Occupy Wall Street

[GameChild214]

Anyone here planning to show up for the next Occupy Wall Street protest?

I want to go for 2 reasons
-To party
-To protest abuse of corporate power

America is about Free enterprise, not monopolies.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

they still do Occupy protests? I thought they got tired of that shit when they figured out it didn't do shit, and were kicked out of the camping areas and local businesses.

[Camarohusky]

At 9/2/13 07:47 PM, GameChild214 wrote: I want to go for 2 reasons
-To party

If anyone ever wondered why OWS isn't taken seriously, this is a good example.

[KatMaestro]

Occupy for what? Sure, the US government is corrupted. But did the OWS in 2011 worked beside a bunch of squatting?

You liberals should start to find a job soon. Sucking on welfares from hardworking taxpayers and complain about how 'suck' is the government make you feel more superior?

[Light]

At 9/2/13 08:13 PM, Elitistinen wrote: Occupy for what? Sure, the US government is corrupted. But did the OWS in 2011 worked beside a bunch of squatting?

You liberals should start to find a job soon. Sucking on welfares from hardworking taxpayers and complain about how 'suck' is the government make you feel more superior?

Oh, the ignorance. It pains me.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 9/2/13 08:18 PM, Light wrote: Oh, the ignorance. It pains me.

then enlighten us what the Occupy movement actually accomplished.

[KatMaestro]

At 9/2/13 08:18 PM, Light wrote:

At 9/2/13 08:13 PM, Elitistinen wrote: Occupy for what? Sure, the US government is corrupted. But did the OWS in 2011 worked beside a bunch of squatting?

You liberals should start to find a job soon. Sucking on welfares from hardworking taxpayers and complain about how 'suck' is the government make you feel more superior?

Oh, the ignorance. It pains me.

Instead of protesting (sooner or later, the protesters gonna get beaten by cops) squatting and/or breaking shops' windows. Why not directly making changes?

[Light]

At 9/2/13 08:19 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote:

At 9/2/13 08:18 PM, Light wrote: Oh, the ignorance. It pains me.

then enlighten us what the Occupy movement actually accomplished.

I never said Occupy Wall Street accomplished anything.

At 9/2/13 08:20 PM, Elitistinen wrote:

Instead of protesting (sooner or later, the protesters gonna get beaten by cops) squatting and/or breaking shops' windows. Why not directly making changes?

Martin Luther King got shit done by protesting.

So did Gandhi.

And sadly, so has the Tea Party.

Besides, how else would these people accomplish their goals? How would they "directly make changes" as you wish they did?

[GameChild214]

At 9/2/13 08:32 PM, Light wrote: Besides, how else would these people accomplish their goals? How would they "directly make changes" as you wish they did?

The Tea Party wants the first constitution restored... well let's just say the founding fathers weren't big fan of blacks.

[Camarohusky]

At 9/2/13 08:32 PM, Light wrote: Besides, how else would these people accomplish their goals? How would they "directly make changes" as you wish they did?

Numerous ways.

First: Stop protesting in a way that turns off the very people that would be their base supporters. People turn against a message they support if the supporters of that message make them look bad, inconvenience their lives, or in general are repulsive (see stinky and homeless.)

Second: CLEAN UP YOUR MESSAGE! OWS is about fighting corporate welfare and gross inequality among the classes. It is NOT about treatment of dolphins, the environment, female bodied individuals, and so on.

Third: Instead of trying to make change by loudly doing nothing, put that fervor to work toward a law degree and make some ACTUAL change.

[GameChild214]

At 9/2/13 09:52 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Third: Instead of trying to make change by loudly doing nothing, put that fervor to work toward a law degree and make some ACTUAL change.

Where's the fun in that?

[Light]

At 9/2/13 09:52 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 9/2/13 08:32 PM, Light wrote: Besides, how else would these people accomplish their goals? How would they "directly make changes" as you wish they did?

Numerous ways.

First: Stop protesting in a way that turns off the very people that would be their base supporters. People turn against a message they support if the supporters of that message make them look bad, inconvenience their lives, or in general are repulsive (see stinky and homeless.)

Second: CLEAN UP YOUR MESSAGE! OWS is about fighting corporate welfare and gross inequality among the classes. It is NOT about treatment of dolphins, the environment, female bodied individuals, and so on.

Third: Instead of trying to make change by loudly doing nothing, put that fervor to work toward a law degree and make some ACTUAL change.

Not that I disagree with much of what you say here(Except the third statement. A law degree is not the only way to affect change), but I think you believe that I'm a supporter of OWS. I'm really not. I'm very liberal, but I was always reluctant to give OWS my support. Probably for the reasons you cite.

