The Occupation has Failed

page: 3
49
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by nihonjindesu08
I, being a part of Occupy, agree that Occupy has served its purpose, for now

Which would be what .. exactly? What was it's purpose and what was accomplished?




posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
Oh yeah??

How many self-proclaimed “occupiers” hold public office? Pelosi cries every day about how the Tea Party is messing things up in Washington! What impact has OWS made?


That is your marker point for success? A movement that obfuscates the political environment even more than it already was? Please...the Tea Party is nothing more than an extension of the Republican Party and does nothing to address the issue of corporate manipulations...

Be skeptical as you will...either the Occupy movement will continue or it won't...but we have already made an impact and there is nothing to suggest that it won't continue despite everything I have read here...



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by nenothtu
 


So people who didn't plan ahead do deserve to be screwed by poor government management?


Yes.

People get caught in their own concupiescence. Then whine that someone else is "screwing" them. Here's a thought: If you don't wanna get screwed, don't bend over and advertise.

Also, it would be good for OWS to pick a target. Is it banks, or is it "poor government management"? Pick a target, and act accordingly. Don't aim at bankers and financiers, then squall about "government". If you think the government is the problem, why direct your ire at Wall Street? Their "message" should at least be consistent and make sense if they hope to garner support.



They were standing up for your right to free speech and their own.


No, they were not.

They ABSOLUTELY - were - not.

I can't even imagine how anyone could mistake what they were doing for that.



Come on. You guys just want to hate a group of people because you are jaded. You see a lot of young kids out there and the geezer comes out in you and you start ripping on them. They are taking a stand for what they believe in. They recognize a problem in the country and they are taking what action they can. All the people that are against them need to grow up. Don't support them, fine, but don't spend all your time railing against them and trying to convince others not to support them.


You BET I'll work against others being sucked into the OWS trap. As has been said, all that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing. I won't have that on my conscience.

If OWS wants to avoid that, they need to get their act together and Present a coherent message and plan of action to achieve the goals of that message.

Until it's clear where they stand, they really aren't standing anywhere.


edit on 2011/12/21 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I think you missed the point of that posters post.


It looked like a pretty clear threat to me. There wasn't a lot of wiggle room in it, and the clear "assimilate or die" character was plenty enough communicative of the gist of the post.



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


You took it as Occupy versus the people (you) when it was clearly meant as the people versus corrupt government. It's so funny to me that you guys are horrified of Occupy. Why don't you just join up with the cops if you are so eager to "fight" your fellow Americans no matter how peaceful they have been. Nothing about their action have hinted towards any type of assimilate or die attitude. You know it too. Don't be so ridiculous.



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Why can't they direct it at both since both are the problem?
They absolutely are. Doesn't matter if you agree with their message or not. They have a right to it and you disagreeing with that means you would deprive yourself of the same right. There is no trap. It's plain mental to spend so much time trying to convince people to be against something that you yourself obviously don't have a complete understanding of. I'm sure there are many other areas you aren't an expert in and you don't go around trying to teach people in them based on your opinion. Why do the same thing with this movement. All you have to go on our biased reports.
edit on 21-12-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by MemoryShock
he Tea Party is nothing more than an extension of the Republican Party and does nothing to address the issue of corporate manipulations...




AND...

Defecating on Police cars does?
edit on 21-12-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 



A homeless guy in New York sh!ts on a police car and all of a sudden it's the fault of thousands of people from the Carolinas to California.



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
SnF

The OWS movement was doomed to fail from the beggining
And that's a generous statement because it implies it even started

OWS was more of a flash mob that an actual movement

The biggest problem I had with them is that they gave a bad name to serious protestors who actually know what they are talking about

I hope another OWS never happens again, it was horrible if not horrific

Most expensive flash mob ever



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


That one piece of paper is more than you have done in your entire life to change the government. More than you ever will do.

That is a group of Americans. There will be more and more just like them.

This whole thread is soo funny. A bunch of anti free speech, protester haters patting each other on the back for doing absolutely nothing. It's made even more funny by the fact that none of you are correct or even know what you are talking about. I'm gonna get out of here before you guys start calling each other BFF's.
edit on 21-12-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I wanted to add that holding public office is another very good idea for helping positive change to occur. But if it's specifically about Occupy's goals, it should not associated with one of the existing parties - neither one is backed by 99% of the population. We do need more average people, and young people, especially, holding office, so that our views are represented and taken seriously.

