OK, let's try this again because it IS important.......

[socialist_n_TN]

Trying to make a "revolution" without inconvienence to the public is going to be impossible. To get any REAL change, we're going to have to shut it ALL down for a while. Even if you WANT to scab, you're not going to be able to. That's history.

[saras]

1. History also indicates these will be life-and-death decisions, not convenience or comfort

[liberalmike27]

29. As I posted Elsewhere

Do any of you find it amazing that while we're having some of the largest protests in ages, unaffiliated with either major party in Washington, that both parties on a bi-partisan basis, passed three more "free-trade" agreements? So it's pretty clear now the corporations want these, to export American jobs, especially union and manufacturing jobs, usually synonymous. And it's also clear that after nearly thirty years of these agreements, down-sizing, union-busting, and tax cuts for the rich, that these methods don't work to create jobs, at least outside of selling crap made in another country, from a Wal*Mart, or BestBuy.

So, what an insult, right? Both parties, pass more agreements, a baseball to the head of protestors, right in the middle, using their own protests as media cover.

Unless the rich, the people who control everything feel intimidated, and in danger, threatened in some way, they will not change. People with jobs as I've seen reading within this post, are more worried about losing their jobs, than trying to fulfill some sort of protest fantasy, so no one is going to sacrifice their jobs to jump on-board.

I don't know what the solution is, as no one wants to go Mark Wahlburg on some rich-f-ers to make them intimidated. Perhaps we all stage protests where we bring a bit of garbage to the entrances of rich neighborhoods, and pile it up, so they can't get out, or into their own neighborhoods.

But all I'm saying is, if you want to change power, you have to make power feel the breath of the revolution down their necks. What was it Tamany Hall said in Gangs of New York? "One thing about the unwashed masses (rabble, whatever) is that when half of them riot, you can always hire the other half to beat them down," or something of the sort.

[socialist_n_TN]

34. That was a Glilded Age capitalist quote.......

and the quote was, "I can always hire one half of the working class to kill the other half." Jay something or other. That sums up their attitude on the class war. Divide and conquer.

And yes, I have noted the irony of the "free" trade agreements passing amidst of the largest economic demonstrations seen since the 30s in this country. That's why the folks that think that OWS should point their attention towards governmental solutions are just wrong. Wall Street OWNS the government. The focus IS in the right place.

The first sentence of your last paragraph is God's own Truth (with a CAPITAL "T"). I don't know why it's SO hard for some people to see this.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

2. Maybe at least inconvenience people, so they begin to take things seriously nt

[jaxx]

3. You are advocating shutting down the country?

[socialist_n_TN]

11. I personally believe that that's what it will take

to remedy the systemic abuses that the OWS people have laid out. I don't believe we'll get it any other way. I also believe that a six week general strike and a bank "repayment" strike would be the MOST peaceful way to do it. But I never said that we're there yet.

All I was saying in the OP is that we shouldn't be afraid of a little "inconvienience" to make the point. WHEN we get serious about it, inconvienience will be the least of it.

[Vanje]

12. Be sure to alert on it , Jaxx

Maybe even call the FBI or something.

[hfojvt]

35. it would be like

the day the earth stood still

[TBF]

44. Damned straight. nt

[pipi_k]

4. I want to know...

who is this "we" of which you are speaking?


This nameless, faceless "we" who will make the decisions for the rest of us...

"Shutting it ALL down for a while"...


Not a great idea if "you" want people to be on "your" side.

Don't play with the lives of others to make a point.

[dtexdem]

6. That always gets defined by the history books.

Don't expect a specific definition now. Even when protagonists provide such definitions, history sometimes shows those definitions to be wrong.

[socialist_n_TN]

15. Yep. Revolutionary situations (and we are definitely NOT

there yet) are fluid things.

Personally and at present, I'd advocate just what's going on now simply BECAUSE people aren't quite ready for stronger methods yet. YET. At some point folks will see the "Whose side are you on?" moment and make the choice to jump one way or the other or get out of the way.

But I'm not going to complain about "inconvieniencing the public". This is too important to worry about that.

[pnwmom]

5. Good way to make an opening for the fascists to step in,

to bring order back to the country.

:shrug:

[Whiskeytide]

8. That's a great observation...

.. because that's exactly what would happen. Wait... OH NO!!! OWS is a fascist plot to steal control of the country!!!

Seriously - that's probably part of their contingency plan. But the only way OWS could make any real real difference is at the ballet box. A demonstration/protest will never influence sitting politicians (D or R). Not any more. There's too much money on the other side.

[Vanje]

13. Shhhhh. Be vewy vewy quiet

or the Fascists will step in.

[ThomWV]

14. I don't know if you've noticed it or not but the Fascists have already stepped in and taken over.

What you mean is that will send their minions to beat us down.

