Government wants to wait for however many years it takes for the people they taught to be proud and rebellious finally actually rebel, is the same as a call to violence or wishing for revolution. No.
And while such violence and rebellion is a LONG way off, if it even were to happen, I'm not going to let trolls imply that talking about the obvious implications (a just people possibly revolting if dissent does no good or is met unjustly) is only ok if it's THEM talking about things getting ugly from their ignorant perspective (i.e. inevitable rioting by those nasty OWS protesters, as they have been hooting from day 1 ). No one either in or supporting OWS wishes for the first, but even any mention of it as a possibility far down the road make the trolls crow that we want violence. Yet the trolls have left too much evidence in the posts here and all over the web, in posts about how much they can't wait for riots to give the elites an excuse to crush dissent, to try to imply they are peace loving folks. So those hypocrites can suck it and STFU :)
They should fear the IRS like the rest of us.
Why should they fear the IRS? They pay less in taxes than the rest of us.
eggsakley!
Interesting. You need to expose the root causes of making money.
They fear anyone elected via a Direct Democracy most...This implies the people stopped chatting, got together, debated, and elected someone...
www.uponlocal.com Direct Democracy
Well yeah when in history populations become screwed, go hungry, have less than what they need people get pissed. Irish? Like in the potato famine? Armenians? Jews in ww2? Palestinans? & the list cold go on. Its time to TAX the RICH. If they are unwilling to share, screw them. Its time to get a 2nd party as the 1 party 2 sub-divisions long ago sold us down the river. Sure a few decent wealthy folks like Warren Buffet exist & Bless Buffet for his courage & honesty but the rest need to end the war on the 99%.
Agreed
The wealth inequity is much worse in many 3rd world countries, and the rich do indeed live in fortresses with the poor outside their gates. The problem is the poor are too poor, too disorganized, and too leaderless to organize any real revolution. The inequity has become status quo and perpetuates year after year. It is not a given that wealth inequity will lead to any kind of meaningful revolution.
You are correct, but hopefully, the OWS movement has started before WE ALL become too poor and too disorganized to end the class warfare that the rich started over 30 years ago. As far as it being a given about revolution, the flaw in your statement: "It is not a given that wealth inequity will lead to any kind of meaningful revolution." is that thinking in this manner grantees defeat: If the founding fathers of this country had thought as you do, or imply you do with this statement, we would still be a British Colony or a colony of whatever country took us from the English. If you choose to bury your head in the sand, that is your prerogative, but can you do it quietly, while the rest of us try to make your life better?
I like especially how OWS people think they are making our lives better. OWS knows the best and everyone should just follow. It's apparent in OWS chant/repeat that most of OWS is brain washed. Follow blindly and don't question,OWS is here to save you don't you know. Pffft
OWS asks for everyone's input. It does not, nor has it ever said it knows what's best for everyone. It has however said what's bad for everyone. If you have something that you feel needs to be changed in our country, you can be heard at the general assemblies.
Lol semantics,OWS knows best? OWS is arrogant in believing it know what is bad or good for everyone.
By the definition of this movement I am in the 1%, so I guess it is my house (my 'fortress') you intend to breach during your revolution? Are you going to take my TV or what? Are you going to shoot my kids in the face? Can I just let you in and you take my TV?
Do you live in a fortress? Do you consider yourself wealthy? If not, what will you do when the 1% leave you outside with the rest of us?
I did not say I was happy about it (or not). I'm just making an observation about how it is presently in some places in the world.
I'm not heartless, I am concerned for the working poor and the loss of socio-economic mobility in this country. I just don't think a violent revolution is going to happen. More likely some sporadic looting.
Do you believe that OWS is a violent revolution? I personally am opposed to any type of violence and I believe that OWS has continuously stated that it is a NON-violent movement. I can see, from your replies that we will never agree on this fact, so let's simply agree to disagree. Later G
Oh I thought your original post here, this post was suggestive that OWS is the last peaceful chance for negotiation before the violent revolution begins. Did I misunderstand?
