Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Who would mourn them?

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 23, 2012, 5:14 p.m. EST by FawkesNews (1290)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Were they to be besieged in the mansions they live in, dragged out of opulence and presented to an angry mob, only to be flayed alive, it would be you, the very victims of their crimes who would defend them. It would be your children they use as shields, against a justice they are fully aware of. You would gladly give them your children as you have for so long. You know no different any longer.

They own you. They own your children. They have convinced you to steal from your neighbor while they steal from all of you. They prey upon you. They feed their children, the remains of your childrens futures. They dictate to you your laws, your rights and your limited freedoms. They do this with the criminals they have implanted in your government. There is no end to their hubris. They do these things with impunity because you are too afraid of them to stand up and resist. You comply. You acquiesce. You deserve what they have done to you, because you are docile, domesticated and tame. You have not the will to take what they have taken from you back from them. You are unwilling to use force. They are not. You fear justice. they do not, because they know you will never be strong enough to administer it to them.

But, if they were systematically removed would you miss them?

144 Comments

144 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Those who advocate violence are not only morally bankrupt and incapable of even remotely forseeing the outcome of their actions, they are also simply idiotic.

Or else they are an infiltrator.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Do you honestly think I advocate violence? ...or is the possibility of violence so abhorrent that anyone who discusses it is at fault.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Well, if you are not openly advocating it, than based upon this post, you certainly seem to be tacitly advocating it.

If you aren't doing so, than why not simply say that you aren't?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

There are very malicious people. They are not popular with a great many people. They prey upon their fellow citizens. They get away with it. History has shown that they do not get away with it long.

I asked a question. I meant it.

[-] 1 points by Cephalus (146) 2 years ago

Why should they have to be an infiltrator? Some of the founding anarchists like Derrick Jensen openly promote violence. Those people were inspired by Singh, and not Gandhi.

[-] 0 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

Surely someone as intelligent as you realizes that - all ethical issues aside - violence on the part of this movement, or even the plausable accusation of violence against this movement, will simply give those who control the"security state" the desperately wated pretext to label us "terrorists" and crush us by main force. That is absolutely clear, and even if it wasn't the case, I would quit this movement in a heartbeat if it became violent, and so would many, many others..

I think that is exactly why our adversaries are going to go back to this tactic - trying to tar this movement with the "violence slander."

[-] 1 points by Cephalus (146) 2 years ago

You are so naive.

[-] 2 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

"Un pueblo que no sabe leer ni escribir, es un pueblo fácil de engañar." Ernesto Che Guevara

Translation: A population that cannot read or write are people who are easily manipulated

I hold an overwhelming majority of the US population is poorly educated, bordering on illiteracy and thus all too easy to fool or manipulate. That's the real issue

[-] 2 points by gosso920 (-24) 2 years ago

Agreed. Look at how many voted for Obama.

[-] 1 points by Pidge (18) 2 years ago

Obama will handily defeat your pathetic lot of candidates. Repubs and Tea Partiers are obviously dissatisfied with their candidates, and now you lean toward Newt, a man of such flimsy moral character, he stands for everything your 'family values' voters once reviled. Now, it seems, you will abondon your principles to get Obama out of the White House. And Romney, a man so insulated from reality he can barely speak to the common man. He is one of your champions? Only an embittered fool would vote for these two. I'll stick with our intelligent, articulate, compassionate President.

[-] 1 points by TimMcGraw (50) 2 years ago

no, we pick Romney.

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 2 years ago

Easily manipulated, yes, but not because they could not read or write. Only 4% of voters did not have at least a high school diploma. The largest voting block (44%) had a college degree or higher.

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/exit-polls.html

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I'm assume that's accurate for the sake of argument but it's also estimated 38.4 percent of eligible voters didn’t cast a ballot for president in 2008.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/01/2008-voter-turnout/

[-] 1 points by LetsGetReal (1420) from Grants, NM 2 years ago

The NY Times said the above figures were based on exit polls from actual voters.

