you're 'concerned' about flag burning -- this is what you should be 'concerned' about

[xchrom]

http://blogs.aljazeera.com/americas/2012/01/30/homeless-cat-empires-hat


Phillip 'The Cat In The Hat' Black sells newspapers in Washington

"I know them all. This one on the wheelchair, with everybody around her. She sells heroin. That guy who’s looking at you like that - he’s high on crack. Don't take a picture of him or you might not get home to your daughters alive."

I first met Phillip Black on a corner of cosmopolitan F Street in Washington, a few stops away from Ford’s Theatre, where Abraham Lincoln was shot, and almost within earshot of the White House.

Surrounded by shops selling frozen yoghurt, organic gourmet sandwiches and trendy clothes, Phillip sells copies of Street Sense, a newspaper sold, and written by, the homeless.

If a customer pays the recommended donation price of $1 per copy, Phillip makes 65 cents per paper.






Incarceration in the United States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States

Incarceration in the United States is one of the main forms of punishment and/or rehabilitation for the commission of felony and other offenses. The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world. At year-end 2009 it was 743 adults incarcerated per 100,000 population.[4][5][6][7][8]

According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) 2,292,133 adults were incarcerated in U.S. federal and state prisons, and county jails at year-end 2009 — about 1% of adults in the U.S. resident population.[4][5][9][10] Additionally, 4,933,667 adults at year-end 2009 were on probation or on parole.[4] In total, 7,225,800 adults were under correctional supervision (probation, parole, jail, or prison) in 2009 — about 3.1% of adults in the U.S. resident population.[3][4][11] In addition, there were 86,927 juveniles in juvenile detention in 2007.[12][13]



long term unemployment
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/06/the-many-the-doomed-the-long-term-unemployed

According to the December jobs report, there are nearly 5.6 million people in the U.S. who have been unemployed for six months or more—42.5 percent of all unemployed Americans. Labor Department data shows them to be disproportionately black and Asian. They are slightly more likely to be men than women. They are not as well-educated as their more successful counterparts in the labor force. And the recovery is not benefiting them the same way that it is benefiting other laid-off Americans.

[See why there's hope for the economy in 2012.]

The unemployed population can be roughly split into two camps, says Stephen Rose, senior economist at Georgetown Unviersity's Center on Education and the Workforce: "There are cyclers—those who are there relatively short periods of time, and there's the long-term, who are there year in, year out." The "cyclers" make up a majority of the unemployed population, he says, but the long-term unemployed face a tougher challenge.

The long-term unemployed are not being kept out of work simply by a lack of economic confidence or a temporary decrease in demand for particular goods, says Scot Melland, president and CEO of Dice Holdings, a provider of career websites. "You clearly have a long-term unemployment issue in the U.S., but it's driven, I would argue, much more by structural factors that have to do with—where's the demand for people in the economy?" says Melland.

the uninsured
http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/economy/census_bureau_health_insurance/index.htm



NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The number of people who lacked health insurance last year climbed to 49.9 million, up from 49 million in 2009, the Census Bureau said Tuesday.

Nationwide, 16.3% of the population was uninsured last year, statistically unchanged from 2009.

Three groups comprised the bulk of the uninsured in 2010, including foreign-born residents who are not U.S. citizens, young adults ages 19 to 25 and low-income families with an annual household income of less than $25,000.

Much of the declines in insured rates in recent years can be attributed to the loss of employer-provided coverage, which fell amid sustained unemployment and as employers continued to cut back on benefits.

The percentage of people who had health insurance through their employers fell to 55.3% in 2010 from 56.1% the year before, continuing a long, downward trend. In 2000, 64.1% of the population received health insurance through their employers.



i'll be more worried about peoples sensibilites about burning a flag when 'they' get more worries -- and DO SOMETHING about real problems.

everything else is horse shit.

