that seems like the most optimistic view. At this point, it feels like without forceful revolution, it boils down to voting for the lesser of two evils. We need a real leader and we haven’t had one of those since Johnson.
and what about Ron Paul, suppose that he is a presidential candidate? How would that work out?
Paul impresses me 9 out of 10 times with his views on social liberties, but I think he’s too skeptical of government as purely a problem-solving tool, and he has some pretty freaky convictions about vast government conspiracies that lead me to believe he’s not the most rational guy in the world.
I wouldn’t want him as a watchman, but he’d be splendid as the watcher of the watchmen.
DUDE! NOT cool.
…that’s an insult to gibbons everywhere.
@Pedoviejo and goodm0urning, that’s why the people are speaking up. Currently the money of the corporations is worth more than the vote of the people. That’s not how it should be.
The government will not regulate the banks and investment firms because it is against their best interest. That’s why all of the chief financial advisers to the president (Greenspan, Paulson), have been shooting down any attempt to regulate. And anyone on the inside who tries to speak out about it gets fired, or shut down.
There is too much money in the political system, and all of the people up top have been rooted to eachother regardless of political affiliation (Obama you’re failing us son). That’s why we need to take the money out of government. It’s like they all have differing opinions of how the country should be run, but they can all agree they like the money that lobbyists and interest groups are showering on them, and God knows what else is going on under the table.
Check out this interview, it’s good info. http://davidmquintana.blogspot.com/2011/02/wall-street-untouchables-exposing-wall.html
And if Ron Paul were elected, I foresee an even bigger stalemate in creating legislation. He won’t have any democrats on his side, and most republicans wouldn’t play along either. It would be 4 more years of bickering without changing anything. Although he would be able to bring the troops home (Obama can right now if he really wanted to).
That’s why the Occupy Wall St movement needs to continue growing like it is. It’s going to take a long time for them to be recognized, but I think they can actually change things. It took the civil rights movement a long time too, but they accomplished their goal through perserverence. We need a real change in the political system, because the current one is letting to many things go unchecked, which in turn ruins the economy and causes greater disparity between the classes.
Does Occupy Wall Street have a specific set of goals it’s working toward? I know the broad strokes–they’re pissed off that nobody’s doing anything to fix their shit, they want big business’s hooks taken out of government, etc.–but what’s the point-by-point plan? Civil rights had a series of concrete goals, which I think helped a lot in its legitimacy and effectiveness.
Some important things that the Occupy movement has that the Civil rights era movement didn’t have was technology, and the popular opinion of the country and the world is parallel to theirs that things aren’t right. Both of these things have helped them so far, and will help them immensely.
The goal right now is to be as loud as possible and to try and educate more people to sympathize and support the movement. Already there is many movements across the US and in other countries that are hundreds to thousands strong, and they are coordinating and supporting/gaining support of other causes (teachers unions, pilots unions, etc.). They have a fundamental list of demands that they formulated into a living document. The keyword is “living”, like the constitution so changes can be made. It’s nowhere near the final version.
So many people are willing to laugh and write it off, instead of supporting the movement and bringing their own input into it. You can still support it, even though you might not agree with everything. I believe that down the line it will become even more coherent, and hopefully with more intelligent minds working together they can turn the demands into something that can actually work.
One thing they don’t want is a public “face” or a figure. They are being written off as hippies, yet yesterday 13 people were arrested in peaceful Sacramento protest (a sit-in), some of them school teachers and for sure one army veteran. A woman who served 7 years. The movement is for the people, everyone. They don’t want to be the victims of a vanguard, where someone takes control of their movement and directs it in another direction. That’s why they don’t want to have a figure head.
I’m going to go cook myself some dinner, and try and find something in Malcolm X’s autobiography so I can tell you about the civil rights movement. I remember it, but I don’t remember every detail exactly, it has something to do with vanguarding.
I’ve read X’s biography a couple times. It’s been a while, but still. Good book.
Obama just proves that black and white is meaningless.
Green is the only colour that matters.
The knowledge is slowly coming out. Look at how few people knew fuck all about these companies, or people like Ben Bernanke.
The part I was talking about starts on page 320.
Basically the whole famous March for Jobs and Freedom on Washington DC where the famous “I Have A Dream” speech was given, wasn’t supposed to be a peaceful protest. It was originally a bunch of angry black men (mostly unrelated to civil rights groups) who were going to march on DC. Then the White House got scared and told black civil rights “leaders” to call it off, but they said they hadn’t started it.
