Discussing the "Occupy" movement (merged on pg 51)

[Hubbs]

You know, while I agree that Wall Street and Capitol Hill are in need of a serious overhaul, I really can't feel one way or another about this Occupy Movement.

I used be really into activism (though I leaned more to the right), but I've come to the realization that no matter how much protesting and hollering a person does, it really won't make a bit of difference in the end. All nations are doomed to fall eventually and all governments will eventually lead to corruption and suppression, in some way, shape or form, of the people's natural rights. Communism, democracies, fascism, theocracies, republics, socialism, monarchies...they will all end the same way.

Look at Russia: hundreds of years under oppressive czars, then replaced by 70+ years of oppressive premiers under the Soviet banner, and now they're ruled under a shady, single party that will surely do more of the same. I'm sure there are countless other examples, but they don't come to mind right now.

Human nature will always get in the way of freedom and prosperity.

All I can see now from these popular movements, whether it's these Occupy Movement folks or the "Revolution" Ron Paul supports, is naive simplistic thinking. They're all perusing the same, unreachable, impossible goal.

So, let them occupy Wall Street or the Capitol or their local for IHOP for all I care. Even if they get what they want, what then? Eventually we will face the same problems and we'll be right where we started. It is all futility. In the end, the only thing a person can improve is him or herself. After that, he or she can only hope others will learn from their example and mistakes and create some sort of chain reaction.

Wait... what?

I'm a cynical ****, but I can't bring myself to agree with a single thing you just said. You seem to have two basic premises: The first is that all human societies will, at some point, endure some form of autocratic rule, and history would certainly suggest that this could very well be true. But the second premise is that because all societies will, at some point, endure some form of autocratic rule, and a perfect society would never endure autocratic rule, and therefore perfection is impossible, then all forms of activism, all efforts to improve government, all movements of any kind, indeed all efforts to merely make a society better are inherently pointless because they won't make a society perfect. And I'm sorry, but I simply can't comprehend how you can use history to back up one premise while simultaneously ignoring history in order to believe the other.

If Martin Luther King were alive today, how do you think he would respond if you told him that activism never achieves anything? How 'bout Ghandi? Susan B. Anthony? The gay rights leaders of today? Do you think that Scott Brown would tell you that the Tea Party movement hasn't achieved anything? Do you think that Barack Obama would tell you that he became the first black president because it was preordained by the powers that be? Would the world have been a little bit different if the Nazis never became a popular political party? Did the signing of the Magna Carta have no effect on England? I've heard that the French had a bit of an internal spat around 1789. Do you think anyone noticed? Were they all able to eat cake?

Let's focus on your example, Russia, for a moment. The revolution of 1917 was indeed a very political movement. Just imagine if it had been more along the lines of the aforementioned French revolution. Don't you think the past nearly-hundred years would have been a tad different? I still remember a story that my mom once told me about a family she knew that managed to come here to the U.S. from the Soviet Union in the 1970's. After they got here, the father would occasionally go to the nearest supermarket just to look at it. He was overwhelmed by the simple fact that we could go to a place full of food whenever we wanted, and buy whatever food we wanted to buy whenever we wanted to buy it. Such a concept simply didn't exist in the USSR.

I'll throw out one more Russian example. Granted, this one comes from a movie, but the basic point is rooted in reality. In one of the last scenes in The Hunt for Red October (spoiler alert, but if you haven't seen the movie by now it's your own damn fault), the October's first mate is talking about living in the United States, and he asks Captain Sean Connery, with a complete sense of wonder, "You mean you can travel from state to state without showing your papers?" (I'm paraphrasing, for the record.) Again, the impression is that he had spent his life in a place where he would never even conceive such a possibility.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that if the Soviet Union and the United States existed at the exact same time, and one was better in pretty much every way than the other (something which I very much believe that I can back up if necessary), and both were the products of political movements, then how can you possibly hold the position that political movements achieve nothing? Shouldn't history be telling you that we should always be striving to identify ways to make our lives better, and then pushing to implement whatever policies would further that goal?

[visionary]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/politics/occupy-wall-street/index.html

Unions endorse, will join Occupy Wall Street protests

New York (CNN) -- As the Occupy Wall Street protesters rally for a third week, social media sites such as Twitter seem to be spurring similar protests in other cities.

A Twitter account called Occupy Boston mentions a citywide college walkout there Wednesday.

Meanwhile, the Massachusetts Nurses Association says hundreds of the city's nurses will rally with the Occupy Boston protesters on Wednesday. The association says the protest will be part of the opening day activities for a national nursing convention in Boston.

iReport: Send us your photos, videos

In New York, several unions endorsed the Occupy Wall Street movement and plan to join the protesters' street theater Wednesday, labor leaders said.

