Many of us are still going to protest. Some might not like our "tactics".

[mmonk]

Well, we don't like the brutality and false witness but that is beside the point. Anyway, if you want people to quit creating inconvenient protests and events, do something about it legislatively. Otherwise, deal with us as we deal with economic injustice and bills built on falsely framed positions that do nothing to end or alleviate it. Life I guess is putting up with each other, eh? But love of others is making space for others. Otherwise, it isn't love at all other than self.

[backscatter712]

1. Absolutely. We've tried playing nice, writing letters, voting, going to town-halls.

And we've been ignored.

It's far past time to aim to misbehave. I don't care how much it pissed off the "concerned" among us.

[mmonk]

3. Yes. I have worked it on the inside and have done the fax and calling campaigns.

The time has arrived, especially in the political season.

[rhett o rick]

5. We need a new Declaration of Independence. nm

[tavalon]

70. A Constitutional Convention is what we need

Time to make an end run around both of the parties, as they have been coopted.

[rhett o rick]

118. But how do we wrest power away from the corp-overlords? nm

[roguevalley]

68. Go. Save the nation. This has already changed things permanently. I love Occupy.

[backscatter712]

75. I've been going.

Occupy forever!

[tavalon]

69. Oh, hell yeah!

I suspect the OWS will slumber for a few months, wintering over. But come the spring, we're going to do or Arab brethren proud.

[Matariki]

2. Amen Brother.

[rhett o rick]

4. Watch out for the anti-OWS crowd in here. There code is "OWS is hurting their own message"

Not too different from "They dont have a message".

[backscatter712]

6. Their concern is touching, isn't it? n/t

[greytdemocrat]

10. Not always.

But it really doesn't matter. If you aren't "for" OWS a lot of people don't want to hear you. For the record I don't support OWS. I did in the beginning but no more. It's growing into a "religion" like Global Warming.

[rhett o rick]

11. Please expain how it is becoming a religion? And what do you recommend instead? Status quo? nm

[RandomKoolzip]

12. "Global warming" is a "religion?!"

Uh....huh?! Explain the fuck out of THAT gibberish, kemo-sobby.

Just parsing your words here, but....what you're saying is that you don't support the efforts of OWS because you liken the participants to religious fanatics. Oh, and anyone who believes in man-made climate change is ALSO a religious fanatic? Just trying to understand you. I mean, that SEEMS like what you're trying to say. Help me out if I'm incorrect.

[greytdemocrat]

14. Well...

My true opinions on both subjects would probably get me banned so my stated answer will have to be it. I don't suffer fools lightly.

But...if you don't see the connection between global warming believers and fanatics in general, I can't help you.

[RandomKoolzip]

20. Oh, you mean how there's overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change exists, unlike

ACTUAL religion, for which there exists NO evidence whatsoever? Oh, yeah, they're completely alike.

[Bjorn Against]

62. So you believe nearly every climate scientist in the world is a fanatic?

If you think people who believe science over right wing think tanks are fanatics then I completely understand why you would oppose the occupy movement. The Koch brothers fund the global warming deniers as well as the Tea Party, sounds like they would be much closer to your beliefs.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

73. I'm trying to see the difference

between global warming deniers/anti-OWS and the Republican Party.

[Fuddnik]

87. Is that called "self-hate"?

[kenfrequed]

95. Uhm

Global warming is acknowledged by the overwhelming majority of climate scientists. And you merely decide it is a "religion"? And You don't suffer fools lightly?

Seriously, do you have an elementary understanding of the properties of gas, heat, climatology, hydrology, or basic chemistry? Carbon Dioxide traps heat. So do a number of other gases. The only (and largely fictitious) debate has been whether other factors are at work, other factors might neutralize the effects of carbon dioxide, and whether human released products are responsible and by how much. If you read any of the research on this each of those arguments have been disassmbled and disproven.

Whose friggin side are you on and what do you base your obviously superior opinions on, since you seem to have decided that the overwhelming majority of all scientists are religious fools.

[fascisthunter]

135. Holy Crap... turn off the right wing propaganda

[randome]

15. He's right about the OWS = New Religion.

But equating Global Warming with a religion? That's...strangely out of place.

But yes, OWS IS becoming a religion. Because enough people want to claim that it is infallible instead of engaging in a useful discussion about it.

Blind faith in camping out in parks and shutting down ports.

Anything but directly going against the legislators who put us in this ridiculous economic situation.

OWS has had a good effect on the country. But its potential is being squandered precisely because it lacks leaders and focus.

The message from those who don't want to concede flaws with OWS is this: "You are either with us or against us."

[RandomKoolzip]

16. You have a fucked up definition of the word "religion."

[randome]

18. How so? Blind faith? Refusal to discuss alternative opinions?

Sounds EXACTLY like religion to me.

[RandomKoolzip]

22. As someone who actually participated in the protests, I assure you

that you have no grounds on which to base that comparison.