So basically the White House instead welcomed the marchers. And it became a big event lead by the civil rights leaders who came together despite their past differences, due to a large monetary donation. So basically they took control of the movement, and were controlled by the white people who donated them the money. Basically it became glamorized and what started off as a black-only angry march, became a publicity stunt where it was the fashionable thing to do where the upper class black people and previously scared white people joined in. People were told not to bring signs that they would be provided, and they were told what to sing, where to march. Instead of the people deciding what they want, it was decided for them.
It was a great protest, and it was probably better this way than how it was originally planned (or not planned). The Civil Rights Act was passed the next year, they accomplished some of their goals, and it was very beautiful. But they were still taken over and guided in a certain direction by their leaders TO ADDRESS what you said earlier, the concrete goals were given to them by the people who took charge of the march and of the movement.
If that were to happen in the Occupy Wall Street movement, where the leaders get bought, then the demand for regulation and equal taxation will never be put into fruition, and the cycle will continue. The people in power will continue manipulating the system and draining the economy, and the rest of us will continue to feel the effects.
Leaderless is honorable and sounds great but when you have a bunch of people aiming in a bunch of different directions, it’s fractured, weak. Get everyone to concentrate on the same points/goals and you have a much stronger force. You got X,000 of people demanding different things. I understand there’s a lot of shit that needs to be done and some of them are right in their complaints but they need to all be demanding the same things.
How can I put this to be less confusing…
If someone walked out the white house and asked “what the hell do you want?”, instead of being in inaudible mess of a hundred different demands said at once, everyone should say in unison all hundred things. One voice.
It’s leaderless but still organized. There is no face, and no hidden leaders with hidden agendas. I’m sure if there ever was a chance for the protestors to be formally and officially addressed they would reply with the general consensus and not just everybody yelling random nonsense.
It’s not like they’re trying to do that while they’re marching. The marching is to bring attention and support. The general assemblies are ways of people’s demands to get heard first by the group and then to the world, and I’m sure there’s lots of people saying the same thing you’re saying.
I agree with you and everyone else to some extent when you say it needs to be organized and have concrete demands. But I still support the movement. And right now they’re working towards that, and they’re just trying to gather some attention and support. Like a “Hey everybody. Join in.” kind of thing.
Hey they spoke about it on the local news. They’re doing it downtown here in Buffalo. Patrolling officers gave them their blessings.
Thursday one of my professors spoke about it for a bit, said to look it up and mentioned there was a protest on my campus against the constant rise of tuition.
The problem with “hey everybody join up” is that you get the loonies as well. I’ve seen free Manning, end the death penalty, no more oil, anti war, anti drone attack, pro green, anti pipe line, end the fed, end the government, pay my student loans, straight up anarchists, you name it, it’s there, including 9/11 truthers. So this is a mix of every left and right wing crank out there, along with anybody who has a marginal beef or wants something.
Sorry, it’s full of dipshits morons and malcontents. If they could come up with a cohesive message and focus on one or two things, something could get done, but they wont and so nothing will.
If ever there was a way to get a group full of lunatics that’s easy to dimiss this was it.
still lurking this thread but anyone seen this?
EDIT: Also a followup interview with the guy Chris:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=J0cp_DyfiRU
i’m slowly following this stuff and trying to keep up with it more. But you know, i’m one of the few trying to get out of that shitty job, go to school, and try to enjoy life.
That dude is an idiot, ending the FED is a fucking crack pot idea that’s pushed by right wing lunatics. They’ve always had an express goal of letting people print their own currency, that way lies madness. Companies print their own currency and then only let you use it at the company store…
i stopped listening the moment he said food prices and gas prices are up because of increased flow of money by the government.
Its not the government, its fucking speculation. people seriously should read a tad bit more before they say blah, blah, blah. These people also fail to understand that this a god damn republic, not a fucking clown show democracy.
Coupons, man. Saves you a bundle.
Makes people think you’re gay, but still. Bundles!
I don’t really have a take on it because I never know what to really believe when it comes to this shit. I just go by what I personally know and it’s not much.
Depends. Do you mean the goal of the people showing up or the goal of the guys who are laying the astroturf?
So… did anyone else see that video with John Lewis? That thing gave me the creeps. Why do y’all like this movement so much again?
If implemented well, it wouldn’t be. The concern is that it’d lead to overcentralization of power. The same thing some people think is causing a lot of problems in the US.