For those that support measures against the OWS movement and its goals

[mmonk]

of economic justice, use this thread to explain your position to the rest of us.

[Turbineguy]

1. I want

to be destitute in my old age!

I want to die young from preventable disease.

I like being homeless and enjoy looking in restaurant windows, watching others eat expensive meals.

I drive a piece of shit car with a Bush/Cheney sticker on it.

And all my friends want the same.

[mmonk]

2. LOL.

[SammyWinstonJack]

83. LMAO!

:spray:

[Fumesucker]

3. TEH DURTIE HIPPIEZZ ARR EVIILL!!1!!1

[mmonk]

4. Bob has returned!

[Avalux]

5. Get a JOB you stupid kidzzzz!!!

That's me pretending to be a self-righteous nutjob :D

[Marrah_G]

6. No :)

I just like being contrary.

Doh: I picked the wrong day to try and quit coffee. I misread your question :(

[randome]

7. Offering constructive criticism is not the same as 'crushing OWS'.

If you think you are central enough to represent OWS, you need to listen to opinions outside your echo chamber.

If you do NOT represent OWS, then stop insulting people who want to see greater economic justice.

[Avalux]

10. You don't get it. OWS is all of us; "central" and "represent" mean nothing.

While I'm at it, just exactly how do you plan to go about achieving greater economic justice?

[randome]

26. By taking more direct action protesting.

Rather than getting bogged down in fighting cops for 'camping rights'.

The march on Wall Street is more direct action. (And yes, before anyone else feels compelled to point this out, I know it was planned some time ago so no one is 'taking credit' for it now.)

[Harmony Blue]

11. Constructive criticism

will be tuned out if the pro OWS posters have to constantly explain their position. The anti-OWS posters position is that the movement is pointless, doesn't have a coherent message. That is fine, that is their opinion, but to try to argue they don't understand what OWS is about is being obtuse.

[mmonk]

16. We desire the same.

It is the point of the post. So go ahead and post any criticisms. I am only a member/supporter of my local Occupy. If there are legitimate positions at ending all this, I'm interested in them. I see nothing legislatively slowing down budget cuts.

[mmonk]

27. I changed the wording of the OP for you.

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. The OWS movement has the potential to give the GOP a bogeyman which

they can use to paint Democrats as dangerous radicals. The sooner it goes away, the better.

[Fumesucker]

12. Have you listened to right wing talk radio at all in the last ten years?

:shrug:

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. No, have you?

[Fumesucker]

20. Yes I have..

Know thy enemy..

They make stuff up out of whole cloth anyway, truth never enters into it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

23. It seems that a lot of DUers do. I wonder how high their ratings would be if

only conservatives listened to them.

[Fumesucker]

32. Never been polled..

If I had been I would have lied and said no..

[ZombieHorde]

115. I have, and they already paint Democrats as dangerous radicals.

Your fears came true a long time ago.

[HereSince1628]

13. I don't think the professional dems as a whole have supported it

I'm not sure even a strong minority of dems have made formal statements of support...

[HappyMe]

39. Since I have been told that it is

strictly non-partisan, it shouldn't matter if anyone makes statements of support.

[HereSince1628]

47. My point is only that 'D'ems haven't anything to worry about

from repubicans relative to Occupy. As a whole the party hasn't taken a pro-Occupy position, even while a small number of individual congress critters have.

[HappyMe]

66. I would hope not. But time will tell.

The repubs are top notch at twisting, rewording and generally bending everything to suit their needs.

They are doing nothing in Congress but renaming post offices. They will stop at nothing to get their way. I can't even imagine what the tp has up their sleeves.

[HughBeaumont]

18. OWS participants aren't Democrats nor do they have anything to do with the Democratic party.

Republicans cannot successfully paint something that doesn't exist.

Republicans can only go with their tired, victim-blaming "GEDDAJOBYABUM" horseshit they're so famous for. The public isn't buying the Republican message of economic inequality or laissez-fail anymore.

And . . . yeah, much to your dismay, you'll be waitin' a while on that last wish.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. "Republicans cannot successfully paint something that doesn't exist."

{cough}wmd{/cough}

[Freddie Stubbs]

33. Look at what happened in 1968

Nixon's campaign successfully tied the violent protests (especially at the Democratic Convention) to Humphrey.

