You
BUY YOUR TICKET NOW!
 
Forum
Filter     |   View Watchlist
[ Print Friendly ] [ Watch Thread ]

Carder52
Occupy Wall Street ProtestWhat are your thoughts on these protesters? I think that they are all talk. You can't change anything with signs and chants. Here's a video of my dad talking to the protesters at Occupy St,Louis. Notice how they cut out some of the audio? Thats when the protesters were threatening him. Wouldn't want people to hear that now would they? www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1Qhk9pwWhY
He is not on their side and does agree with them, and I don't either.
#1  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  - 4 Noob
153 REPLIES Watch  |  Sort by Likes · Date
Cometgreen
...Your dad sounds like a dick.

"You're gonna fail and get the shit kicked out of you" is not the best way to approach a gang of emotional people. As for "threatening him"... umm, his whole lesson to them is that violence is the answer. You should probably applaud them for threatening him.
#2  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 11 Ditto
Carder52
my dad sounds right.
#3  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  - 5 Noob
DoNothing69
In reply to Carder52, #3:

Good comeback. You've really made a convincing and well thought out argument.

#4  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 6 Funny
1984
In reply to Cometgreen, #2:

More to the point, they were actually trying to make a cogent argument for peaceful protesting. Whether or not they're emotional, it still at least speaks to a good mentality in my mind.

Violence against the police is never going to help them draw sympathy from the larger population (which is ultimately one of any protests goals); getting beat in the streets by over aggressive police officers for protesting peacefully just proves their point to an extent.

Whether or not anything effective comes from these protests is another thing in and of itself, as well as whether or not you personally agree.

But the minute you're seen as a violent mob, beyond all of the labeling news outlets like FoxNews all ready say, all of your credibility goes out the window.

In reply to Carder52, #3:

Sounds like your dad is on the right, politically, and just wants to quash a legitimate protest movement that he disagrees with - just because he disagrees with them.
#5  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 3 Ditto
Mongopwn
Relevent.
#6  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
1984
In reply to Mongopwn, #6:

Matt Taibi might as well have been one of the literary and philosophical progenitors of the Occupy Wall Street movement. His work on the corruption in the banking industry, before and after the economic meltdown, is more or less tied to the response we see in the streets today.

For his to misunderstand it, that seems either a vast misstep on his own part, or a coy rhetorical tactic to come off as impartial initially and then "find himself" as an avowed believer because of 'x' 'y' and/or 'z'.
#7  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Mongopwn
In reply to 1984, #7:

Eh, I see it like this. The man is a journalist. It's his job to frame the news. I think he just realized he was using the wrong frame. Just a slight edit to the narrative.

This quote I think is the take-away bit:
Meanwhile, on the other side of the political spectrum, there were scads of progressive pundits like me who wrung our hands with worry that OWS was playing right into the hands of assholes like Krauthammer. Don't give them any ammunition! we counseled. Stay on message! Be specific! We were all playing the Rorschach-test game with OWS, trying to squint at it and see what we wanted to see in the movement. Viewed through the prism of our desire to make near-term, within-the-system changes, it was hard to see how skirmishing with cops in New York would help foreclosed-upon middle-class families in Jacksonville and San Diego.

What both sides missed is that OWS is tired of all of this. They don't care what we think they're about, or should be about. They just want something different.

Because lets be honest. Even Taibbi is trying to sell us something, even if it's only an idea we already agree with. Or more issues of Rolling Stone
#8  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Carder52
We're just saying, you can't change any thing by waving signs.
#9  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  - 3 Noob
DoNothing69
In reply to Carder52, #9:

Prove it.
#10  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 4 Ditto
pal_sch
In reply to Carder52, #9:

Except that peaceful protest (which is far more accurate than 'waving signs') has been successful in many cases in the past.

You can bring plenty of criticisms against the OWS protesters, but to do so you would need to understand what is going on rather than just dismissing them. And understanding what is going on and why is part of their goal. Once you can grasp that, even if dismissal is your target, you must have internalised part of why they are on the street.
#11  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 3 Ditto
Carder52
Last time I post in the politics area of the forums.
#12  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  - 2 WTF
Matheau
Peaceful protests work, but Occupy Wall Street doesn't really have the most coherent goal. It basically boils down "We think things should be different." A lot of people involved are protesting different things and creating mixed messages, which is going to dilute the impact of it. If you look at successful peaceful protests, they ask for one very clear thing and there is no mistaking what they want for the average, rational purpose (obviously, some people will twist it to mean something entirely different, but those are almost exclusively people that do not want the protest to work).