[backscatter712]

27. Damned straight.

"You're only trying one tactic!" ... FALSE.

"You won't listen to criticism!" ... FALSE.

"You're ineffective and condemning yourselves to the fringe!" ... FALSE.

[randome]

28. Wow. Such cogent arguments.

With many DUers saying much the same thing, I would think a rational person might conceive that there could be something to what is being said.

Instead, it's stick your fingers in your ears and shout, "I can't heeeeere you!"

[RandomKoolzip]

30. Funny, that's the same logic DU's Obama supporters refuse to acknowledge.

With so many Dems and lefties airing grievances about Obama, you'd think they'd get the hint.

[randome]

31. Actually, that's a good point.

And no, I am not trying to be passive-aggressive. I simply acknowledge a good point when I hear one.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

38. Go to a protest and be heard!

All I see you do is post here about how OWS doesn't want to listen to you. Maybe it's because you're not listening to anyone else.

[randome]

40. I'm listening.

I'm always willing to listen to alternative points of view. I don't care if I'm right or wrong as long as I learn something new.

No, I am not going to help shut down west coast ports or live in a tent in a park. I have 2 14-year-old daughters and I'm trying to keep my ex-wife out of bankruptcy so my plate is a bit full.

That being said, I would gladly join in some local protest if I could see a point to it.

But the enemy is in Washington. Unless OWS morphs into armed insurrection, change will not occur until we start holding our legislator's feet to the fire.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

41. Washington is one of the targets of the protest.

I really don't see how you can say otherwise. They whole system is a target - from Washington to the Finance Kings and the collusion between the two.

If you haven't gotten that much out of the protest, then I don't know what else to tell you.

[randome]

43. First you say Washington is one of the targets.

Then you say the whole system is a target. It's this 'whole system' that dilutes the message.

There is no focus! Instead of trying to fix the world in one fell swoop, I wish OWS would focus on something that will help the millions of unemployed. Protest Republicans regarding jobs. Protest Democrats regarding jobs.

By little OWS groups going off to do their own thing, nothing gets done except around the fringes. This country needs more than that.

[rhett o rick]

45. You are demeaning OWS. "little groups going off on their own thing". Whose side are you on?

They have change the discussion in America. The status quo is killing the middle class. And you side with the 1%.

[randome]

47. Where the hell do you get that from?

I'm siding with the 1%? Really?

I KNOW OWS has changed the discussion. I KNOW the status quo is killing the middle class. Protesting at West Coast ports does NOTHING to change that. Nothing.

Do you really think the 1% are afraid of OWS? They are sitting on the Jamaican beach far, far removed from these matters.

The target of mass protests should be the legislators who let this happen to us.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

49. They are protesting both Democrats and Republicans!

What do you want us to do? Pull a miracle out of our collective asses overnight? We are working and agitating, and all you're doing is bitching and moaning that we're not doing it fast enough, and that we're not listening to you.

Go to a protest, make yourself heard; otherwise stand back and let us do our work!

[randome]

58. I said nothing about speed or instant gratification.

I'm saying that protesting West Coast ports and having public park sit-ins -oh, and the hunger strike, wonder how that went?- do nothing to change the system.

If OWS wants nothing to do with politics, then the only way things will change is via armed insurrection. You cannot shame people into behaving better.

If OWS is not willing to organize for an armed insurrection, then the only thing that will be effective is for it to be involved in politics.

This dichotomy is why more and more people are starting to be annoyed with the movement.

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. Ammendment to get rid of corporate personhood

Where do you think the pressure came from? Two main places, move to amend and occupy. The Congress critter even acknowledged that one.

Oh wait, I thought they had zero effect.

The fact we are having this discussion is part of the power

Or the use of occupy language by yes, the spokesperson fr ssa ports the day before last. Here is a fun fact...you know who owns 51% of ports in the us? Goldman Sachs.

[jwirr]

103. Your claim that they will accomplish nothing is forgetting that they already have. They have

pinpointed the issues in a way that actually got people including MSM talking about them. Up until then it was only the Tbaggers and Koch who got the headlines. Now we are all aware that there is a problem and that it involves all of us. They have even gotten the Tbaggers to realize that they can agree with us on many issues. That alone is a great accomplishment - getting a Tbagger to think.

As to continuing the protests. YES. but now we have to be smart about what we protest and why. We need to let the people understand why we are protesting any specific position. I was unaware that Goldman Sachs owned the ports that are being protested until I read it here. That is a good reason to protest - Goldman Sachs is one of the money bags that are helping to move our jobs out of the USA and bring the junk for overseas in. Reason enough for me.

[randome]

106. What did the West Coast port interruptions do for jobs or the economy?

It highlighted inequality, you might say. Guess what, we ALREADY KNOW THAT!

It's time to move on to something more long-lasting.

[jwirr]

108. WE already know that but there are a lot people who did not know that. It also highlighted the

power that OWS has for the benefit of the people around the USA who have thought that we are helpless.

