HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Let's Not Forget OWS...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:37 PM

Let's Not Forget OWS...

Occupy Wall Street helped to change the dialogue and played a huge role in the election. So much of the campaign dealt with income inequality and issues of tax fairness. I don't believe that this would have been possible without OWS.

-Paige

206 replies, 13071 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 206 replies Author Time Post
Reply Let's Not Forget OWS... (Original post)
WiffenPoof Nov 2012 OP
redqueen Nov 2012 #1
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #4
Luminous Animal Nov 2012 #8
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #13
PETRUS Nov 2012 #28
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #75
redqueen Nov 2012 #16
PETRUS Nov 2012 #31
Leopolds Ghost Nov 2012 #55
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #9
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #24
Luminous Animal Nov 2012 #34
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #49
mattclearing Nov 2012 #109
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #48
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #52
LadyHawkAZ Nov 2012 #53
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #76
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #82
WorseBeforeBetter Nov 2012 #180
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #59
Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #47
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #81
roseBudd Nov 2012 #160
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #166
OLDMDDEM Nov 2012 #2
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #26
LeftInTX Nov 2012 #32
OLDMDDEM Nov 2012 #206
oldhippydude Nov 2012 #3
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #5
HappyMe Nov 2012 #6
Luminous Animal Nov 2012 #29
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #50
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #11
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #15
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #25
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #33
Downtown Hound Nov 2012 #42
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #56
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #106
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #107
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #60
Zorra Nov 2012 #198
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #38
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #61
sibelian Nov 2012 #65
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #68
sibelian Nov 2012 #72
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #79
sibelian Nov 2012 #63
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #70
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #12
WillyT Nov 2012 #14
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #17
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #19
WillyT Nov 2012 #20
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #27
WillyT Nov 2012 #35
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #39
WillyT Nov 2012 #41
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #43
sibelian Nov 2012 #64
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #69
sibelian Nov 2012 #73
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #113
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #135
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #186
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #117
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #129
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #143
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #145
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #148
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #161
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #164
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #178
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #179
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #182
randome Nov 2012 #183
rhett o rick Nov 2012 #184
woo me with science Nov 2012 #201
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #140
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #144
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #147
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #149
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #151
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #157
randome Nov 2012 #150
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #155
randome Nov 2012 #158
argiel1234 Nov 2012 #162
Chathamization Nov 2012 #167
Luminous Animal Nov 2012 #23
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #37
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #110
Zorra Nov 2012 #30
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #40
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #112
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #133
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #138
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #141
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #187
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #190
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #191
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #192
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #204
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #108
Shankapotomus Nov 2012 #18
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #44
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #54
Joe Shlabotnik Nov 2012 #7
Rex Nov 2012 #10
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #21
WillyT Nov 2012 #22
LeftInTX Nov 2012 #36
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #51
Leopolds Ghost Nov 2012 #57
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #67
Leopolds Ghost Nov 2012 #74
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #114
randome Nov 2012 #115
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #118
randome Nov 2012 #119
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #123
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #116
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #137
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #146
Luminous Animal Nov 2012 #58
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #62
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #80
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #83
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #84
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #85
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #87
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #89
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #90
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #93
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #94
zappaman Nov 2012 #96
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #97
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #98
kestrel91316 Nov 2012 #165
randome Nov 2012 #168
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #170
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #172
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #173
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #174
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #175
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #176
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #111
Chathamization Nov 2012 #121
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #122
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #124
randome Nov 2012 #125
HangOnKids Nov 2012 #132
Chathamization Nov 2012 #136
Chathamization Nov 2012 #86
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #88
Chathamization Nov 2012 #91
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #92
Chathamization Nov 2012 #95
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #99
Chathamization Nov 2012 #102
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #103
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #120
Chathamization Nov 2012 #128
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #134
Chathamization Nov 2012 #142
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #154
Chathamization Nov 2012 #159
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #163
Chathamization Nov 2012 #169
nadinbrzezinski Nov 2012 #171
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #185
Chathamization Nov 2012 #188
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #193
Chathamization Nov 2012 #195
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #197
Chathamization Nov 2012 #199
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #203
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #196
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #46
Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #45
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #71
TBF Nov 2012 #78
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #126
Summer Hathaway Nov 2012 #131
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #139
sibelian Nov 2012 #66
TBF Nov 2012 #77
WiffenPoof Nov 2012 #100
randome Nov 2012 #101
WiffenPoof Nov 2012 #104
sabrina 1 Nov 2012 #130
AndyTiedye Nov 2012 #105
upi402 Nov 2012 #127
99th_Monkey Nov 2012 #152
99th_Monkey Nov 2012 #153
WorseBeforeBetter Nov 2012 #156
Chathamization Nov 2012 #177
WorseBeforeBetter Nov 2012 #181
4 t 4 Nov 2012 #194
WorseBeforeBetter Nov 2012 #205
Fire Walk With Me Nov 2012 #189
RiffRandell Nov 2012 #200
woo me with science Nov 2012 #202

Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:40 PM

1. I had to start ignoring Occupy stuff due to all the "OBAMA IS JUST AS BAD YOU FOOLS!"

" VOTE LIBERTARIAN!" bullshit they spewed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:50 PM

4. Are you suggesting that OWS was libertarian? That doesnt make sense. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:08 PM

8. It didn't happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #8)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:24 PM

13. I cant imagine libertarians protesting Wall Street. I just find it sad that some Democrats

join with the RightWingers in disparaging OWS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #13)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:02 PM

28. Libertarians

Ron Paul types did appear last fall but they were a distinct minority. It smelled like opportunism to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PETRUS (Reply #28)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:00 AM

75. Yes, I think they wanted the attention. Cant see them wanting more Wall Street regulations. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:31 PM

16. No, but down here they seemed to be overrun with those types.

It was easy enough to ignore them usually. The closer it got to the election, though, the less tolerable I found it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #16)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:07 PM

31. I think that happened in certain cities.

My experience has been pretty nonpartisan, direct action oriented.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #4)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 09:01 PM

55. Left-libertarian. But I notice everyone on this thread is talking about us in the past tense.

So yes, they have forgotten OWS it seems. Grist for the quadrennial electoral mill... no change possible except through the voting booth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:10 PM

9. That is hilarious

Given the voting registration drives.

Yes, some occupiers voted for Gary Johnson, and a good majority here are democrats, some even members of the Central Committee. How does that square with that supposed reality of yours?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:48 PM

24. Really? What were you reading that gave you that incorrect perception? OWS

is non political so maybe you need to change your sources.

It is well known that a majority of people involved in OWS are Democrats.

The tell the truth though so maybe that is hard to take for some people. No mincing of words when it comes to issues that are important to the American people.

That is what GOOD Democrats do. They are FOR helping people. Libertarians are for the opposite.

Your comment makes no sense at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #24)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:11 PM

34. This kind of disinformation is why I don't recommend DU to anyone anymore...

It's embarrassing to be affiliated with it. I've been here long enough to suss out the best but a newbie doesn't have the same background knowledge that I have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #34)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:10 PM

49. Yes, it's very embarrassing, I agree.

DU used to require some kind of credible backup to statements like this. But then it used to be mainly populated by progressive Dems.

Sometimes it's hard to tell you are on a Progressive forum here as I find myself arguing with people in the same way and about the same issues, that I used to only feel the need to argue with Republicans over.

Hopefully now they don't have the excuse of 'there's an election coming up' to try to silence the Left here, we can start moving forward on issues that badly need to be addressed with our own party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #49)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:12 PM

109. A lot of people rely on MSM and tv news here.

They accept a lot of the corporate media premises which DU has traditionally been a check against. Many of us progressives are still around, but we lurk, because it gets tiresome arguing over shit that any real progressive wouldn't argue about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #24)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:07 PM

48. There's been a vocal (very) few pushing the

"both sides are exactly the same!" and "vote third party!" and whatnot. I strongly doubt they were anything close to representative of OWS, or the election wouldn't have gone the way it did. Just a few squeaky wheels that got a little press time and attention.

I have one on my FB list, he's now sulking because his "Obama = Romney, vote third party!!" crap didn't work and is blaming Obama for everything that has ever gone wrong with the world. Boehner who? Bush what? Who were those guys again? It would be funny if it weren't so deluded; even funnier because he swears he's not influenced at all by the MSM, yet is pushing their talking points just as hard as he can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #48)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:29 PM

52. Yes, but the written declaration of what OWS stands for makes it clear that they

do not support any political party or politician. However all politicians who agree with what they are doing, are welcome to be members, and so far as I know, the only politicians who have joined OWS, are Democrats. It is a natural fit for Democrats.

Otoh, we should not chase any US Citizen away from a Social Justice Movement. But OWS is probably the exact opposite in philosophy of the Libertarian philosophy so it's hard to image anyone conflating the two. OWS is all about helping people, Liberatarians are about people taking care of themselves.

I do think though that people can learn and be influenced when they see something that works. So while OWS is in no way a Libertarian movement and that any Libertarian identifying as a member definitely does not speak for them, I do think that getting away from demonizing people simply because we do not like their views, is refreshing. People can be respectful and even can come to agreement on issues if they are willing to talk and listen to each other.

One of the most destructive things affecting our country today is the divisive rhetoric that is part of our political discourse.

We are all Americans and I see more intelligent discussion about ISSUES rather than political ideology among people at OWS than in any other format. This gives me hope.

The main point is though that the statement that OWS is 'Libertarian' above is completely false.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #52)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:31 PM

53. I wrote it off as part of the same disinformation campaign

that said OWS members were all junkies and rapists. Just media smear in action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #53)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:01 AM

76. I agree. What do you think of Democrats that help spread this disinformation?

What possibly could be their motivation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #76)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:36 AM

82. Simple...it is a clear and present threat to the system

as they understand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #53)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:01 AM

180. "...young people in scruffy beards..."

Even the AP, in an article dated YESTERDAY, can't help itself.

Occupy Sandy: Onetime protesters find new cause

(snip)

Ultimately, though, the movement collapsed under its leaderless format, and Occupy became largely forgotten. But core members, and a spirit, have persisted and found a new cause in Occupy Sandy.

(snip)

In Rockaway Park, Occupier Diego Ibanez, 24, has been sleeping on the freezing floor of a community center down the street from a row of charred buildings destroyed by a fire. "You see a need and you fulfill it," he explained. "There's not a boss to tell you that you can't do this or you can't do that. Zuccotti was one of the best trainings in how to mobilize so quickly."

(snip)

"This is young people making history," said Mark Naison, a professor at Fordham University who has been studying Occupy Wall Street. "Young people who are refusing to let people suffer without putting themselves on the line to do something about it."


In this Thursday, Nov. 8, 2012 photo, at the Yana (You are Never Alone) medical clinic, Nastaran Mohit, with Occupy Sandy, right, speaks during an Occupy Sandy coordination meeting in the Rockaway Park neighborhood of Queens in New York. Along with other groups, Occupy Sandy has sprung up in an effort to bring goods and services to people left in need in the wake of Superstorm Sandy.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/11/10/3656490/occupy-sandy-onetime-protesters.html#storylink=cpy

It's disturbing how so many on this site can't wrap their brains around "leaderless format." And contrary to popular belief, it's not all white hipsters... a group some DUers bash with impunity. And even if it were, so fucking what? At least they're doing something...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #52)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 11:40 PM

59. Thank you. You can say it so much better than I. I completely agree. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:07 PM

47. OWS is strictly non-partisan and supports no candidate or party.

 

Some may have preferences and voted them but the declaration of the NYC General Assembly says "no politics". Any individual promoting politics is not speaking for the entire movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:20 AM

81. What a ridiculous and baseless slur on a social justice movement that changed

 

the tone of the national dialogue from 'austerity' to 'fairness' when it most mattered.

Just to mention one OWS accomplishment.

The Ron Paul Libtards were at Occupy Los Angeles for its first two weeks and then vanished, once the principles and practices of Consensus made clear that they couldn't simply stamp their feet and get their way. Come to think of it, I never saw any Libtards at an OLA General Assembly. They would come with their signs during the day, but then fade away when the real meat and potatoes (the GAs) took place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:57 PM

160. Once the saane people stopped going to GAs, OWS was nothing but the crazy people, and no they didn't

vote and yes they hate Obama. It was like Romney did not exist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to roseBudd (Reply #160)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:06 PM

166. So the members of the Central Committee of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY

Hate Obama? I am sure that is like news to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:41 PM

2. You are correct

Many people have left them for dead, but they are still a force to reckon with. They are now going to be buying up discounted mortgages in New York(?) and turn around and forgive the loan. What a great idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OLDMDDEM (Reply #2)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:56 PM

26. They were never dead they were busy doing things to benefit people. They were only dead

to those who fear a real people's movement, which is as everyone knows, the Right who absolutely hated them from the beginning.

Occupy moved to dealing with fraudulent foreclosures and have had more success in helping the people than Congress in shaming Big Banks into stopping many of their cruel, illegal foreclosures. And in doing so they have grown in membership.

They are now all over the areas destroyed by Sandy and according to some news media outlets, have out-performed the Red Cross.

