Occupy Wall Street

[Roarey Raccoon]

Obama is not a muslim and is very much an American. All this pathetic branding of politics using words with warped contexts is also greatly childish. Socialist is a dirty word? Honestly, if you're the sort of person who loads political buzzwords with severe biases you're really not going to be grasping any issue of any importance. Shoving everything people say under the umbrellas of labels is shaky ground to begin with, let alone when you start representing those labels as being fundamentally positive or negative for reasons that amount to "just because".

I'm not happy when people in positions of leadership ally themselves with any fucking religion, because it's nothing if not a display of immense ignorance. People responsible for the welfare of others should not be so willing to subscribe to something that is not only entirely horseshit but detrimental to society in damn near every respect.

Honestly, every time I read comments from people brandishing sweeping statements like "socialist" "liberal" "conservative" etc I can't help but think of them as woefully ignorant at best or completely fucking stupid at worst.

[Flyboy Fox]

Now isn't this thread supposed to be about Occupy Wall-Street?

Topics take tangents sometimes, and it's relevant because we're comparing the Tea Party to OWS. I will look at the supposed evidence, but I have to admit that the source doesn't exactly sound unbiased.

I really should dig up that quiz which shows pictures of OWS and Tea Party protesters/scenes and asks people to guess which they are, because it really is interesting how similar many of the gatherings look, at least at a glance.

[EXshad]

Spiky: You sound moronic. Just stop. Both the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street have scores of uneducated loons who don't know what the hell they're talking about. Likewise, both movements also have educated people who want to see substantial change.

I can sum up this movement's goal in a single statement: to get corporate money out of politics. Since the supreme court ruled that corporations have the same rights as people, particularly when it comes to making political donations, political candidates can be put into the back-pocket of a wealthy CEO, and they can pay for an almost unlimited amount of advertising to try and get them into office, and once in, the candidate which they "bought" can have an active role in controlling what bills are passed, or what regulations stay in effect, etc. As a result, we have a broken system where corporations pay an incredibly small percent of the nation's taxes, even though they hold more than a 5th of the nation's wealth, and they have countless loopholes and enough deregulation that allows them to get away with damn near anything. Oh yeah, and when these institutions crash, it's up to the tax-payers to bail them out. What a joke.

And I agree with this sentiment. Now am I a socialist? Hell no. I love the capitalist ideology, that people can be rewarded for their hard work, dedication, effort, and innovation. I also happen to think that plenty of millionaires and even some billions deserve to be exactly where they are, and yes, some poor people are poor because of some choices they've made and deserve to be where THEY are too (OBVIOUSLY not all, I'm very sympathetic to the working class, which I am a part of, but I'm trying to make a point). However, what I'm against is the corporation's ability to tip the system so sharply in their favor, and at the working class' expense. It's literally destroying are country, and it's a practice that I personally wanna see end.

This video shows exactly what the movement is all about.

Edited October 24, 2011 by EXshad

[Velotix von Skruviktorrius]

I see you run things through a spell-checker before posting. You might want to proofread that last post.

As people have been trying to impress upon you, maybe you should just stop trying to apply a label to yourself? Especially in my case, as I have stated, there is no political label that accurately fits my beliefs, try as I might. This is particularly true as those labels mean different things to different people - both liberal and conservative are synonomous with "moron" depending on who you ask, to say nothing of socialism.

There's just two things I want to chase up though.

I never thought people would be called racist for demanding that the President shows a birth certificate.

When was the last time a President had such insulting allegations made against him? And why this guy and not the rest? What's different about this President that none of the others shared?

...Oh yeah. I was too busy not caring about it to notice, but I guess it bothers some people and they have a name for people like that.

There. It's strange that only a ridiculously hyperconservative website like that will compile this information.

Because only an insane Conservatard* website like that would believe such information in the first place. The very mention of "liberal bias" (they're dead centre on the universal political axis guys!) anywhere should raise a red flag as to what bias the article itself holds.

*Speaking of labels meaning different things to different people, I distinguish between conservatives and "conservatards", in that conservatives are capable of a rational argument, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. They're around, but they seem to prefer keeping a low profile, probably because of the loudmouths wrecking the credibility of their arguments on a daily basis. Funnily enough the ones I have encountered tend to be American.

