Occupy Wall Street better defend its identity

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by Stout

My mistake and that would explain the limo load of lawyers parked in my driveway.

Interestingly, in researching my error, I found out Yoko Ono is worth $500 million,

And what does this have to do with OWS?

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by dc1971

Yes, it's rather interesting how things are explained many times to them yet it never sinks in.

Not sure if critical thinking is really for them.

I know, it really kills me. I think some people are just really enamored of their opinion and they are certain if they repeat it enough others will also become enamored of it.

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by dc1971

And what does this have to do with OWS?

Who knows, she's liberal, perhaps she supports OWS and that would illustrate hypocrisy or something. Ultimately it's just something to add to the circle jerk.

[Virus]

More pictures and videos of this lunatic asylum here.

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by Virus

Check out the Occupy LA freakshow.

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2012/05/08...inglepage=true

They look like they've lost their noggins to me. Do you reckon they've lost their noggins? I reckon they've lost their noggins.

Originally Posted by Virus

More pictures and videos of this lunatic asylum here.

I approve of the choice of words. Don't know if that was intentional, if so then thank you.

[dc1971]

Yup! There's a Communist party in the United States! Glenn Beck made a big stink about them a few years ago yet they're such a small and ineffective group of citizens, however it's funny and amusing at the same time when you make reference to them like they're some big threat to the world and to humanity!

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by RandFan

Who knows, she's liberal, perhaps she supports OWS and that would illustrate hypocrisy or something. Ultimately it's just something to add to the circle jerk.

I think she feels she's too old to even worry about the Occupy movement. She has better things to do, I'm sure!

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by dc1971

And what does this have to do with OWS?

OWS cheerleader Roseanne Barr says she should be executed, along with everyone else worth more than $100 million.

[NoZed Avenger]

Originally Posted by WildCat

OWS cheerleader -.

Have you no shame, using that word?

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by WildCat

OWS cheerleader Roseanne Barr says she should be executed, along with everyone else worth more than $100 million.

Okay!

And?

[Brainster]

Originally Posted by WildCat

OWS cheerleader Roseanne Barr says she should be executed, along with everyone else worth more than $100 million.

No, you've got it all wrong. Roseanne's not a fat cat--err, well, she's not that rich. She's only worth $80 million. But if we executed all the $100 million folks, she'd be living in Bill Gate's house.

[000063]

Originally Posted by Virus

Check out the Occupy LA freakshow.

http://pjmedia.com/zombie/2012/05/08...inglepage=true

They look like they've lost their noggins to me. Do you reckon they've lost their noggins? I reckon they've lost their noggins.

Quote:

And then there is what strategists like to call “bad optics.” Who exactly thought it would be a good idea to march around in paramilitary uniforms at a political rally which calls for the confiscation of other people’s money? Are we seeing this generation’s “brown shirts”?

And then they complain about "militarized" police without any irony whatsoever.

[Virus]

Does OWS even exist as an entity? Or was it just a clever branding of the disparate groups that rally around the "anti-capitalist" cause but agree on little and are often hostile to each other.

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by Virus

Does OWS even exist as an entity? Or was it just a clever branding of the disparate groups that rally around the "anti-capitalist" cause but agree on little and are often hostile to each other.

Did the protestors of the 60s ever exist as an entity?

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by RandFan

Did the protestors of the 60s ever exist as an entity?

They had a clearly defined goal.

OWS, it's diminished to the same usual bunch of far-left radical full-time protesters, indistinguishable from groups like ANSWER.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by RandFan

Did the protestors of the 60s ever exist as an entity?

Better question: Did the tea party ever exist as an entity?

[Virus]

I posted this article about the mind of the left in the other thread about why leftists are angry and it made me think of OWS when I read it:

Quote:

It would also explain why Leftists so often have a "spare me the details" or "Don’t worry about the facts" orientation. For most Leftists, it is the activism itself rather than what is advocated that is the main point of the exercise. As long as the cause advocated is both generally praiseworthy and disruptive to implement, that will suffice.

They don't have any concrete plan, direction or even a core issue that they're protesting about. Because their attraction to protest isn't about that. It's a play-date for leftists to come together and indulge their ridiculously inflated egos.