Why do you think that President Obama's spokesman said that the President believes that it is up to individual Mayors as to how much force should be used when dealing with Occupy protesters? He wants to keep this movement at arms length.

[Ship of Fools]

40. Absolutely right.

As a small example, my husband is so pissed off, he feels he can't go to the protests because
he'd be the first to try to beat up a cop or some such. He was a registered, all-in Repub until
3 months ago. He's registered as a D, but he'd rather not be pigeon-holed in conversation as
a D or R. He's OWS all the way now.


My thoughts to anyone I talk to who doesn't understand OWS:

OWS are not Ds. OWS are not Rs. OWS are not Is. OWS is U. U R OWS.

You are a 99%er by definition.

You don't have to participate, but you do have to think more creatively if you truly want change.

Why does OWS have to have an agenda? To suit you?

We are the 99% and all that that implies -- that is the agenda.

[randome]

70. Yeah, but your 'we' apparently doesn't include those who disagree on tactics.

People are participating by making suggestions. You don't want suggestions or support from people WHO ARE ON YOUR SIDE?

What planet do you come from where that stance is anything but a recipe for marginalizing yourselves?

[Ship of Fools]

74. Well, I come from the same planet as you do.l

I agree that at some point, the movement must start to organize or it will flutter away.
At this very moment? NO FUCKING WAY.

I have offered suggestions and support myself. I don't think the time is now.

It will be winter soon. MSM will giggle up a storm about how they've scattered to the wind.
I would like to see a HUGE rally next spring, followed up by some major organizing. BTW,
they have already begun to. Saw a couple of people on MSNBC discussing the organizing.

Thanks.

[randome]

75. That seems to be what most of us want.

Better organization. I feel only dismay when people say OWS doesn't need leaders or a coherent message.

Without a coherecy, a message will not be heard nor delivered.

Too much time is being spent on fighting cops for 'camping rights'. I, for one, would like to see more organized protests. Today's march on Wall Street is at least a step in the right direction.

[Ship of Fools]

79. Absolutely!

I just feel the TIMING of selecting leaders/coherent message is critical.
But for right now, massive protests and frightening the 1% is essential --
Over the winter would be the best time to build a coherent message and
elect leadership ... just my opinion, of course.

My comments that I posted earlier (I'm not a very clear communicator...)
were my fantasy comments to teabaggers & the bubble-heads on MSM who ask
"What do they want?"

I'm beginning to think that the best response would be: "If you have to ask,
you won't understand." :hi:

[randome]

89. Right back atcha!

:hi:

[Ship of Fools]

81. Absolutely!

I just feel the TIMING of selecting leaders/coherent message is critical.
But for right now, massive protests and frightening the 1% is essential --
Over the winter would be the best time to build a coherent message and
elect leadership ... just my opinion, of course.

My comments that I posted earlier (I'm not a very clear communicator...)
were my fantasy comments to teabaggers & the bubble-heads on MSM who ask
"What do they want?"

I'm beginning to think that the best response would be: "If you have to ask,
you won't understand." :hi:

[sabrina 1]

109. Is there any other movement that has had this much success

over the past, say, 20 years or so? Maybe you are not aware of the planning and the organization that got this movement to where it is. Just because it doesn't follow the old way doesn't mean it is not organized.

Maybe the idea of this movement is too new for a lot of people. Maybe people feel more comfortable with the old ways, even though they have failed to get anywhere close to where this movement is in just seven weeks. It has spread across the country and the world. Each day there are actions being taken, such as the General Strike in Oakland eg, which managed to get 100,000 out on the streets in less than a week. Or the march in NYC which brought out the Unions and other Workers in solidarity with them.

They have gotten the support of some powerful organizations AND individuals and in a very short amount of time. That means the message resonates despite the whining of the MSM, ie, Erin Burnett 'but what do they waaaaant, nobody knows'!

Or the several court rulings in their favor regarding 1st Amendment rights, or the 'move your money' day, taking it directly to the Banks and yes, it was someone else's idea, but OWS got on board and helped make it a huge success.

For ten years we have tried to get attention for even one of these issues, with no success. These things do not happen without organization.

In the very beginning they stated that they would not get mired down in expected negative criticism, they would keep moving forward.

That was obvious when the Oakland PD nearly killed two veterans and put many more people in the hospital. Rather than rest, they immediately organized that huge and successful General Strike. That scared the 1% so much they sent out their goons to try to destroy those efforts in the middle of the night.