[randome]

112. I agree, OWS got that message through just fine!

But people are still wasting time and resources battling corporations (Mindless Greed Machines) versus the politicans who put us in this mess.

And interrupting port operations? I'm sure supplies ended up being delayed for many Mom-and-Pop stores, as well as inconveniencing Goldman-Sachs.

More protests directed at the politicans. Absent being more active in politics, the only thing that will have a long-lasting effect is armed insurrection.

[Bjorn Against]

143. Corporations bought the politicians

Both corporations and politicians put us in this mess and they worked together to do it, if you don't want people to stand up to corporate abuses you are part of the problem.

[rhett o rick]

115. The general public is ablivious to that gross inequality. They dont

hear about it in the corp-media. OWS is getting the message out.

What's your alternative? And why arent you doing it?

[randome]

122. I don't have to do shit.

I'm merely a guy with a keyboard daring to suggest that OWS is not all things to all people and it is not perfect.

Is there anything about OWS you do not agree with?

[nadinbrzezinski]

130. In other words

I am free to ignore you from now on. Any inconvenient fact will be ignored by you.

Keyboard commandos truly need not apply...yup, you are part of the problem...

Could suggest you read on union history and what they used to have actions at...free clue ports included, but why bother? Your mind is pretty much made up, and you prefer to be miserable within the status quo, than even think of rocking anything.

[fascisthunter]

136. not if the poster's agenda is to help fight against a movement and idea

[kenfrequed]

98. Ridiculous

The organization is consensus based and they have tried many forms of protests and many different styles of protests. OWS is doing a hell of a lot more than just sitting encamped at public locations. They have marched, they have sat in, they have marched on banks, marched on washington, organized massive movements to switch from banks to credit unions, they have created videos, built websites, started letter writing campaigns, called on elected officials. They have done everything they can and have even invented clever ways to get around the inability to use bullhorns.

I would again ask "What other tactic should they be employing?" No one has ever effectively answered that question.

[randome]

110. It's been answered many times by many posters.

You can't change politics without getting involved in politics. Unless you're talking armed insurrection, of course.

More protests directed at the politicians who wrecked the economy. More involvement in local politics. Interrupting port operations does nothing to make a long-lasting change to our society. It's a distraction.

On edit:
Marching on banks or corporations is another example of wasting time and resources. Corporations are Mindless Greed Machines. It's the politicians who opened the doors and said, "Here. Take what you want." who are responsible for our current mess.

[kenfrequed]

119. Uhm...

They do both. They have done both. And anyone who suggests they have not spoken out to politicians is not paying attention.

One of the crucial reasons to continue marching on banks and on corporations is not to try to convince banks and corporations to be nice people or to be responsible citizens. To suggest that this is what they are trying to accomplish when they do so is either a blunderous misreading, or an intentional and obtuse blindness.

The reason they march on these organizations is to remind the people who caused the financial ruin. Just blaming the government and politics is useless as it only garauntees that someone will posit something slightly different and pretend it might work, like more friggin tax cuts, or deregulation.

By attacking the banks and Wallstreet we are indicating who needs to be regulated and who caused the problem, and more importantly pointing out the costs of irrational and insane levels of greed.

Until we get politicians speaking and voting for the people and against the banks and Wallstreet we will not get meaningful reform.

[randome]

121. I agreewith your last paragraph.

But no one is going to 'cure' greed. It's part of the DNA of corporations and of human nature. Better regulations are the only things that will have a lasting effect.

[truedelphi]

141. Do you have any idea what it entails to be involved in Politics?

Try running for even dog catcher in San Francisco California. The only way your name will get on a ballot as a Democrat is if Diane Feinstein approves of you.

Politics is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the MIC, Big Media, and The brokers at the top of both Corporate-Owned Political Parties.

If it was possible to change thing through politics, at this point in the game, people wouldn't be out in the police-patrolled streets, breathing in pepper spray, and getting arrested.

I am speaking as someone who ran for office, and got little support for my running from people who were Democrats, and people who were top notch party members. I got plenty of support from independents and ever Republicans.

What was the major platform of my election efforts in Sausalito California? An Anti-pesticide program.

[Zorra]

117. +1

[tavalon]

71. Wow, you have been busy!

Going to all of the General Meetings, held throughout this nation at each OWS site. Sitting through that much consensus building would make my butt chap, but you did it! You did, didn't you?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

74. His lounge chair is like Bill and Ted's

telephone booth.

[RandomKoolzip]

144. Apparently some people think a "religion" is "something I like a whole lot."

By that definition, my religion is mint chocolate chip milkshakes.

[greytdemocrat]

32. Perhaps with Global Warming

I should have posted "Industry" instead of "Religion"

The people pushing GW have whole careers built on it. They defend it since if they are wrong, the grant $$$ will dry up. I understand the fact that the earths climate changes. I just don't buy into people like our former VP Al Gore that "we" are causing it.

