OWS: ATS has your opinion changed?

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Siddharta


So most people are waiting for a handbook or a leader they can follow? They miss the chance to take part in a movement which they could influence with their voices then. Change cannot be ordered from the pizza service.

Nelson Mandela,Gandhi,MLK all were part of movements that changed the world,OWS...?

Not so much.

Protesting doesn't require pitching a tent either.

OWS comparing themselves to ANY other GREAT movement,is also preposterous.

agreed.. also its been hijacked by the obama political machine

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by SLAYER69


Have your views, stance or opinions changed about OWS since OWS started?
No, I always knew protesting only garners the dregs of society who jump on bandwagon's in order to have their voice heard. I always knew without strong leadership it would end up being a movement that lands you in jail and does nothing to influence governments to change.
I always knew the movement would be used and abused by everyone and anyone with a gripe with their government.
In the end all they were was a drag on police which is paid for on taxpayers dollars. People who actually have jobs did not go to protest for they need to support their families. They did not support the 99% at all like they said they did, they represented themselves. Most people I know hate the government but also, dislike the movement for how it is perceived, perception is just about everything.

If so, from what to what and why? N/A

The only way we will change the government is if we all participate in the democracy portion of our government and make our voices heard, if that doesnt work, storm the palace. Enough of this protesting crap.

It's proven, now and in the past, without war, without fight, their is no change. Protesting leads to violence if any protester and cop is serious about their beliefs, this did not happen like it did in Egypt, because generally people in the West are scared and won't stand up for themselves. This is due to the silver spoon being fed to you daily, soon as the spoon is gone you all huddle into a corner ready to die.

reply to post by SLAYER69


My initial (and silent) response to the OWS was one of reluctance, if only because it was not clear to me how any change could or would be effected by protesting Corporatocracy at the doorstep of large firms. Moreover, their message is too unclear. Some people appear to be okay with such a lack of coherence. I am not.

In my estimation there is simply no incentive for businesses (big or small) to alter the way they conduct business. In most cases business is probably only altered by opportunity costs, marginal costs, and net revenue. Moreover, the large firms conduct business internationally, so to truly effect change would require international players to move in step with American protestors. What incentives would entice international players to bite on that carrot? Primarily, I doubt international investors regard the OWS movement as a step in the right direction concomitant to their interests. Correspondingly, I posit that the economic downturn is the impetus which inspired OWS. If it were the case that we were undergoing another boom or at the very least sustaining the natural rate of unemployment, then I doubt there would be such thing as an OWS movement.

I believe their frustrations (which in a casual way is a reflection of my frustration) ought to have been channeled thru to the three ivory towers in the District of Columbia, where some 70K + documents that comprise the Federal Register (probably all in digital form at this point) constrain individual liberty. More and more I am convinced that individuals' long-run economic welfare is best achieved when central planing is minimized to the greatest extent possible. The rub in this case comes about when deciding what minimized the the greatest extent possible should mean. Nonetheless, the plethora of rules and regulation that oversee day-to-day transactions cannot, in my opinion, be easily described as anything but an effort to centralize transactions.

No, I think the problems that underlie the economy are much more fundamental than I hear coming out of the OWS movement. Well, what I hear coming out of the OWS movement is difficult to gauge. But to make my position clearly understood I'll come right out and say that, for the most part, I regard the OWS movement as a socialistic movement. It seems their primary strategy is one of a Robin Hood strategy rather than a correction of rules which govern the playing field (which, as I previously noted, is what I regard as an excess of rules). If they were to somehow succeed in their objective then there would probably be a short-run benefit; however, in correspondence to that there would probably be short-run and long-run detriments to investment, trade, etc. and, more importantly, we'd inevitably find ourselves where we began. As such I do not support the OWS movement agenda. I support their right to protest, but I do not support what I perceive as their underlying objective.

reply to post by Kovenov


You don't support their underlying objective?

So you think Monsanto GM and the Bankers should continue to dictate how we eat, who we 'bail out' and how we slide inexorably into debt?

Good thinking...

reply to post by jimnuggits


Thanks. I thought it was pretty clear thinking as well.

Originally posted by jimnuggits
reply to post by Kovenov

 

You don't support their underlying objective?

So you think Monsanto GM and the Bankers should continue to dictate how we eat, who we 'bail out' and how we slide inexorably into debt?

Good thinking...

better than thinking that college should be free. and letting the nanny state take 100% control

I notice many on this thread dont understand the movement, and where its going. Its not about anarchism, though that has a place in the overall frame of things, and its not about occupying small spaces. Its about actually making this a country of the people, by the people and for the people. And since the corporations that control this world refuse to let go and give it back, its going to take a pry bar.