No. I hoping that if OWS fails, there will be other peaceful protests, because violence is not only bad for the obvious reasons, but it would be futile in our case (America): Who would we turn to if our government starting attacking us? We're not Libya and the United Nations couldn't step in to save us (America's defense spending is twice that of the rest of the world). No, I think that violence is not only wrong, it is not a real option for us. What I was saying is that there are militias in this country that have no problem with violent tactics, but they do have a problem with our government. It's best for all concerned that the 1% at least concede that their greed serves only to do more harm than good.
It is most certainly NOT futile, though yes, I believe there will be many protests before it is even a remotely viable or justified option, and am hopeful that peaceful options are all that will be required anyway. As to why should it happen, they (the elites, not the people) are the ones with the futile position, see my posts above about the honorable men and women of the US military.
I read your earlier post and I am pleased to hear about the Oathkeepers. I actually saw another group of ex-military of youtube carrying AR-15's (right in front of the police) vowing to protect the OWS protesters. You probably saw it, but here's the link just in case. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0HNr2Y7B5c They mention the Oathkeepers in this video. I actually came across it because of one the trolls on this website: They were pointing out that the protesters were violent, but the soldiers in the video state that they are there only to defend the protesters in the event that the police choose to resort to violent methods to squash the peaceful protests. Also, there is a movie that, if you haven't seen it, you should do so and spread the word about it and the manipulation from our political leaders at the time to downplay the actual impact that the movement in the movie had or should've had. The movie is "Sir, No Sir". It is about the rebellion that occurred with in the military, due to opposition of the Vietnam war. This dissent was quite substantial (various bases had their own underground, anti-war, newspapers and shops were set up near bases where former and current military personnel met to discuss problems with the war. This film needs to be seen by all Americans, as well as plenty of other, because too many are blind to the facts: Things like the fact that the incidents that caused WWI was setup (the German Embassy ran ads in New York papers and anonymous telegrams were sent to many passengers warning that any ship going into the war zone would be fired upon); Australia warned the U.S. of the Japanese fleet amassing near Pearl Harbor, two weeks before the attack; and the incident that started the Vietnam war The Tonkin incident, never happened. Here is a site that list other U.S. false flag operations that led to war in the past: http://911review.com/articles/anon/false_flag_perations.html Besides these, the U.S. ordered attacks on its own naval ship the U.S.S. Liberty in 1967 (this is an government website and the information was declassified a few years ago) http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/uss_liberty/chronology.shtml. I would suggest people take this information in an do further research, because this stuff only leads to one conclusion: The people of the United States are not being represented by the government of the United States. Hopefully, the police and our service men and women will ALL realize this and stand with the people in this matter before it is too late .
Thanks for the links, I'll check them out :) And the movie as well, since I hadn't known about this kind of opposition from within during Vietnam.
You're welcome. The movie goes through the dissent and the subsequent follow up. That's probably why you and most Americans don't know about it.
Saying something and what actually happens is two different things. OWS is very violent and continues to become more so all the time. As for you being opposed to violence,that's funny,because you sure do threaten it in your OP.
Please explain how I threatened violence. I predicted it as a possibility, but I did not promote it as an ideological answer to the troubles so many face, nor as a feasible answer, because as armed as the people of this country are, the United States government has bigger guns and there is no country that will come to our rescue as was the case in Libya. I am sorry if you felt threatened by my post, but I am certain that you cannot feel as threatened as those who have lost their jobs, their homes, their security and their hope because of the greed of a few. Your perspective seems to be one-sided and perhaps this is why you only saw a threat in my post. Try reading it again, but this time read it with the knowledge that I am for non-violent change, but change nonetheless.
Where? Your whole take implies it. Listen to us or it will go badly for you. What a crock. You can try to play the peaceful one but most people know the truth. OWS is violent and will only get worse. My perspective is mine and no 2 perspectives will ever be the same. If you are so non-violent why the implications of violence to come?
