First, I’d like to apologize for bringing another rather contentious issue to the boards. For a long time, I’d vowed to remain mostly silent,
positive, and non committal when it came to political issues. I figured ATS sees enough of those, and opted to add content to the other forums on the
site, mostly for fun and to connect with you (I’ve gained so much from so many extraordinary ATS members.)
Suddenly, though, I feel that the stakes are higher and that to stay out of the political realm and to stay silent on important issues is to do a
disservice to my children. The world is indeed changing, and if we’re not careful we’ll end up in a psychopath’s utopia: www.weforum.org...
Any and all past human attempts at achieving a utopia has been a disaster. A good friend put it best “A utopia for who?”
Whenever anyone focuses outward (how can I change the world to make it a better place) rather than inward (how can I change myself to make the world a
better place) they are missing the point.
It’s time an increasing number of us upped our awareness of the autocrats who believe their vision for the future of the world ought to supersede
any national laws or personal boundaries.
Which gets me to the point of my post:
When exactly did Occupy Wall Street sell out to the 1 percent?
Let me start by saying this is only a THEORY. A theory that makes a lot of sense if one thinks about it, though
Occupy Wall Street began in late 2011, with a group of protestors camping in a public park in order to draw attention to the gross disparity between
our world’s richest and the rest of us.
Now Occupy operates under a different name, same MO.
But the new occupiers are now allies with the governing forces, and are now using the police force to deny journalists the right to stand on publicly
owned property and report the news.
The new occupiers also seem to have some source of funding; where else would all those new tents and umbrellas come from? And do the some leave the
encampment every evening to hunt for food while others forage for berries, or is a source of food being brought in?
Who is paying the security to watch over the tent town? Who is paying for the drugs?
Btw: this video is really comedy gold, despite its gravity. I hope you enjoy and am looking forward to a spirited discussion!
Back when occupy was going on. I was landscaping. We had an extremely rich customer. Like they had a dog they kept alive for $10000 a month because it
was born without the ability to control its asshole. They had a son around my age, hippy type dude, didn't work or anything. One day we're showing up
for work and him and daddy are getting into the car to go somewhere. Kid's all excited, he's on his way to sleep downtown for two weeks at the occupy
protests to fight against the 1%.
I found it really hard not to point out the irony and thank him for representing me while I had to work to make his garden pretty for him for when he
Honestly, he was a nice kid, pretty sure he meant well, he just lived in such a bubble he didn't really get it. He'd always bring out coffee and food
and actually came and talked with us. Of all the lazy, stay at home rich kids I've met over my years of working at rich people's houses, he was really
the only one I didn't have scorn for.
Still, I always think of the irony of that whole situation. It's pretty much what taught me almost every protest in recent times is some controlled
demonstration put on by rich people.
I didn't mean to come across as disparaging this wealthy family either. Anyone should feel free to accumulate as much wealth as a legal operation
It's when people begin to use their wealth to influence entire populations toward their vision of "justice" that my suspicions start to rise.
And the meat comment was directed at the WEF who wants to control was does or doesn't go into food trough of all us "chattel." They are among the
worst psychopaths out there, imo.
But good point also about the current demographic of protestors.
OWS was essentially infiltrated by social justice warriors who were unaware they were being used as pawns. These useful idiots started setting up camp
and tried to lobby for their own causes using the already-established OWS platform as their own.
It was supposed to be about holding the 1% accountable. Not about racial & gender equality and LGBT whining. The media was complicit in this and it
eventually caused uprisings and arrests which led to the earnest OWS movement being derailed.
In short, the REEEE crowd REEEE'd the whole thing to oblivion. They haven't shut up since, and they still don't get it.
I went to an OWS event in Vancouver at the art gallery.
The hour I spent listening to speakers fumble to come up with content, left me with the impression these people were handed a platform they didn't yet
know what to do with so they inherently began drawing up new statutes anyway. How to raise your hand, how to clap without offending someone...
It felt like lord of the flies.
The day before that was my last full day as a progressive.
I did my share of demonstrating in my college days That was against the Iraqi invasion then. I'd also met up with a group of Iranian expatriates
who were protesting the brutal Iranian regime (we went to New York when Ahmadinejad was allowed to speak in front of the UN), but shouting slogans was
really never my thing.
I will definitely stand up for anyone's rights if I have the opportunity, but my new way is through Civil Disobedience.
That encampment is a hodgepodge of mental illness, socioeconomic disenfranchisement and indoctrination, which pretty much encapsulates the entire
Antifa movement. A collection of lunatics, misfits and rejects programmed to "fight the power"; cannon fodder for far left and borderline anarchist
forces attempting to trigger an implosion of Western civilization.
As an aside, I'd also like to point out to anyone who has watched the linked video--notice the hired security for this news crew did not pull out a
gun and shoot their attackers in the head, unlike the security hired by our local news station (9 News Denver).
Hey Zosimov I actually had a hand in planning and setting up the original OWS. I'm at work right now so I can't really spend the time going into
details, but basically it started as what you described. What happened was that the more senior people either wanted everyone to be free to join in
and spout their own messages, or didn't want to be criticized for not allowing the "minority" groups to join in.
I was vocal against it. I said we should focus on the mission and the main statement, and the other groups could plan and have their own protests and
rallies, but we all see what a crap show it turned into. Instead of one coherent movement against crony capitalism and corporatocracy it turned into a
free for all.
I put up my activism gloves shortly thereafter.
After that nothing new that hadn't already been happening occurred. Activist groups have to get funding from somewhere and barely any of that comes
from grassroots type fundraising. People with money fund them and place their own people within the groups to facilitate their interests.
When it comes down to it, no matter how noble or righteous an activist thinks they are they are only human, and money makes the world go round. They
can say it's for love, peace, or equality, but it's all BS.
My two cents for anyone who will listen is that if you do want to do the whole peace, love, and equality thing then don't join an activist group.
Practice those things in your own life. Go about your daily life treating others how you want to be treated. Don't get on "free buses" to cities
hundreds or thousands of miles away to scream obscenities at people or burn buildings down.
Interesting video, discussion and weird, Weird days.
I identified with progressives and the moderate version of the left back when it was against: corporate rights as individuals and corp's
disproportionate power in government lobbying, limiting the rights of individuals in regards to their own bodies/ minds and excessive environmental
The "war on drugs" was (is) a truly fascist movement tied to endemic racism and classism. The right also tended to let people destroy our common
environment to make a buck. Abortion rights figured in as well... as in don't "like" it, but governments should not be allowed to punish for it.
Now? I don't know what "team" to cheer for. Extremists suck in all the air.
The media, where we get our info about what is going on beyond line of sight, is clearly biased for controversy and profit. It focuses on clearly
deranged individuals and ignores the boring reasonable people.
The only solutions I can see is to bring back the laws where the government cannot use propaganda against it's citizens and where both sides of issues
have to be addressed in editorials AND platform algorithms.
a reply to: Baddogma
Similarly to you, I definitely used to identify as a leftist.
And really feel that some of the movers behind our prison industrial complex are criminal in ways that far exceed many of the inmates'.
I also think your post has really pointed out a few other areas which seem to have gone horribly wrong--extremism portrayed so often by a few
sensational and biased networks that it appears to be the norm.
I think the solution you offer is a good one, and would go far in the way of balancing the off-kilter state of our republic.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.