"It's really simple. These young people on Wall Street are giving voice to many of the problems that working people in America have been confronting over the last several years," said Larry Hanley, international president of the Amalgamated Transit Union, which has 20,000 members in the New York area.

"These young people are speaking for the vast majority of Americans who are frustrated by the bankers and brokers who have profited on the backs of hard-working people," Hanley added in a statement. "While we battle it out day after day, month after month, the millionaires and billionaires on Wall Street sit by -- untouched -- and lecture us on the level of our sacrifice."

Transport Workers Union Local 100 spokesman Jim Gannon said the Occupy Wall Street movement, which denounces social inequities in the financial system and draws inspiration from the Arab Spring revolutions in Africa and the Middle East, has advanced issues that unions typically support.

"Their goals are our goals," Gannon said. "They brought a spotlight on issues that we've believed in for quite some time now. ... Wall Street caused the implosion in the first place and is getting away scot-free while workers, transit workers, everybody, is forced to pay for their excesses.

"These young folks have brought a pretty bright spotlight," Gannon added. "It's kind of a natural alliance."

[Corcaigh]

The youth of today sit there clouded in ignorance with pink hair.

You and Goskins561 need to get over your obsession with the chick with pink hair. She's just not into married men from some rural ****hole town.

[Koolblue13]

We must be looking at different pictures.

I was walking around talking to them, not looking at pictures.

Protesting is what Democracy is. The fact that people are making an effort to go out there and be counted, instead of sitting behind a computer ****ing about it, is great. The system is broken in many ways. The more people that show up and the more places these protests start, the harder it will be to deny that.

[Thiebear]

Wide Receiver walk ons should be a right also.

[Ellis]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/politics/occupy-wall-street/index.html

WOAH....

if the unions really do get behind this... and walkouts begin... this could get really interesting.

[Koolblue13]

WOAH....

if the unions really do get behind this... and walkouts begin... this could get really interesting.

This isn't ending any time soon. There was a ton of energy there yesterday. It's coming to a city near you.

[Ellis]

This isn't ending any time soon. There was a ton of energy there yesterday. It's coming to a city near you.

It's already here. There was an event yesterday in Baltimore but it's nowhere near as strong.

Also... it's far better to get the NYC event to critical mass.

[Brad_Edwards_Fan]

I actually see the Unions getting involved as a problem. They will, IMO, only serve to politicize and event that seems to cross parties. I hope the dont try to take this over the way that we saw the original tea-party taken over by more traditional republican groups. I see the power in these groups highly related to avoid being branded as one party or the other.

[Koolblue13]

It's already here. There was an event yesterday in Baltimore but it's nowhere near as strong.

Also... it's far better to get the NYC event to critical mass.

At lunch time, people came from everywhere. When we marched, everybody we "inconvenienced" were cheering us on as we passed by. It was pretty electric.

[Kilmer17]

What do people think the end result will be?

My guess is this ends up like the world altering protests in Wisconsin.

[Ellis]

Not to be cynical, but I'm sure the bankers are laughing, knowing that a movement like this can only sustain itself for a limited time... then it will be back to business as usual.

[Koolblue13]

What do people think the end result will be?

My guess is this ends up like the world altering protests in Wisconsin.

People are just sick of sitting by and watching things go the way they have been. They want honest conversation about it. There is no "end goal".

[Kilmer17]

Then they are stupid to think this is the way to do it.

This is an anger movement. Nothing more.

See- France- Rail strikes. They happen a few times a year and do nothing but **** up the train schedule.

[Bang]

No, he sounds like he did all he could to earn an opportunity. That's all it is. We all have a right to seek a job. Doesn't mean there will be one waiting. And it doesn't have to be anyones fault.

No, I don't think it's my right. I actually don't have a job, but I'm currently looking for one while I take classes. I do all the previously stated things to make myself more competitive so I have a chance at a job, but that doesn't mean I'll be a fit for one. If a company wants me, they'll hire, if they don't they won't. If I don't get a job, it's actually partially my fault, because I can ALWAYS do something better. Face it, we all could if we applied ourselves.

Just because the Redskins practice all week and play the game of football doesn't mean they have a right to win.

What's next, we all have a right to make out with Mila Kunis?