Today, after the attacks from the government all over the country, they have taken to the streets and even the MSM has been unable to ignore them.

They have camped out at houses in Foreclosure, at Banks, drawing attention to issues the MSM refuses to cover. They have had some fun, mic checking eg, Karl Rove and Scott Walker and in Berkeley they started the students protest now spreading to colleges across the country, at which thousands showed up, there at Harvard.

While everyone is busy giving them advice, they have stuck to their commitment in the beginning to keep moving ahead. That is why the interest in it is still so high, they are always doing something.

Before this movement started, what was happening, organized or not, that could have possibly made a difference? All we had were Moveon sending out petitions which are ignored . Organized, but ignored.

There is a lot to be said for confusing the 'enemy'. Traditional organization makes it easy to target, leaders become sitting ducks who can be discredited with the idea that if you 'cut off the head of the snake' the rest will die.

They do need ideas and the beauty of that is that anyone can go to a GA and be heard, and the movement has spread so far and so rapidly that most people can find one in their area.

No one is refusing ideas, they hold GAs every day, some twice a day, where ideas are put forward and discussed and voted on.

They have also created their own media in this short amount of time, 'The Occupy Wall Street Journal' was produced in the first couple of weeks, for example and people in NYC were reading on the subway. Which is the reason why everyone knows about them. Frankly I have not seen anything so successful, from a political marketing POV ever. Every effort made up to now, failed. Huge marches, petitions, calls, emails to Reps, all very organized, but with zero results.

I have some ideas for this movement but it's too early to put them into action. They are already going to court to stop the police raids and forcing a discussion on the 1st Amendment, which was one thing I thought they should do and they have had success with that.

But going to a GA is probably the best way to put forward ideas and to hear the ideas of other people.

[randome]

111. I don't hear anyone arguing over its success.

But it has had its setbacks, too. Are you saying that no one at DU should be offering help or advice?

I haven't seen anyone trying to dismiss OWS. People are suggesting ways it can be improved but a lot of posters think of that as intruding on 'their turf'.

[sabrina 1]

113. Did you read my post? I said 'they need ideas' and that

the best way to contribute ideas to the movement is through participating in a GA where the ideas will be heard, and voted on.

Posting them here won't accomplish anything as far as getting them heard. And it is no one's 'turf'. It is 'everyone's turf'. All you have to do is present your ideas where they are guaranteed to be heard which is becoming easier as the movement spreads around the country.

[lame54]

21. So we should surrender now so we won't risk being beaten in the future?...

great strategy

the right will always have bogeymen - that's what they do

[Freddie Stubbs]

34. Perhaps registering new voters would be more effect activity as opposed to

sitting around in a park.

[Fuddnik]

69. Perhaps giving us better candidates would work better.

Instead of incumbent protection rackets, leadership posts bought and paid for, and election committees that actively undermine progressive candidates.

Half the populace that is registered don't show up, because nobody gives them an incentive to show up.

And you start registering voters, and they just laugh at you, call you "ACORN", and try to figure out ways to throw you in jail for voter fraud.

It's beyond elections now. What we need now, is a long general strike.

[Freddie Stubbs]

76. The filing deadline to run for Congress has not passed in any states yet

We don't know for sure who the candidates are going to be. Why don't some of the Occupy people run if they think they can run the country better?

[freshwest]

92. There has been registration going on there. What's your opinion of Arne?

[Freddie Stubbs]

98. I believe that is doing a great job implementing President Obama's education agenda

[freshwest]

102. Arne's been berated for supporting privatization of public schools. Is that an error?

[Freddie Stubbs]

103. He is pushing the President's agenda. That's his job.

If you don't like it, you either need to change the President's mind or change Presidents.

[freshwest]

104. Explain how privatization fits in Obama's support for public workers. It doesn't mix...

[Freddie Stubbs]

105. Perhaps he believes that public school teachers can compete with private school teachers

Do you?

[freshwest]

107. It's not a matter of competition for tax dollars, but ownership and accountability.

You ask a question that does not address those things, nor the question I asked regarding Obama's support for public workers.

Communities that have been served by public schools that are required to handle all students without discrimination, and are being cut back because of privatization. Communities are losing their cohesion due to privatization and balkanizing education.

The subject is about something larger than who's better than who. I won't question your motivations.