I live in Florida, Gore at one point was inferring we were going to be having CAT 5 hurricanes every year from now on. I've lost a lot of respect for Gore over the years, he strikes me now as nothing but a huckster. He won't even accept the possibility that GW is wrong and to a point I can understand why. He'd look like a fool.

[RandomKoolzip]

33. Really? You think academic grant money compares to oil+chemical lobbyist money?

[greytdemocrat]

37. I've had this arguement countless times

Nothing changes, I shouldn't have gotten sucked into it again.

You have a nice evening.

[Bjorn Against]

63. Yes nothing changes, you lose every time when you don't have the facts on your side.

[JVS]

99. It would have been very easy to avoid this if you'd refrained from calling global warming a religion

Now you're expected to explain.

Next time you need to use an example of a religion, consult wikipedia for a list of actual religions.

[RandomKoolzip]

145. Wikipedia is a religion.

[randome]

36. We're getting off-topic here, obviously.

But I think the point isn't who or what is causing it. It's that it is occurring and we need to do something to stop making things worse.

[greytdemocrat]

39. My point is

That we as the human race don't have control of the weather. Later gator.

[Bjorn Against]

65. Who the hell says we control the weather?

Seriously, if you think people who believe climate scientists also believe we can control the weather then you clearly do not understand the science at all. If people who believed in climate change believed we had control over the weather then they would not be worried about natural disasters because we could control them from happening. Believing the scientific fact that increased carbon levels can lead to increased temperatures is a far cry from believing humans control the weather.

[Raster]

101. Unfortunately just about every competent scientist studying human-induced global climate change...

...believes the opposite. Humans have, and are changing the Earth's climate in ways previously unfathomable. Every study, every new piece of information confirms this. There is NO peer-reviewed scientific evidence that contradicts human-induced, global climate change. Human-induced global climate change, like evolution, is no longer just theory. Both are confirmed reality.

You are entitled to your close-minded, self-serving opinion. The facts - yes, I said facts - speak for themselves.

[jwirr]

105. Actions have consequences. That is a very conservative statement that should make you very happy.

So we can dump all kinds of pollutants into the air and water and it will have no consequences? Your logic is not sound.

[RandomKoolzip]

146. Tell you what: let's test whether we humans have control of the atmosphere on a small scale first.

First, take your car's exhaust pipe and securely attach a long rubber hose securely to the opening.

Take the other end of the hose and pull it through a window in your house, sealing off draft holes and vents where oxygen might be able to escape, in the same way the upper layers of earth's atmosphere does.

Next, start your car. Leave it running.

Now - take some coal and burn it on your living room floor. Make sure all your windows are securely sealed.

Do you notice any difference in the climatic conditions within your house?

[dogknob]

61. Grant money riding on it? Your opinion is straight off the O'Reilly Factor.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/shock-as-retreat-of-arctic-sea-ice-releases-deadly-greenhouse-gas-6276134.html

I guess Global Warming will cease to be a "religion" when the Free Market decides so.

[Marrah_G]

89. Anyone who thinks global warming is wrong, IMHO, is a fool

[rhett o rick]

44. So you are against OWS. What's your answer? Status Quo? nm

[randome]

48. I am not against OWS.

I am against not having focus and a cogent message. By trying to be all things to all people, OWS is starting to fracture and people are losing interest in the idea that things CAN change.

I am in favor of OWS trying to get into the Democratic convention. I am in favor of mass protests in Washington. Everything else is a distraction from getting jobs for the millions of unemployed.

[rhett o rick]

51. Your first two statements conflict. You support OWS if they did it different, means you dont

support OWS. Your prediction that OWS is "fracturing" is premature. Maybe you think they should sit down and shut up like Rahmbo wants.

The system has to change. There is no use continuing to play the game while the rules are f'd up.

[randome]

55. Yeah, well, I can compress your statement down further, too.

"You are either with us or against us." The same kind of fascist CRAP we have had to put up with since Bush, Jr.

I do not think anyone should sit down and shut up. I don't see that protesting West Coast ports is a valid target. And I don't see how the system is going to change until we force our legislators to do their damned jobs.

[rhett o rick]

57. Do you understand the concept of civil disobedience? If so, explain why you dont agree the ports

should be shut down.

And by the way, Bushy was right. Either you are for the 99% or you are against us. If you have some sort of "centrist" stance I would love to hear what your objectives are.

[randome]

60. Civil disobedience is usually directed at groups or institutions responsible...

...for discrimination in the first place.

West Coast port have nothing to do with our current crappy economic situation. Public park sit-ins have nothing to do with economic injustice. Hunger strikes, etc.

Yes, OWS has helped spread the message that there is vast and unsustainable inequality in our current system.

The only things OWS has done that directly address this injustice are mass protests against the legislators who made this happen and trying to be heard at the Democratic National Convention.

