I can't say that I know a whole lot of either side, but from what I've gathered, I think that The Occupy movement is nowhere near perfect. I find it difficult to summarize their aims, because frankly there isn't any main focus. It's people who are angry about either unemployment, unfair distribution of wealth, capitalism, corporate greed, class warfare, etc; but that's not necessarily true between each person, and it's hard to get a clear point across without a platform everyone can agree upon. Because of which, people who oppose the movement see it as people who just want a handout, or that it's just lazy people who are blaming their unemployment or lack of money on Wall Street and away from their own bad decisions, or even just left-wing agitators who are just protesting for the sake of stirring up a storm.
At the same time, though, we are seeing this uprising of people that all across the nation are getting out there and expressing what is concerning them. The movement may not be clearly focused, but even if there isn't the same goals in mind between everybody, there is a certain connection between each member of the movement: they are all sensing that something is wrong with the way things are going, and they want to make sure that people know that they don't like what's going on. It certainly isn't perfect, but it's masses of people stating that something needs to get done. Sounds like democracy-in-action to me.
I guess in the end, I support the movement, but I'm not 100% sure what exactly I'm supporting. Pissed-off Americans, angered by the system, perhaps?
This movement is extremely important. The only thing is, nobody cares. To see people care more each day is nice, but I see a lot of people I know just not really caring.
-- GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
it's been pretty impressive, but it was during summer. the real test comes with how they deal with winter. if they can outlive that and still be strong, it's completely legit.
--
The future must protect the clone's past. "Maybe it's a tentacle, molesting the planet itself. - Aschen Brodel.
Anyways, I think that the majority of the American people either support, or sympathize with the Occupy movement. I honestly hope that this ends up getting bigger...
--
Post on Zoids, and all of your dreams will come true! Project C64: Leave no C64 board dead.
The biggest reason people don't care is that they think it has no real impact on their lives. The thing people need to understand is that the "American dream" has been on the decline for a long time now. People aren't upset because they're living in their world. Just look at peoples knowledge on politics. People figure it has been taking care itself long enough, that they'll be fine.
-- GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
if they didnt moan and b**** enough throughout history to get changes to actually be made we wouldnt be in a position where anyone would want to be saying our government is crappy
It's funny, because if you posted this other places (Non-Stop Gaming Social), all you'd get would be a bunch of insults towards the movement, anybody who supported the movement, and those without money.
--
Post on Zoids, and all of your dreams will come true! Project C64: Leave no C64 board dead.
The movement itself is good, but many of the people that are claiming to be a part of it are self-important idiots who's near-sightedness has screwed up their own lives - and they are the only ones to blame for it.
If you've put yourself into a position where you are nearly homeless, have children at a young age, have no job because you invested time in a useless degree - well guess what? It's your own damn fault, the government shouldn't need to bail you out.
That's not to say our government is perfect, far from it, wherein lies my original point - the movement itself is good, but most of the people that think they're a part of it are bad.
-- Accel ACE Totally still relevant, totally not just a lurker. Totally.
General consensus is probably that while there's a message in there that needs to be expressed, the movement is silly and doesn't understand what it is asking for.
They're a bunch of Communists and anti-Semites who advocate the violent overthrow of the United States government, the disestablishment of capitalism (by force), and the rounding up of Jews.
So, uh, put me down for "bad"
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
Well I guess the French protestors in 1789 didn't want anarchy, mob rule, high inflation, and public execution of anyone deemed a threat to the government either, but they got 'em all by 1793.
Though personally Smuffin, I have a dream......to one day launch a hostile take over of Goldman Sachs through stock market operations like cornering (dunno if it's still legal, but if not it should be). Then I'll fire everyone and ruin the company. Maybe I'll appoint a high school dropout as CEO. If I ever had that kind of capital, I would lose a ton of it, and it would cause collateral damage to the economy too, maybe a recession. But wouldn't that be such an awesome play?
Not really much of a movement without any cohesive message, a lot of awful people that make the others look bad, and aside from taxing the rich, there's not much of a solution or idea on how to implement anything from anyone.
About all it seems to be is people saying they're upset over something.
--
I have no idea who you are, but I thank you for arousing me. - Beruga Brawl FC: 3823-8243-5663
It's not necessarily a bad thing in terms of what they want, the problem is that it's basically just empty words. Too many slogans, not enough content. "Redistribution of wealth" sounds nice on paper but do you actually have a decent proposal for how to achieve it without tanking the economy in the process and making things way worse? If you're the majority of the movement (shall we say...about 99% of them?) you probably don't.
--
We clasped our hands, our hands in praise of a conquerors right to tyranny
Well I guess the French protestors in 1789 didn't want anarchy, mob rule, high inflation, and public execution of anyone deemed a threat to the government either, but they got 'em all by 1793.
The Reign of Terror was horrible, but I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Do people deny that The French Revolution was, overall, a source of good for the country?
--
"Ahem! There is *sand* on my *boot*!"--Kefka Black Turtle beat me, Yesmar in the Fall 2010 Guru Contest!
The Reign of Terror was horrible, but I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Do people deny that The French Revolution was, overall, a source of good for the country?