[phantom power]

1. the thing worse than flag burning is the the thing that causes flag burning

[xchrom]

3. you wouldn't know it from the 'concerned' around here. nt

[Gold Metal Flake]

19. They are the Concernvatives.

[Voice for Peace]

13. yes

[Cali_Democrat]

2. All that is meaningless because a piece of cloth was burned in Oakland

**clutching my pearls**

[xchrom]

4. wait... let me go get mine and we can clutch them in tandem. nt

[MisterP]

41. *mutual* pearl-clutching? kinky! and in public, too, no less

[MNBrewer]

6. The people who already don't support OWS won't support them even MORE now

but now they have an even less relevant reason (sigh).

[Starry Messenger]

5. k&r

Shouldn't be shocked to see people hauling out the tone argument about activism around class issues, but I am. "If only you'd be nicer, I might care." Every. Fucking. Time.

[xchrom]

7. it's a weird threat.

they were never going to care.

[Starry Messenger]

8. That way they can reassure themselves that they are essentially well-meaning.

It's an ego-trip.

[sudopod]

10. well put! nt

[notundecided]

14. They were just waiting

to shit on OWS for any reason.

[Starry Messenger]

18. Yup. nt

[SammyWinstonJack]

84. Indeed!

[hack89]

9. And how exactly did burning a flag help the homeless?

do you think this incidence helped or hindered Occupy Oakland help homeless people in the future? Did this act give them to resources and support they didn't have previously?

[sudopod]

12. You're more worried about the symptoms than the disease.

This is the OP's point.

[hack89]

16. In this case stupidity seems to be the disease

movements grow or fall based on their actions. Stupidity in the name of a good cause is still stupidity. Do you really think this helped OWS?

[sudopod]

17. Do you really enjoy repeatedly missing the poster's point on purpose? nt

[hack89]

20. Stupidity in support of a good cause is still stupidity

if this incident hurt OWS then it was a stupid choice regardless of the intended message.

So you tell me - what was the intended message? Or was it meaningless?

[sudopod]

22. OP is discussing the causes that led to the formation of OWS, not the tactics of OWS.

The OP did a damn good job. What I'm trying to say you're not even on the same page.

What you are doing is congruent to the following simulated discussion:

1) Salviati: Let me explain the events leading up to the formation of the Fellowship, including the re-establishment of Sauron in Mordor, the advent of the Nazgul, and the re-appearance of the One Ring...

2) Simplicio: WHY DIDN'T THE EAGLES CARRY THE RING TO THE VOLCANO LOL, THEY ARE SO DUMB.

[hack89]

24. So we can't discuss actions that undermine support for those causes? Ok nt

[sudopod]

27. There is a time and a place for every thing. This thread was not created to be that place.

You'd think an adult would understand the subtleties involved in making that distinction.

[hack89]

31. I look at things from a practical aspect - I am not into metaphysical navel gazing

like you seem to be.

[sudopod]

33. I am not into metaphysical navel gazing...

wat?

[hack89]

34. You are upset because I sullied yet another OP telling the great unwashed

how wonderful and noble OWS is and thus cannot be criticized when they do incredibly fucking stupid things.

The goals of OWS are in fact good and noble - everyone here agrees with that. We don't need to be reminded of all the societal ills that need fixing. I was just pointing out that stupidity like burning flags is a good way to ensure that OWS is unable to fix anything. That's the practical part I was talking about - the OP needs to get out of the clouds and realize that big lofty goals are often tripped up by little nitty gritty details.

[sudopod]

35. In other words, you didn't read the OP, did you?

Also,

"We don't need to be reminded of all the societal ills that need fixing." --You

What? O_o

Let's disregard the fact that's dumb as hell. You don't like what the pre-existing discussion is about, so you're going to derail it and talk about what you want instead? You wonder why you're not being taken seriously, Mrs. Palin?

[hack89]

36. I did - it is a common theme here

makes you wonder just how relevant OWS is if it requires an endless stream of posts announcing that they are relevant. Looks like OWS needs to hone their message a little.

[sudopod]

38. :3

[hack89]

40. That's the kind of intellectual and moral superiority that is going to take OWS far

have you considered that if you can't get slavish, knee jerk support on DU that perhaps things are not as rosy as you think they are?