They are a growing movement still in its infancy but the way they were able to mobilize tens of thousands of volunteers for Sandy victims, and collect incredible amounts of donations, proves the Right Wing wrong, as if they are ever right about anything. Far from being dead, they are more active than ever.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #26)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:07 PM

32. They are a growing movement still in its infancy

+1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 14, 2012, 09:13 AM

206. I'm so glad

you told me this. I was a supporter way in the beggining. My wife and I went to McPherson Square in the dead of last winter when OWS (DC) was there. We gave money in support of their efforts. We weren't sure the movement would be able to contnue, but I optimistically told my wife that they will be a force going forward. Now they are and I'm glad for that. Helping people is a wonderful strategy and will payoff down the road.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:43 PM

3. bingo.... before OWS nobody was talking about income inequality!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 03:57 PM

5. Yeah.

Because nobody ever talked about those things before September 2011 - ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 04:00 PM

6. Nope. Never, ever.

Plus all the hollering they did about 'no political affiliation'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HappyMe (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:04 PM

29. What's your beef with "no political affiliation"...

King, as leader of the SCLC had this to day about endorsements. (And, for an activist working on social and economic justice issues, I think it is an excellent position to take.)



As the leader of the SCLC, King maintained a policy of not publicly endorsing a U.S. political party or candidate: "I feel someone must remain in the position of non-alignment, so that he can look objectively at both parties and be the conscience of both—not the servant or master of either."

In a 1958 interview, he expressed his view that neither party was perfect, saying, "I don't think the Republican party is a party full of the almighty God nor is the Democratic party. They both have weaknesses ... And I'm not inextricably bound to either party."

King critiqued both parties' performance on promoting racial equality:

Actually, the Negro has been betrayed by both the Republican and the Democratic party. The Democrats have betrayed him by capitulating to the whims and caprices of the Southern Dixiecrats. The Republicans have betrayed him by capitulating to the blatant hypocrisy of reactionary right wing northern Republicans. And this coalition of southern Dixiecrats and right wing reactionary northern Republicans defeats every bill and every move towards liberal legislation in the area of civil rights.

Although King never publicly supported a political party or candidate for president, in a letter to a civil rights supporter in October 1956 he said that he was undecided as to whether he would vote for Adlai Stevenson or Dwight Eisenhower, but that "In the past I always voted the Democratic ticket."

In his autobiography, King says that in 1960 he privately voted for Democratic candidate John F. Kennedy: "I felt that Kennedy would make the best president. I never came out with an endorsement. My father did, but I never made one." King adds that he likely would have made an exception to his non-endorsement policy in 1964, saying "Had President Kennedy lived, I would probably have endorsed him in 1964."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #29)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:14 PM

50. Don't forget, not every one respects MLK. But thanks for the post, OWS has huge respect

for the movements that came before them, such as the Civil Rights Movements and took many of their ideas from them.

I can't imagine anyone thinking that a Social Justice Movement should join the poisonous partisan atmosphere of electoral politics and expect to have any success. I'm sure King had to deal with this kind of nonsense also though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:15 PM

11. This is embarrasing

When even major media outlets credit them with that...I know, I know, you are really committed.

But for god sakes even the NYT went there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #11)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:27 PM

15. Well, Nadin ...

I stopped seeing the 'major media outlets' as credible a very long time ago.

The notion that no one ever discussed income inequality and tax fairness before the launch of Occupy is utterly ridiculous.

To hear the OWSies tell the tale, an entire nation 'learned' about this disparity for the first time last September, having been completely in the dark before then.

The growing disparity between the very wealthy and the hard-working middle-class has been known, and has been a topic of heated conversation, since long before Occupy. OWS picked up on that conversation and ran with it - but to credit them with having started the discussion is silly at best.

The phrase "the top 1%", and all it implies, has been around for a very long time. Occupy turned the phrase around to focus on "the 99%" - a smart move and a catchy slogan. But OWS did not start the fire - it's been burnin' for years and years.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #15)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:54 PM

25. Wow.

"I stopped seeing the 'major media outlets' as credible a very long time ago."
No one is arguing that point. Nadin was saying that even the right-leaning media has conceded that OWS has raised awareness of the growing income disparity. And I would add, on a international level which hasnt been seen before.

"The notion that no one ever discussed income inequality and tax fairness before the launch of Occupy is utterly ridiculous."
Absolutely, but again no one is arguing that OWS was the first ever.

"To hear the OWSies tell the tale, an entire nation 'learned' about this disparity for the first time last September, having been completely in the dark before then."
No one said "completely in the dark" besides you. I would say that OWS brought a great deal of attention that the media couldnt ignore from around the world.

I dont understand your animosity towards OWS. Care to explain?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #25)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:08 PM

33. We've had this discussion before, Rhett

You always seem to equate any disagreement with posts about Occupy as "animosity".

My animosity, if you can call it that, is towards those who give credit to OWS for things they have never accomplished. As I said in another post in this thread, Occupy took up the discussion about the disparity between the 1% and the 99% and ran with it - to their credit.

But they did not start that conversation, nor did they enlighten the populace on the topic as though no one knew about it before they came along.

The OP here states: "So much of the campaign dealt with income inequality and issues of tax fairness. I don't believe that this would have been possible without OWS."

That statement implies that the recent campaign would never have raised the topic of income disparity, etc., were it not for Occupy. And that's just downright ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #33)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:56 PM

42. OWS didn't start the debate

What they did was push it into the mainstream. I can tell you that I noticed a palatable change in the way people discussed wealth and inequality before and after OWS started. OWS made everybody aware of what was going on whereas before people that pointed out wealth inequality were viewed as somewhat fringe. After OWS, it was common knowledge and everybody was talking about it. And the Democrats in power did start to notice. I think it emboldened them to say things they otherwise would not have said. I also think things like California passing prop 30 and rejecting 32 came about because OWS helped change the way people think about wealth and power.

So you can go ahead and pretend that OWS did nothing to change this county or help get Obama reelected, but I assure you are very wrong on that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Downtown Hound (Reply #42)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 09:04 PM

56. Well, if we're going to offer anecdotal evidence

I can tell you that I don't know of a single person who was unaware of the disparity between the 1% and the 99% before Occupy was ever even thought of.

I also know of no one who ever said, "I was totally unaware that the guy who owns the company I work for makes way more money than I do," or, "Until Occupy came along, I always assumed that the CEO of the corporation that employs me was living paycheck to paycheck, just like me."

If you go back through the DU archives - or those of any other political website - you will find post after post by people discussing this very issue long before OWS was ever launched. You will also find article after article about how CEOs and stockholders were reaping millions while the middle-class workers (whose labor made the profits by which the 1% enriched themselves) were well known long before September 2011.

You seem to want to believe that no one was aware of the facts until OWS came along and enlightened them. The citizenry is not as dumb as you seem to think they are - or were before OWS. And that's not because they were politically aware - it's because they were living with the consequences of that disparity on a daily basis. No one needed OWS to tell them the facts - they already knew them. Probably better than most.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #56)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:56 PM

106. If you go back through the archives here, to say 2008, you will posts announcing how

Bush's former donors have 'switched to Obama'. And many people applauding that news. I remember feeling pretty uneasy about it at the time, but put it aside.

Anyone who was aware of the buying of our electoral system by Big Corps should not be happy that they are buying OUR party also. Our party should be working to change the laws that permit this.

Political junkies did know of the poisonous influence of money on elections, and many of them were becoming aware of the huge income disparity. But the message was not consolidated until OWS condensed it into easily remembered and understood sound bites.

To deny that is to deny reality. Wall Street certainly understood it which is why they spent money to try to drown out their message, but failed.

This movement didn't start here in the US. We were late to the game, but once it did, it spread rapidly which shows that there was a need for a coordination of what people individually knew, but had not been successful in putting into action.

NY State US Attorney Schneiderman credited OWS for giving him the public backing he needed from the people to resist the pressure on him to make a deal with the Banks that would left wrongfully foreclosed on homeowners with no option to get justice for the wrongs done to him.

I think he knows the power they had to bring attention to something Wall Street preferred to settle behind closed doors. I will take his word for the impact they have had.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #106)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:59 PM

107. And Kamela Harris in CA credited them for the

Home owners Bill of Rights

Other pols have given obvious nods to OWS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #33)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 11:42 PM

60. You arent fooling anyone. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #60)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:25 PM

198. Yep. As transparent as the air on a crystal clear desert morning.

All you have to do is search "Summer Hathaway OWS" or "Summer Hathaway Occupy" on DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #15)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:26 PM

38. You have an excellent imagination

And you are attributing things that OWS never said....just breathtaking.

I hate to make this comparison, but you know what you remind me off on this? The crazy uncle we all have during thanksgiving that lives in their own reality. As it has been said many a times here, you have a right to your opinion, but not your own facts.

Breath taking indeed. You go on and take on CBC, BBC, The Observer (hardly left wing), the Guardan, and other international publications apart of our own. Their narratives as well, that also speak, at times with amazing flourish, of those facts you have a hell of a time comprehending.

Now I know, you are our local version of that crazy uncle. I suspected as much, but thank you for confirming such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #38)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 02:39 AM

61. When it comes to having an imagination, Nadin

no one can top you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #61)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:07 AM

65. Summer, this isn't achieving anything.


It's very difficult not to assume that you have some problem with OWS other than what you perceive to be their ineffectiveness.

It's very important in public political discourse to have one's opinions represented by political movements. Before OWS, there was no movement specifically dedicated to income disparity, certainly not the Dems. It matters. People around me starting thinking about it as well as knowing about it. That matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #65)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:30 AM

68. I would wholeheartedly agree with you, sibelian

if that was how things played out. But they didn't.

You talk about OWS representing a political movement. But they themselves denied wanting to be political - and I think the term adopted was "a social justice movement" that existed outside of "politics" as we've come to know it.

My problem with OWS is that their stated goals vary from day to day, from group to group. One city's OWS contingent says one thing, while another contingent in another city says something different.

You can't be a political movement representing the goals of the many when you are, depending on where you are, representing opposing points of view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #68)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:56 AM

72. That's a interesting point...


... my own take on which is - everything being political, they really were a political movement even though though they said they weren't (they probably won't like that). There was political capital to be made from their denying their attachment to policy, whether acheived consciously or not. So *I* see them as political.

"You can't be a political movement representing the goals of the many when you are, depending on where you are, representing opposing points of view."

I can see that it's at the very least confusing but I don't entirely agree. Some of their precepts were pretty much universally acknowledged by all members, or at least a sizeable majority, particularly the income disparity problem. They differed as far as I can see, mostly on processes which I would regard as tactical rather than fundamental, and therefore were able to function as a leaderless group, removing any centre of balance that an opposing narrative could upset. It might sound a bit mystical but sometimes it's much harder to oppose a movement whose ideology has what appears to be peripheral incoherence tangentially related to their core values than a movement with a nice, structured, ordered set of tenets. It's very easy to distract disinterested parties that you want on your side with blindsiding. Many of the political points that left wing protest groups in the 80s wanted to get into the public consciousness were smeared over in the media with broad-spectrum character assassination of the protestors and I think the successs of that kind of response is very closely related to how coherent the protest is. It seems to be the case that the more structured the protest, the easier it is to pretend it's something it isn't because human beings are used to having entire coherent structures dismissed by the media. Human beings are *not* used to have interesting ideas that are buried in a wave of loosely related activity dismissed by the media, that stops looking like the media rejecting "bad people" and starts looking more like the media rejecting "ideology you aren't supposed to like". People usually form their political opinions from a wide, muddly range of sources, they make up their own minds and OWS looked to most like a close cousin of their own political opinion formation. Structured, focussed protest and politics isn't always an option for all ordinary people so presenting them with a "brand" sometimes turns them off. I think the sight of people struggling to express themselves but largely adhering to something that they all feel is morally required is in fact often a more powerful message than the sight of a clear-headed, coal-driven politico who has obviosuly decided that it's important you think the same way they do. I you aren't very politically aware yourself, coherent analysis can seem challenging, but a broadly defined sense of injustice is much easier to relate to. I know, it's kind of infuriating.

So, while the message was possibly muddled, I think the audience was more receptive to it through being muddled. People like you and me, who analyse, are in fact a bit of a rarity and, like it or not, we share the political landscape mostly with people who feel their way through things. Also I think it was very appropriate to the times. These days political opinion is sliced up into a thousand thousand tiny issues rather than bought wholesale as a monolithic prefabricated value system. I think OWS managed to highlight a theme without looking like dicks except to the people who are perpetually on the lookout for imaginary dicks (I'm not accusing you of that! ).

Sorry, that was a bit of a screed...

What do you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #61)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:32 AM

79. Yup, that is why I see them for they are

A social justice movement that is still evolving. That is not my imagination. That is a fact ...you have a right to your opinion, but not your own facts.

Yes, some of their actions were, and shockingly are still localized...heard of Tip O'Neil? Or are you too young? He used to say one thing that fully applies here..."all politics is local."

Yup, crazy uncle indeed.

So how do you explain even politicians themselves, kamela Harris comes to mind, acknowledging their role? Another one, Van Jones? I forgot, Leader Pelosi did as well, in passing. That was during the California Democratic Party Convention, where a good half of the San Diego delegations were Occupiers...and where Occupy buttons were sold and were popular at the dealers room.

