Two weeks into Occupy Wall Street protests, movement is at a crossroads

They must not have been in on the real thing in Cairo.

I can understand OWSers making the fatuous comparison, but not any Egyptian kid that actually put his life on the line.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

They must not have been in on the real thing in Cairo.

Your envy is showing.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I can understand OWSers making the fatuous comparison, but not any Egyptian kid that actually put his life on the line.

Or it never was a fatuous comparison, and you just couldn't help yourself from this kind of embarrassing post.

Perhaps you also belive the other international protests calling themselves #Occupy have no connection in their inspiration to the US protests? Maybe if I said they did, you'd call it "fatuous."

A
R
T

Trying to tear everything down and start anew is not a strategy for success.

I've no problem imagining that there are self-proclaimed Occupiers throughout the world who consider the OWSers inspirational, and rather than calling a comparison between such junior OWSers and the original OWS fatuous, I would consider it quite appropriate.

Considering the depth of the attachment you developed for the Arab Spring protestors who literally risked their lives to oppose dictators and their squads of goons, I would have thought you more sensitive than most to fatuous comparisons between real heroes and a gathering of sloganeering dilettantes.

I can see though that your attachment to the romantic notion of OWS and its domestic offshoots is every bit as deep, if not deeper. Perhaps you've joined the DC tribe, if such a thing is possible.

You’re well off the mark if you detect envy in anything I've written about the Cairo demonstrators. This is not to say that many, if not most, of them don't deserve admiration for their courage and fortitude, but any fantasies I may have once entertained about joining in a dangerous but noble struggle against powerful forces of oppression were set aside almost 40 years ago. If you are seeing envy of the Arab Spring protesters, it is because you are looking in a mirror.

I've no doubt but there is any number of sincere and intelligent people participating in any one of the Occupation gatherings. I'm sure, as well, that there are more than a few who hold strong principles and would truly like to change the US for the better. As I've written on more than one occasion in this forum, I would like to see these individuals organize around a political strategy that had even a small chance of influencing current events.

To compare what is happening in downtown Manhattan with what took place and is taking place in Cairo, Tehran, Damascus, Sidi Bouzid and Libya however is vacuous or asinine or inane or just plain silly.

The best way to shut up all the cynics like me is for the OWSers to actually accomplish something of importance, and "bringing attention to the desperate straits of the 99% and the venal greed of the 1%” is, frankly, not much.

As I've written on more than one occasion in this forum, I would like to see these individuals organize around a political strategy that had even a small chance of influencing current events.

Quote:

Trying to tear everything down and start anew is not a strategy for success.

I wasn't aware anyone was suggesting that. Just that things have gone horribly wrong for a large section of the population.

hingehead wrote:

Quote:

Trying to tear everything down and start anew is not a strategy for success.

I wasn't aware anyone was suggesting that. Just that things have gone horribly wrong for a large section of the population.

You should keep in mind that for capitalists, and their conservative dupes, the party line is that any criticism of capitalism, any call for reform or regulation will automatically be branded as a call to destroy capitalism. It is the tactic of demonizing the critics. Capitalists will not, if they can avoid it, accept any limitations, any regulation. Finn is obviously one of their dupes.

Quote:

Trying to tear everything down and start anew is not a strategy for success.

I wasn't aware anyone was suggesting that. Just that things have gone horribly wrong for a large section of the population.

"Will it result in a new and better world model? Let’s hope it does because humanity is craving for one." the spark at occupywallstreet.org

I'm sure I can find quite a few similar and more dramatic statements from OWSers.


My take is that most OWSers wouldn't have researched the economic indicators - they are reacting to their own situations and perceived futures, not statistics. Gross inequality will result in change one way or another - it has always been thus. Your rationalisations matter not one whit.

That's my take as well, but it doesn't mean they shouldn't know what's going on behind their complaints, at least if they are to have any success in seeing them properly addressed. What you call rationalizations, I call explanations and I wasn't aware that I was communicating directly with OWS in this thread. I don't expect anything I say or write will matter one whit to the OWSers, but then I'm not trying to influence them.

I'm sort of in the Tom Friedmann (World Is Flat) school of thought - inevitably there will be seismic changes - the challenge for good governance is to make those changes have as little impact is you can by preparing for them and looking after those most affected. Try to make the change more evolutionary not revolutionary.