Possibly. England never went through all that turmoil and still ended up in the same place with regard to democracy and liberty. 25 years of the French Revolution (the majority of which was under an emperor) ended up with a lost war and the Bourbon Monarchy restored.
What I'm getting at is that the revolutionaries in 1789 were moderates by 1791 standards and downright aristocratic reactionary conservatives by 1793/4 standards. The number of ultra left-wing radicals in 1789 was very low, but the Revolution steadily became more and more and more radical as it progressed. So it's not entirely hyperbole when Smuffin accuses people of being Communists. Maybe most of them are not really Communists, but history shows that it's easy enough for Communists to hijack a liberty/equality movement.
Note: While it may not technically be correct to call the Reign of Terror people Communists (it was half a century before Marx, after all), I think we may safely put them under the broad umbrella of Communism.
Though perhaps Communism is not a danger in the United States today. The conditions Marx envisioned are simply not present anymore. There are no proletariats in the United States today! Perhaps the goal should be a shift to two classes: capitalists, and unemployed noncapitalists. The working class can be completely eliminated, and with it the last embers of Marxism snuffed out.
There's a discrepancy between "the protesters are Communnists" and "there's a possibility of Communists hijacking OWS."
There is. But does it really matter?
I actually fully agree with you. The majority of the protestors are NOT violent Communists. The majority of protestors probably do NOT favor the rounding up of all the Jews. But it doesn't matter what they think, or what they want. Personally, I don't think the majority of Russians in 1917 wanted what they were about to get. The majority of Germans in the 1930s (OH GODWINS LAW HA HAH A) weren't in favor of death camps, that's why Hitler ordered propaganda films showing how great life was for the Jews who lived in cities that the Fuherer generously ordered to be given to them. It doesn't matter what the majority wants in specific if they support a regime who is evil. The majority are useful idiots.
The simple fact is, the leaders and the organizers of this movement ARE disproportionately Communist revolutionaries. They ARE anti-Semitic. There are Communist revolutionaries and anti-semites in the crowd. They are allowed to speak. Nobody shouts them down. Nobody condemns them. Nobody says, "Hey want, no, that actually sounds pretty evil." They just go along with it. They might turn to their friend and say, "Gee, that sounds kind of extreme doesn't it?" but they don't challenge it out in the open. Nobody shouted down the public school teacher who said "The Jews have been thrown out of 109 countries and it's time we throw them out of this one too." Nobody mocked and ridiculed the teenagers who showed up in Communist Chinese military uniforms. Nobody told the guy walking around with a sign of the CEO of Goldman Sach's head on a pike that he should probably leave because he was making them look bad.
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
a bunch of angry people. They had the ability to perceive that there are problems, but they lack the clarity to understand what those problems are.
That is ultimately their problem. Without understanding of the very long history and small things that made the world the way it is, they won't be able to advocate for successful changes. Just a bunch of malcontents.
--
"What if you just eat vegetarians?"-neonreaper "^ You are what you eat. ^_~"-Koiji
The simple fact is, the leaders and the organizers of this movement ARE disproportionately Communist revolutionaries. They ARE anti-Semitic. There are Communist revolutionaries and anti-semites in the crowd. They are allowed to speak. Nobody shouts them down. Nobody condemns them. Nobody says, "Hey want, no, that actually sounds pretty evil." They just go along with it. They might turn to their friend and say, "Gee, that sounds kind of extreme doesn't it?" but they don't challenge it out in the open. Nobody shouted down the public school teacher who said "The Jews have been thrown out of 109 countries and it's time we throw them out of this one too." Nobody mocked and ridiculed the teenagers who showed up in Communist Chinese military uniforms. Nobody told the guy walking around with a sign of the CEO of Goldman Sach's head on a pike that he should probably leave because he was making them look bad.
bwa ha ha
that actually happened?
Okay. Changed my mind. These bums can **** off.
--
"What if you just eat vegetarians?"-neonreaper "^ You are what you eat. ^_~"-Koiji
Very annoying. Get them out of the park down the block that I have to walk through every day. It's become a total eye sore. Their block of tents is lame, their signs are lame, the homeless looking men just chilling in lawn chairs every morning are lame, and the shelter they are trying to build in the park for when the cold and snow come is lame. I read articles about them in the paper and all the quotes are vague "we are unhappy with things" statements with no commitment in their words.
I know nothing about the politics involved. All I know is that they are taking up park space and, more annoyingly, off street parking all around my area.
Also, a 19 year old girl was raped at Occupy Cleveland.
At OWS, a Jewish man was shouted down and told "go back home you Jew bum"
At Occupy Portland, a black counter-protestor had the n-word shouted at him. Eventually he was arrested for disturbing the peace, ostensibly because he had a gun. Open carry is legal in Oregon.
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
I fully support the ideas behind the movement and understand the concerns of the majority of the protestors. I don't really understand the complains about "not having defined enough positions" because they are not politicians, they don't need to write bills with precise plans to solve the problems.They need to create shows of power to catch people's attention, wake them up, and get people involved in showing that they are unhappy with the current direction, and that it needs to change because they aren't gonna take it anymore. First you have to get people to pay attention and be willing to fight the fight before you can actually do anything about it.