[mmonk]

24. So it's political fear instead of a justice issue to many?

[Freddie Stubbs]

35. The President is up for reelection next. Everything is political

[Myrina]

29. Funny, because I don't see alot of Dem party officials on the OWS lines ...

OWS is a mutual enemy of the establishment, Dem AND GOP, who've been bought and paid for. Not alot of elected Dems drowning in student loan debt or facing foreclosure.

[Freddie Stubbs]

37. They are smart enough to realize the danger of being tied to the movement

[Myrina]

110. Yes, because TAKING A STAND is never a good thing ...

:eyes: What. Ever.

[Harmony Blue]

48. GOP is on the defensive every since OWS has been in the news

before that they were on the offensive back in August? Sorry, but your opinion isn't backed by recent events.

[EFerrari]

95. It's not going away. Get used to it.

[bigtree]

9. what a red herring

who here has said they support 'crushing' the movement?

I have seen that canard used here repeatedly to deflect questions about the goals and direction of the movement.

By the way, whose goals are you talking about? I've seen and heard a myriad of goals from movement participants and supporters. I have my own desires for the movement. Who decides which goals expressed are actually representative of OWS?

Also, is it necessary to support every utterance and dictum expressed by supporters to avoid being labeled outside of the movement?

[HappyMe]

15. +1

[emulatorloo]

25. +1. This is strawman flamebait. Should be locked.

[fascisthunter]

28. "Also, is it necessary to support every utterance and dictum expressed by supporters ..."

hyperbole... it is obvious there are folks here who want it shut down by claiming it will harm dems.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

42. I want OWS to change its tactics to strengthen dems

OWs needs to be electorally involved. Get rid of bad careerists. Nominate its own candidates. Propose defined policies. Campaign.

At best OWS will be a sap on dem voters, either splitting them or convincing them the system is too broken to bother voting while the GOPers press-on undeterred. Let's of electronic ink is spilled at DU bemoaning low voter turnout for dems in critical elections (2010, Weiner vacancy, etc).

It might even be worse if OWS becomes a 3rd party (see: Nader 2000).

At worse the GOPers will hang OWS around the Democrat party's neck like an albatross. Whether or not thats fair has nothing to do with the matter. OWS is the anti-TP and the TP is the GOP, ergo the OWS is de facto DNC according to the MSM.

OWS needs to aim for cleaning Democrat house and channeling its numbers and energy into positive political results.

[TBF]

44. It's very clear that professional dems want to channel the efforts into the voting booth -

it worked for them in Wisconsin (as far as getting rid of the protests).

So far the organizers of OWS have been too smart for that and I applaud them for their resolve.

[bigtree]

52. egads! Voting?

Next they'll be suggesting organizing! The horror!

[TBF]

55. If only they would suggest organizing ...

Frankly I think y'all are wasting your time. Most on this website (myself included) will be voting for POTUS for lack of better choices. If Obama were smart he'd jump on this and encourage the protesters. He could be the new FDR and usher in his jobs program. Instead he stands on the sidelines while y'all push your agenda, and he is viewed the same as all the other 1%ers.

It may work for now, you may shut us down - there are not that many protesters when it comes right down to it. But after POTUS wins re-election and austerity kicks in for real, there are going to be many more of us on the streets. That's when you're really going have to decide which side you're on. Now that the fire has been kindled ...

[bigtree]

62. there it is again. Who said ANYTHING about 'shutting it down'?

Who? Anyone on this thread, for instance?

On the contrary, I, personally, have suggested ways that I believe the movement might succeed beyond protesting. How did you jump from what I was saying to assuming I want to 'shut the movement down?' That's just amazingly absurd.

[TBF]

64. "Channeling" it into electoral politics is shutting it down. nt

[bigtree]

67. electoral politics didn't shut down the civil rights movement

it ultimately enhanced it; witness the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.

[TBF]

71. Civil rights are not economic rights. When Dr MLK talked about race he was fine,

when he started talking about class he was shot.

[bigtree]

80. many within that movement argued that economic rights were more important

There were critics of that view within the movement who felt that direct action was the ticket because that would change attitudes, thus changing the landscape.

Others, like Bayard Rustin, one of the organizers of the March on Washington, felt that blacks weren't going to make any significant and lasting progress without economic justice, fairness and opportunity. He wanted the federal government to take responsibility for those. He was on he outs with many protest organizers and members because he wanted to forge relationships within government that might help get some of his economic initiatives passed into law.

