General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOccupy New Hampshire Derides Both Parties {'Why Does 1% Have Two Parties and We Have None?'}
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/01/08-1All political eyes were on New Hampshire this weekend, and members of the Occupy movement hoped to take advantage of the swirl of coverage ahead of Tuesday's Republican Party primary, the first of this election year.
From New Hampshire Public Radio:
Members of Occupy New Hampshire returned to Manchester Saturday to demonstrate outside of the Republican Presidential Debate at St. Anselm's College and spread their message of economic inequality.
***snip
CNN reports today:
Occupy protestors know that many Republicans view them as an extension of the Democratic Party. Elizabeth Grunewald tried to dispel that notion by speaking with folks who are willing to stop and listen to what the group has to say.
"You can't have a slogan that says we are the 99% without including Republicans also," said Grunewald. "It's not aligned with the Democratic Party. It's aligned with the free thinking party."
*** video at link
liberal N proud
(60,344 posts)They had one party and they bought the other one.
Huey P. Long
(1,932 posts)JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)Yeah, that's it! Of course this very morning I found out I got an extension to my unemployment benefits that the Rethugs fought hard to block. This week me and millions like me will find they can eat and have a warm place to sleep, pay the electric bill and other things we can't live without, thanks to the President making this happen.
But I'm sure Bush would've done the same thing right? Cause, after all, they are exactly the fucking same.
Julie
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)I'm really glad that your extension came through!
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)This makes such an incredible difference for me, I can't begin to explain it, though as intelligent guy like you can guess. How many millions breathe a huge sigh of relief, just like me, this week thanks to the Democratic President? Yet so many still ignorantly believe there is no difference.
Julie
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)are Republicans, too. I'm thinking they'll be reconsidering who to vote for, come November. It's so clear that it was Democrats who fought for the extension. This may be a very good thing in 2012. I hope so, anyhow.
G_j
(40,370 posts)is it?
True the Democrats are preferable to the Republicans. But OWS was never about being an extention of a political party.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)And I agree, OWS was never about being an extension of a political party. But what is it about exactly?
It is standard practice for any new identity to criticize all the others to establish legitimacy. A clear example of this is religion. The first thing a new one does is basically explain what's wrong with the others to show how "right" they are.
So this makes me wonder what it is they are looking to accomplish by making such statements.
Julie
G_j
(40,370 posts)one of the OWS 'demands' has been to get money out of politics. I see them as nonpartisan.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Reform the Financial system
Medicare for all...
Point number one BOTH parties, with few exceptions, they are the same. They both eat from the same trough.
And the exceptions to this are actually on BOTH parties, but I can literally count them with the fingers of one hand. They see point number one to a great source of the dysfunction.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)who has been living on welfare programs while I take care of my disabled daughter for years. If the gop had its way we would have been left to starve to death. I have real problems with anyone who thinks both parties are the same.
Both parties may not be doing as well as we want them to but there is a difference in what they do on many issues.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...to get you and a minority of Working Americans an extension on unemployment?
Thank gawd when my father and his father were fighting for Worker's/UNION Rights, they weren't so easily fooled by a few crumbs dribbled out to a handful of people.
[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]
TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)The TeaPubliKlan insanity in this area, to this degree is a new depth they have sunk to.
MineralMan
(146,329 posts)And that's a really, really important thing to recognize. Once again, DU is not representative of the general public.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)these major indicators of the widespread notoriety of the Occupy Movement:
Time names 'The Protester' as 'Person of Year'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/time-names-the-protester-as-person-of-year/2011/12/14/gIQAisaRuO_video.html
American Dialect Society names Occupy word of the year for 2011
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/01/08/american-dialect-society-names-occupy-word-of-the-year-for-2011/
Word of the year
The word(s) of the year, sometimes capitalized as Word(s) of the Year and abbreviated WOTY or WotY, refers to any of various assessments as to the most important word(s) or expression(s) in the public sphere during a specific year.
2011[11]: occupy (verb or noun inspired from the Occupy movements of 2011)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_of_the_year
NEW YEAR"S EVE, NEW YORK CITY
And that's a really important thing to recognize. Once again, some opinions at DU are not representative of the general public.
msongs
(67,441 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)that was creatively transformed
Here
and here
dionysus
(26,467 posts)to make it look generic i suppose considering it's supposed to represent the arab spring as well..
Maraya1969
(22,497 posts)thinking why don't they think of the policies between the two parties and see which ends up with a 1% and which ends up with a middle class?
I'm really disgusted with Occupy now.
Thaddeus Kosciuszko
(307 posts)http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/24/elizabeth-warren-i-created-occupy-wall-street.html
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Party.
We are the very essence of what the Democratic party is supposed to be.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)the point of this was about money and buying influence in both parties -- now lost in an emotional maelstrom of -- GASP -- somebody is claiming they are the 'same'.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)standard diversionary protocol for subjects of this nature.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)I don't see that phrase anywhere.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Huey P. Long
(1,932 posts)Raine
(30,540 posts)frazzled
(18,402 posts)"Why does 1% have two parties and we have none" -- because you have to start another party if you want one (or take over an existing one). No one is going to do it for you. You're not there waiting for some hero or heroine to come along and answer all your needs. That's the white knight theory of politics.
We often talk here about the "paternalism" of the Republican party (and they talk about the "maternalism" of the Democratic party). But this seems childish to me. You want another choice? Don't complain about no one giving it to you: go create it. It's what our system permits (though it won't be an easy job. I might even be interested if it's viable and rational.