ATS and OWS: What the heck, ATS?

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I am sure you were equally as critical about the entire tea party movement because there were racists and idiots in that corporate funded movement also, right?

I actually was/am quite critical of the Tea Party movement (not just for the claims of racism either) but I'm not sure what it has to do with Occupy Wall Street. (hint: Saturn is insinuating that I'm a blind right wing ideologue...)

reply to post by EspyderMan


The only thing in the video you responded to was a line
You are aware the top 1% pays 40% of the taxes

they say this like it means something..
Well thats nice...but not enough

1998, the richest 1 percent of households owned 38 percent of all wealth.
2007 Top 1 Percent Control 42 Percent of Financial Wealth in the U.S.

As of 2007, 73% of all debt in the US is owned by the bottom 90%
Source

This is not just wealth disparity, this is wealth consolidation...there -is- class warfare going on...and its the top attacking the bottom since 1976 and have in the last 10 or so years mulitplied their efforts to reduce anything outside of the tippy top into abject poverty (comparable...not ethopia poverty, but corporate serfdom)

I see anyone cheering the system as someone cheering a murder

I completely support the OWS movement. The positive energy I feel on a daily basis from our fellow brothers and sisters standing strong is simply amazing!!!

Much love to all.

Originally posted by relpobre000

Originally posted by SaturnFX
I am sure you were equally as critical about the entire tea party movement because there were racists and idiots in that corporate funded movement also, right?

I actually was/am quite critical of the Tea Party movement (not just for the claims of racism either) but I'm not sure what it has to do with Occupy Wall Street. (hint: Saturn is insinuating that I'm a blind right wing ideologue...)

Movements in general is the overall link.
As far as insinuating...sure, ya, I did. If you are, meh...wear it with pride I guess..if not, then my apologies, but the retoric of "there be a commie in the crowd, therefore the crowd is nothing but commies" is typically on the lips of the right.

I seen the tea party as a movement to cut spending by the government...sure, fair enough, but the reasoning behind it was obvious and the sponsors were loudly overt.

reply to post by sheepslayer247


The difference as I see it is that a majority of the 99% would replace the Constitution. Patriots want to RESTORE it.

But I agree with the over use of the term... and the manner in which it is often used

I think this pretty much says it all


So, lets structure the tax rate to reflect these numbers...



Of course the numbers are a bit skewed, this is 2007. Since then, the top has consolidated more...but I am sure we can get a accurate count easily enough

Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by Frira

 

What I know for sure is that unless and until we move away from those old useless labels, we won't make much progress.

Let me get this straight.

You want to get away from the labels, which annoy you, like,
* "hard working conservative."

But you approve (because you just used them) of:
* Conservatives think they are entitled!
* Conservatives take advantage!
* Conservative hoard!
* Conservatives resent sharing!

Are you kidding me?

My whole point was about that demonizing, name calling and stereo-typing and your objection was what? Your objection was that I described some conservatives as" hard working." You wrote it annoyed you and then gave your list of the demonization, sterotyping and name-calling of conservatives to which you subscribe!

I am reminded of the church-word of "heresy." The word gets misused a lot-- it means "party spirit" as in: so caught up in a party agenda or affiliation that they cannot see the validity of anyone not also so caught up. And while you gave lip-service to "making progress" you went on to stereotype yet again!

"Heresy" is not wrong belief-- it is a belief so intolerant as to prefer division to persuasion.

Step back! You are so close that you cannot even hear yourself much less anyone else.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
we seem to have a movement within our own ranks to occlude and distract and even just plain lie about hte situations at hand.

Do you mean like this?:

Why, the media - who we can rather inexplicably give our total trust now -

Or this?:

Our politicians, formerly bought and corrupt, are now to be lauded and praised, when they dismiss these people.

Or this?:

Our commercial and financial institutions, formerly known as "part of the problem" are now the defenseless babes that so many ATS posters have chosen to rally around.

Or this?

Why, after ten years, has the mood of ATS reversed course to a point where the media is to be trusted, the corrupt to be praised, the corruptors to be coddled,

Just asking, because I've seen no anti-OWSers making those claims.

So what's the deal, ATS posters? Why can we demand action for ten years, and then throw beer cans at the people who try?