I actually think both instigations of democratic action -- in the streets and in the halls of Congress -- played important roles in effecting meaningful and lasting change; ultimately manifesting their actions in law which made the goals a reality and brought the resources and influence of the federal government to bear to implement the changes.

[TBF]

106. LOL - are you actually trying to argue that economic progress was made?

That is so easy to disprove ...

Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics
Twenty-to-One

By Paul Taylor, Richard Fry and Rakesh Kochhar
Executive Summary

The median wealth of white households is 20 times that of black households and 18 times that of Hispanic households, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of newly available government data from 2009.

These lopsided wealth ratios are the largest since the government began publishing such data a quarter century ago and roughly twice the size of the ratios that had prevailed between these three groups for the two decades prior to the Great Recession that ended in 2009...

much more here: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/07/26/wealth-gaps-rise-to-record-highs-between-whites-blacks-hispanics/

[Nuclear Unicorn]

68. Well, assuming OWS will somehow replace the current US political system is absurd

The elections will continue. Congress will make law.

What will OWS accomplish if is not a part of that process?

[TBF]

72. OWS is not part of the process right now and it sure has everyone in a fit -

gee, I wonder what you all are so afraid of?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

77. I'm afraid the OWS folks will NOT be involved in elections

or will form a 3rd party. Both of which split the progressive vote.

And if they say, "We'll come home on election day" then all they do is leave the bad politicians in the Democrat party in place.

[TBF]

108. It's a little late in the game don't you think?

I haven't seen any serious contenders to POTUS anywhere - and that includes the republican party. I can't imagine voting for anyone else (of course down here in Ron Paul country we don't even get socialist or communist candidates on the ballot) ...

[randome]

78. That was uncalled for.

Accusing people of being afraid for making suggestions on how to make OWS better? You call that fear?

[HappyMe]

90. I am finding all this

'they' are afraid, scared, nervous hot air ridiculous.

[bigtree]

49. that may well be so. Life is full of detractors.

. . . but the op didn't come out of a vacuum, and neither did my statement. The 'with us, or against us' sentiment expressed here on this board is counterproductive and alienating. And, to pretend that the OWS movement is somehow threatened by some dissenting Duers is the height of hubris.

[randome]

53. I haven't seen much on that idea at all.

I have seen numerous threads and DU'ers who want OWS to take more direct action instead of getting bogged down with fighting cops over 'camping rights'.

I haven't seen ONE SINGLE THREAD about OWS harming Dems.

I realize I can't read everything but feel free to post some examples if you can find them.

[mmonk]

30. I changed the wording.

You know how we are. We don't know what we are doing.

[bigtree]

45. curious the way you define yourself away from folks you really have no significant knowledge about

. . . how do you know they aren't you, or we aren't they? How do we know you aren't they?

[mmonk]

51. That is what I hear. That we don't have direction, goals, or know

what we are protesting. Sorry for the snark. I'm human with flaws.

[bigtree]

73. 'clear' direction', no

for some folks, there isn't a clear direction apparent in the many protests around the country. I'm assuming that you do know the answer to what you perceive the movement's goals to be. However, you can get 20 different answers to that question from 20 different participants and supporters. I have my own. It doesn't hurt to be asked and it doesn't hurt anything to answer.

[Bonhomme Richard]

41. +1. Even OWS holds assemblies so that...............

different opinions and directions are discussed among the participants. Why can't that be done here?

[randome]

50. Excellent question.

[Bonhomme Richard]

82. I got called out yesterday for daring to suggest the direction.....

I thought they should go. LOL, I even got called out for using "they" instead of "we" which, of course, proved that I was an OWS basher.
Guess I have to parse all my words now.

[randome]

112. I hear you.

Don't give up. Stay calm and reasonable is the only advice I can offer. This isn't 'us vs. them', no matter how someone wants to define it that way.

[treestar]

84. +1

The biggest straw man on the Board.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

17. I must disagree with your characterization

I haven't seen any threads claiming to disagree with OWS's goals. I've seen plenty of threads looking for more defined terms of what those goals are and how they should be accomplished, policy-wise. "Make the rich pay their fair share" has to be defined in terms that can be codified into law. After that the details of the movement become kind of murky.