I can't disagree with the idea of smoothing out changes, but the real question is how much change is necessary. If you are convinced that OWS is a sign we have reached a tipping point (it seems trite to just use that term now), in terms of people's willingness to live with current conditions, then one way or the other some change will occur. The change, however, may not amount to much more than an increase in taxes on people making over a million a year. I doubt the OWSters would consider that a victory, pack up their tents and return to their homes. The belief that seismic change is necessary and inevitable is popular among the Left, but Tom Friedmann is hardly a reliable oracle, and the pressure that needs to be released my be relatively minimal.

This isn't going to happen, but a return to sub 5% unemployment rates within the next six months would all but eliminate whatever momentum OWS has. It does set up an interesting paradox though. For sometime now it could be argued that Republicans were benefiting politically by high unemployment rates. Unemployment remains over 9% in November 2012 and Obama is toast. At least now, Democrats have a reason to see a silver lining in the black cloud that is unemployment.

Democrats would be foolish to assume that OWS is nothing but good news for them. The serious OWSters don't put a lot of daylight between Pelosi and Boehner or Reid and McConnell, but to the extent they can develop true political influence, it will be directed against Republicans more so than Democrats.

For Republicans, OWS is a small but suspicious looking sore on one of their feet. It probably means nothing, but it could develop into a major problem. For Democrats, the enemy of their enemny is their friend, and you can be certain that there are any number of Democratic strategists trying to conceive of ways for their party to exploit OWS.

However I also think the current growth of resource consumption per capita as the only point to existence paired with population growth is species suicide in the long term. I have no idea how you deal with that one without a point of catastrophe.

Assuming "species suicide" is an appropriate name for it, you stick you head in the sand and wait until people start dying.

American Crossroads: Obama’s ‘Class Warfare’ Message Is Working

Benjy Sarlin October 21, 2011, 11:14 AM 1919 8

American Crossroads, the big money GOP group founded by Karl Rove, is warning Republicans that President Obama’s new campaign to raise taxes on millionaires is a political winner.

Under the header “Obama’s New Class Warfare May Resonate,” the group’s director, Steven Law, cited their own polling data in a strategy memo to argue that the White House was gaining ground with its proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy.

“It may be the result of larger environmental conditions, or he may be moving the needle himself, but Obama’s ‘tax the rich’ mantra is getting traction,” Law wrote. “Our poll found that 64% favor raising taxes on people with incomes above $200,000.”

He added that Obama was winning over Americans on the issue even as their poll showed 47% of respondents concerned that increasing taxes would hurt the economy.

“People are sensitive to the economic consequences of class warfare taxation - but right now, they split evenly between their concern about jobs and Obama’s class warfare agitation,” according to the memo.

Law recommended Republicans try to rebut Obama by citing quotes from prominent Democrats, like President Clinton, that taxes should never be raised in a recession. He expressed more confidence that the GOP could win the overall argument on the American Jobs Act’s other provisions, mostly by relentlessly branding it as a second “stimulus.” Nonetheless, Law was clear that Republicans can’t take victory for granted even there.

“ecause President Obama continues to possess substantial personal popularity - not to mention the massive communications apparatus of the White House - our messaging on the President’s latest stimulus must be sharp, focused and sustained,” he wrote. “The public is open to being convinced by either side on the best way to revitalize our economy; therefore, proponents of real private sector growth and fiscal responsibility need to challenge Obama’s plan in detail - or risk losing what is likely to be a prolonged debate on this issue”

The full memo is definitely worth a read: take a look here.

People are travelling between the groups and exchanging ideas, lessons learned, and networking. Being at #OccupyBoston or any other non NYC location does not make your group a junior group. Moreover, people aren't getting their marching orders from NYC. The group is lateral, it's not a stovepipe top down org. Using language like "junior" assumes a hierarchy that does not exist.

Look, I know you have bought into all this organic networking stuff, but not everyone has and to suggest it is a fact that is as plain as the nose on one's face is silly.

My support for the Arab Spring protester's preceeds them being shot. Perhaps that's the difference: I understand the connection between the two, but you need shots fired here in the USA to bridge the gap. But let us speak plainly, you're not really interested in filling any gap, especially after labeling one group heroes.

Whether or not you recognized the danger facing the Arab Spring protesters early on, I'm sure they did. You see a connection between the two that predated violence: Generally young protesters, communicating through social networking, pissed off because they don't see a clear path to economic prosperity and want to exaggerate it.