This country is very different-- Most of those getting upset and protesting or just stewing at home are not underclass, they are from the working class and middle class of America. They have been pumped full of more self-esteem (some earned some not ) than any generation of people anywhere. They have been taught that it is their right to share in the fruits of a society chosen by god to spread freedom throughout the globe, so long as they work hard and toe the line. They were taught that communism was bad, but most don't know economics so "wealth redistribution" is a buzzword-- it's the lifestyle that made it bad in most minds -- where all the people were poor and downtrodden and with few rights and a small elite lived above the fray. And now they look around and things look a lot the same to them here. Are things as bad as elsewhere? No, they don't have to be, they just have to feel bad enough to the people to make them feel they have lost too much.
We have an underclass, but they aren't the ones marching, they are more cynical than even the trolls here, why should they have any faith that things can change? (Though once they get even a hint that protest is working, they will come out, because they support the concepts at the core, just having never experienced upward mobility are less likely to think demanding it will work)
Revolution is not a given, but it's a hell of a lot more given someplace where the bulk of the poor thought they were the pillars of society and would never have to be poor with a little elbow grease, and are in fact not too disorganized, the opposite, are good little workers who know organizing and marketing like no other poor have ever before-- and don't feel they need leaders yet, either not being in OWS just feeling similarly, or being among the majority of OWS who support or can deal without, and feel more than capable of choosing them if it gets that far---
and yes are armed to the teeth.
The people silly. They need to live in adverse terror of the very people they prey upon.
The good news is companies are hiring in the fields of locksmithing, door strengthening, and firearms manufacture and distribution!
Here's some more good news for you since you seem to be of the belief that people should be "happy to have a job". In Washington D.C. building managers and property owners are using the homeless to evict the soon to be homeless. Maybe you should apply: If you only want to hear about what I referenced, skip forward to 6:25 in this video. http://video.pbs.org/video/2152500591/
I was being facetious...but...I'm confused. Why wouldn't people be "happy to have a job"?
LOL, since 2008, in order to weather the storm without THEIR profit, and paychecks taking a hit, many many many businesses have taken to laying off employees while adding the load to current employees AND giving them a pay cut. I know a couple dozen people personally who are sick of their companies not logging all their hours, "asking" them to take on even more projects when the subtext is, "If you don't like it,there's 500 resumes in my file of people who would love to replace" you. Many of the people happy to have a job are indeed happy, but they are thanking god, their employers they are cursing under their breath and ready to dump the second the job market opens up. (There are businesses where everybody is working harder for less that have happy employees, because the business owners and upper management are taking on some of the extra austerity and hard work right along with the employees. This is different, and employees respect it and end up more loyal after the extra hours and pay cuts, but in many many cases, the burden of making due with less is solely shoved onto the labor, and the management and owners either feel no sting from it or WORSE gloat that they are making more than ever since the economy has gotten bad enough that employees are afraid to complain about being kicked around.)
And the people in my circles I'm hearing this from aren't bottom of the rung or low wage workers, these are folks working in banking, design, distribution, tech, education, medicine, publishing etc, etc. So I can only imagine how bad it is for workers in the retail or other low wage service sector jobs.
I hope you're being facetious now, but if you're not, here is the reason. If you had read my post, homeless people are being paid to help evict the soon to be homeless. Is this a job you would want? Furthermore, this mentality of just be happy you have a job is not very comforting when the wages of jobs stays the same while the cost of living increases. You my friend had better have a really good job and you better hope it never gets outsourced of made obsolete, because it can happen to anyone and then you can go work for McDonald's and figure out how to pay your mortgage. utilities, food, and car note. Good luck G
I did read your post. Homeless people evicting soon-to-be homeless people is sad and ironic.
Still I am happy to have a job, and concerned when I do not have a job. Since you think I am absurd to be 'happy to have a job', are you suggesting that I should be sad to have a job?