Perhaps it is your blinders here at play. Serious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:00 AM

63. How about we credit them with making it more mainstream, then?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #63)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:43 AM

70. I give OWS all credit due

for making the phrase "We are the 99%!" mainstream.

Unfortunately, making a phrase mainstream doesn't change anything - other than how the MSM idiots refer to those concerned with such things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:22 PM

12. I can understand the RightWingers disparaging OWS, but I dont understand

Democrats doing the same. They are willing to put their lives in jeopardy to call attention to the gross corruption of Wall Street.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:25 PM

14. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! - K & R !!!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:32 PM

17. And I don't understand

why pointing out that Occupy did not start the discussion about the disparity between the 1% and the rest of us is 'disparaging' them. It is simply pointing out a fact.

Occupy initially focused its attention on that disparity. But to infer that they brought that disparity to everyone's attention, as though no one knew about it before, is truly naive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #17)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:36 PM

19. So are you saying that you support OWS? nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #17)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:37 PM

20. They Brought That Attention...To Critical Mass !!!

Yes many of us knew about it BEFORE OWS... but not ENOUGH of the public did... UNTIL OWS made it clear to EVERYONE.

They changed the dialog of this election cycle.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #20)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:57 PM

27. Do you honestly believe

that the average, middle class worker never knew that the CEO of the company he works for earns a seven-digit salary with bonuses while he and his fellow employees make a fraction of that?

Do you really think that people working for major corporations or retail chains never realized that they were working for a pittance as compared to the profits being generated by their labor - profits that wound up in the pockets of greedy upper management and stock-holders?

These disparities have been well known and oft discussed for decades.

"OWS made it clear to EVERYONE"? Really? Do you have any understanding of how irrelevant OWS is to millions of people, who have never paid any attention to anything they have to say?

EVERYONE - seriously? It's just this kind of rhetoric that makes OWS look ridiculous.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #27)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:12 PM

35. Believe Me... I'm Not The One Who Should Be Worried About Looking Ridiculous...

This was probably the FIRST TIME that the disparity you speak of, was main-streamed, graphed, and made obvious to the rest of the country.

If ENOUGH of us had been that well versed on the disparity in the past... as YOU suggest... than we would not have had a Republican President for the last 30 or so years.

Unless...WE ARE ALL IDIOTS LIVING UNDER ROCKS.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #35)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:32 PM

39. Again you go on the assumption

that the disparity between the 1% and the 99% was "made obvious to the rest of the country" - as though no one was ever aware of it before.

Are you seriously suggesting that Republicans have been elected in the past because NO ONE knew about that disparity, that the populace was totally unaware that some people made waaaay more money than others?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #39)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:45 PM

41. No... What I'm Assuming... Is That Many Voters Thought That That Was Just The Way It Is...

And That There Wasn't A Lot That They Could Do About It !!!

It wasn't until the masses saw... HOW MUCH THE 1% HAS RIPPED US OFF...

That they got active.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #41)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:00 PM

43. Sorry, WillyT

But we'll have to agree to disagree.

The "masses" were well aware of how they were getting ripped off. This was not late breaking news to anyone with a pulse.

Putting that aside for the moment, the "masses" were spurred to exactly what action by OWS? Camping out in public parks? Showing up at NatGat in Philly on the Fourth of July - all 300 to 400 of them?

Is that what Occupy provided as a means of "getting active"? And what exactly was accomplished as a result?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #43)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:04 AM

64. they made it socially acceptable to discuss it openly.


There was a marked difference in my workplace before and after their efforts. This is anecdotal, yes, but even glossing over my experience, I can't see how you can ignore the mainstreaming of phrases like "the 99%". Communication makes a big difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sibelian (Reply #64)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:38 AM

69. Sorry, but the topic

of the disparity between the 1% and the 99% was discussed - whether "socially acceptable" or not - long before Occupy ever happened. The recognition of what exists was not relegated to secret meeting places, or only spoken about in whispers before September 2011.

Yes, the phrase "the 99%" went mainstream. It was a clever turnaround of the phrase "the top 1%" which preceded it. And I give OWS all due credit for turning that phrase around to their advantage.

But that doesn't mean that no one knew, or discussed, the disparity between the two groups before Occupy existed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #69)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:57 AM

73. Well, my experience doesn't bear that out.


There was a definite shift in the political atmosphere where I live and work. Perhaps it was different in the States.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #69)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:35 PM

113. Where was it discussed? On the media? Do you have links to all this discussion

that most of us, even those who were aware, missed until OWS came along?

I can link you to thousands of articles about this subject SINCE OWS, can you do the same BEFORE OWS?

And what was done about this disparity if everyone was so aware of it? Seems to me it was a rolling train, getting worse by the minute with nothing standing in its way.

No one was pointing at the train and demanding that it be stopped. Until OWS.

Knowing something is one thing, as an individual. Getting it into the mainstream and forcing a discussion about it, is something entirely different, and that is what OWS has done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #113)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:02 PM

135. As always, you're right, sabrina

No one ever noticed the disparity between the 1% and the 99% before Occupy came along, nor did anyone discuss it. Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #135)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:51 PM

186. Yes people did discuss it. And no one, including OWS ever said otherwise. You are

the only here making that claim. What did not happen obviously was that anything got done about it, or that it became a mainstream issue. Considering how that gap just kept growing obviously just talking about it in private or on an occasional talk show, did nothing to bring it into the Mainstream consciousness which is what is needed to get an effective action taken. Politicians were still talking about American Workers 'sharing the sacrifice' 'eating their peas' etc and warning about cuts to Social Programs, UNTIL OWS dragged it all into the National Spotlight and forced Politicians to refrain from their Austerity language which had now been publicly called out.

So I asked you to provide something to show that Income Disparity, Money in Politics and its poisonous effects on the system, was a mainstream topic of conversation before OWS so much so that something was done about it. And your response tells me what I know already, there are no such links. The gap was widening with little action or even talk to try to stop it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #69)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:06 PM

117. Once again you try to change the argument. No one is claiming that OWS was the first

to identify the income disparity. So please, please stop using that argument.

OWS took action at the risk of their health and lives to bring GREATER attention to the fact that Wall Street was running the country. Thousands protested AROUND THE WORLD. And they succeeded.

Now why are you so vehemently against OWS? Why do you take the side of the Reich Wing in this matter? I find it very disturbing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #117)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:44 PM

129. Yet again

you choose to characterize my indifference to Occupy as "being vehemently against" it, or taking the side of the Reich Wing.

I am neither for nor against - I am indifferent, and see them as largely irrelevant.

Please proceed to spin indifference into something else entirely, as you insist on doing - which I find to be very disturbing indeed.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #129)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:21 PM

143. For someone who is indifferent you have quite a fixation, really

If you were indifferent you'd move on, about oh eight months go. That's what indifferent people do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #143)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:24 PM

145. I am indifferent to OWS

I am, however, not indifferent to those who claim to have accomplished things they never did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #145)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:29 PM

148. And you have a good imagination

I mean the AG for the State of California disagrees with you, how do you square that round peg? That is what we call, in the real world where I live, a fact.

I know they are pesky these facts, but hey, at least they are real...not whatever fox nooz nose you like to spread.

You are really entertaining.

And for somebody who is really not interested you are FIXATED.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #148)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:59 PM

161. Nadin

as always, you make absolutely no sense whatsoever. And I find it extremely tiresome to try and make sense of whatever it is you're attempting to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #161)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:04 PM

164. What makes no sense to you?

That Kamela Harris has credited occupy? Not surprising that this would make no sense to you. It truly violates your word view.

And for somebody not interested with the subject at hand, you are fixated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #129)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:46 AM

178. If you were "indifferent" you wouldnt post so many anti-OWS posts.

Just look at this thread alone. You clearly have an agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #178)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:12 AM

179. I admit I often allow myself

to get sucked into these threads - much against my own better judgment - when I see people attributing credit to OWS for things they haven't accomplished.

The Occupy response to Sandy victims has been nothing less than laudable. And their current idea of purchasing and then 'forgiving' debt shows great initiative, as well as a creative solution to a pressing problem.

However, when I see people positing that OWS should not be forgotten for their contribution to Obama's re-election, it does get my back up. Especially when there were outspoken OWSies who were claiming that "both parties are the same", or that people should vote for Romney in order to hasten the 'revolution' that would inevitably ensue.

My only 'agenda' is to point out the facts - which are often at odds with Occupy's version of events.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #179)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:52 AM

182. Be careful painting with too broad a brush. All protests attract anarchists, communists,

socialists, and crazies. They dont speak for the movement.

Our ship of state is sinking. Pres Obama has done some patching but not enough to save some that have lost jobs, homes and retirements. It's not the President's fault but the ship is still sinking. I work first hand with people affected by this mess and the frustration is growing. I applaud OWS for their fortitude to protest in the face of a police state that will beat them and shoot them with gas canisters. I dont like it when the Reich-Wing and the complicit media spews hatred toward them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #182)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:18 PM

183. Nobody speaks for OWS. That's the point.

And when nobody speaks for it, everybody speaks for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #183)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:57 PM

184. I dont agree with your logic. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #43)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:09 PM

201. Actually, that claim is complete bullshit.

Some of the most interesting data that the new focus on inequality has provided has been in the wide distribution of those utterly stunning graphs of people's assumptions about the degree of wealth the one percent hoard in this country, versus how much they actually hoard.

People have, of course, realized that they are struggling. Most had no fucking idea of the utter obscenity and scale of the theft, or to what degree it is attributable to deliberate policy, before Occupy started bringing these issues to the mainstream.



Estimates of wealth distribution are widely wrong
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/10/estimates-of-wealth-distribution-are-widely-wrong/

Americans are horribly misinformed about who has money in this country
http://www.good.is/posts/americans-are-horribly-misinformed-about-who-has-money/




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #39)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:17 PM

140. please stop apologizing for the 1%

 

Ive reviewed your posts and you have NEVER supported economic equality


You seem to support vulture capitalism

Do you have any answer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to argiel1234 (Reply #140)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:22 PM

144. My answer is a simple one

Please provide the appropriate links that demonstrate my apologizing for the 1%, my support of vulture capitalism, or my non-support of economic equality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #144)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:28 PM

147. by pissing and shitting on everyone on this thread

 

with thinly veiled remarks and misdirection who supports OWS


but fear not, there are plenty of other "pragmatic" posters such as yourself,


Unfortunately for you, its transparent and obvious what type of system you support


Mitt and Capitalism lost


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to argiel1234 (Reply #147)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:33 PM

149. Thanks for proving my point

You have absolutely no evidence to support your allegations against me.

Sounds rather RW to me, actually - insisting that someone holds a certain political view, but can't point to anything that supports the contention.

Yes, Mitt lost - I suspect that makes you incredibly sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #149)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:40 PM

151. you have questioned and shit on ever post in this thread

 

when it comes to supporting OWS. Have you heard of the term PROJECTION?


Freepers and racists and homophobes have a violent hatred of OWS.

You seem to support their views.

Have you considered that you support the same exact views that freepers and racists and homophobes have?

Hatred and ignorance is NOT a Democratic value Summer Hathaway

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to argiel1234 (Reply #151)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:53 PM

157. Again, I invite you

to post links to "my views" that support your contentions, or demonstrate my support of the views of "freepers, racists, and homophobes".

Please also include links to where I have expressed 'hatred' of OWS, rather than indifference.

You're right in that 'hatred and ignorance' are not Democratic values. So why are you spewing hatred and ignorance towards someone who disagrees NOT with the Party or the Party's president, but with YOU?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to argiel1234 (Reply #147)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:40 PM

150. And, really? Capitalism lost?

What do you buy your groceries with? Shiny rocks?

The hyperbole used in this thread has the opposite effect from what you seem to want -it turns people off from OWS.

I think we have a lot of areas where we are in agreement and can mutually support OWS if the hyperbole would only go away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #150)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:46 PM

155. sorry but its NOt ok to profit off of people anymore

 

go support Papa John who made his fortune ripping off his employees and customers to enrich himself to live in a castle

No one is buying the capitalists propaganda anymore

Its why tens of millions have to rely on food stamps to get buy so that the Papa Johns of America can live in gated castles with a moat







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to argiel1234 (Reply #155)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:54 PM

158. The truth, however, is that hundreds of millions of people are quite content with Capitalism.

Unbridled Capitalism is always a problem and Republicans have done their damnedest to create a 'frictionless economy', one without any checks and balances.

It's up to us to see that that doesn't happen. And if OWS can help in that direction, all the better. But I don't see anyone saying they hate OWS.

What some find distasteful is the hyperbole. OWS is not perfect. It has screwed up in the past and it has done some great things in the past. I fail to see why anyone wants to disagree with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #158)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:01 PM

162. hundreds of millions dont live under violent capitalism

 

OWS and the people of America have spoken.

They are tired of being ripped off by Capitalism. They dont want their labor and hard work to be exploited anymore by Capitalist vultures who only care for money and greed.

Republicans LOVE Capitalism. They LOVE Profit over people's lives

The American people are tired of being exploited for profit.