You're absolutely right that I'm not at all interested in bridging any gap between the two groups. Why would I be? And it will take a hell of a lot more than a few incidents of pepper gas being sprayed in a CWS protesters face to do it. I feel safe in assuming we disagree here, but I see nothing heroic about OWS. Of course this doesn't mean that they need to be heroic to be effective, if their goals remain modest and rational. I do think that in order to achieve all of their goals they need to be perceived as heroic. You were willing to grant them that status the minute they showed up on Wall Street, but others are less charitable.

They don't need to be seen in the same light as the Arab Spring protesters unless one has a stake in this silly narrative that is trying to be created, wherein the youth and workers of the world are uniting to defeat the forces of greed and oppression and usher in a new and golden world model. It remains to be seen if OWS is much of anything other than fatuous, but comparisons between OWSers and the people who manned the barricades at Tahrir Square are just that.

If what is possible?

Joining the DC Tribe

Oh my. You're mistaken. You're envy is not in those of the Arab Spring (obviously). You're envy is in that after hearing the Tea Party talk about being disenfranchisement, the veil is removed. You're politics lost it's biggest sympathy narrative when people saw what real disenfranchisement looked like.

You really had to reach well up your rectum for this one Deist.

Because you Liberals place such a high value on victimhood, you assume everyone does and that there is some sort of contest going on to be identified as the biggest victims. I assure you that disenfranchisement is not at the core of whatever appeal the Tea Party holds for me, nor is it the rallying cry for anyone considering themselves to be a member or supporter. If you think that the Tea Party has been looking for sympathy, you couldn't be more wrong and I can only assume it is because you can't imagine anyone making a case that didn't rely on sympathy.

I suspect that quite a large number of Tea Party members believe the OWSters have disenfranchised themselves, but are only too happy to cede them the title of "most disenfranchised."

You'd have really loved to see conservative activists bullied under a Democratic President if only to advance the story of America you have in your head.

More utter nonsense. Not only do I not see the Tea Party as heroic in the sense that The Arab Spring movements may have been, I see absolutely no reason to try and formulate a heroic myth for any of its members. Rather than having conservative activists bullied by a Democrat President, I prefer to simply have them respected and not demonized.

Perhaps worst, conservatives have long set the language and dictated the terms in which we speak about these issues. After years of focusing people anger at government, a movement comes a long and draws attention to those who exploit and extort and seemingly live above (for the right price of course) the government.

This is hardly coherent. Are you suggesting that I envy OWS's message, or that I'm upset that they redefined "the enemy?" You're much closer to the core principles of OWS than am I, but it doesn't seem to me that they are opposed to the notion that the government is a big part of their problems. If you took the time to listen to what the Tea Party is saying you would know that it hardly puts Wall Street on a pedestal.

Who is causing our problems?

Big government and its capitalist cronies.

Capitalists and its governmental cronies.

There's a difference here, but nowhere near as much as you would seem to have.


You see, I think you're still thinking too small. That a major cultural event must be only discussed in political language is rather shallow. We can certainly see that political ideas and sharing are taking place, and I'm quite positive it will have an effect philosophically here and abroad. But politics is only a fraction of our society, and I think #Occupy holds the potential to be more. Life is bigger than politics, and to the people building micro-communities in cities around the world at #Occupy camps, they are doing more than drafting talking points.

Perhaps I am thinking too small or perhaps discussing a modest political movement as a major cultural event is rather pretentious.

Obviously you believe OWS holds the potential to be more than politics. It couldn't be more clear that this is what you think.

It would be quite exciting to be on the edge of a social singularity where paradigms with which we have been comfortable for decades if not centuries are cast aside and replaced with a new and more effective working model for the world. And it wouldn't hurt if you felt in total agreement with the people who were charting our new course. I get why you would like to believe we are that edge, I just don't buy that we are, and I am hardly alone in that respect.

To that point, one of the most endearing things about #Occupy is that it has appealed to many of my conservative friends. It's not like they suddenly care about different things, but the appeal is mutual for many reasons. For one, I think we've mostly become political observers in this country. We remain seated while liberal and conservative Achilles and Hector battle it out on TV for our emotional satisfaction (either seeking anger, disappointment, or validation are all emotional desires to some). When people stand up, and meet things happen. When conservatives and liberals meet in public, it is with a certain degree of suspicion because we are trained to think in terms of teams. We begin to model our socialization off of how we see pundits interact, and it's not pretty. We're bitterly divided, paranoid, and angry. Large corporations benefit from us being divided, and can buy any politician on the political spectrum. Part of the game has been to keep us docile and seated.