Not at all. You should be happy to have a job. I am saying that the jobs that they will be offering us soon will be to help evict other people or to work for wages that don't match the cost of living and I don't understand how you can't see that this is where our country is going with the consolidation of wealth that is occurring. Look at how incomes have not only remained static over the past 30 years, but they have actually decreased, but the cost of food, water, gas, housing haven't gone down. How is this a good situation and how do you think this could ever change given the fact that our government has been the cause of it? Please explain that to me.
I agree with most of what you said here, in particular the part about static wages. I guess I'll go argue with you on other threads now.
Looking forward to it. I try to keep an open mind to other people's views. I just felt like this issue was getting old and I think you and I have enough to go on to do our own research on this topic. I look for some of your own posts G
How do you know they fear OWS? Because a bunch of lazy narcissists are holding up signs and camping out in parks? Lol!
Do you know the meaning of narcissist? You are actually more of a narcissist than those "holding up signs and camping out in parks", because you have no reason to be here, but you seem to want to post you lame opinions. You could just ignore OWS, but you won't, you could've have simply ignored this post, but you didn't, you could ignore this reply, but you won't. That's good, because you might realize that this movement affects you as well. Keep following King, we'll help you with your ignorance issue.
You've accomplished nothing. Your movement means jack shit.
Good come back
Yes, I think they are fearing the "hero" types who will come after them. These ultra wealthy must remember that all that really matters is your happiness and your health. They absolutely can be killed if they piss off the wrong people.
http://knockknockrevolution.tumblr.com/post/11573860774/why-occupy-wall-street-flyers - help convince people to become occupiers by using these talking points!
thanks, but i have a site where I get my flyers, which I will use for my video blog: http://im2opinionated.blogspot.com/2011/10/gop-agenda.html
Well, at least they are creating jobs then finally, by buying locks and special windows ;)
Yeah, but what will they do when their locksmiths and security window venders go belly up?
[Removed]
It's not the 99% they should fear, you guys are mostly harmless, it's the III% who are just starting to get agitated.....
who said 347 million people are pissed off? bit of a stretch
You got me. I was simply using 99% of our country's population. this was an exaggeration, but this white lie (if you want to call it that) did not cost millions of people their jobs and homes.
humbly agree, but the movement should not make this claim that they somehow speak for everyone outside the top 1% of earners..it is useless
Perhaps, but 47 percenters, or 56 percenters, or whatever percent you would like them to use doesn't have that good of a ring. Do you think the TEA partiers actually represent those who oppose a tax on TEA, because that would be a more literal interpretation of the name they chosen.
Yes, yes, yes! But who do we go after? How come more people aren't naming these criminals with anything other than "1%"? How come more people aren't naming the "elite" personally? I know who they are, but the majority of people protesting don't even know the names of the people who have done this to them. How can we get the names out there in a mass way?
I think Alternet.org is actually taking a survey from people of who they think are the worse of the 1%. I think they're going to consider the results of this survey and incorporate (sorry for this term) them into a list the Alternet.org is compiling themselves. Have you visited their website. It's very informative.
I'm on my way....thanks! Yes, its unfortunate how the elite have made "corporation" into a dirty word.
the whole 1% thing is ridiculous, the vast majority of high earners are not bad people or criminals. Yet, somehow the movement continues to fall into this fallacy. I know many high earners that got through hard work and striving to fulfill goals...
I agree 100% ! Its not the 1% that there is a problem with....its the .01%. I should have used that term. Below is a list of just a few of the ruling elite that I am talking about.
OWS is evolving as it goes along! Some of the younger folk know something is wrong, but still don't know exactly what, like us awakened people do. What I don't understand is, why are none of the names of the criminal elites on all the signs that the protesters are carrying? The thing that the elite cabal fear MORE THAN ANYTHING, is the knowledge that we know who they are personally...and total exposure is the only thing that will stop them! "End the Fed" is a great start, but it is still too benevolent. We should be carrying signs that show loudly and clearly that we know exactly who they are! That way they can't hide behind the faceless blanket term "GLOBALISTS", 'BANKERS', "ELITE", "FEDERAL RESERVE", "1%" or "NWO".