Yes, a large number of people who could vote, don't. It would be interesting to know about the demographics of that group.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

It would but compared to other nations (eg, European), our educational system isn't as good as we like to believe. Most HS and university graduates don't speak a second (much less a third) language fluently because its not required, we don't produce as many scientists and mathematicians and overall, our understanding of other countries and cultures is very poor. In short, Americans are not very sophisticated about the larger world itself and thus are easily manipulated by various media outlets. Remember those "Get the government out of my Social Security" signs? It's what I consider functional illiteracy.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

One of the reasons that we do not know much about other countries' cultures is because of our geographic isolation. In Europe if you travel 500 miles you might pass through several countries....here you wouldn't even be to Columbus, Ohio. It does not mean that we shouldn't educate our children better in other countries' cultures though. Perhaps if we did, we wouldn't be so apt to bully other countries around, as people would realize that those people have the same dreams and aspirations as we do. One of the countries that does the best jobs in educating their children is Finland and I remember that one reason was they only take teacher applications from people graduating in the top third of their universities. Why we don't emulate them, I don't know. Science and math is a real problem in this country. I am not a fan of Obama, but he was right when he said something to the effect, "the country that leads the world in education will lead the world". I know I rambled in this post, sorry it's late.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

The fact so many Americans didn't vote in 2008 is not a sign of their lack of intelligence, rather it might be more an indication of their despair in knowing that both political parties answer to big moneyed interests, not the people's interests. So one could even plausibly argue that it is a sign of the non-voters being smarter than the rest of us dupes who voted.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

that's a very real possibility

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

And agree with his policies.

[-] 2 points by Lardhead2 (67) 2 years ago

Well said sir.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

did you mean m'am? :)

[-] 2 points by Lardhead2 (67) 2 years ago

Apparently I did.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago
[-] 2 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Actually, not so-there's a qualifier right next to the rate on that page, pointing to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States

That page contains this: "Jonathan Kozol, in his book Illiterate America, suggests that the very high figures of literacy may be due to poor methodology. The Census Bureau reported literacy rates of 86% based on personal interviews of a relatively small portion of the population and on written responses to Census Bureau mailings. They also considered individuals literate if they simply stated that they could read and write, and made the assumption that anyone with a fifth grade education had at least an 80% chance of being literate. Kozol notes that, in addition to these weaknesses, the reliance on written forms would have obviously excluded many individuals who did not have a literate family member to fill out the form for them. Finally, he suggests that because illiterate people are likely to be unemployed and may not have telephones or permanent addresses, the census bureau would have been unlikely to find them (and that if they did, these people might be especially reluctant to talk to a stranger who might be a bill collector, tax auditor, or salesperson)".

So even according to the US Census Bureau, the rate is 86 %, less than Cuba, Barbados, Latvia, Albania and Kyrgyzstan, etc.

[-] 2 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

In my opinion, having a 5th grade education in the 21st century means you're functionally illiterate

[-] -1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 2 years ago

i'm sorry to hear that, maybe you should go back and finish your elementary school education.

[-] 2 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

lol the dude with the the weed is here!

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

ok 86% but I ain't never met no illiterate

[-] 2 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

~lol~

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

DieNachtHexen, So true and on top of that undernourished, overworked, under-employed or unemployed and dying of it all. No, we would not miss them but most of us should really see George Carlin's take on 'The Real Owners' of this country (in 'Who Really Controls America') so we all know in abstract yet concise terms what we're discussing; to wit and not to be missed are his skits on 'The American Dream,' 'Who Really Controls America,' 'Saving the Planet,' 'George Carlin Doesn't Vote' and 'We Like War.'

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=George+Carlin&oq=George+Carlin&aq=f&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=2066l6004l0l7750l13l10l0l6l6l0l357l1200l2-2.2l4l0

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

George Carlin was right about a lot of things. Its clear the OP has never lived in a country in the midst of civil war. I have and its not pretty.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 2 years ago

Please do tell more about your experiences. In the USA it seems to occur on a 'micro' level as in this example but it could escalate once things are allowed to really get out of control and the thought of that scares me too:

http://www.youtube.com/user/george4title?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/168/yoYtnoFn09Y

[-] -1 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 2 years ago

Very nice DieNachthexen, but I think that you are confusing your illiteracy or stupidity with that of the general population.
We've heard this over and over, Americans are stupid. Well, we, Americans, do always manage to beat the smart Germans, Russians, Chinese, Cubans....So i guess people from those countries must be even dumber - like you!: ). You do show your radical, elitist hand by quoting a communist murderer , Che Guevara, who peed in his pants when he was finally caught.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

"Guevara, who peed in his pants..."