[Virus]

Originally Posted by dc1971

Better question: Did the tea party ever exist as an entity?

That would be an irrelevant question. Since this thread is not about the Tea Party, as much as it serves as a useful distraction for OWS supporters on the defensive.

[Virus]

This is the closest thing they have to an official website.

Open challenge: Find something that isn't silly, overblown rhetoric and self-flattery.

[applecorped]

Originally Posted by Virus

Open challenge: Find something that isn't silly, overblown rhetoric and self-flattery.

In this thread?

[Virus]

Originally Posted by applecorped

In this thread?

Ha. No. See the link in the text.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by Virus

They don't have any concrete plan, direction or even a core issue that they're protesting about. Because their attraction to protest isn't about that.

To which I agree. And I have made that point several times about the OWS. What does it take to tell you that when I agree, IT ACTUALLY MEANS - I AGREE???

Should I type it out in Sanskrit?

Quote:

It's a play-date for leftists to come together and indulge their ridiculously inflated egos.

And that is your opinion.

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by Virus

That would be an irrelevant question. Since this thread is not about the Tea Party, as much as it serves as a useful distraction for OWS supporters on the defensive.

Well no. That would be wrong again, Virus. The tea party, as I mentioned before, have many supporters who also support OWS. And the tea party has been mentioned in this thread as two comparable populist uprisings. So yes, it is actually a relevant question!

So did the tea party ever exist as one sole entity?

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by Virus

That would be an irrelevant question.

Unless you are special pleading it's relevant. Are you consistent or is this just an ad hoc insult?

[dc1971]

Originally Posted by RandFan

Unless you are special pleading it's relevant. Are you consistent or is this just an ad hoc insult?

I think he's saying it's irrelevant because he cannot come up with any other answer.

[TjW]

Originally Posted by dc1971

Well no. That would be wrong again, Virus. The tea party, as I mentioned before, have many supporters who also support OWS. And the tea party has been mentioned in this thread as two comparable populist uprisings. So yes, it is actually a relevant question!

So did the tea party ever exist as one sole entity?

You may have a point. It came into existence as a number of groups of individuals who shared concerns about the power of the federal government and the level of taxation.

However, "sole entity" or not, it did have an easily identifiable twofold goal: to reduce the power of the federal government and reduce taxes. You'd probably find some who would argue that this is the same thing. The groups individually organizing under that "tea party" brand went to some trouble to keep their protests legal.

OWS, on the other hand, seems like an umbrella brand for folks who have made a hobby of protest.

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by TjW

OWS, on the other hand, seems like an umbrella brand for folks who have made a hobby of protest.

Yeah, kinda like the 60s counter culture which were an outgrowth of the civil rights movement of the 50s. The 60s saw an expansion where we had anti-war, anti-capitalism, anti-govt, women's rights, minority rights, voting rights, sexual revolution, legalizing drugs, environmentalism and gay rights, there were sit ins at campuses, marches on Washington, etc., etc.

Of course most people only know about or only remember civil rights. The protestors of the 50s, 60s and 70s were also accused of simply protesting for the sake of protesting.

[jhunter1163]

I heard an analogy on the radio the other day that was bang on the money. A political-science professor had had his fill of the people in his class nattering on about the Occupy movement, so he said "OK, we're going to implement income equality here in the class. I'm going to take 200 points away from all the A students, and 100 points from the B students, and give them to the F students."

Of course, there was much screeching about the unfairness of it all.

The prof just smiled smugly and waited for the analogy to hit them...

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

I heard an analogy on the radio the other day that was bang on the money. A political-science professor had had his fill of the people in his class nattering on about the Occupy movement, so he said "OK, we're going to implement income equality here in the class. I'm going to take 200 points away from all the A students, and 100 points from the B students, and give them to the F students."

Of course, there was much screeching about the unfairness of it all.

The prof just smiled smugly and waited for the analogy to hit them...

That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I hope most professors are not that clueless and I hope most students are smart enough to figure out why the analogy is a straw man argument. Perhaps some will take the time to find out what the issues really are and not simply resentment of people who have more because of their talent and hard work.

This little anecdote reminds me why I am no longer a conservative. A huge Rush Limbaugh fan I bought into this 1 dimensional thinking. Rush is very good with these kinds of silly straw men arguments. He paints his opponents as simply lazy and wanting to improve their lives by taking from the rich.