Most people think the Federal Reserve is a government entity. It is not. It is privately owned by the world's wealthiest families and royal families who have violently protected their identiites from being connected to the federal reserve. They are responsible for a countless loss of life to try to keep this secret for many, many, many generations. The internet has been their worst enemy and hopefully will release their strangle hold on us.
The signs should read things like "ROTHSCHILDS END YOUR RULE", "ROTHSCHILDS SHOULD BE IN JAIL", "ROCKEFELLERS ARE GENOCIDAL WAR CRIMINALS", "KISSINGER WANTS 90% DEPOPULATION", "QUEEN ELIZABETH & PRINCE CHARLES ARE DEPOPULATIONISTS", "KRUPPS ARE KILLERS", "ASTORS ARE BANKER THEIVES", "BUSH FAMILY ARE GENOCIDE PLOTTERS", "BUFFET ENGINEERED ECONOMIC CRASH", "GREENSPAN ENGINEERED ECONOMIC MELTDOWN", "GLOBALISTS DEPOPULATE YOURSELVES - END YOUR RULE", "MEROVINGIANS ARE THEIVES", "WALDORFS ARE KILLERS", "FREEMANS ARE CRIMINALS", "CARNEGIES ARE CRIMINALS", "SCHIFFS ARE BANKER CRIMINALS", "MONARCH FINANCIAL RULE ENDS NOW", etc.
Unless we expose the ROOT CAUSE, the invisible ruling elite will still be there to do these things to us again another day. The important but lesser problems will get fixed properly once the ruling elite are gone and honest people are elected. Always aim to take down the very top peak of the pyramid....or nothing will ever change. EXPOSE THEM!! If the whole world knows who they are, they can't hide. Each country that is protesting, needs to look up their countries ruling elite names, illuminati names, NWO names and get them on as many signs as possible and show the whole world who they are! If we focus on this one idea, they won't be in power for much longer. Spread the word!! Don't do this by yourself! This has to be done en masse....if only a few do this, they'll be escorted away. But if tens of thousands do it at the same time, what are they going to do? They can't get all of us. Strength in numbers!
There are many more North American criminal ruling elite families that need to be exposed;
CLINTONS, WARBURGS, LEHMANS, MORGANS, SOROS, RUSSELS, COLLINS, RUMSFELDS, CHENEYS, GATES, KOCH BROTHERS, KUHN LOEBS, LAZARDS, VANDERBILTS, DUPONTS, MCDONALDS, DESMARAIS, WINDSORS, CAPETIANS, BORJAS, VATICAN BANK, LI'S, SAUDI ROYALS, MONSANTOS, and others....
EXPOSE THESE CRIMINAL RULERS!!!! They need to see their own names on tv.
Watch:
The Money Masters ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXt1cayx0hs
History of The Federal Reserve ~ Enlightening! http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7757684583209015812
Your fellow human being
Leynna
I'm sure they'll do whatever is demanded of them.
Who? Who's making demands?
OWS. Forgiveness of student loans. Forgiveness of mortgages. Moratorium on foreclosures, a moneyless society, just to name a few off the top of my head. I don't know if the demands are by individual fecalheads, or official OWS demands.