~lol~

I want what you're smoking-it must be the good shit

FYI Che spit in Cuban exile and CIA goon Felix Rodriguez's face, according to helicopter pilot Jaime Nino de Guzman, who transported Rodriguez to the small town of La Higuera in Bolivia.

Nino de Guzman was present and is confirmed as being the person who over 40 years ago took the last photo of Che Guevara. Nino de Guzman emphatically stated during the meeting between Che and Rodriguez, Guevara spat in face of his captor and refused to speak with him, despite being subjected to the interrogation techniques Rodriguez learned during his stint at Ft Benning.

Che went out like a real man.

Can't say I blame Guevara and the others who executed the Lucha Contra Bandidos(Escambray Revolt) insurgents and the CIA Bay of Pigs mercenaries-Guevara saw first hand in Guatemala what happened when you showed mercy to CIA operatives tasked with destabilizing a country and murdering civilians and was convinced that's what let to the overthrow of the democratically elected Arbenz government. Che was not going to allow history to repeat itself in Cuba.

I see you don't let actual facts get in your way, though, proving my point.

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 2 years ago

he peed in his pants and begged to be spared. Come on, you know Che was just a stupid rich rebel who liked killing people. I'm surprised you like him, being a peaceful occupier and all.

[-] 0 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

give up that killer weed you've been smoking

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 2 years ago

Learn to read material other than communist, socialist propaganda. And go finished sixth grade, it's the gateway to high school!

[-] 0 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

If you're not giving me any of your weed, fuck off

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 2 years ago

no need to get rude. I don't use drugs like you do, and will not be able to supply your addiction. Maybe you can wear your little Che shirt and walk over to your drug dealer to get your fix.

[-] 0 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Bullshit, you're high right now.

Protip: before telling someone to "finish your elementary school education" you should finish yours. Your grammar is atrocious while I learned the basics of English grammar by third grade. But don't stop, you make me laugh more than anything I see on /b/

[-] 0 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 2 years ago

there you go again, are you angry because your beloved Che isn't the hero you thought he was? Don't worry about my grammar, though it probably is a good sign of brain activity that you did catch an error.

[-] 0 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Also, I have no idea why your diatribe refers to "Germans, Russians, Chinese, Cubans" since I didn't but I supposed even the insane must have their own logic so please, do enlighten us.

[-] -1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Overly oppressing the ignorant creates the violent. The violent have little need for diplomacy and thus create risk to oppressors. Hubris in the heads of the powerful open the door for violence.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

A bunch of violent, ignorant dumbfucks creating "risk" for their "oppressors" is never a good thing (anyone here recall the Khmer Rouge?) . Only those that consider themselves the "vanguard" in the most Manichaean sense would encourage it.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

What a well versed response.

Driven of desperation, the ignorant and violent have little need for duality, or military coordination. Autonomous action has worked for centuries for them.

[-] 2 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

orly? please grace us with actual and verified examples of how the ignorant and violent have created an egalitarian and successful society with their violent and autonomous actions

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I am only able to present examples where the violent and ignorant have eradicated oppressors only to become oppressors themselves. The important thing to remember is that when one has nothing, anything is something. Sometimes, that "anything" is merely the opportunity to feel empowerment.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

so what you really mean is there aren't any and violence just make them feel good?

whatever

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Pretty much. Is it difficult for you to understand that those with nothing have nothing to lose? If not, how do you expect so much of them? It is almost as if you are applying a high degree of social awareness and social responsibility to all desperate mobs .

[-] 3 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Listen, you ignorant clown, I have nothing (except for a decent education, something even your wealthy but equally clueless parents couldn't buy for you). Only a smug, upper class shithead would cavalierly state that the hoi polloi have no sense of social responsibility or social awareness and characterize us as a desperate mob. FUCK YOU, my working class neighbors and relatives are better human beings than you will ever be, you privileged, elitist asshole.

And as much at it would satisfy your pathological need to vicariously live though the violent actions of others, here's a news flash: not going to happen. Just like there isn't going to any anarchist-communist revolution led by a bunch of spoiled, whiny rich kids who start screaming police brutality every time a cop grabs them by their greasy, fake dreads.

Do the world a favor, fuck off and go back to the suburbs.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Your assessments fall upon deaf ears. I apologize for any challenges I may have presented you and hereby cease expecting you to overcome them.