Just going "We think things should be different" isn't going to be very productive. A lot of the things that seem to be included in the Occupy Wall Street movement are things that simply cannot change without a very coherent and well thought out plan. Walking around with a bunch of signs isn't going to motivate politicians to make those extreme changes. It is going to cause them to take very short term steps that sound good, but ultimately do nothing to fix the problem.
#13  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
DoNothing69
In reply to Carder52, #12:

You will be missed.
#14  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 1 Funny
Chi_Mangetsu EmEffin TRex
In reply to Matheau, #13:

I think this is really what it boils down to: boingboing.net/2011/10/28/how-occupy-wall-street-cost-me-my-job.html

#15  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 2 Cool
1984
In reply to Carder52, #12:

Why? Because we don't nod our heads in agreement and praise you for your wisdom?

Shouldn't be coming here for adulation, that's the wrong idea entirely.
#16  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
BatJeff
In reply to Carder52, #1:

Just to clarify:

1) Your Dad's a retard

2) You seem to have gotten that quality from him.

3) As soon as people try to say why they disagree with your view you say you won't talk anymore?
Last time I post in the politics area of the forums.

You should have just started with that.
#17  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 4 Zing!
Cometgreen
In reply to Carder52, #9:
We're just saying, you can't change any thing by waving signs.
Perhaps, yet using violence is likely to be counterproductive. Strategic civil disobedience - which the OWS has yet to really use - has a better track record than violence when it comes to affecting change without the cost of major social destruction. Unless you or your dad are talking about a coup or civil war (I assume you don't want a bunch of leftists storming the White House), I don't see how violence could possibly be an effective strategy. They'll get the shit kicked out of them and lose the support of the greater population.

Moving on, I must admit that the middle portion of this account surprised me. Though I think the protest at the conservative conference was stupid and dickish, I'm glad a bunch of occupiers snubbed a partisan group doing a tired, "Kochs are evil and Elizabeth Warren and the Dems rock!" routine. I'm sure a lot of protestors are simple-minded partisans who will scream and shout, and then go vote for a Democrat, but I'm glad that doesn't appear to be the prevailing attitude.

Or maybe it is. We'll have to see where this goes. Talk of a radical new direction in American politics is ridiculously overblown at this stage, just as it was for the Tea Party a whole two years ago. Political institutions are quite effective in neutralizing this energy, even if there are nominal changes.
#18  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 1 Cool
Exodusv
In reply to Carder52, #9:
We're just saying, you can't change any thing by waving signs.

The Women's Sufferage, Civil Rights, and Gay Rights movements are really very interesting parts of American history. I suggest reading about them at some point in the near future.

One person with a sign is a kook. Several hundred people with signs is a mob. Several hundred thousand people with signs is a movement.
#19  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 5 Ditto
Mongopwn
In reply to Chi_Mangetsu, #20:

Pisses me off people get arrested at peaceful gatherings while white collar crimes go unpunished.
#21  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
smantie
In reply to Carder52, #1:

You are clearly uninformed and do not have the slightest clue what you are talking about or how to make an appropriate forum thread. My only conclusion is that you must be a redneck, and for that I am sorry.

The Occupy Wall Street protests have a very important message about the income inequality (which is a direct result of the failed policies of the Reagan administration) and are pro-middle class. Think about it: if income inequality is fixed on some level (not talking about wealth redistribution, just companies paying their workers more) and families earn more money a year then you'll have more people paying taxes and less people relying on government services. That decreases the tax burden as a whole and decreases the amount of government spending, which decreases the amount of tax revenue needed. The very simple fact is that in a consumer-driven economy the consumer needs to have money in order to spend, and without consumer spending the economy tanks. In 2004 Wal-Mart made 234 billion dollars profit and could have afforded to give each of their American workers a 50,000 bonus and still make 200 billion dollars that year. Instead of distributing that to the people who did the work they decided to leave it to the fat cats and big-wigs. That sort of corporate behavior cripples the American economy and you need to understand that. If someone handed your father $50,000 you can bet he'd go out and spend it, maybe buy a new car, put an addition on the house (although it seems you live in a trailer, so maybe you could get a real house) and throw a party for your friends with cake and stuff. Maybe take a nice vacation to Disney World or wherever. Either way, everyone from the local baker to the big businesses win. That money goes back into the community and keeps flowing through the economy, creating a healthier economy for everyone. You need to remember that economies are very social institutions and only work when more people are included.


Do you think it's right that corporate CEOs ran their companies into the ground and then took multi-million dollar bonuses after the American taxpayers bailed them out? Do you think that freedom of speech was put into the constitution as the first ammendment because it doesn't matter? Huhwut? There are very few legitimate arguments against the Occupy movement, and you'll find most of those don't even hold much water. Please educate yourself before posting again.
#22  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 2 Cool
BatJeff
In reply to smantie, #22:

You sir, are my new hero.
#23  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Chi_Mangetsu EmEffin TRex
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45340184/ns/us_news-life/t/police-occupy-wall-street-protesters-arrested/
"This is a critical moment for the movement given what happened the other night," Paul Knick, 44, a software engineer from Montclair, N.J., said as he marched through the financial district with other protesters on Thursday. "It seems like there's a concerted effort to stop the movement and I'm here to make sure that doesn't happen."

Similar protests were planned around the county.