As for the sunshine, rainbows and lollipops comment: yeah, that's pretty much my point, from a cynical stance. Most people are too tired to want to think hard about the issues right off the bat, so first you have to give them what they hedonistically crave, something immediately fun, easy, enjoyable...then, with that kind of energy-kick...sort of like a sugar high... you can start motivating them to work for what they deeply want and truly believe in. It's not that most people are lazy, but they are very busy, and very tired. You do have to make this easy for them to start to get behind.

As for no violence, etc., etc. --- all good points. Violence is just the WRONG direction to go. Put its most simply, who wants more violence? Nobody - it's horrible - so just forget it right now. And as for things that are are politically divisive, that some of the 99% believe but a large proportion disagree with? That's not right, how can you expect everyone to get behind goals if those are not their goals? Occupiers can have many beliefs, but that doesn't have to dictate what Occupy is about... (for example, I'm strongly anti-nuclear, but that doesn't mean Occupy should be all about getting rid of nuclear....lots of Occupiers disagree and think that nuclear is necessary...and that is their right! So rather than me pretending that 99% agree with me and I should shove being anti-nuclear down everyone's throat and tell them that's what they believe, I know that's my own thing and not the common goal of Occupy.) It's divisive and distracting to try to make it about an issue with which many of us don't agree.

We, the public, don't have to agree on all these things. The other issues are important and need to be addressed, but that doesn't mean that Occupy is the place for it. OCCUPY CANNOT BE EVERYTHING TO EVERYONE. We do not agree on everything!

For Occupy to make sense, the majority of us just have to agree on SOME things, and hey --- we do. If this is going to be about the 99%, it should be what most people agree with. Let's keep it to that. Not very many people will tell you that they want MORE corruption and money in politics, so let's stick to concrete goals around things like reducing that. Let's AVOID anything that lets people drag this down into a "Dems vs. Reps" issue, which just tears Occupy apart and weakens the chance of any positive change happening. Occupy shouldn't be about Dems or Reps. Nobody should feel like they are betraying their political stance to be a part of Occupy. They can be an Obama, Ron Paul, Tea Party supporter, or anything else, it really doesn't matter, the point is that we ALL agree: We need to do something about the money and corruption in politics, such as preventing corporations from being able to buy who is elected.

Occupy shouldn't be about trying to convert anyone to "vote X," it's something else outside of that closed paradigm. It's something that unites us, despite our differences. We'll never all be the same. But there are some things we all pretty much agree on. And the only reason they haven't happened yet, is because we haven't demanded it. We've been too busy squabbling about the things we disagree about, and meanwhile, greedy, conniving people have taken advantage of all the confusion and noise to get in position to give us all a royal screwing. Our differences be damned, it's time to rip these sneaky little ultra-leeches off. Think about a whole big family getting together, despite all their disagreements, and working together to do what has to be done for the well-being of the whole family. They'll never agree, on many things. But they're a family, and they can put those differences aside temporarily to work together when they need to. It's exactly like that.

edit on 21-12-2011 by OceanGeek because: grammar



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Just a few news stories about Occupy in the past week, there's many more.

huffingtonpost.com

huffingtonpost.com

occupyfresno

washi ngtonexaminer.com

thinkprogress.org

thinkprogress.org
[url=http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/12/14/388783/tens-of-thousands-march-on-koch-industries-for-suppressing-voting-rights/]thinkprogress.org[/u rl]

Let me know if you want more.
edit on 21-12-2011 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
A homeless guy in New York sh!ts on a police car and all of a sudden it's the fault of thousands of people from the Carolinas to California.



OK so NY protesters are not part of the OWS movement now?


Meanwhile they are OWS protesters but that's right I forget. No OWS responsibility for their action because their actions and all their other activities do not represent the whole right?

RIGHT?

The molotov cocktail fire starter didn't represent them either, Nor the hundreds that occupied a foreign Consulate, nor the Lady who put her child on a Rail Road track over in Californian recently to stop a train at the Port Protest which was part of the OWS movement there. There is always, ALWAYS somebody in the crowd who says.

"They don't represent OWS"

This is one of the reasons why they haven't won over too many on the fence supporters. They will back peddle, deny, justify and straight out make excuses for those OWS members who act out of line. This is exactly the kind of MOB rule that happens with No Leadership, objectives and clearly stated agendas.

edit on 21-12-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by nenothtu
 


You took it as Occupy versus the people (you) when it was clearly meant as the people versus corrupt government.