[sudopod]

42. The OP pointed out examples the injustices in our country that led to the formation of OWS.

OWS is weird, an imperfect, bizarre offspring of social justice movements going back a century and Anonymous-style internet activism, and so people on the internet are going to discuss its history and origins. We want to see where it's going. Some people--though apparently only me in this thread...maybe everyone else has you on ignore--will get upset when other people, such as yourself, try to dominate all discussion by repeatedly carrying on about the outrage-of-the-hour to the exlusion of all else. (see your post above). Pointing out that the weight of these realities should vastly outweigh whatever it is that you don't like today isn't "slavish, knee jerk support" or "intellectual and moral superiority", it's just common sense.

Here's a tip, "hack": No one really cares about how upset you are. Anyone who's posted on DU for more than a day knows exactly how you feel, because you post it everywhere x 12. Running around with a high-handed, puffed-up claim of being victimized serves no purpose that I can tell, other than driving off the impatient, and insisting that you are somehow being oppressed is just plain nonsense.

I stand by what xchrom said in the title: "you're 'concerned' about flag burning -- this is what you should be 'concerned' about"

[hack89]

43. Show me where I said I was upset. All I said is that OWS was fucking stupid to burn a flag

that's all.

Flag burning is not the issue - the issue is that a game changing social movement cannot alienate potential supporters.

So a reasonable criticism of OWS is voiced and we get endless crap like the OP. How hard is it to admit that perhaps OWS made a mistake by burning that flag?

[sudopod]

44. "All I said is that "

Yes...that is all you say.

[hack89]

47. Because you refuse to accept that perhaps OWS is capable of making a mistake.

do you think that burning that flag was good or bad for OWS?

[EFerrari]

45. OWS didn't agree to burn that flag but it would be too difficult to explian that

to someone bent on smearing the whole movement.

But clutch that flag, for all the good it will do you.

[hack89]

48. Is that why we are seeing such widespread condemnation from OWS

and its supporters?

If you refuse to accept that OWS can do no wrong then you are seriously out of touch with human nature.

[EFerrari]

50. Maybe OWS is focusing on the real violence of last weekend

and not on a fetish as you are.

And no, refusing to be manipulated by amped up bullshit is not being "out of touch". Sorry, I'm much more interested in what happened to real people than in healing over your scraped taboo.

[hack89]

64. I am focusing on actions that damage OWS' image

don't you think that is a reasonable concern? I am not concerned about the flag at all.

[EFerrari]

65. Too bad you don't show the same concern for the actual people who were hurt this weekend. n/t

[hack89]

67. It bothers me a lot - the Oakland PD are a bunch of thugs

but that doesn't change the fact that Occupy Oakland seems to be clueless as to how to transition their movement into something positive.

[sudopod]

51. Do you believe you made a mistake when you beat your wife, hack89?

Besides the fact that you are asking a leading question that only an idiot would directly answer, I'm not even sure it was OWS. Some of these guys were wearing combat boots, had short hair, wore 90s clothes had a very expensive looking flag, in front of cameras and a metric fuckton of police, and none of them were arrested.

Moreover, if they were OWS-associated people, it should be pointed out that the general assembly didn't approve of it. You cant really say it was OWS, though some members might have done it. There is no such thing as collective guilt, unless you blame every every Democrat for Ron Blagojevic.

Look, stop blowing smoke up our asses, hack89.

http://bit.ly/y0xgd7

No positive comments, not one, on this list. That's fine, it's a free country, but be honest. It's obvious that, for whatever reason, you don't like OWS. Just say it. It'll be healthy for you and you won't piss people off nearly so much. No one likes it when you're disingenuous.

[hack89]

62. But I love OWS

their puffed up self important acolytes somewhat less. But I must admit they have high entertainment value.

[bahrbearian]

69. Talk about puffed up self important acolytes

This is what you should be upset about

?w=468

[hack89]

70. Trust me - I am

that picture is now unfortunately seared in my brain!

[Kellerfeller]

88. That's good. however, why even bring up the flag burning then?

The OP was trying to say the flag burning was OK because the problems OWS are upset about are real and significant.

