Jump to content
tooner

to occupy or not?

Recommended Posts

Just read HF's post in another thread, and got to wondering what the general concensus was about the various occupy movement that are popping up every where.

 

i am of two minds on this, while i would agree that the current financial climate is fucked in large part due to the shenanigans of the 1%, i don't necessarily side with the 99%, especially since there doesn't seem to be any realistic road map forward coming from the 99% camp.

 

anyway...what are your thoughts/opinions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fair enough, but if they don't come with one who will? the elected leaders won't because they have a vested interest in keeping an even keel, the type of change the 99 are talking about would invoke chaos to the struggling world economy.

 

don't get me wrong i think there needs to be change in the way we look at how the world is being run, but i don't see this movement as a viable means of having it change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess but i've heard exactly the opposite as well.....i.e. the only way it works is if they have a clear and consise agenda with attainable goals, otherwise they just seem like a bunch of random hippies.

 

i also saw an ed op piece that talked about it really only being the 30% not the 99% ( in canada anyway) as the poor have actually had a larger increase to their income in the past decade or so than the middle class have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm intrigued by this but I'm not really sure what they actually want. Seems a bit like an empty expression of dissent.

 

There are no demands. That's the good thing about it. Its a general expression of disgust with the status quo without any solutions provided. Elected leaders are there to solve the problems, the people are rising up to demand they do so rather than catering to their donors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i guess but i've heard exactly the opposite as well.....i.e. the only way it works is if they have a clear and consise agenda with attainable goals, otherwise they just seem like a bunch of random hippies.

i also saw an ed op piece that talked about it really only being the 30% not the 99% ( in canada anyway) as the poor have actually had a larger increase to their income in the past decade or so than the middle class have.

 

you will hear a lot of negative press about them, that's how you know they're doing well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm intrigued by this but I'm not really sure what they actually want. Seems a bit like an empty expression of dissent.

 

There are no demands. That's the good thing about it. Its a general expression of disgust with the status quo without any solutions provided. Elected leaders are there to solve the problems, the people are rising up to demand they do so rather than catering to their donors.

 

Right. I'm just saying that a protest/resistance movement as such should suggest a solution. I think most people would agree that the current situation is unsustainable, but how do we change it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't know about that, there are some good arguments ( and poor ones depending on who is being interviewed) being made for the need for reform to the way banks do business and how lobby groups get their interests taken care of by bribing/coercing elected officials. problem is that this type of thing has been happening for ....well forever and i don't see a solution (one that is tenable to the 99% at least) coming from placards and slogans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't know about that, there are some good arguments ( and poor ones depending on who is being interviewed) being made for the need for reform to the way banks do business and how lobby groups get their interests taken care of by bribing/coercing elected officials. problem is that this type of thing has been happening for ....well forever and i don't see a solution (one that is tenable to the 99% at least) coming from placards and slogans.

 

They highlight a problem but it's a problem that's not in need of being highlighted. Arguments for the need for change are redundant, it's the actual solution in itself that could be a solid basis for a resistance movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to bring down the banks, the stock exchange etc. to be really effective. However, that would probably involve violence so most will stop short of that. Personally, I'd get the state to take all the assets of those responsible for the crash, the Fred Goodwin types, ban all companies that hide their money from fair taxes abroad (so no U2 gigs then) and then nationalise water, electricity and gas suppliers.

 

As for the occupy movement, it needs more than 'stock brokers are wankers', it needs an ideology and a solution to be effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to bring down the banks, the stock exchange etc. to be really effective. However, that would probably involve violence so most will stop short of that. Personally, I'd get the state to take all the assets of those responsible for the crash, the Fred Goodwin types, ban all companies that hide their money from fair taxes abroad (so no U2 gigs then) and then nationalise water, electricity and gas suppliers.

 

As for the occupy movement, it needs more than 'stock brokers are wankers', it needs an ideology and a solution to be effective.

 

agreed, i think the ideology is there but it needs someone to lead with solutions to the problems that have been identified. saw a quote from some anarchist philosophy major i know about the problem that getting such a leader creates its own problems.....