Absolutely that's how I took it, because that's how it was written. Here it is again, in full:



Originally posted by TheMindWar
reply to post by StarPeace
 


The occupation did not fail IMO, it woke alot more people up
these protests are nothing compared to what is comming. People are going to have a choice to make, stand and fight or ignore it and die. Simple.


Like I said, it's a pretty clear threat against the People by OWS, without a lot of room to wiggle out of it.

For what it's worth, I believe the poster. I think that when War Season opens up around the end of March or beginning of April, things are going to get plenty interesting. I think these "protests" really ARE "nothing" compared to what they have planned for next year. Because of that, I have to also take at face value the promise that they are going to make the rest of us stand and fight, or die in place. I don't know if you've ever been in the "fight or die" place, but I have, and I can tell you flat out that it will lead to some thoroughly creative activity that won't bode well for OWS if they DO force us into that place.

"No plan of action ever survives initial contact".

It will be a less than brilliant move for them to initiate that contact.



It's so funny to me that you guys are horrified of Occupy. Why don't you just join up with the cops if you are so eager to "fight" your fellow Americans no matter how peaceful they have been. Nothing about their action have hinted towards any type of assimilate or die attitude. You know it too. Don't be so ridiculous.


I do not fight people, Americans or not, who are truly being "peaceful". Conversely, "peaceful people" do not make me fight or die. Once they breach that line, they are no longer considered peaceful, and I WILL fight them, Again American or not.

Nothing to suggest an assimilate or die attitude? Have you not read any of the OWS threads?

Not even the quote I was responding to?



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Should we go back to calling all Tea Partiers racist then?



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
A homeless guy in New York sh!ts on a police car and all of a sudden it's the fault of thousands of people from the Carolinas to California.



OK so NY protesters are not part of the OWS movement now?


Meanwhile they are OWS protesters but that's right I forget. No OWS responsibility for their action because their actions and all their other activities do not represent the whole right?

RIGHT?

The molotov cocktail fire starter didn't represent them either, Nor the hundreds that occupied a foreign Consulate, nor the Lady who put her child on a Rail Road track over in Californian recently to stop a train at the Port Protest which was part of the OWS movement there. There is always, ALWAYS somebody in the crowd who says.

"They don't represent OWS"

This is one of the reasons why they haven't won over too many on the fence supporters. They will back peddle, deny, justify and straight out make excuses for those OWS members who act out of line. This is exactly the kind of MOB rule that happens with No Leadership, objectives and clearly stated agendas.

edit on 21-12-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)


The problem is that when the whole family is involved, some of the kids are going to do some stupid things. It's still a family worth fighting for, despite its imperfections. And yes, some kids doing stupid things doesn't represent me or my goals, at all.



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
Should we go back to calling all Tea Partiers racist then?



Well I dunno, did you resort to calling people names thinking it was getting your point acrossed in the past? If you feel the need to call people names again then by all means call them names.

I think that really will reflect badly on you though.

Just a thought.


edit on 21-12-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


You missed the point.



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
You missed the point.


I was making another...

Think about it.



posted on Dec, 21 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Why can't they direct it at both since both are the problem?


I suppose they could, although the segment being throw against Wall Street would be a complete wast as far as progress is concerned. Do you think they'll do that any time soon?



They absolutely are. Doesn't matter if you agree with their message or not. They have a right to it and you disagreeing with that means you would deprive yourself of the same right.


Is there any chance that they may express some sort of clear, focused message any time soon? I can disagree with any damned thing I like. I'm not depriving anyone, neither them nor myself, of any rights at all by merely disagreeing. They have no "right" that i must agree with them, any more than I have a "right" to expect them to agree with me.

Are you sure you know what rights are?



There is no trap. It's plain mental to spend so much time trying to convince people to be against something that you yourself obviously don't have a complete understanding of. I'm sure there are many other areas you aren't an expert in and you don't go around trying to teach people in them based on your opinion. Why do the same thing with this movement. All you have to go on our biased reports.


Of course it's a trap. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that people who are attempting to get you on board with a "movement" that they are not being up-front and clear about aren't in it for YOUR good.

No, I probably don't have a "complete" understanding of it. I can't even point out an OWS member who has a complete understanding of it - how could I be expected to have one?. None of the ones I've talked to are very clear about it, any how. The fact remains that I know enough about it to formulate an opinion.

I don't have a complete understanding of nuclear fission, either, but I know enough about it to know I don't want to hug the bomb when it blows.





new topics
top topics
 
49
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join