In my case, it's because I've seen people claiming to do that, but not actually doing anything of the sort. "Trying" implies that they have a valid target in their sights, and a plan of action.

Here - empty this beer can for me. I've got a use for it.

How is it so many of us can stand in solidarity with people whose #1 goal was ensuring the nation's motto remained "In God We Trust," but so few of us can voice even the mildest positive about the people who are trying to change the real problems we're all facing?

In my case, it's because I've not seen OWS even noticing the "real problems we all face", much less trying to CHANGE anything about them. Instead, they are throwing out a smoke screen to provide cover for the targets.

Here - empty this beer can for me, too, please.

I've been to Occupy Tacoma. I've been to Occupy Seattle (Vashon, for a variety of reasons, is a net exporter of occupiers.) I've talked to the people out there on the streets. I've talked to the people at work. I talk and I listen. How many here have done the same?

Certainly not me. I'm not anywhere near Tacoma. I had to do it locally.

How many here simply tune in to some blowhard on the radio, then come repeat him or her, word for word, here on ATS?

Not me. Radios are for playing music. Telephones are for talking.

So yeah. Hey. What the hell, guys? Just... what the hell? A few years ago I'd have thought we could throw in behind something like this. Was I wrong? Why am I wrong?

Why did you think that? I'd have to know that before I could offer and explanation as to the "wrongness" of that thought.

Is there some particular reason we should get behind people yelling at buildings and trying to claim it as "free speech"? I suppose it is free speech of a sort, but where I come from, people who spend their time yelling at buildings generally earn a straight jacket and a degree of sympathy rather than "backing".

Is there some particular reason you think we should "get behind" people who are infringing on the rights of other citizens so that they can yell at buildings in New York?

You know, if one wants to petition the government for a redress of grievances, one directs his attention to the government, as specified in that so often abused First Amendment, not buildings in New York or other citizens who would rather be on about their business than listen.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
The very moment the "OWS" movement adopted as their mantra, "We are the 99%" they willfully invited the attention they've got, and they are getting this attention from the actual 99%. It never should have come as any surprise at all that criticism would follow. To claim to represent the vast majority of the population, and then to insist that while many of those claiming to represent the 99% are screaming death to capitalism are just a part of the 99% and do not represent the 99% in its entirety, while whatever that entirety is remains largely silent, while this supposed minority continues to scream death to capitalism, is more than a little disingenuous. Such dis-ingenuousness invites sever criticism.

While the implicit invitation is there, I disagree that we have to go so far as to segregate the movement into ideology. The 99% (a rough translation at best) is talking to the folk who enjoy the financial well being of the manipulations of our economy. This is just the beginning as right now we are seeing people who are just frustrated with having to deal with bureaucratic third parties when they just want the comfort of what was promised...both in original print and through the propaganda that they have been subjected through for generations.

Wait until they catch on and the "99%" start teaching each other...by product of the internet age.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how often I read posts in this site, read articles about the "movement" laced with bias from various sides, I don't read, see, or hear anyone claiming to represent the 99% defending capitalism, or pointing out that corporatism is not capitalism and that corporatism is a big part of the problem. Instead, I see a bunch of people pointing towards corporatism and declaring it capitalism while they scream death to capitalism.

I see differently. One of the defining protest boards I have seen is, "I am not protesting your making money, but your buying my government."

It's the mixture of corporatism and politics that is the biggest issue and yes...the banks are the biggest people out their...

As always, I have not much to add or contend with your rhetoric however, I do feel the need to state that generational experience does not equate to future comprehension/reaction as in the past...the internet is my generational experience and I find myself with the unique perspective trying to analyze how information transferred in the past as opposed to now...we still have reactionary people who hold true to their bigoted and ignorant expressions but we also have grammar/contextual nazi's...

This movement has only just begun and the roots will hold true. Iceland wrote their own constitution. So Shall We Re-Write legalese...

Or not...

Originally posted by 46ACE

This is yet another amorphic; i.e. "you know what I mean" movement that is molded on the spot in the mind of anyone particular speaker. ( kinda like:"Oh You know, "he"stands for: "hope and change" ."
Then when contested:"Well; He or she doesn't speak for "OWS"!