[socialist_n_TN]

20. Yes, you definitely could make that argument

even if it's just behind the scenes now. The longer this goes on the more overt it will become. Everyone should just watch and see.

[adigal]

31. I am not just going to watch and see

I am going to join the protests on an upcoming weekend Why let the kids take the beatings when we allowed this to happen???

[socialist_n_TN]

32. Watch and see in regard to the more overt nature

of the fascist takeover of the country. THAT kind of watch and see.

Good luck this weekend. I've been out there all year (and previously too).

[adigal]

33. I was in NYC this past weekend, but had my dd and her friend

who is a very conservative kid. My dd and I wanted to go, but the friend's mother freaked out and the girl is a minor, so I am taking another trip down there.

[socialist_n_TN]

17. You don't think that's a possibility now?

At some point it becomes assured IF WE CONTINUE TO CHALLENGE THE SYSTEM. Even OWS is enough of a challenge to bring on the fascists IF it continues on and continues to make the connection between economics, politics, and power. And if it doesn't continue with that, it's useless anyway.

And no I never said we're there yet.

[GliderGuider]

7. How about waiting just a bit?

The only successful revolutions arise organically out of necessity. Revolutions that are imposed by ideology in the absence of perceived necessity are off the rails to begin with, no matter how pure the motives of the revolutionaries.

[socialist_n_TN]

9. I don't doubt that at all. Trotskyist here, remember?

There have to be four preconditions existant for it to be a revolutionary situation and NONE of them are there yet. Hell, we're the ones who are always accused by the Stalinists of "...never seeing a socialist revolution that we like." BECAUSE we haven't seen all of the preconditions. That's why I put revolution in quotes. It's not my word for OWS, it's theirs and others.

But if people are going to complain about the "inconvienience" involved in a few demonstrations, then they're not ready to REALLY make the changes needed. Inconvienience will be the least of it.

[pipi_k]

22. So are you guessing

that this will devolve to rioting?

If it ever does, then I would say that would probably be the end of the movement.

"Inconvenience" (which means different things to different people) may be marginally acceptable to some, but start talking rioting in the streets, and I think that will turn people against you.

I'm not sure people would be willing to be injured...or die...for this cause.

[socialist_n_TN]

23. Well some have already been injured

at least a little anyway. I'm sure a face full of pepper spray would probably count as an injury. And who knows who is ready to die for this cause? I'll be honest, I'm not ready to die for THIS cause. It's not defined enough of curbing the power of the capitalist system. Hell, it doesn't even NAME the capitalist system in SPITE of that laundry list of SYSTEMIC abuses they put out early. IF it gets there, I'll reassess. But that's just me. There might be some petit bourgeoisie kid in NYC or Boise or Nashville that IS ready to die for this cause. And there's probably some fascist cop somewhere ready to accomodate him/her.

And no, I'm not "guessing" that this will devolve into rioting. I personally have no idea which way this will go. Although, I suspect that the most likely direction is co-option by the libertarian Paulbots or co-option by Wall Street. Or both since they're on the same side after all. Of course, I could be wrong about that too. I'm just watching for now.

My whole point is that to correct these abuses is going to take some sacrifice and a WHOLE lot of inconvienience on the part of protesters AND the public. If it were possible any convienient way, it would have already been done.

[pipi_k]

30. Yes, some have...

but my feeling is that people willing to be injured aren't a majority.

I mean, it's not like they're going to go out there with the thought in their heads, "Yeah!!! I'm gonna get bashed in the head with a billy club or the butt of some cop's gun!!! Yippeee!!!"

I'm probably a huge coward, but there are very few things I'm willing to die for...or even get injured for.

[socialist_n_TN]

37. Well, everybody's got different tolerance levels

I'm not coming down on anybody for that. Do what you can.

But sometimes what you're willing to do is changed by circumstances. You can be along in a peaceful demonstration and suddenly be involved in a police riot. And sometimes in a police riot, some folks are going to want to fight back. That's human nature. Eventually if things get bad enough, fighting back against a police riot turns into an insurrection and revolution. That's not hyperbole, that's history.

My point is, and has always been, challenging the power structure, ESPECIALLY the economic power structure, is a dangerous and uncertain game. But if you're convinced it MUST be done, you can't be worried about things like inconvieniencing the public. Nope, you've got to be willing to go so far as to shut it all down. If necessary. I personally think it will be necessary at some point. I don't think it changes any other way.

[Fire Walk With Me]

10. Bloomberg appears to be forcing that to happen.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. The point of demonstrations is to move people out of their comfort zones and wake them up.

The Civil Rights Movement discomfited a whole region of the country and spawned reprisals and eventually won, as much by the overreaction of the PTB to the demonstrations as by the demonstrations themselves.