Well, then i am certainly confused, because when you write

Wait, a job is a right? What the heck? If that were the case, why in the world did I go to college, gain experience, network with people in my field, and learn important skills when just breathing could have got me hired?

you seem to imply that these people believe that simply breathing is enough to have the right to a job? As if none of them ever did any of that, and are simply trying to bully their way into a right they don't have?

because if that isn't what you meant to say,, if you meant to say "why did I go to college to have an oportunity to get better", why imply that these lazy asses just want it handed to them?

No one, as you say, has the right to a job. You have the right to compete for one. But that is inherent on there being one to compete for.

Unless you're competing for a CEO job there isn't much else to go around, and when the trickles from the top stop.. people get mad, especially when the top.. the so-called 'job creators" have more money and more breaks than they've ever had in history. they have exactly what they were supposed to get to trickle things down, and there is none.

In fact, it's just the opposite. Now that they have all the money and all the breaks, they want more.

At some point these demonstrations and protests are going to ring home to the people who's heads will be on the chopping block, and while I know you didn't say it, the others who have stated that they'r nothing but dirty hippies who need a bath should wise up.

These aren't just whiny kids protesting for nothing else but youthful ignorance.

As an atheist, it always kills me to say... "there but for the grace of God, go I."

~Bang

[mossomo]

These aren't just whiny kids protesting for nothing else but youthful ignorance.

You are correct sir as they have made a list of demands. We should review them.

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage*** (raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.)

*** With the caveat of ending "Freetrade"

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy.

Hmmm. Where have I seen these points discussed before? Huffington Post. So is it fair to call this group the Occupy Wallstreet Democrats/Socialists/Anarchists? Because that's what we have here, The 1999 Battle in Seattle WTO Rioters - that crowd.

Unless you're competing for a CEO job there isn't much else to go around, and when the trickles from the top stop...

There is a reason why Hong Kong and Singapore have record 2011 employment rates of ~97%. The "trickles from the top" haven't stopped flowing in these two thriving economies. There is a successful blueprint for economic growth to follow if Western Nations so chose. It's not the job creators who stand in the way.

[USS Redskins]

Thats a funny list. Thats from the Onion, right?

[Ellis]

As I understand it, that list was from ONE guy, not the actual movement.

[China]

That list is ridiculous. If that is for real, there are some people living in fantasy land, or at least they would be if they got all their demands.

[ffxdrummer]

That's some random person's list that's been cherrypicked from a forum. That's like if I made a list of demands I'd like to see and posted it on here.

[Corcaigh]

That list is ridiculous. If that is for real, there are some people living in fantasy land, or at least they would be if they got all their demands.

That's actually my list. But they left out

Demand Fourteen: Kill whitey.

[mossomo]

As I understand it, that list was from ONE guy, not the actual movement.

To be fair, the site does say proposed list of demands... But this ONE guy is organizing the protests in NYC, from his website occupywallst.org, On October 05, 2011, at 3:00 in the afternoon the residents of Liberty Square will gather to join their union brother. And he didn't spontaneously create the website to support the movement, he had forward knowledge of these October protests back in July when he registered it. He seems to be a leader and if not a leader, definitely a mover and shaker for this thing.

That's some random person's list that's been cherrypicked from a forum.

No - it's not some random person. He's an organizer for the protests.

[Koolblue13]

Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity- King Jr

Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.- Churchill.

People are hurting and getting angry. This protest is peaceful now. As it springs up in more places and cops handle it worse and worse, things will change.

[Popeman38]

Anyone who thinks OccupyWallStreet was a spontaneous movement to "represent the 99%" really is naive. Look at the posters. Look at the sponsors. Look the the protesters. I have no doubt that there are some members of the protests that are sincerely there to change the world. The rest are there to create havoc. We see the same sponsors at the WTO protests, World Bank protests....

[ffxdrummer]

To be fair, the site does say proposed list of demands... But this ONE guy is organizing the protests in NYC, from his website occupywallst.org, On October 05, 2011, at 3:00 in the afternoon the residents of Liberty Square will gather to join their union brother. And he didn't spontaneously create the website to support the movement, he had forward knowledge of these October protests back in July when he registered it. He seems to be a leader of the movement and if not a leaders, definitely a mover and shaker for the movement.

Actual Tech question - how can you tell from that link who registered that website? I can't find the part that links it to LLoyd J. Hart

No - it's not some random person. He's an organizer for the protests.

Rebuttal question - is he the organizer for the entirety of the OWS protests across the globe? even all the OWS protests in NYC alone? How can you argue that that list represents the "demands" of anyone that isn't just Lloyd J. Hart? Just posting it on the website and organizing protests doesn't mean that the people at the protest agree with the list.