Welcome to the 60's man!

Those establishment few who pay-to-rule are panicking at the sight of people creating their own social forum where they don't have influence. This memeplex about #Occupy needing to create a list is encouraged because it can tear the group apart. I think it's better that they are taking it slow. Any goals or demands the group has will come when they come.

If you are seeing panic, it's because you want to. Even if we assume that OWS will prove to be a tsunami, no one without sympathy and wishes tied to it sees it as such.

I love how you mishmash caricatures of those who you deem the enemy. The Fat Cats are enormously arrogant and locked into extinct "memes," but they have the foresight to see the changes that will be imposed by a group of people now commonly portrayed as rag tag tribes of neo-Marxist hippies, and the insecurity on their positions of power to engender panic.

Of course OWS isn't required to do anything (other than obey the law) and it may actually be a smart thing to resist a rush to formulate a cohesive message, but here again you are endowing the enemy with supernatural abilities. OWS is on so sharp a cutting edge that they themselves are struggling to make sense of the new paradigms, but their reactionary enemies see the new way so clearly that they are actually able to determine which path will be fatal to OWS and organized enough to do a dammed good job in pushing them in that direction.

Yet when people in Cairo agree it is, you pull a no True Scotsman?

I'm not sure what you mean by that figure of speech, but I'm hardly going to accept that the organizers of the Arab Spring find the comparison valid on your say-so alone, and it wouldn't be that surprising if some of the more politically zealous of them didn't understand the OWC enough to see how fatuous the comparison actually is.

It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks of the comparison though. The two movements are not aligned and unless you are right about a social singularity being on the horizon, never will be.

Who benefits most from autocratic regimes being in power? The events across the Atlantic are not so disconnected from our own affairs here.

Well, you for one have if you accept that their being in power has provided a certainly level of stability to the region which in turn has provided a certain level of stability in the energy markets.

But you tend to believe that not only are your interests not, in any way, aligned with those of the Fat Cats, they are in direct opposition to them. Maybe you're right as I can't profess to know all of your interests.

And of course the events outside of our country are very connected to those within, which is a primary reason why so many in the American working class are experiencing hard times. For good or bad, this is a global economy and American workers are competing with workers from around the world.

These people don't owe you an explanation, but if you're so curious, you can go search for it yourself instead of demanding they bring it to you. Or you can wait.

Obviously they owe me no explanation and this chip on your shoulder concerning anyone expecting something from them is silly. You sound like they're members of your family or very close friends.

I'm not demanding anything from them other than that they obey the law and clean up after themselves when they move on.

If they are going to actually matter at all, at some point they will need to be able to silence their critics, and more importantly, provide their supporters with results. There isn't some new meta state of being evolving that allows for enormous influence to be generated by the simple act of existing in anything but an enormous way. I would like to see them shake up the Democrat establishment, but if they end up doing nothing, that's fine with me too.

They're current, that's their biggest advantage, and so it's to be expected that people are interested in seeing what they can or will do now. Certainly anyone who feels that they exist to promote their interests is going to be anxious to see something change, but I can wait.

The longer they go without some sign of progress and effect the more irrelevant they will become and the more likely that only ugly events will keep them in the public eye.
Philadelphia, July 4th - October 6th, 2012.

A national convention is being organized to draft a tangible list of demands to the US Gov. They plan to humble Congress by demonstrating exactly what they refuse to do: Practice democracy. They are using the already defined districts, and requesting one man and one woman from each district to attend.

Not on the agenda: How to impress Finn.

Well if they not considering how to impress people like me (one way or the other) then they are making a mistake. If I can easily ignore what they are doing they're not having much of an effect, and I'm assuming that remains the primary goal of any political movement.
A
R
T

Because you Liberals place such a high value on victimhood

The Post’s Greg Sargent has thoughtfully broken down the data and found that the group that should resent the occupiers most — working-class whites — doesn’t resent them any more than anyone else does. In the National Journal poll, 56 percent of non-college-educated whites back the demonstrators, though the right-wing media continually depict them as trust-fund babies gone wild.