[socialist_n_TN]

18. Yep, that was the era I grew up in

so I know whereof you speak. It became something that was talked about all the time by everybody no matter whose side you were on. And yes, people were "inconvienienced" by the civil rights demonstrations a LOT.

[kctim]

19. We are nowhere near that point

not in need for or support of.

OWS does NOT represent 99% of Americans and trying to "shut it ALL down for a while" and creating unnecessary hardship on people will only lead anti OWS protests that will do alot more harm than the police ever thought of.

Their "revolution" will become a civil war and I don't think OWS would like the outcome.

[socialist_n_TN]

21. And I never said we were near that point............

But we are getting closer. Eventually it will get to a "Whose side are you on?" moment for the average American. It's inevitable because Wall Street will NOT give up their power without being forced to AND there's no hope for electoral remedies under the current system of money in politics.

BTW, we actually agree that OWS does NOT represent 99% of Americans. I figure it represents to one extent or another, about 65% to 70%. And that's in it's present petit bourgeoisie makeup. The capitalists will ALWAYS have their apologists and toadies.

[kctim]

24. False expectation based on an exaggerated idea of support.

'Whose side are you on?' will be decided by ones preference of government action, not opinions of Wall Street.

Government is the ONLY entity with the power to regulate Wall Street, which is why OWS should be only about getting it to do just that. Support would probably be closer to that 65+% if it was.
Instead, OWS is protesting Wall Street, something that a majority of Americans have a stake in. OWS is also protesting for a progressive agenda, something that the majority of Americans have yet to accept. The majority of Americans are also capitalists.

If progressives can convince the people that this is about government "fixing" Wall Street, OWS may actually get something done.
If they cannot and this thing becomes a hardship, and is seen as forcing a political agenda, things will get real ugly and OWS will be done.

[socialist_n_TN]

27. Government action will NOT be forced to "regulate"

Wall Street until there's enough outside pressure because WALL STREET OWNS THE GOVERNMENT! The only way that FDR got his reforms is because there was SERIOUS pressure for a socialist revolution that was instrumental in a left populist movement in the 30s.

As to the attitude of the American people, some look as self identification polls and some look at issue polling. I look at issue polling myself and for a LONG time now (politically speaking) the issue polling has shown Americans to be center-left on ISSUES. As long as Wall Street frustrates moves to bring the ISSUES into alignment with what the people believe, there will be increasing radicalization OF the public and this majority will move FURTHER left.

As to timing, Lenin said it best. Something along the lines of sometimes years go by with nothing much happening and then sometimes years go by in months. Thanks to OWS's focus ON Wall Street and NOT electoral politics, we're seeing a rise in class consciousness among a majority of the "99%" that could easily reach a critical mass in "months". Or not. The situation is fluid and bears watching.

As to a majority of Americans having a stake in Wall Street, they might have a stake, but it's probably miniscule (comparatively), at best. And what happens to that stake the next time that the capitalists gin up another "crisis" to benefit the big players and the market tanks again? Wall Street is pretty irrelevant in the PERSONAL economic life of the average American on a day to day basis. It does however, have a HUGE negative effect on Americans' personal economic life with it's control over the government. OWS is putting this particular comparison in the face of everybody. That's the BEST thing it's done, IMO.

[kctim]

39. Good reply

Which entity, Government or Wall Street, do the people have the best chance to influence? Which one is more likely to have the most NOT influenced by money? Which one do the people have the ability to replace? Government for all three.

We both know there is more to the FDR story than just "serious" pressure by the people. But even so, was FDR a part of government or of Wall Street? Government.
This is also not the 1930s and the American people have NOT shown they are willing to throw away their form of government and replace it with socialism. Sorry, but those are the facts.

Polls are very interesting because people only use the parts that support their own opinions. But when it comes down to it, the only poll that counts is election day and to be quite honest, Americans are pretty much center-left on some issues and center-right on some issues. I'm not sure we can say we are more of either, but we can definiteley say that we are not a progressive or conservative nation.
Because of this, and my own personal experience, I think we have to look deeper than just certain issues and look at who the people blame and fear most. Class consciousness vs. government intrusion.
IMO, at this point in time, it is still government.

I don't believe the wanted "socialist revolution" is any closer than the wanted "Constitutional revolution" embraced by those on the far-right.

[socialist_n_TN]

40. Quite frankly, neither entity, Wall Street OR government

is subject to influence by the American people now or in the near future. UNTIL THE PEOPLE MAKE UP THEIR MINDS THAT THEY ARE TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN. And NEITHER side is on their side. People can replace the PEOPLE who are in government, but that does not a bit of good when they are ALL (or most anyway) on the side of the current system. IOW, bought BY Wall Street.