If the OP had simply said the problems OWS are upset about are real and significant that would be fine. But to excuse the flag burning opens the discussion to whether the action helped those problems or not.

And hack pointed out that burning the flag not only did not help, it may have hurt.

[LanternWaste]

93. Metaphysics, morality and intellectualism have no place in civil disobedience.

Yup. Metaphysics, morality and intellectualism have no place in civil disobedience. We should rather concentrate on Madison Avenue style marketing because a bottle of the willfully ignorant and a baggie of simplistic dim-wits haven't been able to latch onto an easy, obvious and oft-repeated message.

[hack89]

94. No - kicking potential supporters in the nuts has no place in civil disobedience.

but in any case, that particular post was in response to a gratuitous insult.

[L0oniX]

83. How did burning the flag help the Vietnam protests?

[hack89]

85. They didn't

the Vietnam war ended when American middle class voters got tired of their sons coming back in body bags. Events like My Lai and Kent State also did much to erode support for the war.

But don't forget that at the height of the anti-war protests America elected Richard Nixon as President instead of Hubert Humphrey. And even then, the Democrats rejected anti-war candidate like Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern to choose Humphrey.

I think flag burning was irrelevant when it came to ending the war. It certainly did not help the anti-war movement unless getting Richard Nixon elected was their goal.

[L0oniX]

90. No one is saying that burning a flag is going to change anything ...

except that so called Dems are using this to attack OWS. I got to wonder if they would have attacked the anti Vietnam movement over the same thing.

[hack89]

91. Well, considering the violent confrontation at the 68 Democratic convention, I would say yes.

many Democrats supported the war.

[redqueen]

11. I agree there are far more important problems...

however I also see the point that others are making, which is that more often than not, movements that lose support from the mainstream lose their effectiveness in DC.

If you're waiting on a majority of the voting public to go out and demonstrate before you treat their concerns as valid, then you might be in for a very long wait.

And if you need their support to put pressure on congress, then that might arguably be construed as a not-so-constructive strategy.

[TriMera]

15. The folks who are so concerned about the flag burning are

many of the same folks who just can't understand why OWS doesn't just "work within the system". Just an observation on my part.

[hfojvt]

21. What are people supposed to DO about those problems?

Is driving fifteen miles to a rally, really gonna solve any of those problems?

How do you know what their worries are?

[sudopod]

25. Driving 15 miles to the football stadium doesn't seem to help the Jets, does it? nt

[hfojvt]

56. who does THAT anyway?

When you can watch them for free in the comfort of your own home?

But my Jets icon is not about THOSE Jets http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/122

[Luminous Animal]

29. Occupy Oakland was doing a lot and they want their own space to continue serving the community...

They fed 100s a day, provided warmth, community, safe place to sleep, and basic medical services.

[Starry Messenger]

32. Evidently, they are going to bitch about a flag burning.

That's really solving things.

[MineralMan]

23. It's not a zero sum thing, really.

My response to one thing has nothing to do with my response to the others. And burning a flag in Oakland won't solve any of these problems, either. It's going to take the efforts of the whole society to solve the problems you display.

[msongs]

26. that guy in the wheelchair obviously knows nothing about the symbolism of that flag, right?

[xchrom]

28. indeed. nt

[T S Justly]

30. K&R (nt)

[TheKentuckian]

37. I tend to think that in some quarters, once OWS didn't become the "Democrat's tea party"

it became a threat to be opposed, a joke to be mocked, or often both.

There also plenty of economic conservatives that at most want a little tinkering that see Occupy as too radical on its face that like picking at nits to negate traction and expansion of the sentiment or at least keep it from having a center. Conservative doesn't mean anti-government zealot or theocrat so the pro-government" party has been a natural home for folks of such a bent since the Republicans have become an out anti-government party.