But in general, I am still a firm believer in the power of organized, peaceful, and lawful protests. OWS might get something done if it could pull that off.

[orangebomb]

At 9/2/13 07:47 PM, GameChild214 wrote: Anyone here planning to show up for the next Occupy Wall Street protest?

No. I've been close to one of their protests before, and it was a clusterfuck of hipsters, career protestors, and the undesirables bitching about 500 different things that were not the original message, and tried to attract the lowest common denominator and failed.

I want to go for 2 reasons
-To party

The fuck? If you want to go party, go to a nightclub, frat house or something, not to a bunch of ego-driven fuck-offs who have nothing better to do with their lives.

-To protest abuse of corporate power

Too bad that got drowned out when OWS started touring around America. For God's sake, the New York Jets are less dysfunctional of a freakshow than the OWS movement, and that's splitting hairs. When your original message gets lost in the crowd, it's hard to take you seriously, especially when you leave the jackasses in charge.

Occupy Wall Street is nothing more than a joke now, and they were rather hypocritical at what they did to begin with. Nothing says stick it to the "corporate badmenz" like drinking Starbucks coffee, eating Papa John's pizza and having Apple iPhones all over the place, which was a very common sight in the protests. And that's not including those who grew up, and got work from the very same corporations that they protested a couple of years ago.

[GameChild214]

At 9/2/13 10:51 PM, orangebomb wrote: Occupy Wall Street is nothing more than a joke now, and they were rather hypocritical at what they did to begin with. Nothing says stick it to the "corporate badmenz" like drinking Starbucks coffee, eating Papa John's pizza and having Apple iPhones all over the place, which was a very common sight in the protests. And that's not including those who grew up, and got work from the very same corporations that they protested a couple of years ago.

That's not corporate greed. Corporations such as McDonalds and Wal-Mart are like empires. They spread like an army, leaving the natives of the colony unemployed and homeless. Obama bailed out the Auto industry and made it mandatory to buy both health and car insurance.

Taxes are going up but those taxes go only to corporations and the government (which is turning into a police state). The IRS is like America's shutzstaffel.

[orangebomb]

At 9/2/13 11:17 PM, GameChild214 wrote: That's not corporate greed. Corporations such as McDonalds and Wal-Mart are like empires. They spread like an army, leaving the natives of the colony unemployed and homeless.

First off, you have virtually no proof of that happening, especially when in most communities, there is more than enough competition to go around. Not to mention that some of the poorer places in America, a company like McDonald's or Wal-Mart provides some jobs within that community, which provides much needed income to their families. Granted, they're not that well paying, but it's better than nothing.

OWS for the most part did jack shit in solving the problem of corporate greed, and it only alienated more people to their cause, and that's not including the hypocrisy I've mentioned in my previous post. I take it that you're either that naive, ignorant, stupid, or a combination of the 3 in believing that a disorganized group of hippies and hipsters could enact any type of serious change.

Taxes are going up but those taxes go only to corporations and the government (which is turning into a police state).

Christ, I get fucking tired of hearing America is becoming a police state just because of the corporations, NSA and what have you, when in reality, you're only making excuses out of sensationalized news that is taken out of context. In other words, YOU'RE FUCKING WRONG. Maybe it's high time to grow up and smell the coffee, because even the most undesirable groups of people heavily rely on corporations, never mind the average Joe.

[Camarohusky]

At 9/2/13 10:48 PM, Light wrote: Not that I disagree with much of what you say here(Except the third statement. A law degree is not the only way to affect change),

That statement was more of an example of a proper way to make change. It can be done in numerous other ways. The main point being that our system is built to allow and encourage change when needed. There are numerous paths i n the system to get that change that are highly effective. Law is what I picked because it is my field and it is a bone fide way to get change through the system.

But in general, I am still a firm believer in the power of organized, peaceful, and lawful protests. OWS might get something done if it could pull that off.

True, but I hate, and I mean HATE, protests that have no real goal, protests that are just plain poorly done, and those protests that seem to protest for the mere sake of protesting (hence my gruff attitude in the SOPA discussions.)

[Light]

At 9/2/13 11:45 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 9/2/13 10:48 PM, Light wrote: Not that I disagree with much of what you say here(Except the third statement. A law degree is not the only way to affect change),

That statement was more of an example of a proper way to make change. It can be done in numerous other ways. The main point being that our system is built to allow and encourage change when needed. There are numerous paths i n the system to get that change that are highly effective. Law is what I picked because it is my field and it is a bone fide way to get change through the system.