Its that simple, and Everyone can see right through the Profit Propaganda that defines the Republican Party

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to argiel1234 (Reply #147)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:08 PM

167. "Mitt and Capitalism lost"

I saw a lot of posts at Townhall saying the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #17)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:47 PM

23. It seems to me that the OP is referring to the election cycle and the campaigners...

Occupy Wall Street helped to change the dialogue and played a huge role in the election. So much of the campaign dealt with income inequality and issues of tax fairness. I don't believe that this would have been possible without OWS.


Nowhere in the OP do I see the OP claiming that Occupy started the discussion nor do I see the claim they brought the disparity to everyone's attention.

What I do see is the OP helped change the dialogue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #23)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:26 PM

37. But that's my point, LA

How was the dialogue changed?

There have been tens of thousands of words, spoken and written, about the disparity between the 1% and the 99% for a very long time. If you accept that that dialogue has been ongoing since long before OWS, how did they 'change' that dialogue?

I would quickly agree that OWS took that topic and focused on it as part of their initial raison d'etre. But they neither started that conversation (as many OWSies claim), nor did they change it.

There is the other side of this in that OWS has repeatedly held itself out as non-political - and now they want credit for their contribution to Obama's re-election (or at least some of their supporters do).

The last quote I saw in this election cycle from an OWSie (which was posted here on DU) was that people should vote Romney, so as to speed up the process of citizens being so disgusted with the government they would be moved to do something about it. That doesn't sound like "helping" to change the dialogue in any positive way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #17)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:14 PM

110. So where are all these people you are talking about? What did they accomplish? Did

they get the attention of the WH eg, or Congress, or the major Media, or even more important, Wall Street itself?

No one ever said people weren't aware of these issues. We were aware, but we had no real voice. OWS provided that voice and got the attention of every single politician in this country and in other countries.

Democrats have been waiting for a social justice movement like this for a very long time and I do not know a single Dem who opposes it or denies the power they have had to bring these important issues into the mainstream. Which is what Social Movements do. Judging by history, it will take a long time before they accomplish their main goals, but they have made an impressive beginning so far.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #12)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:05 PM

30. Often, it's a Third Way thing. The Third Way values profit over people, and is trying to move the

Democratic Party to the right, and make our party more like the GOP in this respect.

Naturally, the Third Way views Occupy a deadly threat to the Wall St. status quo, and their corporatist goals, so they will make every effort to disparage and denigrate Occupy at every opportunity, even while Occupy is actively engaged in selfless volunteer humanitarian work, such as buying up consumer debt, or is engaged in a grass roots relief effort to provide help to those in desperate need.

They really, really hate Occupy.

And some of them are maybe simply dumbass Limbaugh brainwashed Reagan era hippie haters who see Occupy as an extension of the 60's anti-war protest movements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #30)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:39 PM

40. I knew it wouldn't be long

before the ol' Label-Maker was dragged out. "Third Way" - I would have put money on that being the first label to come off the machine.

No one is terrified of Occupy - and I doubt that anyone 'hates' it.

"... while Occupy is actively engaged in selfless volunteer humanitarian work, such as buying up consumer debt, or is engaged in a grass roots relief effort to provide help to those in desperate need."

Those are activities in which Occupy can take great pride, and should be given credit for their accomplishments.

The problem arises when OWS (or their supporters) insist on taking credit for things they didn't do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #40)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:28 PM

112. The Third Way is not a label. They exist, they have a website. They have an idealogy and

unfortunately they have invaded the Dem Party with the goal of moving this party to the right.

They are easily recognizable because they generally both agree with and oppose the same policies, people, organizations etc as the Right does. They share the Right's absolute hatred for the Left eg. They sneak into the Dem Party by choosing a few issues they hope will fool Dems, abortion, gay rights eg to support or don't get involved in, because no one could pretend to be a Dem and not support those issues. But the policies they do support are harmful to women and all minorities, so any outward support they may claim for minorities in general is irrelevant.

And of course they hate OWS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #112)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:58 PM

133. It's a "label" that has been affixed

to anyone here who disagrees with a certain contingent of DU posters - along with Conservadem, triangulators, 'New' Democrats, etc.

Don't play naive, sabrina. The Label-Maker is always in full use on DU, and the labels it creates are invariably attached to anyone who does not fall into lockstep behind OWS, Greenwald, Assange, etc.

But War on Christmas season is soon to be upon us. Perhaps this is a good time to re-gift the Label-Maker to the GOP - who will no doubt use it as readily as so-called progressives have used it against their fellow Dems who dare to refuse said lock-stepping.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #133)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:06 PM

138. Are you really saying that Third Way, who are very proud of their role in the Dem Party

does not actually exist? They do, and if you support their policies then naturally you will be viewed as part of that wing of the party. They hate OWS, Glenn Greenwald, Wikileaks, Assange, and anythingthing they view as a threat to the Corporate State. Most Democrats other than that wing of the Party, have always valued the opinions of people like Greenwald, still do and always will. But Third Wayers cannot abide anyone who points out inconvenient truths. Democrats are not going to deny the faults of their own party and try to fix them. That is the difference. The Drone War eg, is an abomination supported by the Third Way who have no problem with killing people under the banner of Bush's WOT.

And that is why they hate OWS and Wikileaks, and no one has ever accused Wikileaks of lying have they? So to object to the truth is not a Democratic value, it is a Third Way value.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #138)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:19 PM

141. Good grief, sabrina

Who here has denied that the Third Way exists?

What is deplorable is that it is a label (among others) that is thrown at people who disagree with a certain group of DUers, along with anyone who refuses to fall to their knees and worship the idols that the same DUers have set upon pedestals - idols that cannot be questioned in any way without earning the 'labels' thrown around with complete abandon.

But please proceed to believe that anyone who disagrees with you or your cohorts is deserving of being labelled as such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #141)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:22 PM

187. 'Idols' 'pedestals'

That is the language used to try to marginalize the 'left'. The left fyi, has no idols, most especially they do not idolize politicians. They agree or disagree with them.

The Third Way supports privatization of all public programs, they support war as foreign policy, they HATE what they perceive to be the 'left', which is actually Democrats who support programs like SS the Public Schools, who oppose the gambling on Wall Street with public funds.

They use the kind of language you just used in an attempt to marginalize Democrats in their own party and their disdain for those who fight for traditional, working class Democratic policies, matches the Right and they cannot hide it.

Their hatred for the left can be seen in their trashing of Democrats like Kucinich, authors who do not 'idolize' politicians but who dare to criticize them when they stray from Democratic principles. They have gained power within the Dem Party but they will and do have a huge fight on their hands now.

I'm sure they are certain that their way is the 'right' way but a majority of Democrats disagree. Democrats do not support the privatization of SS, the Public Schools even war with their mercenaries like Blackwater etc.

If pointing out that someone has identified themselves as part of the Third Way is labeling, I don't agree. The battle for the Dem Party should have started when the Third Way began its infiltration of the Party and before they gained any foothold. They are responsible for the 'compromises' made with Republicans regarding the deregulation of Wall St eg, for supporting Bush policies on foreign wars, drone wars, the NDAA etc.

And they fear any organization or movement such as OWS that challenges their ideology. They fear authors and people like Michael Moore who dare to point out how wrong some of these policies are for the American people. So they try to smear them, they accuse those who agree with them of 'idolizing' people, a transparent attempt to demean intelligent people.

Frankly their views would make them a better fit for the other party where rather than dragging the Dem Party to the Right, they might be able to drag the Repub Party to the middle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #187)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 06:59 PM

190. Thank you for your condescending and arrogant response

"Idols and pedestals" is the language used to try to marginalize the 'left'." Where I see those terms used the most on this board is towards staunch Obama supporters, whose support is frequently characterized as "idol worship".

The contingent here who throw that accusation around are almost invariably the same people who put Greenwald and Assange on pedestals. Ironically, but not surprisingly, they never see in themselves the very behavior they decry in others.

"The left fyi, has no idols, most especially they do not idolize politicians." Again, some people here cannot distinguish between support and idolization - except when they're the ones doing the idolizing. I have seen posts about Kucinich, for example, that look like they were lifted from a movie fan mag.

I don't need a lecture from you about what the "left" is, nor anything else to do with this party. Given my age, it is likely I was a registered Dem long before you were. I can also tell you that reading DU for several years has confirmed that I am far to the left of many people here.

The labels "Third Wayer, Conservadem, psuedo-Dem, corporatist", etc. are most often attached here, to myself and others, in the context of three specific types of discussions: those who do NOT idolize Glenn Greenwald nor agree with his ramblings, those who do NOT think Julian Assange is the second coming, and those who do NOT see OWS as the be-all and end-all.

Granted you spend way more time here than I do, but I have yet to see anyone advocating Third Way ideas here. I would imagine that given DU's make-up, anyone who did advocate for Third Way policies would be, or have been, made so uncomfortable as to leave of their own accord in realization that their viewpoint is not welcome, nor in keeping with the tone of this community.

If anyone advocates Third Way on DU, it would seem logical that they would be labeled as such by others - and would probably not object to being so, if that is their true position.

However, it has become a label consistently applied (by a small but annoying vocal contingent here) to anyone who, as stated above, takes on their three sacred cows: Greenwald, Assange and Occupy.

You, like your friend Nadin, seem to believe that you have some special insight into other posters' political stance - "insight" that has no basis in reality, but is simply a figment of your over-active imaginations. I should think that your rapturous idolization of BBI - who turned out to be nothing more than a very successful and prolific RW troll - would have taught you a valuable lesson about how completely wrong your alleged "insights" are.

"Oh, but I just KNOW who the Third Wayers are by the words they use, and the phrases they post." Here's a newsflash for you: You KNOW no such thing. Your assessment of other posters based on using certain words or phrases is as ignorant as it is utterly laughable.

Now, if you can provide any links to anything I have ever posted on this board that advocates Third Way, please go ahead and do so. Of course, we both know that no such comments by myself exist - but please proceed to try and locate them.

The task might be time-consuming - but at least it will keep you from using your Label-Maker for a while, the one you whip out every time someone disagrees with you, or refuses to kneel before one or more of your sacred cows.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #190)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:12 PM

191. 'Rapturous idolization of BBI', 'sacred cows, Greenwald, Assange and Occupy'

Need I say more. For the record, I do not and have never referred to any supporter of any politician as 'idolizing' anyone, so you have the wrong person here. Try not to throw everyone into your boxes.

I'm surprised you didn't throw in all the rest of the labels aimed at the Left on this forum lately, 'purity trolls' 'concern trolls' etc etc. Funny how sensitive you are, but I never once saw you object to the numerous attacks on the left on this board over the past number of years which people finally became sick and tired of, as have all Democrats.

As for the Third Way, anyone who offers support for any compromise on SS with Republicans simply because they support this president, is playing the game of the Third Way.

Anyone who refuses to oppose Bush policies still in place, the NDAA, Drone wars etc, is playing the Third Way Game.

Save your insults, I am immune. As for BBI, I barely knew him/her but I know left from right and will support Democratic principles and left wing views always over right wing/third way propaganda every time, which include criticizing Bush/Right Wing policies even when it's our side adapting them. Thanks for YOUR characterization, the name-calling, label attaching diatribe, you really just confirmed my views frankly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #191)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:30 PM

192. Your lack of self-awareness

is truly astounding.

As for BBI, it was on one of his threads that you and I first locked horns. When myself and others pointed out his penchant for spewing RW talking points, you defended him/her vehemently - referred to him/her as "one of the most well respected DUers on this site", if I remember correctly.

Now you "barely knew him" ...

But I'll leave it there. Your Label-Maker is probably feeling lonely for you. There are so many posters here who need to be labelled by your own good self, being the one with the special insight into everyone's political views, along with being the self-appointed judge-and-jury in all such matters.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #192)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:21 PM

204. Seriously, I'm flattered you remember our first encounter, I did not frankly. I knew

BBI as well as I know you or the right winger supported by the anti Nadin contingency Obamanaut, no longer with us either, or Lozocolla or anyone else I see posting here. Never exchanged PMs or emails or anything with him/her.

Lol, I probably wouldn't even remember him/her if it weren't for his fan club here who seem to have been enormously impressed by him/her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:06 PM

108. Democrats don't do the same Rhett so you are correct.

I do not know a single Democrat who is not thrilled with the emergence, finally, of a much needed Social Justice Movement in this country.

When someone refers to OWS as 'owsies', they give themselves away!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:36 PM

18. David Wolff in his book

democracy at work gives a nod to ows for re-opening capitalism to large scale public criticism. you would probably have to go back to the '60's before ows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #5)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:03 PM

44. Who was talking about those things before Sept 2011?

OWS made money in politics a huge issue, and were better at delivering the message than all those you say were doing so, who can't have been doing a great job since I can't think of it being a big issue that was HEARD by over 80% of the population within weeks of Sept 2011. Now their language is in the mainstream. They consolidated the message into easily remembered phrases which are now used even, inadvertently sometimes, by Republicans trying to sound like they care.

They reached the ears of the WH after which we were relieved to NOT hear any more talk of 'sharing the sacrifice' etc and all that other Austerity language that so prevalent until the emergence of OWS.