Thank you.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

There 's a saying in German that's tailor made for you:

Die schlimmsten Tauben sind die, die nicht hören wollen

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

More insults? Are you truly upset, or are you acting as such?

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Nah, useful idiots like you usually hang yourselves with your own rope

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Rope? Your insults are not adding to your intellectual prowess. In my opinion.

[-] 1 points by DieNachthexen (103) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Cool story bro

not that I give a shit

[-] 1 points by smmv2005 (106) 2 years ago

Hi dear Friends Do you know why USA keep about 27000 nuclear weapons, But Iran has no right even to have peaceful nuclear technology?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Of course I do. What relevance does this have to my question?

[-] 1 points by smmv2005 (106) 2 years ago

So Sorry, I don't read your question, my english is too poor! Forgive me.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Tell your Mossad handlers to adjust the agents they send here.

[-] 1 points by smmv2005 (106) 2 years ago

I'm Iranian, Mossad is our Enemy. They kill our Nuclear Scientist, Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan. We hate them.

see this link, these are images of our Leader visitation of his family members. http://farsi.khamenei.ir/photo-album?id=18638#148127

Do you have news that four year old child still knows his father is dead?!!

Mossads peoples are wild animals.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Mossad is an enemy to all goyim. You are not my enemy.

[-] 1 points by smmv2005 (106) 2 years ago

Of course... Do you see pictures? Must see, Man will cry for that children.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I am not my average American. They are who you need to express the wrongs of their ignorance. Please forgo the details and allow me the respect of recognition in who the enemy is. Please translate.

[-] 1 points by MikeJ (2) 2 years ago

Instead of "they", let's call them "The Parasites"

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I am alright with whatever term is used to describe the "soon to be eradicated". I am furious and I am not alone.

[-] 0 points by BonTon (57) 2 years ago

dehumanizing terminology is a sure sign of a fascist tendency

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Are you a "have" or a "have not"? Dehumanized?

[-] 1 points by BonTon (57) 2 years ago

I am an "am"

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Cool. Are we an "are"?

[-] 1 points by BonTon (57) 2 years ago

youse a "do not"

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

If you need to dehumanize me for your own ends, I insist, as I am immune. Thank you.

[-] 1 points by BonTon (57) 2 years ago

who is "they"?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

The people who have wronged so many, and yet still live among them as if they had a right to protection from the people they have wronged.

Does that help?

[-] 0 points by BonTon (57) 2 years ago

Oh yeah, plenty. Democrats.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Democrats? Damn you are one polarized motherfucker.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

nice talking points! miss them? how bout just enjoy their caviar and truffles!

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you. When enjoying the caviar and truffles, remember not to get attached to them as if it were your god given right, they taste better that way.

[-] 1 points by JackPulliam3rd (205) 2 years ago

isn't this the plot of Dark Knight Rises? Batman's gonna kick your butt

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 2 years ago

Some of you jump on my back when I say pro-choice but you wouldn't mourn a full grown man or woman

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Pro choice? I never discussed that at all. Ever.

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 2 years ago

Would not miss them. I vote for non-violent systematic removal.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Best answer. I thank you sincerely.

I would not miss them either, regardless of the type of their demise.

Non-violent systematic removal is the only way to rightfully remove oppressors. The court system is the best way to do it, once it has been wrested from them. Achieving such a monumental task may not be as systematic as one would prefer, and it seems more and more impossible daily.

Ideas or suggestions are welcomed.

[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 2 years ago

"The court system".. which would require ... ugh.. Lawyers. I am still mostly convinced that we got ourselves into this mess and we can get ourselves out. I think we have to be hyper aware of the things that are going on around us. I know 'waiting' is not on everyone's list of favorite activities, but there is something to say for acting precisely when the action is called for. No sooner and no later than that.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Lawyers may be one of mankinds gravest social ailments, but until the general population is able to quantify the wrongs incurred against them, in a clear and concise fashion, there will be the need for lawyers, at least as long as there is a need for courts.

Hyper-awareness is the only way to change the current state of affairs, for sure. I understand your inference to waiting, but why wait when there are so many people who can benefiet from discussions about what is so important to so many.

Yes, action has its time and place. Be prepared is not solely for the Boy Scouts. Thank you for your thoughts.

