Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jillan

(39,451 posts)
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 09:57 AM Aug 2012

OWS has meant just as much - if not more- than the teabagger movement to politics...


This was thought just discussed on the Stephanie Miller Show...

What did OWS accomplish? They changed the entire subject in politics to Income Inequality.
The 99% vs the 1%. And that message stuck, imho alot more than people running around with teabags hanging from their hats and threatening 2nd amendment remedies.

Enter Mitt Romney and his car elevators, dressage horse, off shore bank accounts.

It's no wonder people can't stand Mitt and his snooty better than you attitude.

I would love to see 99% of Americans vote against Mitt, but of course that won't happened. 43% of Americans have been brainwashed to vote against their own best interests.

IF President Obama wins by a large % in November, I think we need to thank OWS.
98 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
OWS has meant just as much - if not more- than the teabagger movement to politics... (Original Post) jillan Aug 2012 OP
Really? I don't think they made any difference at all 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 #1
What do they say when you're at Tea Party rallies? UnrepentantLiberal Aug 2012 #2
It doesn't matter if people know who they are or not - that bottom line jillan Aug 2012 #4
I agree with you 100% Voice for Peace Aug 2012 #41
It's possible that it had a greater effect on politicians CJCRANE Aug 2012 #6
That may be true, but I think there is a sign that it is not 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 #24
Are you saying that all those hours I spent at Occupy Los Angeles (and coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #8
Yes, out here in the country you weren't even a blip on the radar 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 #22
What does 'in the country' refer to? A rural setting? I ask coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #26
You know, flyover country. UnrepentantLiberal Aug 2012 #30
Yes, northeastern WV, about a two hour drive to DC 1-Old-Man Aug 2012 #57
I live in the country, too. Zorra Aug 2012 #31
And there are some very good Occupy movements UnrepentantLiberal Aug 2012 #33
Out there in the country is probably Republican territory anyway. JDPriestly Aug 2012 #54
Spot on. raouldukelives Aug 2012 #70
Thanks. That's great news. JDPriestly Aug 2012 #73
So you think tax equality would be an issue without OWS uponit7771 Aug 2012 #34
LOL there's no way to RATIONALLY believe that tax equality would be an issue without OWS. Zalatix Aug 2012 #89
That's strange, because all polls taken on OWS showed that over 80% had heard of them sabrina 1 Aug 2012 #49
Blame your media, I can tell you right now nadinbrzezinski Aug 2012 #97
Whatever happened to that big spring surprise you promised us? zappaman Aug 2012 #98
Occupy was also international. CJCRANE Aug 2012 #3
The movement could only be ignored for so long by M$M nc4bo Aug 2012 #7
Hmmm salinen Aug 2012 #5
Weimar had proportional representation in its Reichstag. U.S. has 'winner take all' coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #10
Could you please explain this point in very simple terms? I don't get it.... (nt) philly_bob Aug 2012 #14
Um, in the Weimar Republic a poltiical party needed to only secure about coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #21
It is a myth that proportional representation had anything to do with the Nazis taking power. JackRiddler Aug 2012 #61
Proportional representation had something to do with the Nazis taking power, as Hitler would not coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #65
The Nazis were largest party in both 1932 parliamentary elections (July & November) JackRiddler Aug 2012 #68
Your point is valid for a hypothetical winner-take-all system with multiple viable parties. I might coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #71
Thanks, Coalition and Riddler, for interesting (if opposed) replies. (nt) philly_bob Aug 2012 #72
When the Nazis first came to power the Social Democrats and Communist had a combined majority. Puregonzo1188 Aug 2012 #75
Amen My Friend... KharmaTrain Aug 2012 #17
But the Baggers are not a 'movement'. They were a creation of big money interests sabrina 1 Aug 2012 #50
The Weimar Republic lasted less than 15 years RZM Aug 2012 #53
We get it. Give OWS a gold medal. randome Aug 2012 #9