This election I met more people who, rather than be impressed with candidates who received huge donations from big Corps, were suspicious of them. I looked back at this subject to the 2004 election and was not surprised to see how thrilled people used to be to announce that a candidate had just received a huge donation from a major wealthy donor. OWS made that something to use AGAINST candidates, rather than for them.

I know you have always been opposed to OWS, but they are no only not going anywhere they are growing across the Globe and are really the only hope of stopping Wall Street influence on our lives and elections and for a movement still in its infancy, have had more success than any other entity so far in shining a light on the issues most important to PEOPLE.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #44)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:42 PM

54. Of course, sabrina

you are right.

No one knew about the disparity between the uber wealthy and the rest of us before OWS pointed it out. How could we have been so dumb?

No one was ever aware, no less suspicious, of political donations from Big Business to politicians, or political parties, before OWS.

No one ever realized that money influenced the political process before Occupy came along and schooled them.

"I know you have always been opposed to OWS, but they are no only not going anywhere they are growing across the Globe and are really the only hope of stopping Wall Street influence on our lives and elections and for a movement still in its infancy, have had more success than any other entity so far in shining a light on the issues most important to PEOPLE."

Now let me school you, sabrina. I have never been 'opposed' to OWS. I have just found them to be irrelevant and ineffective. There IS a difference.

You keep insisting that OWS is a growing movement - despite the fact that the numbers show otherwise. Oh - and on that topic - claiming that every pro-liberal, pro-progressive, pro-democracy movement around the world is "part of Occupy" doesn't make it so.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:05 PM

7. Occupy's message is more relevent now than ever.

Lets hope that the 'fiscal cliff' doesn't produce a grand bargain that hurts the most vulnerable, or keeps wasting money on a bloated military, and subsidizing big business.

Climate change was right up in everyone's face last week with hurricane Sandy; might be good time to kill the Keystone pipeline for good, and examine public infrastructure, and investment into alternative energy sources too.

Marijuana got legalized in 2 states, maybe its time to examine the costly war on drugs. Soon it'll be cabinet shuffling time, so its a perfect opportunity to get rid of the incompetent Eric Holder. Maybe its time to give homeland security a bit of a haircut too (The police have enough urban-tanks).

Its also a good time to protect and ensure a free and public internet, so that citizen journalists can continue to capture '47% moments' and continue to do the job that the mainstream media doesn't.

Now that Obama is reelected, and some progressive Dems will reinforce congress, now is the time to push for promises to be kept, and bold initiatives to be introduced towards the future sustainability of people, not corporate interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 05:11 PM

10. They helped frame the issues so that the common voter

could realize that RMoney was part of the 1%er group. THAT helped immensely imo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #10)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:40 PM

21. Yes, because no one would have realized

that Romney was part of the top 1% without Occupy pointing it out to them.

You must think the "common voter" is pretty damned stupid, or has been living under a rock.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #21)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 06:45 PM

22. Yes... I think the "common voter" is pretty damned stupid, or has been living under a rock.

They are generally called, "low information voters".

If they HAD the TRUE information... Obama would have won by 10 points, and not 3.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WillyT (Reply #22)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 07:14 PM

36. Yep. Look what the Tea Party did.....

Isn't OWS a counter grass roots to the Tea Party?

What OWS says isn't new, but without someone saying it, the average voter is still waiting for "trickle down"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LeftInTX (Reply #36)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:23 PM

51. OWS could have been a response

to the Teabaggers - but wasn't. And here's why (IMHO):

The Teabaggers presented themselves from day one as a voting block - and all politicians pander to blocks of voters, in hopes of capturing their support in elections.

Occupy presented itself as non-political, a disparate group that might (as individuals) vote Dem, might vote GOP, might vote Green or other third party, might not vote at all.

Whether perceived as fair or not, as justified or not, the reality is that groups (like the Teabaggers or the OWSies) that fail to represent themselves as a political movement to be wooed and won as a whole don't warrant much attention from politicians. That is the way of the world.

Had OWS made it clear from the beginning that they were likely to vote as a block - "Give us this, this and this", and we will support you en masse." - they would have garnered much more attention, and would have been catered to by politicians anxious for their support.

By claiming to be apolitical - as altruistic as doing so may be - Occupy took the position of being unattainable as a voting block to be counted upon, and presented themselves as voters whose support came down to individuals rather than a united force to be reckoned with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #51)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 09:05 PM

57. Voting is not very effective in itself. I'm sorry you don't understand but civil rights movement etc

Was not won at the voting booth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Leopolds Ghost (Reply #57)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:14 AM

67. Do you not think

that the civil rights movement was perceived by politicians as being a voting block whose support could be counted on in future by those who took up their cause?

Imagine if every citizen who wanted climate change addressed formed one group and said, "We will vote as ONE for whoever aggressively addresses this issue." That would be millions of people - millions of votes - that any politician would be more than happy to try and woo.

Occupy has changed its goals from day to day, city to city. Had they been united in their agenda, and narrowed that agenda to a few specifics, they could have been much more effective, IMHO, in drawing attention to their stated goals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #67)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:28 AM

74. I don't think it's healthy for civil rights movement to be perceived as a monolithic voting block

It makes it quite easy to take the black vote for granted, for instance... even insult them by gerrymandering them into safe districts in both red states and blue states.

If someone is an activist then the very first thing they want is for a center-right politician (i.e. most of them) who doesn't agree with them on most issues (only a few) to not take their vote for granted.

The slow decline of Occupy is the electoral equivalent of unions giving up the right to strike. Once you give up the right to strike, you have no power at the mediation table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #67)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:42 PM

114. OWS never changed its goals. .

What are the new goals? I never got that memo. The corporate media has tried to create that impression, but from OWS I have received no message that its goals have changed, nor have I or the majority of people when polled on this, ever been confused about its goals.

Fox pretends to be confused but the truth they know exactly what their goals are which is why they are so scared of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #114)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:48 PM

115. Well, helping out Hurricane Sandy victims and buying up debt...

...doesn't really seem to have much to do with Wall Street, does it? And it sure as hell doesn't use the word 'Occupy' to much advantage.

So yes, I think their goals have changed. Of course, without leadership anyone can say what those goals are.

The things that a few groups are doing now are supported by many more of us than the initial camping out in public parks did.

I would think you would encourage our support instead of insisting, to no good effect, that the goals have not changed.

Obviously they have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #115)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:09 PM

118. How exactly is that changing goals? That is what they have always done from the beginning.

Help people. That is NOT what Wall Street does. In Zuccotti Park they demonstrated what they meant by 'We Are Unstoppable Another World is Possible' when they welcomed the homeless, provided them with food and shelter and arranged for medical care and counselling for those who needed it. It was awesome, people actually living by what they claim to be.

They have continued to use their skills to take care of the people who have been victims of Wall Street and Predatory Capitalism by fighting the Banks, forcing them to negotiate with homeowners rather than foreclose on them. That has been a huge success.

Mobilizing and not profiting from, tens of thousands of people to help the victims of Sandy is exactly in line with their original goals. Contrary to the Predatory Capitalists who tried to take advantage of the Storm and charge people $700 for a motel room for one night. They are DEMONSTRATING their goals by putting into practice how we can be a better world, that not everything is about profit.

And eliminating student debt was ALWAYS a goal. So for months they have been working on a way to demonstrate how it can be done without the need to profit from it.

Everything they have been doing over the past year up to and including their current activities, is fully in line with their original goals.

Amazing after all the information I have provided you with you still don't get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #118)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:20 PM

119. Neither one of us seems to 'get' the other.

So instead of castigating your fellow DUers for not expressing the proper amount of enthusiasm for OWS, why don't we focus on the things we do agree with?

Hurricane Sandy relief efforts. Buying up debt. Helping halt foreclosures.

I doubt you'll find many who think those are NOT worthy efforts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #119)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:31 PM

123. They are doing nothing they have not been doing from the beginning. The sad thing is

that the brutal crackdown by Wall Street's troops removing them from the parks cost the homeless and disabled they were helping, the lifeline they had provided. But that didn't stop them, they continued to provide that lifeline despite the attempts to stop them.

I correct false information which you have frequently presented here. If you consider that to be 'castigation' then I don't know what to say.

Nothing they are doing now is any different from what they were doing from the beginning. And their debt forgiveness program has been in the works for months. It is not new to people who have been involved, only to those who have been busy trashing them.

Their work in the courts, with foreclosures, setting up Credit Unions, providing shelter and services for the homeless, nothing has changed, there are no 'new' goals, all of this has continued from the beginning. Another World Is Possible is what they have, from day one, been demonstrating and along the way those who have benefited from their actions have joined them and as a result the movement continues to grow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #67)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:01 PM

116. They have?

Why are you spreading Fox News channel talking points?

Next you will tell me "they are strange...." Local CBS affiliate to be exact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #116)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:03 PM

137. Nadin

as has become your very noticeable habit, you fail to make any sense whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #137)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:25 PM

146. What? You claim goals were changed

THEY HAVE NOT. NO HAN CAMBIADO...in two languages, let us see if this is crystal to one who s indifferent to OWS, but strangely fixated on it...



Tonight's entertainment brought to us by Mrs. Hathaway.

We really need a distraction from the strangely fixated indifferent person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #51)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 10:09 PM

58. They never presented themselves as apolitical. They presented themselves as nonpartisan &

issue oriented. Their target is not a specific political party but rather those who wield power and facilitate inequality. Members of both parties do that in spades.

The teabaggers are becoming increasingly irrelevant as a movement because they tied themselves to electoral politics. They never had a chance of influencing institutional change because they never understood that it is nigh impossible to do that by joining the institution. Sure they got a few of their outlier members elected to Congress (some of which already lost their seats) but getting their agenda passed in a 435 member House was like whistling in the wind. It's akin to Kucinich et.al; who day after day, month after month, year after year, propose pro-peace, pro-FDR programs but can never get legislation passed (and often end up voting YAY for such that they advocated a NAY). The teabaggers' issues became subdued by the inertia of the institution. The teabaggers didn't grasp the long haul.

OWS, on the other hand, quickly instituted and continues to carry out studies and discussions of people's movements. They understand (as did MLK Jr.) that in order to engender effective change, they must not be beholden to any political party. They understand that activism is a moving train and not a station stop at the ballot box. Sustained economic & social activism is extra-ordinarily difficult. Unlike winning a congressional seat, it offers no paycheck. Unlike volunteering for someone seeking that paycheck, it rarely ends up in a clear victory (or defeat) even after decades of advocacy. OWS is not seeking a quick celebratory win "against the man" that merely makes them a member of "the man".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #58)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 02:58 AM

62. I was responding to

a particular question equating OWS to Teabaggers, and expressing my opinion as to why the two groups have been perceived differently by the political PTB.

But just to address what you've said briefly, it is not a matter of being beholding to any party or politician; it is a matter of representing as a cohesive group with a common purpose and agenda. I feel that's where OWS has failed, in that the goals and agenda vary from day to day, and from city to city.

It is one thing to say "we as a group" want financial reform, or a revision of the tax code, or an overhaul of the voting process, etc. It is quite another to say "we as a group" want all kinds of different things, depending on which one of us you happen to speak to.

The civil rights movement was about one cause, one goal, and achieving that goal. Occupy seems to have as many goals as there are participants - which leads to the perception that they are too "all over the map" to be taken seriously as one united force to be reckoned with, and whose demands are too scattered to ever be satisfied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #62)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 11:09 AM

80. And that is the problem


We can present you facts, like the Occupy Wall Street Declaration, that emphatically says taking money out of politics as a chief goal of the OWS movement. and is a commonality among all General Assemblies, and you will proceed to ignore it. You are a victim of your own opinions.

My LOCAL General Assembly decided to get involved in Yes on 37, explained as food justice, yes, I have a right to know what s in my food. i guess from your posts i should trust montsanto with no question. Pray tell me, how would Yes on 37 even apply in New York?

At this point, yup, it is like talking to that crazy uncle. And the best part, they are not occupying physical spaces but the POLITICAL CLASS has acknowledged their role in things like the California Bill of Rights, yup that was Kamella Harris. This is just a art of the universe of facts you even refuse to admit exist.

I expect them to continue to evolve and have successes here and there, things that in some cases will take a generation...before you say it, civil rights and 1965 civil rights legislation was the end result of work that started in the 1920s...but I am sure at this point you blame them for not getting instant change. Oh don't worry, had this conversation with a young activist who expected change within six months. Now he realizes this is a life time struggle and not a tv sitcom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #80)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:08 PM

83. With all due respect, Nadin

You are the last person on this board who is in a position to refer to others as being "like that crazy uncle" ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #83)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:27 PM

84. I am not the one denying a certain universe of facts


You are.

And it is getting down right comedic. In fact, this is down right hysterical.

We get it, you hate OWS. That is an opinion, but once again you do not have a right to your own facts

So how will you respond to national media, international media and political leaders acknowledging the role OWS had in changing the conversation?