IMO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

64. I will ask a very rethorical question

Where exactly do you think baubles sold at insert big box here, produced in the far east (China for example) come through? Just in time....three words that should give you a hint on how thse protests work in slowing down profits.

I will leave it at that...


No need for an answer. I am just offering as a hint.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

77. This is like trying to explain rock and roll to grandpa.

OWS never claimed to have the answers. Not being a cult of personality has been their central theme from day one. You say the only valid thing they can do is protest in Washington DC, yet the message that our leaders aren't representing us came strait from parks across the country and has reached the ears of everyone in Washington DC.

When they threw tea into the ocean, they didn't throw it into the English Channel, they threw it into the Boston Harbor. King George must have had good hearing.

[randome]

82. So now OWS is even MORE than a protest movement?

It's going to give us a new world in which to live? Does it do windows, too?

Is there anything -ANYTHING- about OWS you do not agree with?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

113. Nice straw man you made there.

I won't argue people who make stuff up as they go along. Did I say OWS was going to give us a new world order? How could I agree with everything everyone who has participated has said?

Now go ahead and get the last word in.

[truedelphi]

124. Totally agree. And while the M$M Media whines about this

Aspect of OWS being wrong, and about that aspect of OWS being wrong, the fact is that the Mainstream Media has done squat about telling any side of any story other than what its Masters at the MIC and Corporate World wants to have told.

Sure, maybe there were better ideas than shutting down the ports on the West Coast. But how often did the M$M mention that Goldman Sachs is heavily involved in the running of those ports?

How many Americans know that while the tent cities are shut down for violating the health rules, any trucker coming into the port setups every day of every week for the last thirty years, must pee into a damn bottle as there are not any porta potties provided!

[AntiFascist]

50. OWS is learning how to adapt in order to survive...

that hardly makes it a religion. It is certainly much less like a religion than other, more political campaigns that have occured in the recent past, A hem!

[Remember Me]

53. It's a social movement, fer cryin' out loud

Forget the "religion" thing. That's ridiculous.

[kenfrequed]

96. Actually it makes sense.

Denying we should do anything about climate change and denying the people should stand up to Wallstreet really makes perfect sense to me. Put those two ideas together and tell me what sort of ideology would guide it.


The "confusion" meme, the "need for leaders," the "lack of solutions," lack of ideas," and the dirty-smelly- hippie meme, are all a part of the gradual tearing down of an actual movement by the mainstream media. With any luck, none of these memes will work.

[truedelphi]

125. The "dirty hippies" meme didn't work in the time

Period of 1965 to 1975, I sure don't think that meme will work now. So we can have a basis for hoping Big Time, while getting out there and putting our butts on the line.

[DonCoquixote]

114. that sounds like

The Fox mantra that they should "march on Washington" something they would never advocate for in a GOP administration. IF McCain was president, there would incidents that make Kent State look like a party, and Fox would be supporting it 100 percent.

Yes, sometimes OWS can show some sharper thinking (like making sure the folks who show up just for a free meal or street cred do their part), however, as far as actual disruptions go, they have been outright serene. Has any Wall Street type been beaten up? Are any execs in the Hospital? Heck, not so much as a Starbucks window has been smashed, unlike the "battle in Seattle." IT is non-violent, and as a result, has forced people to talk on the issues; they have not fallen into the trap of being violent, which will allow the media to focus on the violence, and get the camera lens off of the issues they are so desperate to avoid. When folks like Ted Rall urge them to get violent, they wisely ignored them.

AS far as "leaders" the entire reason this works is because it has no set central organization: as sopon as someone "controls" OWS, in will come the powers that be with, to quote Warren Zevon: "lawyers, guns and money." Money and Lawyers worked to bamboozle the Obama administration, but the GOP knows guns work to stifle movements; they did it before in the 1960's, and they will do it again. They can do it easier as they can paint shooters as "mentally disturbed", and act as if this was some unforeseen event, despite the fact the Tea Party makes a point of showing up with guns and "second amendment remedies." Never mind the fact that the powers that be would pop champagne and light cigars in the back room, because they could not be blamed for what this shooter did, right?

Let me give another analogy: the way we Yanks beat the British was by using Guerilla Warfare against the Redcoats, who, in true European fashion, would still be in line even as they got blasted. For the past 40 years, we Democrats have acted like the Red Coats; we stay in a line, use the same results, trying to be honorable against enemies that know no honor, while tons of money and religion offered the enemy cover. The last straw was Obama, who showed that the establishment had gotten so entrenched that it made even the Oval Office irrelevant. Yes, Hillary would have been the same, because Wall Street vetted both of them, and both of them are Policy wonks that really think the world works like they were taught in school.

Now, that is not to say that there is not a lot of room for improvement with OWS. For one thing, they need to pander to the mass, which means find something people can grunt out in low brow, reptile-brain, Anglo-Saxon english. "tax the rich" is good, but adding something specific, but still gruntable, is the problem. I would say "revive Glass Steagall!" which is the main law that, once removed, allowed the banks to gamble. A simple one: "Ban deratives!"