LOL! You are definitely going to hold the DU record for most anti-Occupy posts by a country mile. Zorra Aug 2012 #36
nonsense. yes, coining the one percent line distilled the cali Aug 2012 #11
Your argument is an exercise in SHEER DENIAL. Zalatix Aug 2012 #23
No, my argument is factual. cali Aug 2012 #25
Your argument is as factual as Mitt Romney is a leftist. Zalatix Aug 2012 #29
wow. couldn't possibly argue with that brilliant gem cali Aug 2012 #37
Well hey at least my arguments don't come from Bizarro Land Zalatix Aug 2012 #42
Which of the following is true: onenote Aug 2012 #46
OWS has pushed a number of Dems to the left. Zalatix Aug 2012 #48
The people who turn up at Democratic Club meetings are the same ones JDPriestly Aug 2012 #55
I don't see any facts. Quantify them. nt Union Scribe Aug 2012 #76
OWS has helped bring together people to help those being illegally thrown out of their homes... midnight Aug 2012 #12
The tea party was sponsored by Fox News. Blanks Aug 2012 #16
I agree... midnight Aug 2012 #60
Yes, the Occupy Caucus in Congress has really accomplished so much! frazzled Aug 2012 #13
Frazzled you make an impressive point... I'm wondering if that list would not be so long if not for midnight Aug 2012 #64
But OWS has no intention of working inside government frazzled Aug 2012 #67
My humble suggestion-keep reading what you can about OWS. It is a world wide movement regardless if midnight Aug 2012 #78
how many OWS representatives have been elected? NightWatcher Aug 2012 #15
The teabaggers are heavily funded by the Koch Bros and more. OWS does not have the $ behind jillan Aug 2012 #18
sure, but that doesn't make the claim in your op any more accurate cali Aug 2012 #19
OWS never intended to become politicians. UnrepentantLiberal Aug 2012 #32
The fact is, Democrats are supposed to represent OWS. Zorra Aug 2012 #40
Even my Republican friends throw around "the 1%" Patiod Aug 2012 #20
Has the OWS movement figured out how to balance the budget? Southerner Aug 2012 #27
that's an absurd non-sequitur cali Aug 2012 #28
Yes. Zorra Aug 2012 #38
Yes. Blanks Aug 2012 #69
for the first time in a generation - OWS made the subject of inequitable distribution of wealth a Douglas Carpenter Aug 2012 #35
i agree samsingh Aug 2012 #39
OWS is 'movement' politics while Teat Party is electoral politics. TahitiNut Aug 2012 #43
You exaggerate their value and "success" kctim Aug 2012 #44
Gotta disagree. Beautiful concept. Disastrous execution. Tarheel_Dem Aug 2012 #45
1+ patrice Aug 2012 #80
No, and drop the fantasy. One side mobilized and elected 60+ people to congress, the other side cecilfirefox Aug 2012 #47
There is no comparison between a real Grassroots, International Social Justice movement sabrina 1 Aug 2012 #51
"The Tea Party" is an old, old part of the Republican Party... JackRiddler Aug 2012 #63
So how many congressmen/women in their caucus? badtoworse Aug 2012 #52
Electoral politics by itself has given us a congress.. Teamster Jeff Aug 2012 #58
That's pretty difficult to argue RZM Aug 2012 #56
Well, Obama hasn't told us to eat our peas in a while DerekG Aug 2012 #59
Indeed. And "Teabagger Movement" is a laugh in itself. JackRiddler Aug 2012 #62
Yep, woo me with science Aug 2012 #84
I'm one of the guys that decry OWS as a waste of potential. MrSlayer Aug 2012 #66
So get out there and show them how to do it. JackRiddler Aug 2012 #74
Every time I've seen an interview with an OWSer... Scootaloo Aug 2012 #81
That would be true if you didn't ignore what happened. JackRiddler Aug 2012 #82
And why are they bowing their heads to that authority? Scootaloo Aug 2012 #85
Go out and lead the charge, tough one. JackRiddler Aug 2012 #92
By the way, are you comparing today's US urban police to Bull Connor? JackRiddler Aug 2012 #93
Do I approve? You really want to try that? Scootaloo Aug 2012 #94
I do appreciate the part where I'm a kid! Thanks! JackRiddler Aug 2012 #95
+100! zappaman Aug 2012 #96
I tried. I got crickets. MrSlayer Aug 2012 #87
Lol @ how HARD some push against Union Scribe Aug 2012 #77
OWS & President Obama!!! That's hilarious. The single biggest trait of OWS has been Obama hate. patrice Aug 2012 #79
Before I call bullshit, I'll ask a question to be sure... JackRiddler Aug 2012 #83
I'll be honest - I don't understand fainaent Aug 2012 #86
First of all, Welcome to DU. jillan Aug 2012 #88
Ah, I see... fainaent Aug 2012 #91
No, the OWS movement became an unfocused mess without force CabCurious Aug 2012 #90