There are plenty of self described "economic conservatives/social moderates" which seems to roughly translate to I'm not a fundy and I'm not a racist and even more "economic conservatives/social liberals" which means not only am I not a bigot, a fundy, I'm okay with gay people, and I might be open to not sending you to jail for smoking weed neither of which have any interest in anything like an anti-corporatist movement, are dubious of campaign finance reform by default, and are often devout believers in the basic structure of our economy and largely see themselves as above the fray of any downsides. They are certainly pleased with the Turd Way direction of the Democratic party and seem annoyed as hell by certain conversations that push for a different path.

[xchrom]

39. +1

[EFerrari]

46. Yep.

[Starry Messenger]

61. Beautifully stated. nt

[hack89]

68. So folks like you trying to whittle the 99% down to a much smaller number

are going to turn OWS into a game changing movement? Ideological purity is not compatible with growing a universal movement.

[jwirr]

49. I am not concerned about the damned flag. I am concerned about losing supporters because of

burning the flag. OWS claims to represent the 99%. Do you think there might be a few of the 99% who do not think burning the flag is necessary? We need all the support we can get in this fight and this is not the way to get it. Those pictures you showed above are the way to get it.

[EFerrari]

54. Don't you think that most reasonable people can look at what happened

and see that burning that flag was not planned or agreed to by OWS?

In any mass movement there are outliers.

Plus, the attack on Occupy Oakland from the police and from the media mobilized groups all over the country to march in solidarity with them on Sunday.

[jwirr]

59. I hope so. In almost every protest I have witnessed since the 60s there have been fringe groups

who have gone their own way and I am hoping that people will remember that. It bothers me that people lump the whole group into one whenever something goes even a little wrong but I also recognize that generalizing is pretty human.

I think they will overcome this - what really needs to be done is somehow the Oakland police have to be brought into control. I fear them much more than anyone who burns a flag. We need an event that will refocus the attention back onto the real problems in this nation - in that I am sure all of us can agree.

[Kellerfeller]

89. No because OWS has made a point

to emphasize that no one person or group speaks for or represents OWS. So there is no one to disassociate OWS from it.

In most peoples' mind, OWS is composed of all people who participate in it. Any and all of those people represent OWS.

[Uncle Joe]

52. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, xchrom.

[leftynyc]

53. Not an either/or proposition

I can care about the problems and still think burning the flag was a stupid thing to do. Perfectly legal but stupid. That you can't hold both those thoughts in your head at the same time isn't anyone else's problem.

[Uncle Joe]

58. I do believe with some people it is an either/or problem.

"I can care about the problems and still think burning the flag was a stupid thing to do. Perfectly legal but stupid. That you can't hold both those thoughts in your head at the same time isn't anyone else's problem."

Some people or institutions; not supporters of OWS are more concerned about the flag burning than the issues, the OP raises, MineralMan upthread said it wasn't a zero sum game but with too many people and institutions, it is.

[leftynyc]

77. But what gets accomplished?

If you (not you personally) know you're going to piss off people at a time when you're trying to get your message across, why do it? If you know some people consider it a kick in the nuts, why do it? Speaking only for myself, while I'm a big believer in the right to burn the flag, I think it's a stupid thing to do and I automatically discount the message of the burners.

[Uncle Joe]

80. I have some qualms with the case in Oakland as it wasn't their own flag which they burned, however

there is a logical motivation in some cases to piss people off, simply put because the greatest enemy to any progress or reform is apathy; much of that being a deliberate product of the continous, corporate media Sominex induced propaganda effort.

The corporate media in too many cases will make sure you don't get your message across and the people won't know because they have been put to sleep by the so called "Fourth Estate" watchdogs for democracy.

Sometimes it takes a bucket of cold water to wake them up.

I've come to the conclusion that flags have become virtual idols in the U.S. with much more emphsis placed on the Stars and Stripes by the corporate media than is focussed on the Constitution and the critical issues of the day.

I vividly remember the questioning of Candidate Obama's patriotism in a national debate because he decided in wearing or not wearing a flag lapel pin, excuse my language but that's how fucking ridiculous the worshiping of the flag had become.That kind of thinking was/is a direct descendent of the McCarthy Era Witch Hunts when the First Amendment was totally trashed by a flag waving Congress as the people's lives and careers were ruined because of their political or alleged political opinions.