[mmonk]

13. Interesting concept.

So you say there is no there there as far as substance? In both? Trickle down and worrying about deficits at this time to me is a sort of religion because it has to be taken on faith as opposed to evidence.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. I guess it's a good thing

They proved the Higgs Bosom is real....now we have a god particle for that science religion.

So when does the church of Higgs blossom meet up?

Science is not a religion.

[G_j]

80. I can't believe you just said

Global warming is a religion. Omfg!

[Pacifist Patriot]

93. Wow, I've read silly stuff at DU over the years, but this is up there.

Neither OWS nor Global Warming come close to growing into a religion. To quote Inigo Montoya, "...that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. "

[jwirr]

100. Hmmm. you do not sound like you have ever supported OWS. Religion - it takes much longer than

this to become a religion. Global warming is not a religion but the deniers are. Are you a denier?

[RoccoR5955]

111. Yeah, and I have a statue of the Global Warming Goddess that I pray to every night.

Give me a break already. #OWS is about getting out the message, and the only way it's done is if it's on people's minds ALL THE TIME, until the "leaders" eventually get it through their thick skulls that things have to change. Or as the bumper sticker says, "If the people lead, eventually the leaders will follow."

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

128. Calling global warming a "religion" is like calling gravity just a "theory"

You don't get to vote on science. The facts stand for themselves; it's the interpretation that is in dispute.

BTW, "religion" is defined as "Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe."

"Science" is "A branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: e.g., the mathematical sciences." and "The systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation."

In what way is the environmental science which studies global warming a religion?

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. On the bright side

OWS now has a message.

[rhett o rick]

140. I believe they always had a message, but many are too clueless or in denial to recognize it. nm

[applegrove]

56. How do you appeal to the 99% you claim to represent if you do use more violent tactics?

OWS is being its very own agents provocateur if they do go radical. The reason OWS was so successful was because they allowed for many points of view and many realities...you know...the 99%.

[formercia]

109. The 'New Democrat' Message

Formerly known as the DLC. I could say something nasty, but I'll limit it to saying that the ND Message is the failed policies of the past.

They had their chance. All we got is the same old Dog and Pony Show. If the DEMs want me to buy into the Program, They better get a new act. The Pony is lame and the Dog has found a new Master.


Lead, Follow, or get the fuck out of the way.

[backscatter712]

7. Also, MLK Jr. was also unpopular, and HATED by many during his life.

Where did his "divisive and unpopular" tactics take us?

Oh yeah, the Civil Rights Act.

It was only after his death that politicians started lionizing him.

[bigtree]

21. I liked the way he protested

AND worked with legislators and the WH to forge a legislative solution to what he was protesting against, be it the Civil Rights Act or the employment legislation from his Poor Peoples Campaign.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

79. Not in the 50s and early 60s he didn't.

Kennedy had as little to do with the civil rights movement as he could. He didn't want to lose Southern Democrats in the 64 election. They were on their own in the early days. Maybe you haven't seen film footage from that time.

[bigtree]

86. I remember seeing where Kennedy invited Dr. King and others into the WH for a series of discussions

Kenneth C. Davis writes in his book, 'Don't Know Much About History', of Martin Luther King Sr.'s reversal of his earlier vow of refusal to 'vote for a Catholic':

"Nixon's running mate Henry Cabot Lodge promised there would be a Negro in the Nixon cabinet. Nixon had to disavow that pledge, and whatever white votes he won cost him black support. A second boost among black voters came when Martin Luther King was arrested during the final debate. Kennedy called King's wife, Coretta, to express his concern, and Robert Kennedy helped secure King's release on bail. Nixon decided to stay out of the case. King's father, who had previously stated he wouldn't vote for a Catholic, announced a shift to Kennedy. "I've got a suitcase of votes," said Martin Luther King Sr., "and I'm going to take them to Mr. Kennedy and dump them in his lap.""

[UnrepentantLiberal]

116. Kennedy made some gestures, yes.

But MLK didn't achieve what he did by negotiating with Washington DC.

[bigtree]

120. it was a combination of efforts

The Poor People's march and the subsequent Resurrection City protest in D.C., for instance, had its 'economic bill of rights' that King put at the head of his protest being debated in Congress as he protested.

"Under the "economic bill of rights," the Poor People's Campaign asked for the federal government to prioritize helping the poor with a $30 billion anti-poverty package that included a commitment to full employment, a guaranteed annual income measure and more low-income housing. The Poor People’s Campaign was part of the second phase of the civil rights movement. While the first phase had exposed the problems of segregation, King hoped to address the "limitations to our achievements" with a second, broader phase."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_People%27s_Campaign

So, certainly, at least in the economic phase of Dr. King's advocacy and activism, protestors had a specific set of legislative expectations and demands which were clearly presented and understood.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

133. He did work with Congress at that point.

But as I said, they were pretty much on their own in the 50s and early 60s.