Spiky, in case you were curious, I'm legitimately trying to give your argument the benefit of the doubt here, but you're making it really difficult with the incredible amount of prejudice radiating from it that you seem to be oblivious to. I was recently reminded of the value of anticipating what people will read between the lines of what you say, and I suggest you pay more attention yourself, because you may be saying more than you mean to and even things you don't believe in truth.

No two people will read the same text in the same way.

[Cynical]

....

Some people over look this... Well, as I'm going to reflect and place an analogy.

Corporates = the devilishly cute lite sister of the family. parents = Government. Brother = us.

Kid persuades the parents with cute remarks and unresistably adorable eyes, Parents buy it, the oldest gets fucked over by getting the blame and ends up suffering by being grounded for a month and the little girl gets all the glory.

Er, well it sounded a lot better in my head.

[Cynical]

Nobody should be supporting Occupy Wall-Street, especially those who want to see its goals accomplished.

[Badnik Mechanic]

So we should just sit back and watch the corporates fuck us over?

[Edward_Elric]

I can sum up this movement's goal in a single statement: to get corporate money out of politics.

[Cynical]

How exactly are corporations fucking you, yes you personally, over?

[Badnik Mechanic]

Exshad basically said it.

And people wonder why this movement is looked down on?

I was asking you, the least you can do is try to debate.

[Tornado]

Exshad basically said it.

Exshad didn't say anything that has to do with your initial statement. And lobbyists existing is not an example of such a thing, before you play that card.

Edited October 25, 2011 by TGaP Tornado

[Cynical]

Exshad didn't say anything that has to do with your initial statement. And lobbyists existing is not an example of such a thing, before you play that card.

[Flyboy Fox]

Okay, guys, chill out. This is a tetchy subject, yes, but let's not get inflammatory and personal.

[SuperStingray]

I don't want to generalize these people as bongo-drumming, sack-hackeying hippies in the same way I can't fairly generalize the tea party as a tidal wave of xenophobic rednecks. But I look at OWS and can't help but be reminded in Britta in the recent Model UN episode of Community, who had no idea what to protest and just did insane gestures to get attention and the appearance that she was fighting some sort of machine. But my biggest problem is that these people know what they're protesting and yet have no clear image of what they're protesting nor how to go about doing it effectively; creating a message that basically amounts to the level of political commentary of this.

There's no agenda, no tangible aim, no leader. Again, I don't completely stand by the Tea Party's ideals, but at least they have enough of an idea of what they want and a visible level of organization to create a visible social following. That said, I have nothing against the participants themselves. I don't know why you're so hostile towards them, Spiky. Worst thing I can say about them is that they're too passive and don't know where to direct their message- two fatal flaws for a protester, but not necessarily in one's morality. If outlandish metaphors, outfits, tattoos and signs is how they want to get their message across so be it, but I say they should pack up their things and try again after they have an actual agenda outlined other than yelling at the sky about how society screwed them over.

Edited October 25, 2011 by SuperStingray

[Tornado]

.... STFU, I honestly thought what I said was right, but then I just remember something else, and in this case, I fucked up.

[turbojet]

I keep telling my buddy that is in Occupy Orlando to point this out. He knows what irt is about. He knows what they are against. He even cited the Citizen's United case. Yet, there are too many idiots in this protests that make it seem like it is "They are rich and we are poor" drivel when it really it isn't.

[Edward_Elric]

Was walking around down town today looking for a job and I saw the occupy winnipeg's shab azz camp. I felt like walking into the heart of the pretty much pointless at this point in time group and yelling out "YEAH OCCUPY WINNIPEG! WHAT ARE we protesting again..." then walking away and catching the bus. Face it, if a big change is gonna happen, it ain't happenin in a shabby city like Winnipeg. All of them should pack it up and go to Ottawa and try their luck there.

[leave_nothing]

The "Occupy" Oakland group were a bunch of pussies and got kicked out of the park they were squatting in last night. The group has claimed they will "retake" the park tonight.