--
I'm "kind of a big deal". http://img.imgcake.com/cyclo/Cyclopngegpngre.png
It seems like a bunch of recent college grads doing battling the police, some cops might be kinda rude but overall I'm on the side of the police and hope they win
--
Donny: Are they gonna hurt us, Walter? Walter: No, Donny. These men are cowards.
From: red sox 777 | #011 General consensus is probably that while there's a message in there that needs to be expressed, the movement is silly and doesn't understand what it is asking for.
As a libertarian I agree with this. I think the overall message is stupid, but its worth protesting for if the people think its that important to get their voice heard. The problem is that it seems that most of the people at the movement don't care about the message as much as being part of a movement.
--
yE frE me Kweku Ananse Papa me:http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1508/masterplumgm3.jpg
I have to disagree with you on this one, Smuffin. Lots of people got arrested at Tiananmen in 1989 too, but it doesn't mean it was justified.
You know what I'd like to see though? I want to see a major bank start declaring OWS bonuses- $1 million to be divided among its employees for each day the protests continue.
--
The box says "Online Gameplay not rated by ESRB", I should be able to trade my phallic named Wobbufetts to a bunch of 8 year olds. - MarvelousGerbil
The tea party protests were also characterized as "anti-government"
Guess how many arrests there were at those?
That doesn't prove anything. It could just as easily be that the government is more against OWS than the TP. I'm sure pro-Putin demonstrators are just fine in Russia. Not that I think that's what's going on in America, but the arrests/lack thereof is really weak evidence here for the argument that the OWS is bad.
Better just to analyze their conduct itself, rather than whether they got arrested for it.
That doesn't prove anything. It could just as easily be that the government is more against OWS than the TP. I'm sure pro-Putin demonstrators are just fine in Russia.
That's a terrible analogy though. As I said, everyone characterized the tea party as "anti-government." The police unions stood with the socialist protestors in wisconsin. Why would the police do this? And it's multiple locations throughout the country. To believe that this is the case is to believe that every police department has an irrational support of the tea party and opposition to the occupy scum. That doesn't make any sense, and there's no evidence for it. The FAR more likely and logical explanation is that the occupy people are just more violent and/or getting arrested on purpose (there's video released of SEIU activists discussing who is scheduled to get arrested that day and who isn't).
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
The police are directed by higher-up government officials, like Mayor Bloomberg, for example. I'm not saying that OWS is actually being unfairly picked on, but it's just bad reasoning to say that all these arrests prove that they are a bad movement. For another thing, an arrest is not a conviction. Look at the acts themselves; if there's no evidence from that, then there's no evidence.
The police are directed by higher-up government officials, like Mayor Bloomberg, for example
Once again though, this is happening in LOTS of independent police departments throughout the country. Also, Bloomberg is a HUGE progressive, so yeah.
Anyway, no, the amount of arrests in and of itself is not reason it's a bad movement. There are plenty of other reasons. This is just ONE MORE piece of evidence.
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
Also, the Tea Party is anti-government, but in a different way. I'd be very confident that there are more tax evaders among Tea Partiers than the OWS people. Now granted, I'm sure a much higher percentage of them owe taxes at all, but even accounting for that, there should still be a sizable margin.
Once again though, this is happening in LOTS of independent police departments throughout the country. Also, Bloomberg is a HUGE progressive, so yeah.
Bloomberg is a billionaire who cares very much about protecting the top 1%. He's as progressive as all those Wall Street people who donated to the Obama campaign are (not at all).
What's the general consensus on the Occupy movement?
The what?
(No, don't answer me to explain it or post a link. Just take that comment for what it's worth -- I'm disinterested enough in news and current affairs that I really don't know anything that's happening in the world.)
I'm not sure what tax evasion has to do with this.
Once again, the narrative trotted out by the media is that tea party protestors are violent and a danger to society, but occupy wall-street is a non-violent peaceful movement. Yet, there have been OVER TWO THOUSAND ARRESTS at OWS meetings, and, as far as I know, zero at tea party rallies.
In order to believe the original narrative, you have to believe in some sort of nation-wide conspiracy among ALL the police departments to harass and arrest the occupy protestors even if they don't deserve it, AND to ignore and leave alone the tea party protestors even if they do deserve it.
That seems like a bit much for me.
-- SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized http://img.imgcake.com/gadsdenflaggifda.gif
Once again, the narrative trotted out by the media is that tea party protestors are violent and a danger to society, but occupy wall-street is a non-violent peaceful movement.
What media is that? I've never seen this story......
If there is a media narrative against the Tea Party, it's that the people in it are uneducated and stupid. Whereas the narrative against OWS is that these people are just pathetic.
Anyway, if any media is saying that Tea Party people are apt to be violent and dangerous at protests, that's just completely not credible and they're just making themselves into a joke. Who would believe that?
No media is saying that. They have said that many tea party members use violent rhetoric, most of this kind of talk came after the giffords incident, but that is about it. Smuffin is going a bit overboard, or imagining things.
--
I'm "kind of a big deal". http://img.imgcake.com/cyclo/Cyclopngegpngre.png