If the details of OWS's grievances are so ill-defined that even a progressive safe haven like DU has doubts amongst its members than imagine how it looks to middle America just trying to get to work but can't because some people are blocking the roads.

Others take issue with the tactics, myself included. Nothing will come of this unless OWS insinuates itself into the political process. There will be no massive replacement of the US political system. Elections will still be held. The military will still obey the POTUS. Congress will convene and pass laws. Courts will adjudicate. Unless OWS becomes a part of that process that process will leave OWS behind, with or without their tents and sleeping bags. No grievances will be addressed. It will all be for nothing and that will strengthen the narrative of the RWers.

So far I've been treated to silly retorts like, "It's the only way they'll understand!" or "We won't need politics."

Really? There's supposed to be some mass social consciousness awakening / egalitarian epihany and somehow the 99% will be invested with the wealth of the 1% ?

Really?


There is no "support crushing the OWS movement." That is akin to saying those who want disreputable puppy breeding mills shutdown somehow don't like puppies. Fair people can fairly disagree about framing, optics and tactics even though they agree on objectives.

[mmonk]

59. I took out crushing in the OP. Thank you for your reply.

[SidDithers]

19. ...

Sid

[fascisthunter]

31. somehow OWS has become the dem party's red herring

the gop uses it to clump the two together and once again, the DEM insiders follow the narrative, giving the accusation credence in the end. A perfect strawman to shut the movement down, to try to anyways...

My answer to those folks is... your ridiculous concern has been noted. You aren't helping the party nor the OWS movement.

[bigtree]

tyoo many folks imagine they're running the movement from DU

[fascisthunter]

46. no, I think many are a part of it and feel the concern is over-the-top and it doesn't help

either the party itself or the movement. Stop using hyperbole...

[bigtree]

57. no, not yet. I'm still pissed.

so folks can't have concerns? It's not like this board has been receptive to criticisms. It's as if supporters here feel that the movement can fall on a word. And the way folks have been trying to make questioners look like traitors or trolls. Don't give me that 'concern' rhetoric, either. I'm nobody's bitch to be shoved into some little box that someone might claim to be 'progressive'.

I have concerns, yes. The fact that I bother to express them here is anything but a threat to the party or movement.

I do think, though, the arrogant retorts and cliquishness of some supporters here is certainly a threat to generating the level of transformational support the movement needs to transform all of the agitation into meaningful action and lasting change.

[fascisthunter]

60. stop playing the victim... this isn't about YOU

... if your concern(s) are valid then go with it. But some concerns I have seen from others is ridiculous and transparent. It doesn't help the movement nor the party by running with a right wing meme, such as this movement being about the democratic party itself, so now OWS needs to chill out. You want to know who the real victims are, look at AWS. They are there for a reason and they aren't taking anyone's shit anymore regardless of people's concerns here.

[bigtree]

65. it's about me when I'm being falsely accused or the subject of innuendo

It's about me when others here are treated the same.

[fascisthunter]

93. No, it's about the 99% and those who attack OWS

but if you want it to mean you, go for it.

[bigtree]

96. not this discussion

this is about DU, no matter how many times folks try and conflate the piddling here with the actual OWS protest movement.

[fascisthunter]

97. many of us Here are a Part of DU and this Movement.... so your statement is about us

and if you don't like us calling people out for the BS attacks, not much I can tell ya. Have a nice day.

[nadinbrzezinski]

99. Thanks for the laugh

First thing you need to wrap your head around is...nobody leads OWS. Nor does anybody speaks for OWS. Anybody tells you this, they are lying.

[SidDithers]

36. Nice edit...nt

Sid

[mmonk]

54. Thanks. Honey works better than vinegar.

I forget sometimes. I admit I'm flawed at times.

[SidDithers]

58. Aren't we all...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[bigtree]

38. what measures are you talking about?

Who has said anything about 'taking measures against the movement'

The revision is more baffling than the original.

I will say that I and others have asked for more civility and comity toward those who have questioned the scope, direction, and ultimate goals of the movement. I realize that much is seen as a threat by quite a few folks here, but I don't know how all of the sudden unquestioned support for every instigation of the OWS movement is somehow the only legitimate progressive stance in town.

[mmonk]

56. To discredit it. To use local laws to suppress. Inaccurate descriptions

at times. Excessive force against it under cover of darkness. To pretend it has no legitimate points or questions. That it generally is violent.