An excellent point, which I've ran into several times myself. How the hell is one to back a movement when no one can say for sure what the hell that "movement" stands for?

So-and-so doesn't speak for OWS? Ok, I guess I have to accept that. They should get back to me when they have someone who speaks for them because, well, if you got something to say, someone damn well better be saying it!

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth


Are you under the impression that one idiot is the representative of all OWS protestors around the world?

Yes, that guy is an idiot.... If you talk to all OWS protestors and all of them are as stupid as this guy, then your disdain will be justified.

But, to base your disdain on a single video of a single idiot.....Come on, is that really fair to you?

Just trying to keep both sides honest here.

Actually you can find "plenty" of those type of people,"idiots" as you call them,on plenty of videos,at these protests. You dont even have to "cherry pick". There are many who have really twisted views,as some do on ATS.

You can also find "idiots' at Tea Part rally's. That is comparison to "idiots". I think "Tax the Rich",compared to "We are taxed enough",is the best example as to ideology's that conflict with everyday Americans. Hence NO Million man OWS protest on Wall Street.

Edit to add: Its finding the will to get to a solution that ALL Americans can get behind. I am willing to protest in DC. All Decisions are made there,IE; the Federal Reserve,and Congress and the President. Now I wont be there yelling "Eat the Rich",but I sure would be asking for ALL of the politicians for immediate resignation.

Originally posted by Afterthought

To those who are saying that the protests haven't done anything positive. Could this be because our "leaders" haven't budged on anything? I wrote a thread about the protests and how to tell when they're working, but I haven't seen our politicians address one of those points I listed!
You can read it here if you so choose: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Admittedly, I'm not a big fan of this particular method of protest, and when I was in school, I studied academic subjects rather than "Protest 101". Because of that, I may have the wrong perspective here, but isn't the whole point of a protest to convince the "leaders" to budge?

If that doesn't occur, can it not be fairly said that the protest is a failure, and the protestors "haven't done anything positive"?

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


AMEN to that! Star and flag for you well put!

Just goes to show how many people ain't "bout it" and really side with the system in the end. ATS is not what you think, it is a social experiment imho. As you can see there is a smear campaign being played out here by corporate/banking sympathizers as well as hired sock puppets. To be perfectly realistic there is going to be a percentage of elitists here as well as sock puppets so it just comes with the territory. In other words, if they are hating you then you are doing something right!

They are FAIL

We are a reality, we have taken to the streets world wide.. they just regurgitate propaganda on web sites



This is US



This is them

.

The ATS poll is testament to that and that's why they are so buthurt over the ATS OWS poll

DUH WINNING!

Today we OWN the banks, Operation cash Run. The Credit Unions are staying open extra late this evening. They are expecting us.

As a Canadian, I USED to think that what was great about the US was the capacity of the people to just say NO, and get change, but after 2001, and the hollowing out of the character and the soul of the nation, and the complete dumbing down of the population via a hyjacked nationalism and patriotism, I'd all but given up on that idea, and then along came this movement and my first thought was that I was too quick to count them down and out the American people. I was hopeful. That was about two weeks ago, and yet the reason for my hope is still well founded, for different reasons.

It's a strange movement though in the sense that there's no plan or policy whatsoever, just anger and angst, and perhaps that's why everyone isn't getting entirely behind it - nevertheless the message has been sent, and truth has been spoken to power, and we know that we need to come to power, at all levels, just like the hippies who became the current leaders, except that we will not forget just who we are and what we stand for.

This movement will pass off the scene, and in the process, will have served to awaken one entire generation of people.

I think you did it - in spite of the catcalls from the brainwashed stands. It's done. Therefore, consider switching tactics to daytime demonstrations, without the need to camp, have a shower, put on a suit and run for office!

America will become America again, the jig is up, and change is in the air.

So THANK YOU OWS, for speaking out, and for making my voice, our voice, heard at last. It was prescious. But there's no need to sit in the mud any longer, imho.

reply to post by Unknown Soldier


Your second Picture has been proven to be a HOAX.



As you said........

We are a reality, we have taken to the streets world wide.. they just regurgitate propaganda on web sites ........