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 2 years ago

If I lynched my black friends, would you miss them?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Who would lynch their friends?

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 2 years ago

You're missing the point, if I lynched my black neighbors for playing music too loud, would you miss them?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

My point was very different.

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 2 years ago

Well now I'm confused so let's just quit while we're ahead.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I meant not to confuse you.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

to expand on this and other conversations on this thread, the web is their(the 1%) biggest payday and their demise all wrapped in one. For the web to continue making the money it has(far more than hollywood does any more) it must remain free and open. It is this same freedom and open communication that is providing education to the world and empowering us to slowly bend society back in our favor. It's the most beautiful irony any of us will see in our lifetimes.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

I like what you said there.

May I add that the double sided sword can easily swing amiss, so it(the web) must be protected at all cost.

[-] 1 points by Samcitt (136) 2 years ago

I seriously doubt I would. I would probably only miss them if my job went because of it. My conscience and guilt would extend only as far as the realisation that I am a killer or an accessory to a murder.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Most feel the way you do. The actual administering of justice is much more difficult than most are capable of, but few would dispute it's value.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

I am not a religious person, spiritual probably yes. Despite all of the egregious wrongs that 'they' have done, and the devastating consequences that it has had on so many innocent people, I would not take any glee in 'them' being victimized by any vigilante justice. We would then be no better than 'them.'

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Currently, "we" are their slaves. Is that your preferred status quo?

If you have some secret that never has been used by the oppressed, please share.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

No, that is not my preference.If it were, I wouldn't be here. And no, I have no secret that would be useful. I am part of 'this' in the hope that we will be able to make a sea change in the way things are. I do realize though that we are involved an epic struggle and there is no telling how this will turn out or what will transpire along the way.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Slavery is not a choice. Remaining in slavery is.

To fear the whip, is to not know how to wield it. When the people finally realize that whip has actually been in their grasp the entire time, they will remember how to wield it. It is a reality, and an ugly one at that. I know of no means to wrest power from oppressors either. They never give it up without a fight.

I hope change comes in a peaceful way, but it has never done so. I know that justice is necessary regardless of the horse she rides in on.

Thank you for your time.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

I do not take what we are trying to do as a game. I do enjoy myself in the company of other OWS members when and while I can, and I encourage others to do the same, since I know there are bound to be dark days ahead. How dark? Who knows?

I am also aware that we are going up against THE most powerful political/financial interests in the world who have a lot to lose if we succeed. At this point and in the forseeable future, I feel it is imperative that we maintain the moral high-ground. If we lose that....... we lose.

Finally, I have lived on planet Earth long enough to know that those who talk the most heroically, are usually the least so.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for your insults, but I am unimpressed.

This is not a game. We all know this. The stakes are the highest and growing every day. These institutions have the most to lose, and thus are the most likely to be unwilling to relinquish what it is they have. The consequences of failure are dire and dark.We all know that.

To adhere to a moral high ground, in a fight with those with no morality, is merely another method of placating oppressors in order to reduce any backlash. It is an understandable mindset. It is the mindset of the subservient, and I will never adhere to it. If this peaceful opposition "loses" then we all lose. there is no option for failure, and moral high ground is of no value to an opponent without morality.

I thank you for your discourse and kindly ask you to refrain from insulting me further.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Mr. Fawkes, my question to you is, 'Will you be the exception to the kind of people who promote what you seem to be advocating for, and will you be on the front-lines--and will you be there long before we have exhausted all other options?' Will you strike and take the first blow for what we both know is a righteous cause, or do you regard yourself more as a general whos job it is to run things from some CUSHY, safe place afar????

Didn't the tyranny in most of Eastern Europe and India even fall by mostly peaceful means? Perhaps some of it was replaced by a different type of subjugation, I know. Those regimes were brought down by the masses who did not regard their rulers as legitmate, and were no longer willing to co-operate with them. Even in Egypt while still messy, their revolution, so far isn't as near as bloody as it could have been.

If you took my last sentence in my previous post as an insult, it was not meant to be. It was just a personal observation that came from years of experience, and observation of people. That's all. Have a good day sir.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

May I attempt to provide answers to your relevant questions. Will I be an exception?.To what?.... Will I be on the front lines?. I will be there when the very last option has been exhausted. I will never be a general, but a mere peer of the lowest member of the ranks. I will probably be the first of the nameless to perish, rather than to live under furthered and more tolerated oppression. If not, I will be the last man who believes in the good nature of the common man.