You know how we do /new/s around here, so let's get to it. Get your popcorn ready.

http://www.livestream.com/occupyoakland

[Ekaje]

Speaking of Oakland, that reminds me of this.

The group Iraq Veterans Against the War has identified the demonstrator who endured a skull fracture after Occupy Oakland protesters clashed with police Tuesday night.

According to the organization’s statement, Scott Olsen, also a member of Veterans for Peace, was “shot in the head with a police projectile while peacefully participating in the Occupy Oakland march.”

A news release from Mike Ferner, Occupy Oakland’s interim director, said that Olsen’s condition was stable but serious.

Olsen, 24, a former Marine, did two tours of duty in Iraq before leaving the military in 2010. Formerly of Wisconsin, he now lives and works in Daly, Calif.

[...]

Authorities have denied reports that they used flash-bang canisters to help break up the crowds, saying the loud noises came from large firecrackers.

During a late-night news conference, Oakland Interim Police Chief Howard Jordan told reporters that authorities had no other choice then to use the tear gas, saying the protesters were throwing rocks and bottles at officers.

According to Ferner’s statement, a Veterans for Peace member, Josh Sheperd, who’d witnessed Olsen’s injury, said that after police fired tear gas, bean bags and flash-bangs and warned demonstrators to leave, “people in the rear of the crowd threw eggs at the police.”

[...]

The statement from the Iraq Veterans Against the War said that Olsen was sedated at a local hospital and would be examined by a neurosurgeon.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Ekaje

[Edward_Elric]

You know how we do /new/s around here, so let's get to it. Get your popcorn ready.

http://www.livestrea...m/occupyoakland

Great lulz. Love the peeps trolling the chat.

The occupy in winnipeg has a camp set up and everything. They had a camp fire going and all that. But will they stick it through the harsh Manitobian winter?

Edit Supreme: occupy oakland's protest turned into a rave after they thought they decided and agreed on an oakland general strike that would infect the world, with a specific 96.6% agreed vote that they would carry it out. Great lulz had been had tonight.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Edward_Elric

[CanofEpicSauce]

I'll leave this here.

So can we just stop going on about how people in this movement are a bunch of "hippy socialists". Yes there are extremist socialists there that I would not for the life of me like to associate myself with, but this movement is not about abolishing capitalism, it's mainly about getting corporations out of politics. Any person with a brain would root for this

BTW a Corporation=/=A Company=/=Capitalism

A corporation is a company that works with government and has protection and laws from the government. Before they were used for good, but now they're mostly used as a means of profit. The central banking system, corrupt politics, wars, ass backwards taxation etc. are the cause of this recession. Not capitalism, socialism, etc.

Capitalism on the other hand is rather simple. It's when the means of the production are privately owned. Well what if a CEO forces their workers into piss poor working environment? here comes Worker's Rights to save the day.

This is why I'm glad I'm centrist, because I can see from both sides of the spectrum nice and clear.

Me? I'm all in for capitalism, but there's a difference when tax money is used for the means of profit for a corporation, or when they make money at the expense of everyone else.

I believe every person has the right to do piss all they want with their money as long as it's not as a detriment to everyone else.

There, now here's a video of a cute hedgehog to cheer everyone up

Edited November 18, 2011 by CanofEpicSauce

[Tornado]

it's mainly about getting corporations out of politics. Any person with a brain would root for this

A statement like this merely shows that you fail to understand just how deeply rooted corporatism has become in America in the last 40-50 years; to the extent that if you listed some of the stuff that would be eliminated if corporations were forced to stop being buddy-buddy with government there would be riots. I'm not saying you are wrong (far from it), but you are lacking perspective in just how large the problem is and why most of the people involved with this protest would drop it immediately if they knew what it would meant for them.

Also, what the protest is "really about" means little when many/most of the people taking part in it and/or talking it up are using it purely as a pretext to justify class warfare, or (even more entertainingly) as a pretext to piss and moan about (generally "left"-leaning but not always) things that aren't in a million years related to it. I've seen Occupy Wall Street used as a justification for abolishing the Electoral College, of all the stupid shit.

Edited November 18, 2011 by Tornado