So, you think it's okay to charge inordinately high fees for education? It's not and people should not have to pay back loans that are as close to loan sharking as loans can get. Of course these people didn't have to take out these loans, but the propaganda out there has been telling us all that "College graduates make a million dollars more in their lifetime than those who only earn a H.S. diploma." There are even college ads out now that have the slogan: "If he/she can do, so can you." As if to say, "If this moron can get one of our worthless degrees, so can you." And you think that collapsing the economy with immoral mortgage practices is okay? In your opinion, as long as the law says it's legal to steal billions of dollars from millions of people, everything is okay? If you believe this than you should (or probably prescribe to) the writings and philosophies of Ayn Rand and if you do live by her teaches, then no one should care about what you think, because you only think for yourself, not for the group. And this is fine, except you should expect to live in a society that rebelled against authority that only respected itself and did not listen to the voice of the people. And lastly, you think that the money you have in your wallet is actually valuable. It's not based on anything except faith: Faith that the government and the private bank that is the Federal Reserve will honor the piece of paper the 1% live by. I understand you don't believe in this movement. That's your right, just as it is your right to ignore this movement and go on with you serene life, but I must warn you, the life you lead is not secure as they would have you believe: Majority of the food supply is controlled by a few corporations, so what happens if they decide to abandon the rest of us?; Even some STATE legislation has to be approved by multinationals and the World Trade Organization before it can be passed. We created most of the problems that we now face in the middle east. And here's are two facts for you to research: The first is for those who don't think our government would do anything so underhanded as attack or order attacks on our own people. Note, this link is to the NSA. This information was declassified a few years ago: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/declass/uss_liberty/index.shtml and you can look this up yourself: Standard Oil, provided products for the war effort to both the U.S. and the Nazis. Why would a U.S. corporation do such a thing and why would our government hold them accountable? Farley, you need to wake up like so many others in this country, because we are all being raped and even if your life is comfortable now, there is no guarantee of that. Just ask those who went from 100K jobs to homeless in a matter of years. http://www.pbs.org/wnet/tavissmiley/interviews/the-poverty-tour-part-2/
I do agree with some of your points, and I am not entirely against this movement. My son just took out a student loan. He works full time as an overnight janitor and carries 11 credits. He is paying for most of it as he goes. His interest rate is 7%, about what I paid at 35 years ago. No one forced anyone to take out loans, or mortgages. Fannie and Freddie should not have been propped up at taxpayer expense. Many people took out mortgages who were too stupid to say," gee, when this mortgage adjusts in 3 years my payment will be too much". Predatory lenders? Yes. Greedy banks? Yes. Stupid sheep? Yes. It's a much bigger picture than, fuck wall street. Their is plenty of greed and blame to go around. No one deserves a house. Their is no shame in paying a landlord. Taking 6 or 7 years and working ones way through school is not a stupid thing. I see greed not just in the so called 1%, but also in the people too ignorant to think to live off loans for four or five years, would not have the potential to be a financial disaster. We live off credit in this country. Everyone has been doing it for decades, putting off the day of reckoning for another year. The day has come. The price will be paid by all. Their will be many winners and losers. If occupiers can get their loans for school, or mortgages forgiven; more power to them. I paid for all my shit, and would never expect anyone to cover it for me. That is what bankruptcy laws are for, although student loans don't qualify, but will allow tremendously long forbearance. Good luck, and if you are camping out, stay warm and make sure you have plenty of layers.
I agree with everything you said, except for the part about the mortgages only being taken out by people who should never have taken them out. I say this because I have met too many people who could afford their mortgages. . . Until they got laid off and the lay offs were the direct result of financial, institutional gambling. Theses were not sheep who were simply following the crowd, these were supposed experts who risked the entire future of this country to line their pockets. The people I know who have lost their homes, had families and bought exactly what they could afford to pay for, nothing more. Is it their fault that they have lost their homes? God forbid this happens, but would you feel it right to blame yourself for losing your home if you were to lose your job or business, because greedy Wall Street types gambled and lost and got bailed out? As for the credit that people accumulate, I agree that Americans should eliminate this type of debt and in that respect, live within their means, but what do you say to those who can only find jobs that pay minimum wage (including professionals who were making a lot more than minimum wage), while the cost of living (food, rent, gas) requires they make more than minimum wage. I don't know if you've noticed, but their are forces out there (mainly Republican) that seek to not only drive more people into minimum wage jobs, but to lower the minimum wage: Manufacturing jobs that have returned are all coming back at half of what they were before the collapse, but the cost of living hasn't been halved. Since the banks had a direct impact on this driving down of wages, shouldn't they only get half of what they got before the collapse. Is it fair that we get half as much money, but they get 100%?