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
All I can guess is that the programming worked.

The dwindling middle and upper middle class, who are comfortable in their homes with their Blu-rays and i-phones aren't going to buck the system that is insuring this comfort. The 'haves' want to keep what they have and not become a 'have not'... What they don't realize is that they are one step away from becoming one.

How people can continue to support a system that insures their own demise is BEYOND me. It IS a conspiracy. One worth talking about. Thanks Fox.

This is a large part of it, the animals do not want to bite the hand that feeds them.

A large part of the population that is well off drank the kool aid.

Large sections of the population are willing participants in "the system".

They not only don't mind being a small cog in the machine, they will fight to save the machine.

The chemicals in the water and the Hypno box in their living room made them compliant.

This will all go just like HG wells said decades ago.

"Countless people will hate the New World Order and will die protesting against it." -- H G Wells The New World Order (1940)

reply to post by muzzleflash


thanks for clearing up what i'd seen as "contradictions" in your posts
:sigh: i suppose i ought to do the same:

that said i too have been on the fence re OWS direction

so i should clear up a few things for fellow members

i'm a practicing anarchist, as opposed to the cafe and salon types that are just talk, or closet socialists of the communist lite variety, i suppose you could say i'm a Heinleiner,
TANSTAAFL!

i'm also a long lapsed Objectivist disagreeing with the the poor are poor because they're lazy tropes that ignore other reasons for poverty which are mighty inconvenient for the corporate fascists that hijacked and re-branded objectivism for there own ends. for all her flaws Rand is looking more like a prophetess, especially concerning the root causes of the imminent collapse, and the kind of diseased mentalities occupying government. same for Lyndon Larouche, who has pointed to the economic crisis, as merely yet another iteration of the same practices from the banksters since Mesopotamia.


despite that,and to be brief, i do believe taxpayer money should go to helping orphans, the elderly [soc. security was a good idea, the problem was all that money saved up by people who earned it, was just too tempting to the corrupt in government that skimmed and finally looted it], helping the poor in a "let's teach you how to fish, so you can feed yourself" manner and as a preventative measure to prevent criminality. however everyone should pay the same amount, this alone will place a cap and also bar certain methodologies of getting rich, especially those corps and orgs that have become gargantuan feeding off the public purse.


that said i do not believe in the viability of mass movements, they are too prone to manipulation and infiltration at which TCOTBIP are THE Masters,
how do you think that The Tyranny of the Minority Behind the Mask of The Majority came about?

one has to stop feeding the beast and remove ones sanction of the way things are


this doesn't mean i'm knocking OWS or T-party, it's just that i've long been weened of the need to belong, and neither want to lead or be led by anybody or anything.


that doesn't mean i can't or won't cheer them on for getting off their butts [t-partiers, do take notice, and of the picture and graph in my previous post.]

the methodologies and organizing principles for the creation of resilient communities linked to is a workable and sensible path. big is not always better

the real problem isn't the USA as such but Western "Civilization" as a whole has long abandoned it's underlying principals, one of them being The Heroic Ideal, hero[ine] being a dirty word nowadays as shown by the institutionalized punishment of heroic acts such as individuals who stood up to criminals and were rewarded with unemployment, and legal hassles as is often reported on this site.


just my 2 bucks [adjusted for inflation]

reply to post by MemoryShock

While the implicit invitation is there, I disagree that we have to go so far as to segregate the movement into ideology.

My friend, you seem to be missing my point, and that is that plenty of these so called "99%" are espousing ideological arguments, and I have no issue with this at all. What I take issue with is that others come along and claim there is no ideological campaigns coming out of the movement, but from my point of view, and many, many, others, this could not be further than the truth, and we see, hear and read plenty of ideological mantras and arguments coming from this "movement'.

You know, I would love to stop placing quotation marks around the word "movement' in regards to this "OWS" thing, but as long as so many keep insisting that ideology has nothing to do with, then what shall we call it? Movement, in this context, means A series of actions and events taking place over a period of time and working to foster a principle or policy: a movement toward world peace, or an organized effort by supporters of a common goal: a leader of the labor movement, for example. No matter how you slice it, if this thing is going to be a movement, ideology is going to have to come into play.