And it's coming closer to the 30s every day. The 30s weren't even the 30s until 1934 or so. It takes a gradual rise in class consciousness, fueled by Marxist agitation and propaganda (whether that agitation and propaganda is recognized as Marxist is moot) AND capitalist abuses that prove the TRUTH of the agitation and propaganda, to make for a movement like the one that swept the country in the 30s. As I've always said, the best recruiter for Marxism is capitalism. The more the capitalists overreach, the more the anti-capitalist movement, whatever it's called, will grow.

And I'd say it was about even right now between class consciousness vs government intrusion thanks in large part TO OWS. We'll just have to see if it continues to build. The only reason you see more "government intrusion" viewpoint represented in government (which is I believe is what you're thinking about) is because government is ALWAYS behind the popular sentiment.

I think that the "socialist revolution" IS closer to fruition today than it was at any time since the 30s simply because today's unrest is fueled by economics and not an overriding issue like civil rights and the war. Any time the true enemy is recognized, socialist revolution creeps closer. That said, I don't believe it's really that close. But sometimes years go by with nothing much happening and sometimes years go by in months. We MIGHT be in a situation where years are going to go by in months. Or not. We'll just have to see what happens over the next few months.

[kctim]

41. We will have to agree to disagree

I still have faith in our form of government and believe we would have a progressive government if the people voted for one.

There is no way to know how it will all play out, and you have made some very good points and guesses. I am wondering if you have given the millions who would fight for the Constitution any thought? Do you think they would eventually throw away those beliefs and accept socialism?

[socialist_n_TN]

43. Do those millions who would "fight fort the Constitution"

give the 99% any thought? And BTW, I don't think that socialism as an economic system is incompatible with the Constitution. But that would be a "Whose side are you on?" choice by those who would take up arms against a majority revolution.

If it's plain that a majority of people in the country SUPPORT, either actively or tacitly, a socialist revolution are we supposed to let the threat of minority violence keep the majority from instituting socialism? THAT sounds like tyranny to me.

I honestly don't think that anything changes otherwise. My experience and a study of history tells me this. In fact, it will only get worse if the capitalists continue to have their rule. It will actually kill us all.

[apocalypsehow]

25. LOL. That is all. n/t.

[Nye Bevan]

26. Did MLK shut the country down? (nt)

[socialist_n_TN]

28. He didn't have a chance to, but I honestly think

that was coming. He had begun to PUBLICALLY make the connection that OWS is making now. Which is why he was assassinated. A charismatic leader making that "Wall Street owns government for the benefit of the 1%." (or it's '68 equivalent) is a HUGE danger to the capitalist system.

MLK, had he lived, would have probably been calling for a nationwide general strike within a few months over inequality issues, racial and class, and over the war.

[TBF]

46. MLK, and Malcolm X, were only killed when they started talking about class -

listen to the later speeches. THAT is what gets the attention of TPTB.

From MLK Jr's final speech (the day before his assassination):

Now the other thing we'll have to do is this: Always anchor our external direct action with the power of economic withdrawal. Now, we are poor people, individually, we are poor when you compare us with white society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively, that means all of us together, collectively we are richer than all the nation in the world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I could name the others, the Negro collectively is richer than most nations of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States, and more than the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That's power right there, if we know how to pool it.

We don't have to argue with anybody. We don't have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don't need any bricks and bottles, we don't need any Molotov cocktails, we just need to go around to these stores, and to these massive industries in our country, and say, "God sent us by here, to say to you that you're not treating his children right. And we've come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda--fair treatment, where God's children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you."

http://www.mlkonline.net/promised.html

[socialist_n_TN]

48. Thanks for the TRUE history of this TBF

SO many people don't make that connection.

[Tsiyu]

36. "That's why they call it labor"

Birthing babies hurts some.


We've got a big baby to birth.



Can't rec but shall :kick:

[socialist_n_TN]

38. Thanks for the kick. I do think this is an issue

that needs to be discussed.

[Bake]

42. Frankly, I don't think the banksters will really be afraid ...

... until they see their own blood in the streets.

I'm not advocating it. But I think it will happen.

Bake

[lunatica]

45. This revolution is going to take years

and it will get ugly. But the 99% will keep it as peaceful as possible in most places. We will do things like recall governors and other officials who try to destroy the unions, or cut social services. We will stop doing business with the banks who are screwing us. We will stop buying shit we don't need because we choose to. And we will start putting real candidates forward for public office and we will vote for them. A movement like this is will move on to change things because this time we know we're legion. Right now we're all amazed and surprised and even shocked and marveling at how this has taken off and how many people all over the world knew all about what's been happening. One month in and the world is now galvanized because we are all suffering the same thing. We really are legion.

We are 99% of the entire planet. They are less than 1%. Let them all go live in Dubai for all I care. It's just a make believe world for the dirty rich and the filthy rich. Let them have their mirage in the desert. It'll lose its charm as reality sets in.

[TBF]

47. Excellent post -

it will take time, but with each round we gain clarity.