Occupy Rants, Flames, and NSFW

[Harrison]

Honestly, I read the first half of your sentence in your post and ignored the rest outright. There is absolutely nothing of worth that you could possibly spew, and as such, is ignored.

[Tadzi]

some info for those confused. this took all of 5 minutes to find out for myself.

What/why they are protesting: "OWS is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations."

Source: http://occupywallst.org/about/

Why Prostest?: From the wikipedia definition of protest- "Protesters may organize a protest as a way of publicly making their opinions heard in an attempt to influence public opinion or government policy"

Some examples of successful protests:
American Revolution
Martin Luther King's 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom
Tiananmen Square protests of 1989

[Awwalike]

wut

[naez]

buncha hippies lookin for a handout

[Mardur]

You're really comparing Occupy Wall St. to the American Revolution? Holy fucking shit.

The difference is that in those 3 examples you gave, there was an obvious problem and an obvious solution. And generally, people did more than stand around with a sign.

They're not accomplishing anything. It doesn't really bother me, I don't give a shit how people waste their time. That's why I'm not condemning nor praising the protesters. Except for the fact that, yeah, they could be spending their time improving their life if they don't like. But whatever.

The point is that people are aware there's a problem, but a solution isn't clearly well defined. Jailing Madoff was one, but we did that already. If you took any random person on Wall St. and asked them "so if you were in charge, what would you do to fix the economic problems in the country?" they'd have no fucking clue.

And I'm flat broke and unemployed. I was making $12/hr in 2008-2009. It took me about a week to get that job after I moved into this area. I haven't been paid above $9 since end of 2009. I haven't been paid above minimum wage in the past year. It generally takes me at the very least to land a new job. I was laid off from my last minimum wage job in August. I'm currently job searching. But I'm not going to stand around and cry about how bad the economy is, I just have to work harder than I did a few years ago. It sucks, and I'm all for protest, but I realize that this can't accomplish anything. I'd rather do something more productive, like post on Rants & Flames.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by Tadzi [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

some info for those confused. this took all of 5 minutes to find out for myself.

What/why they are protesting: "OWS is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations."

Source: http://occupywallst.org/about/

Why Prostest?: From the wikipedia definition of protest- "Protesters may organize a protest as a way of publicly making their opinions heard in an attempt to influence public opinion or government policy"

Some examples of successful protests:
American Revolution
Martin Luther King's 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom
Tiananmen Square protests of 1989

The difference is that successful protests all have one thing in common: a goal. What is OWS's goal? Their only stated goal is to protest. What do they want done? Eliminate Wall Street? That's not a realistic or desirable goal.

I'm going to ask a genuine question, because it doesn't make any sense to me. Liberals (and I use the term loosely, because I'm not sure how else to classify the group) argue that the banking industry has corrupted the government in order to continually push policies which move capital toward the richest of the rich and away from the middle and lower classes. However, they by and large support programs that would increase taxes and increase the role of government within the life of the everyday citizen. More taxes, more social programs, more federal funding. How do you reconcile those two view points? If the government is being corrupted by Wall Street, why increase their funding and influence?

I generally agree that Wall Street -- and more specifically, the rich -- use their resources to manipulate government and maximize their own earnings, regardless of the effect that has on the rest of the country. But partially because of that, I'm wary of expanding the role of federal government within the lives of the everyday citizen. If anything, the role of government should be increased within the financial sector. Increase oversight and legislation, sure. But when everything points to the government being in bed with big business, why would you want to increase the amount of money and scope of influence being provided to the government as it relates to your common citizen? That's what doesn't match up for me.

[purest]

Originally Posted by Daldolma

What is OWS's goal? Their only stated goal is to protest.

Part of what OWS is doing right now is just getting bigger, which is an end in itself, and one in which it has been tremendously successful at it. Everybody around the country is asking what you are, "what do these people want? so we can give them something and make them go away." The longer they wait to announce specific demands, the more people are gonna be willing to give them. So right now, just growing is an important goal.

A better question is when it comes time to actually get down to specifics, what 1 or 2 things should they settle on? For me, the big thing would be break up the banks (an idea which already has a lot of support in Washington).

[Mardur]

If they form an armed revolutionary group, I'll join up.

[Daldolma]

Originally Posted by purest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Part of what OWS is doing right now is just getting bigger, which is an end in itself, and one in which it has been tremendously successful at it. Everybody around the country is asking what you are, "what do these people want? so we can give them something and make them go away." The longer they wait to announce specific demands, the more people are gonna be willing to give them. So right now, just growing is an important goal.

A better question is when it comes time to actually get down to specifics, what 1 or 2 things should they settle on? For me, the big thing would be break up the banks (an idea which already has a lot of support in Washington).

Getting bigger is fine, but the problem is that there's no unifying goal at the core. If they do settle on a small set of defining goals, it's very possible the movement fizzles out as they lose relevance to many. Part of its current appeal is the fact that there's no actual demand at its heart -- it's just a general statement that "Wall Street sucks".

There's also no chance they break up the banks. It's not that I don't think they should. But realistically, the banks wield far too much power within government and have far too much legal firepower to be dispersed. It would take much more than the current Occupy Wall Street protests to break up the banks -- it would take a borderline revolution.

[Tadzi]

Originally Posted by Daldolma [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The difference is that successful protests all have one thing in common: a goal. What is OWS's goal? Their only stated goal is to protest. What do they want done? Eliminate Wall Street? That's not a realistic or desirable goal.

I'm going to ask a genuine question, because it doesn't make any sense to me. Liberals (and I use the term loosely, because I'm not sure how else to classify the group) argue that the banking industry has corrupted the government in order to continually push policies which move capital toward the richest of the rich and away from the middle and lower classes. However, they by and large support programs that would increase taxes and increase the role of government within the life of the everyday citizen. More taxes, more social programs, more federal funding. How do you reconcile those two view points? If the government is being corrupted by Wall Street, why increase their funding and influence?

I generally agree that Wall Street -- and more specifically, the rich -- use their resources to manipulate government and maximize their own earnings, regardless of the effect that has on the rest of the country. But partially because of that, I'm wary of expanding the role of federal government within the lives of the everyday citizen. If anything, the role of government should be increased within the financial sector. Increase oversight and legislation, sure. But when everything points to the government being in bed with big business, why would you want to increase the amount of money and scope of influence being provided to the government as it relates to your common citizen? That's what doesn't match up for me.

"OWS is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations."

Goal is to lessen/eliminate the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process.

They're doing this by trying to raise awareness and change peoples opinion of how the government currently works. Like in the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom where 75–80% of the marchers were black and had little to no actual power to change anything other than protesting and changing the minds of the public and eventually the senate, house, and president to sign the Voting Rights Act.

If the government is being corrupted by Wall Street, why increase their funding and influence?
I dunno I'm not a liberal or know anything about government corruption. I just saw people having conflicting stances on what OWS was doing so I looked up what they're protesting, why to protest in general, and some protests that worked in the past.