The April 6th movement is no different than the OWS movement. Its all connected. the world is waking up, and there is no turning back at this point.

The end result will either be a free world that is socialist based (providing for the needs of all people) or a tyrannical world that is fascist based (providing for the needs of the rich and their lackeys). Im fighting for the first.

And it really is that simple. Though individual groups may want to co-op the movement and what the struggle is about, its not about just them. Its way bigger.

Originally posted by zworld
I notice many on this thread dont understand the movement, and where its going. Its not about anarchism, though that has a place in the overall frame of things, and its not about occupying small spaces. Its about actually making this a country of the people, by the people and for the people. And since the corporations that control this world refuse to let go and give it back, its going to take a pry bar.

The April 6th movement is no different than the OWS movement. Its all connected. the world is waking up, and there is no turning back at this point.

The end result will either be a free world that is socialist based (providing for the needs of all people) or a tyrannical world that is fascist based (providing for the needs of the rich and their lackeys). Im fighting for the first.

And it really is that simple. Though individual groups may want to co-op the movement and what the struggle is about, its not about just them. Its way bigger.

actually I think the headlines will read this

"occupy wallstreet... Just got in the way"

its gonna look like a huge blunder.. can't wait to tell my kids about this

If you have your own true opinion on OWS that is a start.

Frankly, I haven't changed my opinion, and as sure as this movement will not change ideologically I will not change my opinion... And it is pointless to argue the points when you are accused of "hate" because of being critical of this movement... I have said to that:

One person's "hate" in this case could be another's healthy skepticism.

Facts and actions speak louder than words...

OWS can't be for all people, only those that agree with the "collective" therefore those that feel excluded because they can't support the ideology, message and demands are seen as "haters".

If this was a true movement for the liberty and freedom of the REAL 99% of Americans there would be overwhelming support for it.

You should be thankful that the majority of Americans have the ability to think for themselves and not be so quick to blindly follow this movement without questioning everything, especially its true origins which are in my opinion meant to only further divide people, and possibly lead to violence with authorities.

If you can't see clear goals, hear from very vocal and public leadership, and have witnessed this movement in action without at least asking WTF? ... Then you're already among the sheep in the flock.

Hate for those who dare to question, or oppose this movement is far more venomous and overt than the perceived hatred among the critics and skeptics.

It is all a matter of perspective, either you are in or out, one of them, a part of the collective or you are a hater, subversive infiltrator, capitalist pig, defender of the elite etc. .... There is no middle ground here.

Change that, and maybe the hate on both sides will evaporate and people will find the middle ground together, support will rise and this movement will become something that can actually accomplish something good.

But, you know that isn't going to happen, because the "haters" are gonna hate.... Right?

Divide and conquer.

I'm still neutral. ATS hasn't changed my views... Elsewhere as well, while researching what is going on has attempted to sway me against it more, from being backed by communism to the ones they claim to rail against. I remain, or at least try to remain neutral and in hope of change, keeping an open view on opinion and fact.

We, as a nation have not seen this kind of action in a long time, and for us younger people it is our first time. With any big movement there's always room for corruption. Evidently is why it's so hard to pinpoint what to believe anymore, which that might be the full intent of outside influence. Hopefully that won't be the downfall of anything positive that would come from it.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


OWS's critics contradict themselves.

On one hand they say that there is no clearly defined message, and on the other that we should be skeptical of the message.

Which is it?

How can we make ANY changes at all if we don't at least make an attempt, as 'futile' and 'politically infiltrated' as some here claim OWS to be?

If it were up to these critics, we'd all just get a job and ACCEPT the corporate takeover of our Democracy.

I say the only people who are anti OWS are people with something to lose if the system is changed to represent all people.

reply to post by zworld


socialism is tyrannical too. you forget your lessons from history. let me give you a small example. the KKK was a socialist group, not politically, but in exercise of their platform. how do i know this? well, they decided democratically, the fate of other people they didn't agree with. socialism is mob rule, and mobs can be manipulated to do some of the worst atrocities. they can vote away all your inherent rights because they don't like you for whatever reason. take my word for it, as an american, you don't want to live in a society like that. it's a craps shoot whether you will survive long enough to create a new generation or see your own grandchildren.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by zworld

 

socialism is tyrannical too. you forget your lessons from history. let me give you a small example. the KKK was a socialist group, not politically, but in exercise of their platform. how do i know this? well, they decided democratically, the fate of other people they didn't agree with. socialism is mob rule, and mobs can be manipulated to do some of the worst atrocities. they can vote away all your inherent rights because they don't like you for whatever reason. take my word for it, as an american, you don't want to live in a society like that. it's a craps shoot whether you will survive long enough to create a new generation or see your own grandchildren.