Yes, the tyranny in Eastern Europe fell relatively peacefully, as well as Egypt. Considering the awful options of further oppression, those places are today, both for the better. As with any regime change involving masses, there will be a period of dissarray, usually it is filled with military trained individuals, prepared for such chaos. So long as a constituion is left to defend, that may not be a bad option, considering the options. Either way, changes are needed, we all know it. The longer those changes are resisted, the more repercussions are created from them.

Thank you, and I hope not to have offended you.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

No you did not offend me. I too am a freedom loving person and know that we are on an epic journey here where we must win. Thank You for the honest discourse that we have had.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for your reply, your discourse, and the respectful view of the future.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

I can see jealousy and hypocrisy dripping down from this post. And you still wonder why you haven't made it big in life.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Jealousy? Hypocrisy? Big? Life? Not all people value the same things. Do they have to?

[-] 0 points by smartcapitalist (143) 2 years ago

Oh good. Then why do you complain that others are making more.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 2 years ago

good god smartcapitalist; you're smarter than this. please don't blatantly try to stuff false words into someone's mouth to try to shift conversation away from the issue as framed.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

When did I do that?

My post was a question, vile yes, but nevertheless a legitimate one.

[-] 0 points by America921 (161) 2 years ago

What you describe is not justice. What you describe is mob "Justice". You cannot send these people to their deaths. If you do then you belong with them. I'm not part of the 1%, but if things like this were to happen I would give my life in defense of Lady Justice.

[-] -1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

What I describe is exactly mob justice. In a vacuum of justice, mob justice steps in. I send no one to their deaths. I asked who would mourn the absence of their own oppressors. Incidentally, the time to fight for liberty is right now, because by the time the above-with scenario has played out, there will be none left.

[-] 2 points by America921 (161) 2 years ago

No we can never allow mob rule. You can fight your oppressors all you want. But I will never tolerate mob justice as any form of justice and I would fight to end it.

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I would call the choice between mob rule & oppression a false dichotomy. I don't think many here are endorsing doing away with our Bill of Rights, but it's clear that under our current system, there's uneven enforcement of the Bill of Rights (and things are totally skewed towards the mega wealthy). This is because there's inadequate participation in our democracy, but it's not just complacency, although that's part of the problem, it's the way things are currently structured (the deck is stacked against us).

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Who controls a mob? C'mon.

I will fight oppressors. Because it is the right thing to do.

Whether you believe in mob justice or not, it is the result of a lack of actual justice. To prevent it, you then must regain control of your justice system. Unless of course you have.

[-] 0 points by YouDontRepresentThe99Percent (-10) 2 years ago

I would. Could you imagine a world run by the scumbags that are ows? This country would be sleeping outside in tents and shitting in buckets! Soap would be a rare comodity!

I would rather have 400 CIVILIZED people hold the wealth than the 2000 handout loving soap hating hippies that are ows.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

You are entitled to your opinions regardless of what they may be. Thank you.

[-] 1 points by YouDontRepresentThe99Percent (-10) 2 years ago

You know what, thank you for being the first to say that. You may have given me second thoughts about this movement. If it was run by more people like you it may even make a difference.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for that, but I may add, that the majority of this movement will fight to the death for your right to any opinion.

[-] 0 points by YouDontRepresentThe99Percent (-10) 2 years ago

Unfortunatly they are over cast by the majority who belive it is their way or the highway. This movement was founded on many principles I belived in from the begining, like getting money out of politics, but there are too many that are part of this movement who swear up and down the rich should be doing this this and this, and stray away from the real issues because of their hate twords the rich.

If this movement was about protesting the government to get money out of politics, put a loan cap on banks so they can't give out more money than they have, pushing for financial education in schools so people can be smart with their money,ect. I would be on the front lines with you guys. But whenever I try to bring that up I get hammered by the crazies who just have unbelivable hate twords the rich.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for your valid points.

I have never heard a single argument in favor of money in politics. I consider that "common ground" for a great many people everywhere. That is important. The hatred for the wealthy is a misdirected emotion due to a lack of accountability of those who have directed such financial disparity as we see today. People basically have no one to blame. If there were criminal trials of the guilty, that hatred would recede.