[Removed]
If it comes down to it in America as many other countries have proven this year that to get leadership changes for the common people it will cost lives. So then for me "This is a battle worth fighting to the death for"
I also don't think occupy togethers poblems will end with a sit down peace treaty agreement. Lots of smoke and mirror tricks on down the road. Remember the people were up against are lying politicians. They just love to tell you what you want to hear.
How much longer before peaceful protest turn violent, how many more people will take it lying down when their job is shipped overseas, they lose their savings, then their personal belongings of any value, then they lose their vehicle, then their house, then the wife dumps them they and lose their kids, they can't pay the child support or afford a place to live, hell eating is gonna be hard enough, then I ask, how far can a man be backed into a corner and still yet, remain peaceful.?
You know why they built so many prisons in the last 20 years because they knew the day of reckoning was coming. The government has a lots of body bags ready too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nonLNmm_NLs
NO THANKS fows, why are you adding a comic book link?
Correct, they do, and much more.
Peaceful protest is an oxymoron.
Indeed, along with child support.
ROFLMFAO so you're not calling for violence? Oh yeah,you're just threatening it if they don't do what you want. I think YOU might be surprised when most of America takes up arms not against the rich but against ignorant violent OWS people. BTW OWS has been proven violent over and over again. Now you'll probably give me the old line that the violent people don't represent you,Bullshit,you welcome them with open arms and support them in their violence. The bulk of Americans are tired of something alright,OWS.
You sound disturbed Perspective. I'm going to hang up now
Smartest thing, trolls only get bolder when fed
Well, I was trying to feed them a better diet than the propaganda they're used to ingesting.
So fearing an angry mob filled with "violent fringe(s)" isn't allowed?
Do you mean like the TEA party?
no, I mean like OWS!. Tea Party is a political party. They might have violent thoughts, but they have never decied to vandalize a city
Just because they're a political party, doesn't justify anything they stand for, because all I've seen that the TEA party has been responsible is to stop government in its tracks. The Nazis were a party. but I hope your don't praise them. I am however curious (seriously) can you provide proof, either links or hints as to where I can find this out, about acts of vandalism that were NOT provoked by the police. I await your reply and appreciate it, if it is sincere.
As the party in power, the nazis did horrible things. As a party seeking change, they were perfectly fine. The Tea Party wants things and they are sending people to office to do it. And yes I can. You all may not want to claim them, but the "black block" is associate with you. The first is a video and the second is a picture (sorry it's so long) of Occupy Oakland defaming a Whole Foods store.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJenvz_JBM0
http://www.google.com/imgres?q=ows+oakland+vandalism+whole+foods&um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1366&bih=651&tbm=isch&tbnid=JgnDTbluIF59dM:&imgrefurl=http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local/protesters-target-downtown-oakland-bank-branches/nFTCW/&docid=aKoFvJzz-80LKM&imgurl=http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2011/11/02/occupy-whole-foods-vandalism_t670.jpg%253F2663c383ae3146e1f47ef3bf52e57c5fcacce698&w=480&h=360&ei=HGW9TpPsH8mW2AXGmoi2BQ&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=228&sig=103929706700544891193&page=1&tbnh=142&tbnw=190&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&tx=115&ty=16
I see your video and raise you with raw video (of this same instance) showing Occupy Oakland protesters stopping the Black Bloc. Try showing all sides next time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqoFR1MPSH0&feature=related
As i said, violent fringes. Is everybody in the OWS movement anarchists, I don't think so (or at least hope not). But the fact remains that with int OWS, there are groups that do have a policy of pupblic violence and civil unrests. a group wich does not exist in the Tea Party. They may applaud things like pulling the plug on a coma pacient but they have, as of yet at least, done anything like this