[leftynyc]

81. I totally agree that the flag is merely

a symbol. And both of us have every right to feel that way. And the ones who are offended have every right to feel the way they do. When the message is finally starting to get heard, when the subject of income inequality is finally being discussed, why did the messengers feel it was a good time to totally change the subject into who loves this country more? Why?

[Uncle Joe]

86. I don't know, maybe they were plants or perhaps their youthful frustation with the pace of the

message getting out got the best of them.

I do know the Oakland Police and city government have been among the most hard ass in treating or responding to protesters.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002252396

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/1002238782

I also believe the "change in subject" will not last, the message is too fundamental and pervasive, the cat is out of the bag.

[leftynyc]

87. I hope so

It's too important a message to get muddled up in nonsense like this. But since we know the media will play up anything that makes OWS look bad, handing them something like this on a silver platter was short sighted.

If they were plants, they should have been denounced immediately....if young, it's time they grow up if they want people to pay attention.

[redqueen]

92. +1

[Politicub]

55. The flag burners are the Newt Gingrich of the Occupy movement

I'm not concerned with flag burning per se, but I do crticize the people who burned the flag at the Occupy protest.

That one image has done more damage than a right wing blowhard could ever do.

The flag burners, IMHO, are petty and shallow.

[xchrom]

57. you mean like the watts rebellion of 1965 and the detroit rebellion of 1967 did

such damage to the civil rights movement?

[Politicub]

73. No, not the same.

All movement aren't created equal.

Occupy is a very important movement and a force for change, but at the same time people are going to take advantage of the attention.

I'm not convinced that the flag burners even cared about Occupy. They were in it for themselves.

And, I love my imperfect country. I wouldn't burn the flag, and I wouldn't arrest anyone who did. It's a matter of free speech.

But with free speech comes responsibility and culpability for what you do or say.

[leftynyc]

78. Total agreement

It was a stupid thing to do and turned even more people off their excellent message which has now been sullied by this childish act.

[slay]

60. k&r

for getting priorities straight.

[xchrom]

63. +1

[arely staircase]

66. i'm concerned about an important movement being marginalized by either an idiot

or a cop.

[xchrom]

71. What movement for the people isn't potentially

Marginalized by some 'perceived' dumb move?

Burning draft cards?

Moving money to credit unions(that was criticized her)?

[arely staircase]

72. i'm sure many teabaggers felt it very unfair that

their whole movement was characterized by people with racist signs and carrying guns - but their failure to strongly enough denounce and distance themselves from the likes of such people has assured that they will never be mainstream but rather relegated to the fever swamps far right of the american political spectrum. the civil rights movement was a very disciplined non-violent organization that won over enough of the american mainstream to change policy. they didn't do it by trying to antagonize middle america.

[xiamiam]

74. thank you thank you thank you..you are so right..outrage over burning the flag

while atrocities are being committed against people..not things..every day. the friggin faux outrage was beginning to grate..glad to see you put it in perspective..and you haven't even scratched the surface about what we should be talking about..instead of the polls and mitt and newt..we've got real problems here in merika and none of them, including the dems are going to fix it..today or tomorrow..that is up to us.

[Chill Keney]

75. Test

Hi

[tex-wyo-dem]

76. Yep...love your post!

It embodies much of what OWS is fighting for...the people that are the most in need and who have been taken the most advantage of and left to suffer.

Of course there are those who use their broad brush to discredit the movement due to a singular incident with a burning piece of cloth. These are the same who claim OWS is "circling the drain" and ineffective because of "a lack of leadership and a coherent message."

The only thing "incoherent" are these concern-troll's thought processes.

[leftynyc]

79. If more people were condeming burning the flag

It would help OWS - it's easy to use a broad brush when all you see is people trying to defend this. Go...burn a flag - it's your right as an American...but then don't be surprised when you piss people off. OWS only hurt themselves here. And call me a concern troll all you like....the only thing hurt here was the movement.

[SammyWinstonJack]

82. K&R

[99Forever]

95. Spot on. n/t

[woo me with science]

96. Thank you.

K&R