This movement is about protesting the government to get money from politics. Implementing your good ideas requires a degree of control of the government the people currently don't have. Thus, protesting is required.

I ask of you, to go to a local GA and see for yourself who and what this movement is about. Meet the people in the streets. You will be welcomed and face to face dialogue will be available to you. There are a lot of very intelligent people involved at all levels. Most don't hate the rich, they hate the unseen ultra-rich for what has been done to the world, by them.

I am grateful for your respectful discussion. I appreciate your honest discussions and encourage you

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (9780) 2 years ago

I would like to point out that most people here don't hate "the rich." What we hate are the astronimically rich, who have so much power that they can subvert and trample American democracy. It is a question of preserving our democracy, not of "hating the rich."

[-] 0 points by shooz (17945) 2 years ago

Instead of repeating history.

Take it upon yourselves to understand that these people are ill.

It's an illness endorsed and matastised by corporate charter.

Perhaps that's why sufferers gravitate to to the corporate fields.

It's akin to obsessive hoarding.

It's called pleonexia.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for the new word. It speaks volumes.

What do you suggest the prescribed treatment be? May I suggest completely stripping the "sufferer" of all worldly possessions and leaving them alone in a concrete cell with a gun loaded with a single bullet, until hunger dictates the "treatment".

Suggestions welcome.

[-] 0 points by shooz (17945) 2 years ago

Would you do that to the old lady down the street that collects cats?

Or the one with a house full of old news papers?

I think not.

Perhaps 20 years at the salary of their lowest paid employee, and a lifetime disbarment from a management position would be adequate.

By this time we should have national heath care, and at least they could get a cheap therapist.

For the purposes of a "fine", all holdings would liquidated, and dedicated to national infrastructure.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

What a compassionate individual you are.

How do you instill that compassion into a hard working honest person who has had their life savings stripped from them by those "poor sufferers of pleonexia" in banking and the government?

[-] 0 points by shooz (17945) 2 years ago

I feel for you, too.

That happened to my Father, he picked up the pieces and carried on, though he died young, and never got to retire.

All I can tell you, is not to stoop to their level.

It what they want you to do.

It's what they are prepared for.

It's their "chosen" nightmare.

Help us find ways to lay bare their illness.

It's what they don't expect, that will beat them.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Your fathers plight is heartbreaking and I sympathize.

I would like you to consider the effects upon the many of the actions of the few and the minimum response to those actions.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17945) 2 years ago

Like I said, we need to find ways to lay bare their illness.

Then we can send in doctors instead of guns.

There's always those FEMA camps I keep hearing about.

They would make nice cheap treatment centers.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Great idea, provided power can be transferred to the more altruistic and honest among the people. I fear the difficulty lay in that transfer of power. Which is why I prefer to remain more pragmatic in my thoughts regarding the transfer of power.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21338) 2 years ago

This sounds to me like you've been reading about the Chinese Cultural Revolution.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Actually, I would say it sounds like the power elite have not been reading about the Chinese Revolution.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21338) 2 years ago

Good one.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thanks.

Hubris and ego are the weakness of the power elite and will be their demise yet again.

[-] 1 points by Lardhead2 (67) 2 years ago

But what about the hubris and ego of the people?

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Explain? Please.

[-] 2 points by Lardhead2 (67) 2 years ago

You say that the elites are full of hubris and ego. I agree. But many of the non elites (the people) are also full of the same. Those things are detrimental to anyone.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Thank you for your response, it is accurate and I agree with you.

The difference between the hubris and ego of the empowered and of the un-empowered, is that the un-empowered have little effect on the many, while the empowered have a lasting effect. The lasting effects currently are of the negative and corrupt type.

[-] 2 points by Lardhead2 (67) 2 years ago

I see what you are saying. But the un-empowered will turn the hubris and ego against each other. That is one of the reasons why they can't unite.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Again, you are generally correct.

May I remind you that there have been plenty of times the un-empowered have united under a common cause regardless of personal interests. It all depends upon how oppressed the whole has become.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21338) 2 years ago

It means that the elite don't get it, the problems they have caused.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21338) 2 years ago

Let's hope they wise up.

[-] 0 points by FawkesNews (1290) 2 years ago

Of course, but what can they do now? They have killed the host and fear the maggots.

[Removed]