Socialism killed 100,000,000 people and I didn't even get a tee shirt

Why must all political discourse be an either/or scenario? Truth is always more complex than soundbites.

The military uses a socialist healthcare system.

You probably learned how to read these lines in a public school, another socialist program.

Our democracy, a representative one, is a wee bit fascist.

We have got to stop this elementary name calling and get down to a more adult conversation that includes the BEST of both polarities.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


just two words, hippie.
9/11 truth.

Originally posted by jimnuggits
I say the only people who are anti OWS are people with something to lose if the system is changed to represent all people.

no 9/11 truth, no "revolution".
it's as simple as that.
if you ows guys have a problem with that, check with noam chomsky.
or julian assange.

starting to see a pattern there, all of you true owsers?

reply to post by psyop911


Those who perpetrated that treasonous act have not stopped, so I have to disagree.

9/11 truth is not a necessary component, nor is it something we can change at this point.

Best we can do is learn from it, and make our best effort to see that those real terrorists are brought to justice for something, even if it isn't that.

Originally posted by jimnuggits
Why must all political discourse be an either/or scenario? Truth is always more complex than soundbites.

The military uses a socialist healthcare system.

You probably learned how to read these lines in a public school, another socialist program.

Our democracy, a representative one, is a wee bit fascist.

We have got to stop this elementary name calling and get down to a more adult conversation that includes the BEST of both polarities.

oh i know. i've said countless times that this is currently a socialist country with a semi-fascist side and a semi-communist side, but both socialistic, but what people are asking for now, is to go completely into communism and start taking and redistributing the tiny bit of # we've managed to accrue in our lives. so that a few guys from harvard can run the country from the new kremlin. (stalin had a castle and servants and his people that were not part of the polit bureau, were slaves and scared half out of their wits. don't let the communists fool ya, they still believe in private property just not YOUR private property)

Originally posted by satron
I support the OWS because I'm against ignorance, and the ignorance of the situation is sitting around talking about why the government/corporations are screwing us, but not actively doing anything about it.

ows ignorance has been shown by their complete lack of support for 9/11 truth.
which is not true (as they say), but hey... bad pr is bad pr. and since pr is more
important than truth... well... that's ignorance too.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by zworld

 

socialism is tyrannical too. you forget your lessons from history. let me give you a small example. the KKK was a socialist group, not politically, but in exercise of their platform. how do i know this? well, they decided democratically, the fate of other people they didn't agree with. socialism is mob rule, and mobs can be manipulated to do some of the worst atrocities. they can vote away all your inherent rights because they don't like you for whatever reason. take my word for it, as an american, you don't want to live in a society like that. it's a craps shoot whether you will survive long enough to create a new generation or see your own grandchildren.

Your referring to communism, not socialism. Socialism takes many form, and its important to identify which is being discussed. The kind of socialism Im referring to is what I call 'spiritual socialism', you know, if you have two coats, give one to someone in need. Its about caring for everyone, instead of only caring for self and those close to you. Its realizing that we are all brothers and sisters. No tyrannical system fits into this picture. And any that try will be again overthrown.

Wiki has a good basic discussion of socialism, but lacks true insight into its need. The parts in wiki I like;

As a form of social organization, socialism is based on co-operative social relations and self-management; relatively equal power-relations and the reduction or elimination of hierarchy in the management of economic and political affairs........

Socialists hold that capitalism is an illegitimate economic system, since it serves the interests of the wealthy and allows the exploitation of lower classes. As such, they wish to replace it completely or at least make substantial modifications to it, in order to create a more just society that would guarantee a certain basic standard of living. A primary goal of socialism is social equality and a distribution of wealth based on one's contribution to society, and an economic arrangement that would serve the interests of society as a whole.

Communism and capitalism are two heads of the same beast. One says you own everything but a select group is going to manage it for you, and you dont have access to it, while the other says a select group owns most everything, but if you work hard you can have a piece too. Either way a select group controls things. Socialism takes it back and distributes it to all.

ON EDIT: The reason spiritual socialism (the kind the masters taught) has never taken off is because whenever it tries its squelched by oppressive forces, be they communist, capitalist or fascist. The select group folks. The ones who demand much but give little. Those days will be changing soon though, as enough people wake up to their God given rights.