Ah. My mistake then. Sorry.

But in general, I am still a firm believer in the power of organized, peaceful, and lawful protests. OWS might get something done if it could pull that off.

True, but I hate, and I mean HATE, protests that have no real goal, protests that are just plain poorly done, and those protests that seem to protest for the mere sake of protesting (hence my gruff attitude in the SOPA discussions.)

I get your point. What sane person likes pointless protests? :P

Also, just as you are annoyed at Anti-SOPA discussions, I am annoyed by anti-GMO protests; they're completely futile and predicated on scientific misconceptions. It's something that many of my fellow liberals support for some reason; for them, GMO foods = evil food made by corporations hellbent on stopping organic farmers from succeeding in the marketplace. It's a joke, really.

[ServerServer]

At 9/2/13 08:32 PM, Light wrote: Martin Luther King got shit done by protesting.

So did Gandhi.

And sadly, so has the Tea Party.

Besides, how else would these people accomplish their goals? How would they "directly make changes" as you wish they did?

There's a big difference between MJK, Gandhi, and the OWS movement (Tea Party mentioned in a few sentences). MJK and Gandhi were individuals. The OWS movement is made up of any random people you can coax into squatting in front of a building - they have no leader to make a cohesive statement about what they believe, is what I'm saying. This is part of why they failed - if you wanted to know what the hell this even was, you'd ask someone in the crowd. Chances are you'd be talking to a total idiot who barely even knew why they were there, in which case you'd just toss the whole protest aside, even if it did have any meaning. The Tea Party is the exact same way, hence making very little impact to the overall American Zeitgeist.

And he actually has somewhat of a point. Nobody in the OWS has any balls. Black protesters in the 1960s civilly disobeyed and were jailed as a result. They also had a very low standard of living, and so were willing to sacrifice what little they had for their agenda. The OWS movement is made up almost entirely of a mix of middle class liberals and middle class libertarians. Nobody from the middle class really feels like going to jail for anything. The most you get from them is maybe that stupid "dancing in front of the Jefferson monument" sort of thing where the only thing that's really at stake is maybe a couple of hours in jail. That's it. Violating Jim Crow laws was a much more serious offense than that, and yet people were still willing to do so for the sake of their beliefs. Of course, Tea Partiers are even worse in this category. Seriously, signs and lawn chairs?

[Light]

At 9/3/13 01:03 AM, ServerServer wrote:

At 9/2/13 08:32 PM, Light wrote: Martin Luther King got shit done by protesting.

So did Gandhi.

And sadly, so has the Tea Party.

Besides, how else would these people accomplish their goals? How would they "directly make changes" as you wish they did?

There's a big difference between MJK, Gandhi, and the OWS movement (Tea Party mentioned in a few sentences). MJK and Gandhi were individuals. The OWS movement is made up of any random people you can coax into squatting in front of a building - they have no leader to make a cohesive statement about what they believe, is what I'm saying. This is part of why they failed - if you wanted to know what the hell this even was, you'd ask someone in the crowd. Chances are you'd be talking to a total idiot who barely even knew why they were there, in which case you'd just toss the whole protest aside, even if it did have any meaning.

True. But my point is that protesting would've been OWS's best bet to affect an real change. They just went about it the wrong way.

The Tea Party is the exact same way, hence making very little impact to the overall American Zeitgeist.

They may not have changed the zeitgeist but they've immensely affected American politics ever since they came on to the scene several years ago, so I would say that they have been at least somewhat successful. Thus, that comparison of the Tea Party to the OWS movement is entirely appropriate.

And he actually has somewhat of a point. Nobody in the OWS has any balls. Black protesters in the 1960s civilly disobeyed and were jailed as a result. They also had a very low standard of living, and so were willing to sacrifice what little they had for their agenda. The OWS movement is made up almost entirely of a mix of middle class liberals and middle class libertarians.

True.

Nobody from the middle class really feels like going to jail for anything. The most you get from them is maybe that stupid "dancing in front of the Jefferson monument" sort of thing where the only thing that's really at stake is maybe a couple of hours in jail. That's it. Violating Jim Crow laws was a much more serious offense than that, and yet people were still willing to do so for the sake of their beliefs. Of course, Tea Partiers are even worse in this category. Seriously, signs and lawn chairs?

Valid points.

[Light]

At 9/3/13 01:35 AM, Light wrote: Thus, that comparison of the Tea Party to the OWS movement is entirely appropriate.

*Isn't entirely appropriate.

Fucking typos.