In Dallas, police evicted dozens of protesters from their campsite near City Hall citing public safety and hygiene issues. They arrested 18 protesters who refused to leave.

About 500 sympathizers of the Occupy protest marched in downtown Los Angeles. The protesters, chiefly a coalition of labor unions, gathered between the Bank of America tower and Wells Fargo Plaza, chanting "Banks got bailed out, we got sold out."

Protesters in Las Vegas vowed to pitch tents in front of a federal building. In Albany, N.Y., protesters from Buffalo, Rochester and other encampments were coming in by bus to join a demonstration in a downtown park.

Police in Portland, Ore., closed a bridge in preparation for a march there.

The New York group announced it would rally near the New York Stock Exchange, then fan out across Manhattan and head to subways, before gathering downtown and marching over the Brooklyn Bridge.

A past attempt to march across the bridge drew the first significant international attention to the Occupy movement when more than 700 people were arrested.

The police department said it would have scores of officers ready to handle protesters in the subways.

"The protesters are calling for a massive event aimed at disrupting major parts of the city," Deputy Mayor Howard Wolfson said. "We will be prepared for that."

Passer-by Gene Williams, a 57-year-old bond trader, joked that he was "one of the bad guys" but that he empathized with the demonstrators.

"They have a point in a lot of ways," he said. "The fact of the matter is, there is a schism between the rich and the poor and it's getting wider."

...

The good behavior in Las Vegas and other Occupy efforts across Nevada is even more noteworthy because Nevadans may have the most cause to rage against the machine. The state tops the nation in foreclosures and unemployment and entire neighborhoods have been overtaken by vacant homes and storefronts.

But while protesters in other cities riot and rage, the Vegas group is hosting a series of free foreclosure mediation workshops for homeowners who are underwater on their mortgages.

Organizers insist their anti-greed message has a better chance of spreading if they aren't labeled violent anarchists.
#24  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
DiMono Site Admin
In reply to Chi_Mangetsu, #24:

When will the anti-OWS people figure out that what's going down here is exactly the same as what we were all pissed off about in the Middle East? Peaceful protest, police brutality, unwarranted arrests... pretty much the only difference is that Obama isn't ordering the anti-OWS action himself.
#25  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Cometgreen
In reply to smantie, #22:
In reply to Carder52, #1:

You are clearly uninformed and do not have the slightest clue what you are talking about or how to make an appropriate forum thread. My only conclusion is that you must be a redneck, and for that I am sorry.
[facepalm]
In 2004 Wal-Mart made 234 billion dollars profit... Instead of distributing that to the people who did the work they decided to leave it to the fat cats and big-wigs. That sort of corporate behavior cripples the American economy and you need to understand that. If someone handed your father $50,000 you can bet he'd go out and spend it... everyone from the local baker to the big businesses win. That money goes back into the community and keeps flowing through the economy, creating a healthier economy for everyone.
[double-facepalm]
Do you think it's right that corporate CEOs ran their companies into the ground and then took multi-million dollar bonuses after the American taxpayers bailed them out? Do you think that freedom of speech was put into the constitution as the first ammendment because it doesn't matter?
You sound like some hick Tea Partier! [faints]
#26  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Chi_Mangetsu EmEffin TRex
In reply to Cometgreen, #26:

Hey Scarlett O'hara, do you intend to respond with some sort of quantitative or hell, even a qualitative statement?

Post edited 11/18/11 11:19PM
#27  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Cometgreen
What needs to be said? The first quote is stupid, the second quote is chock full of nonsense*, and my point on the third quote should be quite obvious.

*profits go to shareholders, which includes thousands of people of moderate income, as well as the workers themselves, through their profit-sharing program (ended recently in favor of 401k matching, I know, but he was talking '04 here); the corporation spends its profits just as much as anyone else, more importantly much of it goes into restoring and accumulating capital, all of which suggests he has a horrible understanding of what profit is and how it's commonly used, and how an economy operates in general; an interesting choice for an example in that the following year Walmart would use some of its profits to help New Orleans following Katrina

There are many reasons to be against Walmart and the American corporate system in general. So many reasons that you don't need to distort them or puff them up with emotional blather to make a convincing case.
#28  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Mongopwn
In reply to Cometgreen, #28:

The vast majority of investments come from the upper classes, so the lower and middle classes don't receive (directly) much of a benefit from that system. As for the walmart bit, I remember a study (I'll find a link later, if someone doesn't beat me to it) that walmart could afford to pay its workers a living wage while only increasing costs on customers by a trivial amount, $50 a year or so. And those people will spend most, if not all of that money. More spending on goods, more money in the economy, etc. I won't bother repeating the whole argument, everyone here knows it.
#29  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Matheau
In reply to smantie, #22:

Revenue and profit are not the same thing.
#30  Posted 2 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
[ 1 ] [ 2 ] ... [ 5 ] [ 6 ] [ Next ]
Please sign in or sign up to post a comment.