Oh I know, discount all media and ignore the political class...that will work. FYI, this is exactly what Fox News does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #84)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:36 PM

85. Given how often you

have "owned your own facts" (i.e. created them in your own imagination) in your many posts on DU, again you are in no position to be opining on that topic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #85)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:42 PM

87. What facts have I owned?

I tend to give links.

Look we GET IT. YOU HATE OWS WITH A PASSION.

I care little if this is because you are a DLC'er, a blue dog, a liberal republican, or for that matter a rightie. We get it. You really do not need to try to educate us. . We get it, you hate them with a passion I have not seen in a few years. I really don't care why either...but damn it...next you will also deny their role in Hurricane Sandy because it is in the NYT. In yor mind they are evil incarnate. We know.

Why talking to you is mostly entertaining at this point. And I mean that

We see a post from you and we can predict within 95% of accuracy the content. Yup, it should be embarrassing, but hey...let me get the popcorn, this is like watching an old re-run at two in the morning.



Proceed Mrs. Hathaway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #87)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:55 PM

89. The "facts" you have owned

on this site are the stuff of legend. And you know all about them, because you've been called on them time and again.

You don't know me from Adam, and yet you have already created "facts" about me that have absolutely no basis in reality. And you even go beyond that by predicting what I will say next - but then again, you do have a penchant for making predictions, don't you?

I don't hate OWS - nor do I even know anyone who does. What a lot of us feel about Occupy is complete indifference. It is not relevant to us; ergo, we don't love it, or hate it, or care what it does, or attempts to do.

Indifference, Nadin - or to put it in language you can understand, a lot of people have simply put OWS on 'ignore'.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #89)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:01 PM

90. Well, I swear from your posts

I would think you love and admire OWS.



As to milk, well dear, science is hard for so many Americans...that was a fact, and so sorry science is a hard subject, but you can use the fracking google and read on bio concentration of nucleotides. Yes dear, there is really hard science on that. Or perhaps better not...you might find out you, and your legions of friends were wrong.

No harm no foul, I don't expect Americans to understand science...that was my take home from that fiasco...so go ahead, laugh...I know you will.

Me, will continue to laugh at your willful ignorance of political science, social science and now basic science.

:lol:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #90)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:07 PM

93. Funny to get a lecture on science

from someone who insisted there were hailstones piled ten meters high in Mexico City.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #93)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:11 PM

94. Funny since the video has since emerged

And that the head of the weather service explained this freak incident as increased energy in the weather system...I wish we had people with PhDs explaining things...like Sandy to Americans in the mature way the head of the Mexican Weather Service did...

Yup, related to that thing you probably deny, climate change and adding energy to the atmosphere with the already known increase of one degree Fahrenheit, different than Celsius, to the atmosphere. For reasons I am sure you will miss, I am glad it's just F and not C.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #94)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:23 PM

96. Finally there is video?!

You stated upthread that you provide "links to facts" so please post this link showing the 6 feet of hail that you claimed.
Bear in mind, you also claimed there were 60cm in a meter...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #94)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:28 PM

97. Seriously, Nadin

get a grip.

You know absolutely nothing about me - but have determined, in your own narrow little mind, that I am a "DLC'er, a blue dog, a liberal republican, or for that matter a rightie," who "hates them (OWS) with a passion", and go on with predicting that I will "deny their role in Hurricane Sandy." And now I "probably deny climate change" as well.

Your penchant for creating strawmen, along with an inability to tell the difference between love/hate and indifference, along with your alleged "insight" into what other people's thoughts are or what their politics are has ceased to be amusing.

The discussion ends here. Please proceed back to whatever profession you claim to be part of this week.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #97)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:47 PM

98. But you keep making shit up

And I do not give two shits why you hate OWS with a passion. For all I care you could be a raging anarchist or a libertarian, or a social democrat, or a raging old school Marxist. I really do not give a shit why. You just do.

As to profession, I am a reporter these days, like for real. Like press credentials and everything since you hate the media too, a twofer!!!

Now you will leave these threads alone? Or we will be graced with your hate filled presence?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #97)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:04 PM

165. We know PLENTY about you based on how very nasty you are just in this thread.

And yeah, it's glaringly obvious that you hate OWS and everything they stand for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #165)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:12 PM

168. The only people using the word 'hate' is you and a few others with you.

I didn't use the words 'on your side' because I refuse to believe we are on opposite sides. But if you want to believe that, I can't stop you.

You are certainly not doing OWS a service by responding to posts this way. If OWS represents a calm, measured movement, you are not upholding that ideal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #165)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:14 PM

170. Links, please?

Let me explain something to you and your ilk:

I am indifferent to OWS. I am also indifferent to gardening - as in totally not interested in the endeavor.

According to those in this thread, my 'indifference' when it comes to gardening automatically equates to meaning that I HATE gardening, and I HATE all gardeners. I spend my every waking hour hoping that my friends' gardens will FAIL, their vegetables will DIE on the vine, and their flowers will NEVER bloom.

Indifference is just that - indifference. You can always Google the definition, if you don't understand it - and you obviously don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #170)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:18 PM

172. So why are you still hanging around?

I am indifferent to gardening. I think we have a forum here on DU where it is discussed, but I am so indifferent (look for the definition) that I have yet to find it. As far as I am concerned no difference if it exists or not

Also language such as "you and your ilk" speaks about something a tad stronger than...indifference.

Oh go ahead, tell me again I make no sense...go on...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #172)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:21 PM

173. At your own request

I will say it again: You make no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #173)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:24 PM

174. Polly, do you want a cracker?

For the record my two parrots make more sense, they avoid things they are indifferent to.

Now go on, tell me again, I make no sense.

This has to be a comedy routine of some kind. I mean, it is funny in a tragic way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #174)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:34 PM

175. Yes, Nadin, I agree

it is truly tragic that you consistently make no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #175)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:35 PM

176. Well, go on mrs Hathaway.

Show to the world how nasty (and funny) you are



That must be it.

Go on...



For the record your abuse is almost alertable...actually you crossed a few lines...but hey, I don't alert..I just laugh at you. This kind of bully behavior is hilarious coming from one who still claims not to give a shit about the subject at hand.

Will save it for you,

Nadin you make no sense. (Tm) Mrs Hathaway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #89)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 07:22 PM

111. You are far from indifferent to OWS. We have addressed this before. You are as indifferent

to OWS as I am to the fact that War Criminals still walk free in this country. Which is why I show up in every discussion about that issue.

People who are indifferent to something do not show up in every thread about the subject. They are not even tempted to engage in any discussion about the subject.

People who show up in threads about topics are there either because they support the issue or because they totally oppose it and can't ignore it.

You do despise the movement which is your right, no matter how you deny it (and I don't understand why you deny it frankly as it is obvious in every comment you make,) not to mention how little you understand it.

If you are indifferent to OWS, then I suggest you thrash all threads that deal with it. I have never once entered a thread that is about a topic I am indifferent to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #111)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:28 PM

121. Not obvious to me

I don't see anything in Summer's posts here showing obvious despise for OSW.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #121)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:29 PM

122. It is a LOOOONNNGGG history

Going back at least nine months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #121)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:35 PM

124. Lol, welcome to DU. Summer despises OWS and always has. She has a right to do so.

No one actually cares whether she does or not, frankly, but when something is obvious, people will point it out. She claims to be indifferent to the movement, that is clearly not the case. The solution is simple, if you are indifferent to something, ignore it. If you cannot ignore something, you are not indifferent to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #121)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:37 PM

125. I was going to say you were right.

But I think the two responses you got before mine make the case for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #121)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:47 PM

132. Wow How Amazing For You To Just Land In This Thread

 

Geez that is just so fucking cool that you just showed up and began cheerleading here, IN THIS FUCKING THREAD. Oh and a few

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HangOnKids (Reply #132)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:03 PM

136. Cheerleading?

Oh, I see. You thought there wasn't enough hyperbole in this thread yet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #84)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:37 PM

86. OWS had a role

But there's not reason to exaggerate it. Income inequality was very much an issue before Occupy. If you remember, a big deal was made about Buffett's secretary being payed less than him, as well as a ton of criticism that the bailout was a give away to those that got us into this mess while the average person got nothing, etc. These issues were a catalyst for Occupy, not the other way around.

Occupy did a good job at representing them (at least at first), but Occupy wouldn't have had the success it did without liberal media outlets like MSNBC or leftwing blogs. The media surrounding it eclipsed the movement itself in many ways (though of course, that kind of focus wouldn't have been their without the protesters). Of course, it was instrumental in forging some of the messaging, such as "99% vs. 1%."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #86)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 04:51 PM

88. That will be a discussion held in academic circles

I tend to see the media's role as similar to the 1965 civil rights movement, it just happened faster. Until the media nationalized those famous images it was limited to the Deep South.

In some ways it s quite organic how that happens. The problem is that mrs Hathaway is denying any effect, or the role of the local and national media on this. It will be three years before any good analysis of this interaction will happen, and tat has to do with how academic research happens. I can tell you this, emerging consensus is that occupy did play an important role in getting the discussion going. Where divisions are starting to emerge is in keeping it going. Some of it is who is writing what...some of it is occupy itself. It is hard to do research with a moving target.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #88)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:03 PM

91. Perhaps

That doesn't seem to be the emerging consensus from where I'm standing, but let's say it is. I don't put much faith in the media consensus - one that kept telling us that the presidential race was a toss-up. If they say that that Occupy is the most important movement of our time or a flash in the pan (I tend to see the latter more often in the media), I'll stick to my own analysis - not because I think I'm brilliant, but because the media's track record has been so poor.

The original post said that Occupy had a huge role in the election, which I haven't seen much evidence of (and isn't the media consensus, if that matters to you). Whatever role Occupy may or may not have in the future, it doesn't seem to be much of a political force at the moment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #91)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:06 PM

92. Talking academic

Not media

Truth be told, it will be a few PhD thesis before we see it fully develop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #92)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:16 PM

95. Academic is fine

But for political science I've found that people with experience on the ground often have better insight into what's happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #95)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 05:50 PM

99. Yup, agreed

And OWS has evolved, at least locally, into direct action groups, that are keeping the feet to the fire of the local power structure.

A least in San Diego, the confluence of organized labor and OWS probably is responsible or he first dem mayor in over a generation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #99)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:13 PM

102. We'll see what happens

OWS hasn't been involved much in local electoral politics here; they seem to be working on other things (the ones that are left). They do seem to have broken off into subgroups from what I've seen, which is probably for the best. It seems like in the end OWS served as some sort of leftist networking camp that lasted a bit longer then it should have.

We'll see what happens; that there's still some sort of organization more than a year later bodes well. Still, they're just one of many leftwing organizations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #102)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:19 PM

103. They did here as well

They hold a ga once a week, but they are still very active. It sounds like your group, like mine, adopted the Madrid model..,this s way too much inside baseball, and one media has mostly ignored...this means working in local causes and going into the neighborhoods. Essentially this injects energy and limited know how to local organizations that at times need new blood.

Oh and my locals mind it not at all the local media thinks they are dead...not one bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #91)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:24 PM

120. The media says the opposite about OWS. In fact they ignored it for two weeks and

OWS was very happy about that. Hoping it would go away while their trucks were all over Zuccotti Park, they were obviously under orders not to cover it. OWS however, had its own media and still does. These are different times, we do not need the MSM which hardly anyone respects anymore.

But when they realized it was not going away, what OWS feared and had prepared for, they used Fox and people like Erin Burnett were sent to Zuccotti Park to find a way to discredit it. It didn't matter, Social Media is where to find OWS and they made a mockery of Fox and Burnett and their obvious agenda. And the movement only grew. And is still growing and will benefit from a lack of coverage by the Corporate Media.

The attempt to crush the movement with an army of militarized robo cops demonstrated what a threat to the Corporate State such a movement is. The near killing of several peaceful protesters only guaranteed it will not be going away any time soon.

This is a global movement, still in its infancy but fluid and adjustable as most Social Justice Movements have had to be.

If you're looking to the MSM to know what OWS is doing, you will not get much information there. They have resorted once again to trying to ignore it as their foray into an attempt to discredit failed so spectacularly. This is fine with OWS because as I said, they have their own media.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #120)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:43 PM

128. From what I remember

There was some light coverage by social media, blogs, and MSNBC early on, then there was a sudden focus on it after the police conducted the mass arrests on the bridge.

You may think that there's a media black out regarding OWS, but it still seems to get much more attention than other activist efforts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #128)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:59 PM

134. Actually it doesn't matter what the media does or does not do. But in the beginning they were

there, but did not cover the movement. We were all aware of their presence and glad they were not covering it. When they did begin to cover it, even bringing their news helicopters, it was obvious that they were being ordered what to cover and what not to cover.

Eg, we, those of us covering it through Social Media, following the livestreams etc, noticed a pattern. When the media was present covering huge rallies, such as in Oakland eg, and even following their streams, suddenly they would stop coverage, right before the Militarized Police forces would move in. At first we thought they were having problems, but found out later they were told to leave so as not to film the brutality of the police. They complied.

But again, it didn't matter as OWS had its own media and captured most of the police brutality on film themselves and put it all up on Utube as quickly as possible. This led to the police trying to get laws past forbidding filming them. And many cops were heard saying how the 'hated Utube'. Young people don't watch the MSM for news, they use the social media.