[Iron-Hampster]

identity politics and socialism took over and went from "stop giving our money to rich people" to "give us their money". its a movement of ignorance that divides everyone. It can't even disenfranchise people from the democrats.

[Jorgenheim]

OWS was an alright premise, that fell apart mainly because of Feminazis and people yelling "lul check ur privilege" about a week after it started. Heard the same story from a lot of white guys, they went to OWS, actually were developing ideas, and about a couple of weeks none of the guys could even get a word out because people would just scream "chek ur priv" at them like a bunch of high schoolers. So all the white guys left, and then in the next upcoming weeks, all the Feminazis started getting raped, and then they eventually all left. Go figure.

[ServerServer]

At 9/3/13 01:35 AM, Light wrote: They may not have changed the zeitgeist but they've immensely affected American politics ever since they came on to the scene several years ago, so I would say that they have been at least somewhat successful. Thus, that comparison of the Tea Party to the OWS movement is entirely appropriate.

In what way?

[Light]

At 9/3/13 01:50 PM, ServerServer wrote:

At 9/3/13 01:35 AM, Light wrote: They may not have changed the zeitgeist but they've immensely affected American politics ever since they came on to the scene several years ago, so I would say that they have been at least somewhat successful. Thus, that comparison of the Tea Party to the OWS movement is entirely appropriate.

In what way?

Come on, you're not serious, are you? You really think the Tea Party has accomplished none of its goals? NONE?

You could say that of OWS, but not the Tea baggers.

[ServerServer]

At 9/3/13 04:16 PM, Light wrote: Come on, you're not serious, are you? You really think the Tea Party has accomplished none of its goals? NONE?

You could say that of OWS, but not the Tea baggers.

Give me an example so I know where you're going with this. I'm not purposely denying they've done anything, I either just don't see it or it's a semantic thing.

[Camarohusky]

At 9/3/13 08:16 PM, ServerServer wrote: Give me an example so I know where you're going with this. I'm not purposely denying they've done anything, I either just don't see it or it's a semantic thing.

I have to agree that OWS acomplished nothing. They brought the issue to the public's attention and then proceeded to disgust people away from thinking about it.

[ServerServer]

At 9/3/13 08:34 PM, Camarohusky wrote: I have to agree that OWS acomplished nothing. They brought the issue to the public's attention and then proceeded to disgust people away from thinking about it.

Should have clarified: I meant in regards to the Tea Party.

[KatMaestro]

At 9/2/13 11:17 PM, GameChild214 wrote: That's not corporate greed. Corporations such as McDonalds and Wal-Mart are like empires.

And what proofs do you have beside NWO info from Infowars? Just because you 'feel' it doesn't mean things are happening in the real world. That's not how you start a debate, based off intuition and feeling. You shouldn't even post this thread with that attitude.

They spread like an army, leaving the natives of the colony unemployed and homeless. Obama bailed out the Auto industry and made it mandatory to buy both health and car insurance.

Not this again.

The natives are unemployed and homeless, not because the government is treating them bad. It's because the government are treating them too good. They get their own reserved lands, rights to hunt, double welfare & supports. Even some get free college education and healthcare while most Americans don't have.

And what?

Natives in homelessness is still highest. Lowest in education. Highest in alcoholic & drug uses. You call them the achievements? It's them who done it to themselves. Don't blame the government or other people.

Let's return to the OWS bullshit. The attitudes of blaming other but not themselves is the exact mindset of every OWS squatter.

Taxes are going up but those taxes go only to corporations and the government (which is turning into a police state). The IRS is like America's shutzstaffel.

You have been watching too many conspiracy theories.

[Light]

At 9/3/13 08:16 PM, ServerServer wrote:

At 9/3/13 04:16 PM, Light wrote: Come on, you're not serious, are you? You really think the Tea Party has accomplished none of its goals? NONE?

You could say that of OWS, but not the Tea baggers.

Give me an example so I know where you're going with this. I'm not purposely denying they've done anything, I either just don't see it or it's a semantic thing.

The Tea Party is at least partially responsible for the largest arrival of freshman Republicans in more than six decades and have moved the Republican Party more and more to the right, constantly frustrating Obama's plans.

[GameChild214]

At 9/3/13 10:16 PM, Elitistinen wrote: Natives in homelessness is still highest. Lowest in education. Highest in alcoholic & drug uses. You call them the achievements? It's them who done it to themselves. Don't blame the government or other people.

Uhh, it was a metaphor. Wasn't referring to the actual native americans. Anyway this thread sucks, someone close it please. I'm tired of it showing up in my notifications.