OWS is only three months old. Trying to compare them to everything that happened in the civil rights movement over in its entire history is ridiculous.

I never debate something into the ground with someone who keeps saying the same thing over and over again to get the last word in.

[bigtree]

148. why does OWS have to refight the landscape the civil rights movement won?

There's absolutely nothing preventing the movement from both protesting and working within the political system. I'm quite certain that many individuals and components associated with OWS are doing just that.

[hack89]

52. But he actively embraced the political system

he lobbied and he encouraged people to vote. He knew what it would take to fundamentally change America.

His message was not an unfocused and diffused mess of anger and angst. He had a real plan to turn desires into results.

[Bjorn Against]

67. Many Occupiers also lobby and encourage people to vote

Granted most of them don't lobby much, but that is not for lack of trying as much as it is the fact that most members of Congress are far more interested in meeting with the high priced lobbyists of the 1% than they are with the citizen lobbyists of the 99%. Occupy works both inside and outside the system as did Martin Luther King, but as with King they will be remembered far more for their work outside the system than inside it. Washington did not listen to King at all until he helped build a movement that they could no longer ignore.

[gratuitous]

8. Part of the process is ignoring some of your critics

Another part is learning which ones to ignore. Folks who emerge to criticize without offering alternatives are usually good ones to ignore. People you've worked with in the past, whom you know and trust, and who offer a critique with an alternative should be listened to. Perhaps you don't follow their advice, but you listen to them.

[mmonk]

19. We can afford to ignore our critics but can't afford not to be heard by those that hold power.

[Lint Head]

9. The pricks in control do not honor our rights or the Constitution so why should we

recognize or honor anything they say or do. We need real change and we need to stop it in the most effective way. Putting up with each other is different from putting up with the 1% that say 'this is how things are and you will like it or else'. The politicians that say we must be or live a particular way or the way they dictate is not advancing the way society should be.

[bigtree]

17. we can handle that

thanks for putting yourself 'out there'. I'm not really making the scene on this one. Too much of a commitment with my night job and the rest of my responsibilities. It's good to know that folks are out there and will try and help where I can.

You are making a difference (even though I'd like to see more of a focus on moving recalcitrant and obstructing republicans).

[mmonk]

23. Yes, there is a purpose and direction for us all.

The idea is to move the conversation. We hope to be the pressure the eye cannot ignore. That can make the recalcitrant have to defend their position in representing interests that have put people in this position.

[bigtree]

90. the continuing protests undeniably provide a visible base to the arguments

. . . makes it hard to deny the support for the demands of economic equality, opportunity, fairness, and justice.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

25. The media need to be totally occupied

The media is one of the root causes of this economic mess. The corporate bosses determine what the masses hear therefore they should be occupied. Revolution in eastern Europe was enabled by taking down the media.

[themadstork]

78. indeed

an offshoot of ows aimed at media conglomeration would be exciting!

awesome screenname btw

[truedelphi]

137. Bravo, Rosa. I think the heated hallways of the major

media should be a place to start, now that the winter weather is upon us.

Edited because I forgot how to spell "media"

[Rosa Luxemburg]

139. the Green Room at Fox!

[truedelphi]

147. Let's coordinate our watches and meet!

I'll bring the crackers and cheese, if you bring the bubbley! (or vice versa)

[stevenleser]

29. I still think OWS is on the right track. nt

[Earth_First]

34. Those who tend to 'concern' themselves with this haven't lost enough yet...

Argue this all you'd like; I believe it's fact.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

35. Kicking and reccing ...

[T S Justly]

42. K&R (nt)

[G_j]

46. yep

true

[quaker bill]

54. I am good with protest

but it is necessary to keep it fresh. Doing the same bit over and over loses its impact over time.

[FirstLight]

59. +1000!!!

exactly...the time of "playing by the rules" is long gone...we are legion, expect us

[Modern_Matthew]

66. They are the same poor saps that believe capitalism can be reformed... nt

[Ohio Joe]

72. Agreed - K&R - nt

[themadstork]

76. keep at it!

I hope to join yall soon.

Also, feel compelled to point out that those who are disappointed in ows tactics are free to start their own tactically distinct movement. . . nothing stopping you. . . more the merrier, when it comes down to it

[sce56]

81. Is there an Occupy Du Forum and I'm not talking Occupy DU2!

maybe we can get the Admins to open one!

[TheKentuckian]

83. No thanks, the segregation is a net loss

Locking: belongs in the occupy forum would stink.

[barbtries]

84. OWS

represents the 99% - and so creatively. i am overwhelmed at the creativity, and the love. we all need to occupy early and often. you should have heard my "conservative" sister scoff at me when i told her that this movement is our best hope for bringing the country and the world back into some kind of just balance. let her scoff. this is historical. this is how change happens. it hurts me to see so many
DUers not on board but for the record i am on board 100%.