[Neally]

Originally Posted by RandFan

That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I hope most professors are not that clueless and I hope most students are smart enough to figure out why the analogy is a straw man argument. Perhaps some will take the time to find out what the issues really are and not simply resentment of people who have more because of their talent and hard work.

Much of what we've seen from the signs, chanting, and written stuff from OWS has been about greed, redistribution of wealth, and anti capitalist ideas. That you want to say what the movement is really about is a fallacy by assertion.

[jhunter1163]

Originally Posted by RandFan

That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I hope most professors are not that clueless and I hope most students are smart enough to figure out why the analogy is a straw man argument. Perhaps some will take the time to find out what the issues really are and not simply resentment of people who have more because of their talent and hard work.

This little anecdote reminds me why I am no longer a conservative. A huge Rush Limbaugh fan I bought into this 1 dimensional thinking. Rush is very good with these kinds of silly straw men arguments. He paints his opponents as simply lazy and wanting to improve their lives by taking from the rich.

But, RandFan, that's the whole problem. No one in Occupy even seems to know what their issues are, beyond this vague "income inequality" and "wealth redistribution" stuff. Student loan relief? The Volcker Rule? Something? Anything? Bueller? Give us one thing, just one, that we can agree on as an Occupy objective.

You won't be able to, because Occupy's very structure makes it impossible. They're protesting now for its own sake, not because they have any particular agenda. And, believe me, the 99% see that. I am firmly in the 99%, and Occupy doesn't speak for me.

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

But, RandFan, that's the whole problem. No one in Occupy even seems to know what their issues are, beyond this vague "income inequality" and "wealth redistribution" stuff. Student loan relief? The Volcker Rule? Something? Anything? Bueller? Give us one thing, just one, that we can agree on as an Occupy objective.

I don't buy the meme. It strikes me largely as ad hoc rationalization. Exposing corporate corruption and malfeasance is what I want from them and IMO we are getting that. But that's fine, we can disagree about that. Like the counter culture protests of the 60s I think there is plenty to criticize and I don't mind that you do so.

Quote:

You won't be able to, because Occupy's very structure makes it impossible. They're protesting now for its own sake, not because they have any particular agenda. And, believe me, the 99% see that. I am firmly in the 99%, and Occupy doesn't speak for me.

"Impossible?" When the criticism veers into absolutes I tend to lose interest in the argument.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by RandFan

I don't buy the meme. It strikes me largely as ad hoc rationalization. Exposing corporate corruption and malfeasance is what I want from them and IMO we are getting that. But that's fine, we can disagree about that. Like the counter culture protests of the 60s I think there is plenty to criticize and I don't mind that you do so.

"Impossible?" When the criticism veers into absolutes I tend to lose interest in the argument.

You don't appear to know anything about OWS.

It is what it is, however you seem to think it's what you wish it to be. It doesn't even slightly resemble what you claim it represents these days.

[Neally]

Originally Posted by WildCat

You don't appear to know anything about OWS.

It is what it is, however you seem to think it's what you wish it to be. It doesn't even slightly resemble what you claim it represents these days.

But it's just like the wonderful 60's protests! They accomplished so much, as will OWS!

[bookitty]

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

But, RandFan, that's the whole problem. No one in Occupy even seems to know what their issues are, beyond this vague "income inequality" and "wealth redistribution" stuff. Student loan relief? The Volcker Rule? Something? Anything? Bueller? Give us one thing, just one, that we can agree on as an Occupy objective.

You won't be able to, because Occupy's very structure makes it impossible. They're protesting now for its own sake, not because they have any particular agenda. And, believe me, the 99% see that. I am firmly in the 99%, and Occupy doesn't speak for me.

And who does?

I'm not trying to be flippant. There are so many polls which show a majority of Americans are against corporate welfare, subsidies to companies with billion dollar profits, frustrated by income equality and other social issues that fall under the OWS umbrella. Our senate and congress does not address these. Instead they focus on gay marriage, the war on women and meaningless vague phrases like "job creators."

Both tea partiers and OWS are driven by the feeling that our government is an insulated little bubble of self-interest beholden to only a very few.

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by bookitty

And who does?