I am not really blaming reporters, they obviously feared the wrath of the Government forces and some who tried to do their job were themselves often beaten and arrested and are currently joining OWS activists in major lawsuits against NYC and other PDs.

The social media coverage however was far from 'light'. That is where I and most people still get news from OWS activities and they have been very busy. That is where the best uncensored coverage always was.

Live streamers documented the police brutality, as they were instructed to do by the Legal Organizations, the National Lawyers Guild, eg, before the movement started. A lot of training took place before Sept 17th which proved invaluable later. Those videos of every arrest eg, have forced the dismissal of most of the false arrests that took place.

There is no shortage of news about OWS through the livestreamers some of whom have become quite famous over the past year, and through the hundreds of blogs, FB pages, Twitter etc. It's a very active movement across the globe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #134)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:21 PM

142. There was coverage in the first few days

Just go to Google and do a custom date range search and see for yourself. Some places are better than others with these things, and in general protests don't get covered as much as stuff like horse race politics. I remember there being poor coverage of the Iraq war protests as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #142)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:45 PM

154. Yeah, but as you pointed out

It was as extensive as the anti war protests. What I see is the prefect storm for media. The old media tried it's dampest to control the message. New media came along and created a new paradigm. This is not OWS specific. The 2008 Presidential campaign was the beginning. Nor is this the first time it happens.

You also saw some of this with the Tea Party and in the 1960s with the rise of the mimeograph. The computer and the net has given us a new media that is directly challenging the old media.

For the record, the paper I freelance for is kind of a mix. It tries to be old media in some ways, but it is online and directly challenging the paper of record. In fact, it has already influenced old media coverage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #154)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:56 PM

159. The Iraq war protests tended to be larger

What was interesting about OWS was the encampments and the media buzz. Many people I talked to that visited the site were surprised at how small it was (of course the protests were larger than the encampments).

New media is fine, but long investigative pieces still seem to be done better by the old media. I worry about that being lost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #159)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:01 PM

163. My local paper is a good example

Of where investigative is going. It was bought by local developer. His first step was to fire the Pulitzer award winner investigative reporting team. It was no longer a priority.

In some ways papers are on track to join the 1880s. Why new media is developing investigative consortiums. Ten years from now I guarantee the media will be non recognizable. We are truly entering a new era.

Yes some of the old stand byes will be around, but in name only. I fear I might have to include the old lady herself.

In some ways we are truly rushing back to the past

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #163)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:12 PM

169. Hopefully

I hope it works out well, though I'm always skeptical of things with a lot of moving parts. Wikipedia seems to manage it decently, though (completely different model, I know).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #169)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:14 PM

171. Right now it is really messy

And for our sakes, we need a fourth estate, hope that whatever emerges will do well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #142)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:39 PM

185. I don't think I explained this very well. So, let me try again.

OWS did not land on the streets on Sept 17th. For months before that day a small group of organizers were preparing for what they thought might be at most, a two week occupation of Zuccotti Park.

Three months before Sept 17th, they did a trial occupation to test out their plans, how the police would react, whether or not their strategy regarding using their own media, photographing and video-taping arrests, having legal advisers present etc, were sufficient to deal with any reaction from both the media and the authorities.

They kept in mind the media coverage of the anti-War Protests. You could say the media did cover those protests as they were present and a few articles did appear in the media. But to a majority of Americans, those huge protests, even the ones around the globe, never happened. I asked a friend recently eg, if she remembered the ten million anti-war protest, but she did not. CNN did begin to cover that historical global event, but ended the coverage early in the day.

Yes, the media was there for OWS, we saw them. But OWS never intended to depend on the MSM or coverage. Months of preparation included using Social Media, citizen journalists, live streamers, Utube and any other outlet to get the message out. What they expected from the MSM is what happened but it was irrelevant. The coverage of the attacks on protesters by the MSM did help turn viewers against the cops, but it was NOT the MSM that brought the crowds into the street for them to cover. That was all due to the months long organization by OWS itself.

Eg, they never expected to be there for, at the most if they were lucky, two weeks. The also never expected it to spread around the country to other cities. What they did hope for was that people would come to NYC and join them, and that did begin to happen initially.

The success of their preparations to reach as many people as possible was evident on Twitter as people organized around the country, when the Unions came out early to join them, the Nurses Union eg, Community Organizers all of whom were online also. Students, Labor, all were online and OWS had reached out to them regardless of the media.

Two reasons why they they did not care or depend on the MSM. One, no one trusts the media anymore to give fair coverage to events such as the anti-war movement. Two, if they do, they editorialize most of the time not in favor of these movements generally painting them as 'hippies' etc. with the intention of undermining them, as they did the anti-war movement.

So had no media showed up at all OWS would still have happened. When actual police brutality of the kind that happened in Portland and Oakland, the media left, rolled up their cameras and literally flew away. But it didn't matter, all that brutality was captured on video without them.

Their goals were exceeded when they were not only still in Zuccotti Park weeks later but with growing numbers, with visits from celebrities and politicians, authors, musicians, economists et al which did bring some media coverage, no one was more surprised than OWS. And when early on it spread across the country and then the other parts of the world, even the early occupiers were amazed. The power of their own media was responsible for that.

I watched the Chicago Occupiers grow from four young women to the large movement it is today, not in the media, but on the social media. Same thing with Oakland, San Francisco, LA, Boston etc. This all happened through their own media. Then London, Paris, Hong Kong, Australia, Ireland, it was amazing. OWS joined the Indignados in Spain and other cities around the world in November of that year to coordinate protests all over the Globe which was incredibly inspiring. We watched it all on the Social Media.

I am not saying the Media wasn't present, or that it did not cover some of the activities in the early stages. Eg MSNBC did some great coverage, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and the best coverage from day one was on RT. But OWS was not going to leave it to the MSM, if that was what they had depended on, they most likely would not be around today.

They published their own newspaper, The Occupied Wall Street Journal, using professional journalists to assist them, then other cities did the same thing. Today there is so much news available as to how they are evolving, how they are growing, on hundreds of websites around the world. That is why they were able to mobilized so many thousands of people for Occupy Sandy so quickly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #185)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 05:16 PM

188. A couple things

Based on personal observations:

I agree that organizing and a lot of news was through Occupy's own channels. Certainly the initial demonstration, and definitely the ways that groups have been staying together since then. However, I doubt that "celebrities and politicians, authors, musicians, economists et al" would have showed up without the attention it got in the MSM. Maybe one or two of the active ones, but most protests/demonstrations don't get the amount that Occupy did. I also doubt that there would have been the movements in other cities if it wasn't for the attention in the MSM. Keep in mind, it took a while for the demonstrations to pop-up elsewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #188)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:31 PM

193. Actually it was the other way around. I follow a lot of the celebrities who showed up

at OWS. I followed them BEFORE OWS because most of them are Socially Conscious and interesting. So they knew about OWS the same way I did, from their twitter and fb feeds.

People like Rage at the Machine's Tom Morello, eg. Michael Moore who I had been following for a long time, had stated after he made Capitalism A Love Story, that he was tired, he was tired of taking the heat alone a lot of the time, for challenging the Corporations and that if the people didn't get out there themselves, he didn't feel he could do it anymore.

When he learned about OWS, which we knew for several months was being planned, he was interested. THIS was what he meant. Same thing with Tom Morello, Stiglizt and people like Susan Sarandon, among others. Also several Politicians who were real progressives. When you follow people on the Social Media word gets around pretty quickly about things they and you are interested in.

What happened was that some of the came down to see for themselves, and then they used their fame to get the media there. Iow, they did not learn about OWS from the media, they knew about it, and brought the media there. That was a bonus for the movement.

As for OWS not having the huge crowds the anti-war movement had? Lol, if all the people who have shown up at OWS occupation sites had been protesting for just one day, I am certain they were in the millions.

We who participated in the anti-war demonstrations had learned that they don't work. They last for a few hours, then everyone goes home and they had no impact. We realized that to get the attention of the people, you have to stay there and not leave, like the Indignados in Spain. OWS learned from the Anti War movement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #193)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:47 PM

195. Some did

Just like some showed up for the tar sands protest. But a number only showed up after OWS become a media sensation. You might think that the same result could have happened without the MSM, but I disagree.

The OWS crowds are definitely smaller than the Iraq war crowds. This is based on personal experience and media (social and MSM) reports. One of the larger encampments was here, and the protest here was _much_ smaller than the protests here before the Iraq war.

Saying that you realized the protests against the Iraq war didn't work is fine. Many Occupiers have also said that they realized that Occupying didn't work (not all, but many). Of course people should always be reflecting on their actions and trying to improve them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #195)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:18 PM

197. The anti war protests lasted for a few hours on one day at a time. There are no numbers available

on OWS other than the over 100,000 who shut down the Oakland ports on such short notice, or the tens of thousands currently mobilized all over the disaster areas affected by the hurricane. Or the over 100,000 who were on the streets in NYC with just a day or two notice to protest the brutality of the police.

Or the millions worldwide who coordinated protests last November when in some cities alone, there were hundreds of thousands of them in the streets, all over the world.

And since they are active every day and have been since over one year ago, some taking breaks, others filling in, others working from home coordinating and organizing the hundreds of activities they are engaged in every week, I would say their numbers are in the millions worldwide and growing. They are working on the Courts, on Foreclosures, on the Homeless, on Student Loans, on setting up Credit Unions.

There is no comparison to the anti-war movement which all but disappeared after Democrats won in 2008 sadly. Many of them have joined OWS. There are members of the military, unions, teachers, students, all still very active in this movement. GAs do not represent the numbers of people involved. Eg, I can read what is going at a GA in any city without being there and many people do that.

Once a day of protest ended, the anti-War protesters went home. That was it. OWS is a 24/7 movement, always busy, always active somewhere. So there are no head counts available, but they raised thousands of dollars from their supporters on the first day of the storm with little effort at all because of their communication with members making it possible to mobilize at short notice now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #197)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:38 PM

199. Those that were camping

weren't that many. This was one of the major sites, and there were only a few hundred tents, many of which were empty as time went on. The protests were much smaller here than the Iraq war ones. I doubt that's merely an aberration and all the numbers I've seen for protests elsewhere are lies. The numbers you are citing are very exaggerated, and as others have noted, such hyperbole turns people off from OSW.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #199)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:14 PM

203. Lol, of course they weren't that many. Although they were way more than anyone ever

expected. The vast majority of members of the movement never camped out. Most could not, they have kids, elderly parents to take care of, jobs etc. The plan was to have a public physical 'presence' not to have the entire movement camped out. It was meant to be symbolic, 'we are not leaving until we get your attention'.

The smallest part of the membership were camped out, but they were supported with food, donations, constant contact by thousands who were not physically there. When they needed to have crowds, such as when Bloomberg was going to raid the camp in the early morning hours, thousands showed up to prevent it at short notice.

Iow, the camps were just the visible reminder that a movement was emerging and growing and not going away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #58)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:02 PM

196. Excellent post, thank you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #10)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:05 PM

46. Exactly!

for putting it so succinctly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Fri Nov 9, 2012, 08:04 PM

45. It will be nice to get back to discussing and working to change these issues:

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fire Walk With Me (Reply #45)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:48 AM

71. That's a great list of things that need to be changed

now tell me how OWS is changing them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #71)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:04 AM

78. OWS is at least resisting - they are not in a position of power

to change things themselves. They are opening the dialogue, they do have the attention of TPTB. That in itself is a start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #71)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:38 PM

126. Better question, how are elected officials changing them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #126)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:46 PM

131. Answering a question

by posing another question answers nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Summer Hathaway (Reply #131)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:13 PM

139. OWS exists because nothing has been done about these issues you say everyone knew

about. That is why I asked the question. Congress approved the laws that allowed the financial meltdown to happen over the past decade. Not just Republicans, Democrats. All but 7 Democrats voted to end Glass Steagal in the Senate eg.

So if everyone knew all this, how come no one stopped it? Was anyone screaming at Clinton not to sign the Gramm Blilely Bill? Dorgan was, he predicted the meltdown if they signed that bill. But who listened to him? Where were all the loud voices, like OWS, to stop them from that disastrous vote?

They would have a much more difficult time doing that now, thanks to the awareness raised by OWS about this partnership between our government and Wall Street. But back then, apparently only a few, Brooksley Born eg, who was run out of town with no objection from all these supposedly informed people, were raising the alarm, by Democrats, not by Republicans. They were lonely voices. Not so anymore.