[deacon_sephiroth]

91. I couldn't have said it better! +1 n/t

[truedelphi]

126. The second your sister loses her job, the second some life threatening illness pops

Up and destroys her retirement fund, she will join us.

Not saying I hope that is what the future holds for her, but it sure does seem that the only thing separating OWS from the conservative, now- working relative is the fact that the relative still holds a job.

[barbtries]

132. i know what you mean

though it doesn't apply to my sister. her resources are diverse; she has nothing to worry about. i, on the other hand, live one paycheck away from destitute.

i hope however that even if i was comfortable as she is, i would still recognize the importance and virtue of this movement. i just can't imagine not being a liberal, or limiting what and who i care about to myself and my circle.

[treestar]

85. Who are you talking to?

Some legislator who complained that the protests were inconvenient?

[nineteen50]

102. When media costs are so high and they control the message

you need to use other means to get the truth out. If it creates hardships on some they need to help change the current media control to allow our airways to be used by those without all that money that the court now calls free speech. He that controls the money controls the free speech. Thank you Supreme Corporate Court of America.

[Zorra]

104. Congress and the 1% have to do right by the 99%, or we

will never stop.

People would not be getting inconvenienced by protests if the people had not permitted the rise of corporatism and the takeover of our government by the 1%.

Millions of people are suffering because people just did not care, or were not paying attention

Now, someone has to try clean up their mess. That is what Occupy is trying to do.

So if people feel inconvenienced and want us to go away, they either need to have a better idea than we do about how to go about fixing it, and put this idea into practice, and then make it work.

Note: Strongly worded letters to republican legislators do not work.

Otherwise, please excuse the inconvenience, we're trying to change the world in order to protect our children and grandchildren.

Well said, mmonk, thank you.

[truedelphi]

142. I like your attitude, but would disagree about

People permitting the rise of corporatism.

In fact, I think that 62.5% of the eligible voting public turned out to vote for Barack Obama over McCain. This uptick in the voting numbers shows people were using the internet to understand the issues.

For instance, a littel background: during President Clinton's time in office, I believed him to be a good President. I read the newspaper, and it seemed he did a good job for us Middle Class people.

It was only after I got hooked on the internet that I discovered how he set up NAFTA, and he signed the 1996 Telecommunications Act that stole the "free airwaves" out from under us. Only the internet allowed me to realize that his signing off on several major bank "reform" bills in 1999 and 2000 was a betrayal of the Middle Class.

And Barack Obama was promising us that he would end NAFTA. Many of us who voted for Obama believed that ending NAFTA, and the globalism it represented, would be a good start.

He got elected, and then he betrayed that promise. In fact, in immediately appointed one Rahm Emanuel, the architect of NAFTA's legal wording, to be his Chief of Staff.

[rainy]

107. The revolution has begun. OWS are leading the way.

Get out of the way if you can't lend a hand. You know the words: The Times They are a Changing.". This is it. The time is now. This is such a young movement. We are going to get it right. The baby's learning to crawl now soon we'll be running.

My Virginia Beach Occupy group is very active. We are involved in all kinds of activities. Don't just watch, join us.

[MellowDem]

123. The OP makes a false argument...

They imply that because some don't agree with Occupy's tactics, they are fine with "the brutality and false witness".

Then they imply people want to stop Occupy from protesting because they disagree with their tactics.

Then they ask people that disagree with Occupy's tactics to just "deal with us" the same way "we" (I guess ony Occupy) deals with economic injustice etc.

And they get over 100 recs.

People can fully support Occupy and criticize their tactics. It's not mutually exclusive. To those who suddenly throw ridicule and suspicions on people who disagree with Occupy's tactics, you remind me of those who throw ridicule and suspicion at people who disagree with Obama's tactics or the Democrat's tactics.

Such animosity isn't logical. It certainly doesn't help.

We hold the same ideology, we believe in the same message. We are ultimately on the same side. Tactics can be debated, and really, should be, about how best to achieve goals.

[truedelphi]

127. You make a good point, though in a sense you are throwing the baby out with the bath

Water.

I read the OP as meaning the Mainstream, Corporate Controlled messengers, they of youth and beauty (unless they are older men) who speak in clipped sound bytes, always painting OWS as a failure, always prefacing every story about it with "the fact" that "the city waits to see if violence will again descend on its streets" with no mention that the violence is mostly from the police upon the protesters.

[bluedigger]

129. Meh.

Everybody knows the future is in passive acceptance of continued exploitation of the masses.

That and plastics.

[midnight]

131. Thanks...

[fascisthunter]

134. I Could care Less what the Dem Leadership Parrots have to say

And it is time for the rest to say enough is enough. Now you all know who is on your side and who isn't.

[truedelphi]

138. Ain't it the truth! n/t