 

"As soon as a theory is enmeshed in a particular point, we realise that it will never possess the slightest practical importance unless it can erupt in a totally different area. This is why the notion of reform is so stupid and hypocritical. Either reforms are designed by people who claim to be representative, who make a profession of speaking for others, and they lead to a division of power, to ...a distribution of this new power which is consequently increased by a double repression; or they arise from the complaints and demands of those concerned. This latter instance is no longer a reform but revolutionary action that questions (expressing the full force of its partiality) the totality of power and the hierarchy that maintains it." -Deleuze

 

while i can see the point that is being made here, i don't think i support an anarchistic state model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the purpose and strategy of OWS seems to be lost on a lot of people. That's not the fault of the thousands upon thousands demonstrating, but of the media not articulating it and the political class outright ignoring it

 

You cannot condense total rejection of the two party, corporate financed, right leaning, oligarchic plutocracy into a single soundbite to market yourself. You cannot participate in a curropt democracy and argue against it.

 

These are things Obama was supposed to do with a vague promise of "change" which he failed to deliver as the number one recipient of campaign funds from the investment sector.

 

The big problem KSA had with wikileaks is that it became Assange leaks. These protesters are avoiding the lighning rod diverting attention from the myriad of problems which lead to such outrageous wealth inequality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to bring down the banks, the stock exchange etc. to be really effective. However, that would probably involve violence so most will stop short of that. Personally, I'd get the state to take all the assets of those responsible for the crash, the Fred Goodwin types, ban all companies that hide their money from fair taxes abroad (so no U2 gigs then) and then nationalise water, electricity and gas suppliers.

 

As for the occupy movement, it needs more than 'stock brokers are wankers', it needs an ideology and a solution to be effective.

 

agreed, i think the ideology is there but it needs someone to lead with solutions to the problems that have been identified. saw a quote from some anarchist philosophy major i know about the problem that getting such a leader creates its own problems.....

 

"As soon as a theory is enmeshed in a particular point, we realise that it will never possess the slightest practical importance unless it can erupt in a totally different area. This is why the notion of reform is so stupid and hypocritical. Either reforms are designed by people who claim to be representative, who make a profession of speaking for others, and they lead to a division of power, to ...a distribution of this new power which is consequently increased by a double repression; or they arise from the complaints and demands of those concerned. This latter instance is no longer a reform but revolutionary action that questions (expressing the full force of its partiality) the totality of power and the hierarchy that maintains it." -Deleuze

 

while i can see the point that is being made here, i don't think i support an anarchistic state model.

 

Protest isn't anarchic is it? It's democracy in action. The people demanding representation from elected leaders more interested in selling their idesology to the highest bidder with corporate personhood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for it, I think protesting is something we don't do enough of in this country. It seems peaceful enough and is a good way of getting publicity and getting their voices heard. A lot of politicians are in The City's pocket so it's difficult for others, who don't have means of The City, to have their views represented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the purpose and strategy of OWS seems to be lost on a lot of people. That's not the fault of the thousands upon thousands demonstrating, but of the media not articulating it and the political class outright ignoring it

 

Really? I think OWS are doing a pretty poor job themselves.

 

 

About

 

OccupyWallSt.org is the unofficial de facto online resource for the ongoing protests happening on Wall Street. We are an affinity group committed to doing technical support work for resistance movements. We are not affiliated with Adbusters, anonymous or any other organization.

Occupy Wall Street is a people-powered movement that began on September 17, 2011 in Liberty Square in Manhattan’s Financial District, and has spread to over 100 cities in the United States and actions in over 1,500 cities globally. #OWS is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations. The movement is inspired by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, and aims to expose how the richest 1% of people are writing the rules of an unfair global economy that is foreclosing on our future.

Occupy Wall Street is a horizontally organized resistance movement employing the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to restore democracy in America. We use a tool known as a "people's assembly" to facilitate collective decision making in an open, participatory and non-binding manner. We call ours the NYC General Assembly and we welcome people from all colors, genders and beliefs to attend our daily assemblies. To learn more about how you can start a people's assembly to organize your local community to fight back against social injustice, please read this quick guide on group dynamics in people's assemblies.

Edited by ewerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not the responsibility of the 99% to provide a roadmap. Up to the elected leaders to change the system to placate them.

 

That's pie in the sky and you know it.

 

Most of them are either flagrant careerists or in the pocket of big business and various 'comittees'.

 

This is why the banned protesting outside parliament a few years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm intrigued by this but I'm not really sure what they actually want. Seems a bit like an empty expression of dissent.

 

They want their fuking money back.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for it, I think protesting is something we don't do enough of in this country. It seems peaceful enough and is a good way of getting publicity and getting their voices heard. A lot of politicians are in The City's pocket so it's difficult for others, who don't have means of The City, to have their views represented.

 

Agree with the last bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


Recent tweets

Toontastic Facebook

Donate to Toontastic

Keeping the lights on since... well ages ago
TT-Staff


×