There was a huge need for a movement like OWS to make sure that what has happened over the past decade doesn't happen again, at least without the public knowing about it, and people like Brooksley Born and Dorgan and the other lonely few, have the public's support when they try to stop them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 03:09 AM

66. Yes, I think OWS was a great deal more effective than most give it credit for.


LW cynicism around it's own protesting is deep, ingrained and totally counterproductive. Enormous gains have been possible through protest in the past, particularly things like the ACT UP movement. It doesn't always work but it's silly to through away a sword because you miss with it a couple of times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:02 AM

77. At the very least Occupy has folks actually talking about class -

it is not a revolutionary group but we have to start somewhere. I give them credit for getting that dialogue going & hopefully keeping at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:03 PM

100. As The Original Poster...

...I had no idea that this thread would generate so much controversy or debate for that matter. I thought it was a no brainer that OWS played a role in changing the dialogue prior and during the election . There was no attempt to imply that the issues that concern OWS had not been discussed in the past. They have. Within the spectrum of issues fighting for attention in the minds of the electorate, income inequality, tax fairness and corporate greed held less of an emphasis (mostly due to the main stream media) than other issues. OWS brought to the surface issues that all of us knew existed...however we simply didn't realize how many others felt the same way we did until OWS took to the streets. This is why it grew so rapidly. So much so that the media could no longer ignore the movement.

Yes...OWS issues have always existed and have been discussed among many of us for years. At least in part, OWS owes its existence to the fact that it has been discussed for so long.

Paige

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Reply #100)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:08 PM

101. OWS is a lightning rod for debate.

It wouldn't be such an unwieldy debate if dedicated OWSers weren't on DU every week or so telling us how OWS is responsible for everything from the Arab Spring to being on the verge of bringing TPTB to their knees.

They did some good, no doubt about it. But the mutual congratulatory crap wears thin after a while.

They really don't have much to do with Wall Street these days, from what I can tell.

Helping some people with their foreclosure problems seems quite a distance from Wall Street.

Maybe a name change is in order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #101)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:24 PM

104. Thanks...

I hadn't realized how much of a lightening rod it had become.

Paige

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Reply #104)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:44 PM

130. It isn't, only to those who have always opposed it.

Most DUers who are a part of OWS or simply support it, rarely bother anymore to write OPs about its activities here as they once did.

I eg, wrote many OPs from the beginning as it was a very interesting development, especially for Democrats who had long wished for a Social Justice Movement.

But after a while I stopped, as the anti-Social Movement contingency became boring, repeating mostly right wing talking points etc, and most of us know how boring that can be aside from the repetitiveness of the dialogue not to mention a huge waste of time. After most supporters of OWS left DU or stopped writing about it here, the anti-social-movement contingency decided it was 'dead'. Lol, they wished.

But OWS is no lightening rod to anyone but those who cannot stand it. See Faux's comment section on OWS eg to see what I mean.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 06:28 PM

105. Occupy is Helping with Hurricane Sandy Relieve at the Moment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 08:39 PM

127. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:43 PM

152. Not a chance

that I'd ever forget OWS, and how we changed the conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 09:47 PM

156. OccupyRaleigh is still active...

and calling attention to Citizens United is one of its goals.

http://www.occupyraleigh.org/

I'd wager that the vast majority of Americans have NO CLUE as to what Citizens United is, so I applaud OR for its efforts. And now that North Carolina has an R governor and an R-controlled legislature, it's a given that voter ID requirements will be passed. My spidey-sense tells me that OccupyRaleigh will be all over that... working with the NAACP and other groups in helping voters get the required IDs.

Corporate Media and The Third Way can stuff it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #156)

Sat Nov 10, 2012, 10:50 PM

177. Most don't

Was working on a ballot initiative here to outlaw corporate contributions to politicians, and lots of people (many well read!) thought it went against the Citizens United ruling(it wouldn't). I had to to explain Citizens United and what it did to a lot of people, many of whom stared blankly at me.

To be fair, though, I was fairly ignorant of what Citizens United actually was until working on the initiative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #177)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:07 AM

181. "stared blankly"

There's a lot of that going around, unfortunately!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #181)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 08:34 PM

194. yeah , don't forget



Home About Blog Membership Food & Drink







$25/$50/$100/$250



The People’s Bailout, a variety show and telethon to benefit the 99%-SOLD OUT
w/Janeane Garofalo,Lizz Winstead,Max Silvestri,Hari Kondabolu,David Rees,The Yes Men,John Cameron Mitchell,Jeff Mangum of Neutral Milk Hotel, Lee Ranaldo of Sonic Youth, Guy Picciotto of Fugazi, Tunde Adebimpe of TV on the Radio,Climbing Poetree,the Invisible Army of Defaulters,members of Healthcare for the 99%,Occupy Faith, andmany more

Thu., November 15, 2012 at 8:00 PM

benefitfeaturedstreaming

















Audio / Video


No audio or video here.


Gallery























About This Event

Minimum Age:
All Ages
Doors Open:
7:00 PM
Show Time:
8:00 PM

Description:


The People’s Bailout, a variety show and telethon to benefit the 99%

The event will be livestreamed at www.rollingjubilee.org

Join Strike Debt for an updated version of an old classic, the telethon, to launch The Rolling Jubilee, a campaign that buys debt for pennies on the dollar and does away with it. Instead of collecting the debt, we will abolish it and help free the debtors!

People shouldn’t have to go into debt for an education, because they need medical care, or to put food on the table during hard times. We shouldn’t have to pay endless interest to the 1% for basic necessities. Big banks and corporations walk away from their debts and leave taxpayers to pick up the tab. It’s time for a bailout of the people, by the people.

It will be a wild night of music, comedy, magic, education, and the unexpected. This fast-moving variety show will mix well-known performers, intellectuals and activists from Strike Debt and Occupy Wall Street.

Special guests include Janeane Garofalo, Lizz Winstead, Frances Fox Piven, Max Silvestri, Hari Kondabolu, David Rees, The Yes Men, actor/director John Cameron Mitchell, Jeff Mangum of Neutral Milk Hotel, Lee Ranaldo of Sonic Youth, Guy Picciotto of Fugazi, Tunde Adebimpe of TV on the Radio, Climbing Poetree, the Invisible Army of Defaulters, members of Healthcare for the 99%, Occupy Faith, and many more.

*Tickets will go on-sale Friday, November 2nd at 10AM*

$25 (abolishes an estimated $500 worth of debt)
$50 (abolishes an estimated $1000 worth of debt)
$100 (abolishes an estimated $2000 worth of debt)
$250 (abolishes an estimated $5000 worth of debt)

This is a general admission, standing event.


Artists

The People’s Bailout, a variety show and telethon to benefit the 99%-SOLD OUT


The Rolling Jubilee is a project of Strike Debt, which emerged out of Occupy Wall Street and is dedicated to raising public awareness about predatory debt practices, debt resistance and mutual aid. Debt is the tie that binds the 99%, from recent graduates paying hundreds of dollars in interest every month on their student loans, to elderly homeowners underwater to the banks, to teachers and firefighters forced to take pay cuts because their cities are broke, to countries that that have to slash school and hospital budgets to pay back bondholders. Strike Debt links diverse individuals and communities to resist the debt system. Initiatives include publishing The Debt Resistors’ Operations Manual, hosting teach-ins and debt assemblies, supporting the Occupy Student Debt Campaign‘s pledge of student debt refusal, and creative direct actions across the country.

www.strikedebt.org

Janeane Garofalo


Actress and Comedian Janeane Garofalo has been an American institution since she burst on the scene in 1992.

In addition to acting in film and television, Janeane is an outspoken activist, spoken word performer and stand-up comedy entertainer known and respected around the country, and the world. As well, she was instrumental in the successful launching of the first liberal radio network, Air America Radio, where she hosted her own talk show, “The Majority Report.” A lightning rod for controversy, Janeane’s well informed opinions and unflinching honesty have inspired laughs, as well as striking a chord with the left, right and everyone in between. She is a noted peace activist.

Janeane has had many memorable and critically acclaimed roles in films such as “The Truth About Cats and Dogs,” “Steal This Movie,” “Copland,” “Reality Bites,” and “Duane Hopwood,” as well as for her specific brand of sharp wit and comedy shown in her roles in “Romy and Michelle’s High School Reunion,” “Bye Bye Love,” “Mystery Men,” “Clay Pigeons,” “The Minus Man” and “The Cable Guy,” directed by her friend Ben Stiller. Ben and Janeane also co-authored the best seller “Feel This Book,” (Ballantine May 1999). Janeane was also a cast member of the Emmy Award-winning Ben Stiller Show.

aneane played the role of Paula, the acerbic talent booker, on “The Larry Sanders Show,” for which she received an Emmy nomination in 1997 and two Cable Ace nominations. During the fall of ’94 she joined the cast of “Saturday Night Live.” Some of Janeane’s other television work includes two specials for HBO, the series finale of “Mad About You” and the critically lauded, final season of NBC’s “The West Wing,” where she played Democratic campaign strategist Louise Thornton.

In 2007, Janeane’s voice was featured in the Disney/Pixar animated comedy Ratatouille, and can be seen in Stella writer/director David Wain’s ensemble comedy, “The Ten.” Janeane can also be seen in her latest projects, the Lifetime movie “Girl’s Best Friend” and as a recurring character on the 2009 season of “24.”

Janeane lives in New York and Los Angeles.

Lizz Winstead


As co-creator and former head writer of The Daily Show and Air America Radio co-founder, LIZZ WINSTEAD is one of the top political satirists
in America. As a performer, LIZZ brought her political wit to The
Daily Show as a Correspondent and later to the radio waves co-hosting
Unfiltered, Air America Radio’s mid morning show, where she brought on
board Hip Hop legend CHUCK D and political big brain RACHEL MADDOW.

LIZZ’S talents as a comedian and media visionary have been recognized
by The New York Times, The Washington Post, Entertainment Weekly’s 100
most Creative People issue and has brought numerous television
appearances, including Comedy Central Presents and as a regular
contributor for MSNBC’s “The Ed Show” and “The Joy Behar Show.”

Most recently, Lizz wrote and produced an independent pilot of her
Off-Broadway hit, “WAKE UP WORLD, a show Rachel Maddow called, “The
funniest thing I have seen in years.”

Max Silvestri


Max Silvestri is the host of the award-winning Big Terrific comedy showcase. He has written for the Onion AV Club and Gawker, and New York Magazine called him one of the “Ten Comedians People Find Funny”.

Hari Kondabolu


According to the Seattle Times, Hari Kondabolu is “a young man reaching for the hand-scalding torch of confrontational comics like Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor.” Like his comedic heroes, Hari Kondabolu wants to speak truth to power with confrontational and personal material. Unlike them, he does not want to die of a morphine overdose or set himself on fire.

Hari has performed on Jimmy Kimmel Live, Comedy Central’s Live at Gotham and John Oliver’s New York Standup Show and the 2007 HBO U.S. Comedy Arts Festival. His Comedy Central Presents half-hour television special debuted on the network in February 2011.

In addition to standup at colleges, clubs and fundraisers around the country, Hari also co-hosts the mostly improvised, monthly talk show The Untitled Kondabolu Brothers Project with his younger brother Ashok (“Dap” from hip hop group Das Racist) in New York City.


Hari is also a former video blogger for WORLD COMPASS, a joint initiative between WGBH Boston, PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

In 2009, he made his major motion picture acting debut in the 20th Century Fox Film All About Steve, which the Boston Globe’s Ty Burr said was “to comedy what leprosy once was to the island of Molokai: a plague best contemplated from many miles away.” (It should be noted that he had a very small part. It was tiny. He’s practically not even in the movie.)

Of more consequence, Hari’s short film MANOJ, which he wrote, starred in, and co-produced with director Zia Mohajerjasbi, was selected to play at the 2009 Just for Laughs Festival in Chicago, 2008 Just for Laughs Festival in Montreal and was a Finalist in the 2007-2008 Boston Motion Picture Awards. Unbelievably, the film was also licensed by “Showtime Arabia” in Dubai.

Hari was born and raised in Queens, NY. He went to Townsend Harris High School and the school’s mascot, “Hari the Hawk,” was named after him during his senior year. (He sometimes fears that his greatest achievement was accomplished at 17.) He also attended both Bowdoin College and Wesleyan University, graduating from the former institution with a B.A. in Comparative Politics in 2004. A former immigrant rights organizer in Seattle, Hari also earned a Masters in Human Rights from the London School of Economics in 2008, writing a merit- earning dissertation entitled “Mexican Returnees as Internally Displaced People: An Argument for the Protection of Economic Migrants Under the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement.” This is, by far, the least funny thing he’s ever written.

http://www.harikondabolu.com/

David Rees


http://www.mnftiu.cc/

photo credit: Meredith Heuer

The Yes Men


http://theyesmen.org/

John Cameron Mitchell


photo via passportmagazine.com

Jeff Mangum of Neutral Milk Hotel, Lee Ranaldo of Sonic Youth, Guy Picciotto of Fugazi, Tunde Adebimpe of TV on the Radio


Climbing Poetree


http://www.climbingpoetree.com/

the Invisible Army of Defaulters


members of Healthcare for the 99%


http://owshealthcare.wordpress.com/

Occupy Faith


many more

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4 t 4 (Reply #194)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:34 PM

205. Huh, I wasn't aware of the NMH and Sonic Youth connection to OWS.

I like to see folks stepping up. Thanks for sharing that info... lots to take in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WorseBeforeBetter (Reply #156)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 05:26 PM

189. ...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:54 PM

200. Forgotten.

After reading several articles in Vanity Fair and Rolling Stone it portrayed them in such an ineffective and stupid manner. Very sad, as I had high hopes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:10 PM

202. Huge K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread