[news.yahoo.com]

Summary . . . pretty much "no."

---

MR/F Guestmap: [www.mapservices.org]

I find the comparison between Occupy and TEA tactics telling and amusing.

Not to mention the dichotomy of a self-styled "unsentimental leftist" Harvard professor discussing the issue... Harvard students, who definitely either are or want to be part of the "1%". Nothing quite like the elite discussing a movement of ... the children of the elite.

The comparison with the Civil Rights movement is equally inept... the Civil Rights movement was made up quite significantly of people who were the victims. Based on a statistical study I noted, at least NYC's Occupy movement seems to have been well populated with the children of the 1%.

In the end, of course, the Occupy Movement's lack of organization and coherent structure and goals is and will continue to be its downfall.

Quote
Black
[news.yahoo.com]

Summary . . . pretty much "no."

The reason it is a no is because they "missed" their target. They should have picketed the Congress, DoJ and the White House. Nothing they were protesting was illegal. If they wanted to make them illegal, sleeping in the parks and causing mayhem was not the way to do it. Any comparison with the tea party is purely political. The tea party does it exactly the way the framers had in mind. You don't like what you see? Elect people who can bring the changes you want. Occupy could not enlist a single politician to their cause.

So, aside from the failed strategy of OWS to seek redress, would you say that their actual claims have merit?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2012 10:23AM by Acer.

Acer-
It's hard to synthesize their actual claims or demands in that herd of cats.
A lack of cohesion produces a diffuse objective.
A diffuse objective produces the same results as a fart in a windstorm. A brief smell, quickly diffused.

I'm not sure it's fair to compare the Tea Party movement to OWS, since the Tea Party movement was infiltrated by moneyed political organziations who were able to con the movement into becoming part of the system, which obviously wouldn't fly with the Occupy people. So if indeed OWS has lost its momentum, it surely has more to do with the fact that in this country money talks, and thus a movement which abhors the influence of money could in theory be rendered almost mute.

The many people who have participated/are participating in the Occupy movement may have to resign themselves that in order to achieve any real influence they are going to have to "sell out". In which case, they may actually prefer to remain small and struggling and unbeholden, whether or not it makes any sense to the rest of us.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

Quote
Acer
So, aside from the failed strategy of OWS to seek redress, would you say that their actual claims have merit?

Not sure who you're addressing, but if it's me, my answer is yes, absolutely.

---

MR/F Guestmap: [www.mapservices.org]

OWS's biggest mistake is becoming visible before having financial backing

---

but.. matt... WHO would they get backing from ? The enemy ?

Of course that works for political parties.

Their backing comes from S.E.I.U. (who pays their office rental, phones etc. in D.C.) and George Soros (who pays expenses such as printing, bus rentals to move people around etc.) I'm referring to the "new" Occupy movement, not the grassroots college kids and disenfranchised newage hippies that started the movement. I am referring to the radical anarchists that have evolved from the original folks.

This was pointed out on Fox News and I really don't care if you believe it or not.

---

If you don't stand for something, you'll probably fall for anything.

Sounds too good to be true.

BTW, that Soros guy sure gets around. I wonder if he bumps into the Koch brothers at cocktail parties and such.

I have never heard of this "new" Occupy movement, and I read Adbusters and subscribe to about four Occupy Facebook pages. Occupy DC is one of the most anaemic ones, btw.

---

"Stop thinking about art works as objects, and start thinking about them as triggers for experiences." ~ Brian Eno

No real leadership, no defined goals = no future. You can only hang out at a park for so long before people wanr their park back...

D & C

Quote
swampy
Their backing comes from S.E.I.U. (who pays their office rental, phones etc. in D.C.) and George Soros (who pays expenses such as printing, bus rentals to move people around etc.)

Where do the Illuminati & the Trilateral commision fit in?

Oh, and don't you have a mandate to put "thugs" after every mention of SEIU?

You're slipping.

Quote
mattkime
OWS's biggest mistake is becoming visible before having financial backing

Money wasn't their problem. They had enough money for what they were doing. As I said, they should have picketed the Congress and the White House. They knew that of course, but they couldn't because their buddies were in charge.

Quote
Avenger

Quote
mattkime
OWS's biggest mistake is becoming visible before having financial backing

Money wasn't their problem. They had enough money for what they were doing. As I said, they should have picketed the Congress and the White House. They knew that of course, but they couldn't because their buddies were in charge.

Sorry, matt, you're going to need to preface posts like this with some sort of irony warning (I enjoyed it, FWIW.)

---

MR/F Guestmap: [www.mapservices.org]