[bigtree]

61. that's not working either

You still left in the innuendo toward questioners; positing that they are 'pretending' to have questions or are deliberately misrepresenting the movement without really mis-understanding it's ultiomate goals or direction.

If you don't want folks who might criticize or have questions about the scope, direction, or ultimate goals in the movement, this is a good way to go about it. Just alienate them. Better yet, get a consensus among folks here to do just that.

[mmonk]

63. Got cha.

[Zorra]

85. OK, but this is not our first DU rodeo.

Sincerely asked honest relevant questions that may lead to constructive change are just that, and are recognizable and welcome.

Questions that are asked specifically to spread GOP/Third Way memes as a propaganda device to denigrate and deter the movement are just that, and are also easily recognizable.

Read tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of posts here over a decade and you can get a very solid handle on the sincerity and intent of a post.

Even the grammatical structure and style of these posts is often a quick giveaway as to the intentions of the author.

Some of the lower quality freeper posts are a great (the extreme) example of how grammatical structure and style are a dead give away as to where the author is coming from. These posts are laughable, and obvious.

But the more literate, intelligent, and skilled posters that post anti-Democratic, anti-Progressive, or anti-OWS memes are not so obvious until you see enough of them to recognize what they are immediately. It's like they came out of a cookie cutter.

Consistent repetition of memes and lies is a cornerstone of the propaganda devices that are used by the 1% and the supporters/employees of the 1% in order to keep the people from achieving solidarity and critical mass. They have lots of money to spread and repeat their propaganda memes in many venues.

"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."
George W. Bush

"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it"
Adolf Hitler

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on
a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of
it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people
don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in
Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to
drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist
dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no
voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. It works the same in any country."
Herman Goering

[bigtree]

86. that just sounds like a clever way to marginalize those you disagree with

. . . and foolishly encouraging the parsing of folks' words to fit self-induced, paranoiac distain for posters here who might express a different view than your own.

Are you like some professional progressive arbiter of words? It's just fascinating how you've carved out this seemingly unassailable spot for your sweet self and whatever you believe.

[Zorra]

87. Uh-huh. nt

[bigtree]

88. damn

I was waiting to find out if I uttered any of the forbidden phrases or words. Do you also read bumps on the head?

[Zorra]

91. I read things, stuff like this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2329881

[bigtree]

94. WP's making a good argument

against someone . . . I agree with him on the peripheral and reactionary effects on several initiatives and postures of some public officials and corporations. That's not to be denigrated in any way. That outside pressure is a necessary component in compelling politicians and industry to change their ways, and the OWS protests around the country are certainly due a great deal of credit for the instances he cited.

What we should also be looking for are changes which aren't just reflexive reactions of the moment. We need specific, meaningful, and lasting changes. That effort will require much more than just agitating from the street. I believe for the movement to succeed in bringing about true transformational changes there needs to be some kind of legislative component to the demands that results in laws being changed and federal resources allocated.

I'll let you get back to your reading.

[Zorra]

100. History is a progression. Changes occur in their own time.

This ain't Burger King.:-)

For now, OWS, IMO, is exactly where we need to be in our evolution.

Major political and social change does not happen overnight. Many forces have to be brought to bear in order to effect these changes. OWS is the primary mover for effecting political and social change right now. As the OWS movement evolves, we will continue to adapt our strategies and methods of civil disobedience in response to the repressive measures taken against our existing strategies, as well as develop other strategies logically extrapolated from results of analysis of existing as well as future possibilities. Which strategy(ies) to use will be based upon consensus.

When the time is right, sometime after support for the OWS movement reaches critical mass, there is a good possibility that some type of legislative component will evolve.

At this time, the status quo political process will in no way accommodate the effecting of the necessary changes that we seek to implement. We have no effective means for redress other than direct action strategies.

After these direct action strategies bring about the possibility for equitable negotiation with the powers that be, there may be a possible avenue for change through legislative action.

Until then, the powers that be will keep beating us with clubs and throwing us in jail, and will make every effort, take every possible repressive measure, to protect the 1% and the interests of the 1% from the forces of genuine egalitarian democracy that constitute the collective will of the People.

Back to my reading.

[bigtree]

101. now you're talking

and I'm listening

[TBF]

43. "Get off the white house lawn you stupid kids"

:hide:

[Zorra]

114. _^_