Wait until they catch on and the "99%" start teaching each other...by product of the internet age.

What will they be teaching each other. Quite a few have made it clear I have nothing to teach, so I ask you my trusted friend, what is being taught?

I see differently. One of the defining protest boards I have seen is, "I am not protesting your making money, but your buying my government."

The pretense that the protestors are not using their wealth to gain access to governmental favor is most annoying. Frankly, I struggle to make money and pay the bills and each week struggle through several days where I very well may not eat that day, so obviously no one is speaking of me, but while I listen to these claims I see a bunch of people that want government to a bunch of things that amount to business as usual, only, and annoyingly so, more of it.

It's the mixture of corporatism and politics that is the biggest issue and yes...the banks are the biggest people out their...

I stand my ground on this and still do not see anyone declaring that corporatism has to end, only that the collusion between one legal artifice and another has to somehow stop. How, nobody knows, but what they all seem to instinctively know is that they are not ready to do away with corporatism because they want the good paying jobs that corporatism can provide, providing that government makes them provide this. The free and unregulated market is given no credence and all eggs are placed in the basket of heavily regulated markets and everyone wants people like me to stop being such purists and go into agreement that this business as usual can be fairly called a free market. It ain't a free market and hasn't been ever since either one of us have been born. The purist me argues that the U.S. has never seen a true and free unregulated market at all.

This movement has only just begun and the roots will hold true. Iceland wrote their own constitution. So Shall We Re-Write legalese...

The Constitution for the United States of America is not written in "legalese" and is very easy to understand. The Constitution was never a political document meant to be an imposition on the unalienable rights of the People and the Bill of Rights make this in-arguably clear. Re-writing our Constitution would be disastrous, and if this is what the "movement" is after, then by all means count me out and count me with this supposed "1%" that I assure you, if this "movement" intends to impose their own form of "legalese" on a Constitution that stands in firm and undeniable defense of the rights of individuals, the "99%" will discover just how many comprise the "1%", and they will have awaken a sleeping giant.

Progressivism can only push so far before it is confronted with blow back.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
So yeah. Hey. What the hell, guys? Just... what the hell? A few years ago I'd have thought we could throw in behind something like this. Was I wrong?

As you have started to notice, the internet has opened everyone up to a certain reality. Even though 'ATS' members may agree with what issues we need to face, the main conflict is about how to handle them. 'OWS' does not represent the 99% of the population. It represents only 45%.

Since everyone likes science-fiction, what type of future society makes sense "Star Trek", "Star Wars", or "Serenity"?

"Star Trek: TOS/TNG" - is a reality that depends upon a militant and socialist hybrid society. Government provides free clothes, healthcare, security, food, and shelter. Exploration is driven by military expansion, and the construction of democracies across the galaxy. Even though everyone is treated with equality, you are forced to wear certain clothes, behave in a certain manner, and follow tightly regulated laws. Cultural differences are widely accepted, but they are forbidden to be practiced while in public. While Captain Picard closely follows the rules, Captain Kirk is a reminder that the rules should be broken. Utopian society being built upon the ashes of World War III; thus, 2/3rds of the population had to be wiped out before everyone woke up.

"Star Wars" - is a reality that depends upon a militant, socialist, and corrupted empire. Government provides free clothes, healthcare, security, food, and shelter. Exploration is driven by empirical expansion, and the enforcement of a single leader's view of the world. Cultural differences are forbidden. Utopian society built upon manipulating and corrupting local governments, so they can carry out the will of the empire.

Rebels are republic synthesizers.
Empire is a socialistic monarchy.

"Serenity" - is a reality that pits libertarians/independents against a liberal/conservative government. Even though the Government provides free clothes, healthcare, security, food, and shelter, they prohibit people from exercising a sense of individualism. People's words are censored. People's actions are dictated. Etc... Utopian society built upon the destruction of the planet, and then regulated and enforced through intense government intervention.

Get the problem?

'OWS' is a socialist solution.
'The Tea Party' was a libertarian and republic solution.

Which one is right?

Two different and conflicting perspectives on how to solve our issues.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


Clear poetry my Friend..............

How does one add to it ????