I'm not trying to be flippant. There are so many polls which show a majority of Americans are against corporate welfare, subsidies to companies with billion dollar profits, frustrated by income equality and other social issues that fall under the OWS umbrella. Our senate and congress does not address these. Instead they focus on gay marriage, the war on women and meaningless vague phrases like "job creators."

Both tea partiers and OWS are driven by the feeling that our government is an insulated little bubble of self-interest beholden to only a very few.

This is what steams me so much. It is so transparent. But let's all calm down. Someone is sure to post an anecdote about OWS shortly and we can all laugh at that and ignore the real problems.

[TjW]

Originally Posted by RandFan

Yeah, kinda like the 60s counter culture which were an outgrowth of the civil rights movement of the 50s. The 60s saw an expansion where we had anti-war, anti-capitalism, anti-govt, women's rights, minority rights, voting rights, sexual revolution, legalizing drugs, environmentalism and gay rights, there were sit ins at campuses, marches on Washington, etc., etc.

Of course most people only know about or only remember civil rights. The protestors of the 50s, 60s and 70s were also accused of simply protesting for the sake of protesting.

Many of those groups had an actual goal that one could agree or disagree with.

And those groups that didn't, like the yippies, looked much the same as the OWS.
What, precisely, did the rioting at the 1968 Democratic National Convention accomplish other than to give Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman celebrity?
Is making terrorist threats, even though the threats are not carried out, a legitimate form of protest? (I'm referring here to the threat of dosing the water supply with LSD.) I don't think so.

I'm not saying that OWS is the first hobby protest group. Let me paraphrase a line from the The Incredibles: When everything is being protested, nothing is being protested.

[000063]

Originally Posted by bookitty

And who does?

I'm not trying to be flippant. There are so many polls which show a majority of Americans are against corporate welfare, subsidies to companies with billion dollar profits, frustrated by income equality and other social issues that fall under the OWS umbrella.

Our senate and congress does not address these. Instead they focus on gay marriage, the war on women and meaningless vague phrases like "job creators."

Because gay rights, and women's reproductive rights are minor social issues which certainly don't have protest movements and marches about them, and trying to give people jobs has nothing to do with the economy, right?

Quote:

Both tea partiers and OWS are driven by the feeling that our government is an insulated little bubble of self-interest beholden to only a very few.

Which does not in itself mean that OWS-sorry, "street thespians"-actually represents the views of the majority.

[bookitty]

Originally Posted by 000063

Because gay rights, and women's reproductive rights are minor social issues which certainly don't have protest movements and marches about them, and trying to give people jobs has nothing to do with the economy, right?

Which does not in itself mean that OWS-sorry, "street thespians"-actually represents the views of the majority.

Perhaps some Americans would like to see a focus on gay rights, women's reproductive rights AND addressing corporate welfare, income inequality, and a recession caused by top-level financial gambling, and trying to pay for two wars while reducing taxes on the top 1%.

There seems to be precious little link between protecting the so-called job creators from a small tax hike and actually creating jobs.

As you pointed out, equal rights for women and gays already have activist groups. Who speaks for the rest?

[RandFan]

Originally Posted by TjW

Many of those groups had an actual goal that one could agree or disagree with.

And those groups that didn't, like the yippies, looked much the same as the OWS.
What, precisely, did the rioting at the 1968 Democratic National Convention accomplish other than to give Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman celebrity?
Is making terrorist threats, even though the threats are not carried out, a legitimate form of protest? (I'm referring here to the threat of dosing the water supply with LSD.) I don't think so.

I'm not saying that OWS is the first hobby protest group. Let me paraphrase a line from the The Incredibles: When everything is being protested, nothing is being protested.

Ad hoc. I don't accept your characterization. I lived it. Much of the protests were chaotic and there was a lot of disagreement and lots of vague "love is all we need" propaganda.

As far as your other complaint, honestly, there are not many single protests that I can look at and tell you that it made a difference. I think that is a fools errand. And as for the Incredibles quote, I think that beautifully matches the 60s and 70s counter culture. They had everything. Doesn't mean that they failed though. So, it's noteworthy and thought provoking and I think it well worth discussion and consideration by those who are protesting. But, at the end of the day it strikes me as overly simplistic belied by history.