1-Old-Man

(2,667 posts)
1. Really? I don't think they made any difference at all
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:00 AM
Aug 2012

I could walk up to the road and ask every person who drove by what OWS stood for and I'd be willing to bet that not one out of a hundred could tell me what it stood for. And if I asked them what Occupy Wall Street accomplished I'm sure I'd get blank stares too. Ask about the Tea Party and every single one of them will know what I'm talking about.

jillan

(39,451 posts)
4. It doesn't matter if people know who they are or not - that bottom line
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:04 AM
Aug 2012

is they changed a large portion of dialogue in politics to income inequality.

1-Old-Man

(2,667 posts)
24. That may be true, but I think there is a sign that it is not
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:52 AM
Aug 2012

I had hopes that OWS would change everything, but that certainly hasn't happened. It seems to me that if it effected the politicians then you would see comments about it prominent in the pre-election debate. But its not. Democrats don't mention it, Republicans don't mention it. So how much of an effect did it have? Republican obstruction in the Congress didn't relent a bit, the President did not direct Holder to prosecute the banksters, social justice was not improved. So just how much effect did OWS have? I say none.

 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
8. Are you saying that all those hours I spent at Occupy Los Angeles (and
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:08 AM
Aug 2012

thinking and writing about it afterwards) were for nought? At a bare minimum, OLA recharged my revolutionary batteries (which were badly in need of a power boost) - OLA made me feel there was some hope for the human race after all. That's no small feat.

 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
26. What does 'in the country' refer to? A rural setting? I ask
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:56 AM
Aug 2012

because OWS v 2.0 may need to modify its outreach, maybe restore the old Progressive urban-rural alliance.

1-Old-Man

(2,667 posts)
57. Yes, northeastern WV, about a two hour drive to DC
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 03:42 PM
Aug 2012

Look, I'm not saying I've got a thing in the world against OWS, I'm just saying it had no effect and while for a short time it was a subject of derision in the news today its as if it never happened.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
31. I live in the country, too.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 11:42 AM
Aug 2012

Most intelligent, youngish people here seem to know a lot about Occupy. As does the older liberal-alternative crowd.

I guess maybe it is because they are, generally, much more skilled in using electronic social networking devices, such as the internet, where news of the world is easily accessible.

RW fundies, and other semi-literate, ignorant folks, not so much. They get their info from Fox News, and probably know a bit more about the Tea Party for sure, although very, very few of them really have a clue as to what the Tea Party really is.

2011 Person of the Year: The Protester | Dec. 26, 2011

http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20111226,00.html#ixzz239m6NoEc

Linguists name 'occupy' as 2011's word of the year

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-01-07/us/us_2011-word-of-year_1_linguists-american-dialect-society-new-words-committee?_s=PM:US

 

UnrepentantLiberal

(11,700 posts)
33. And there are some very good Occupy movements
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 11:53 AM
Aug 2012

in the South and Midwest.

I don't think the person you're responding to intends to stick around for long.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
54. Out there in the country is probably Republican territory anyway.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 03:07 PM
Aug 2012

I don't think there is much OWS out in the country, and that may be why people out there in the country don't know about it. It did not receive its fair share of time in the mainstream media. It is best known to those of us who live in cities and could go and visit the campsites.

But it is clear to me that both the Romney and Obama campaigns are responding to the issues that OWS raised - - fairness in taxation, in regulation, in trade, in employment, in our families -- fairness. That is the most important issue in this election -- fairness. How do we as a nation define it?

Does it mean that drug addicts waste away in prison while the crooks on Wall Street enjoy their mansions and swimming pools?

Out there in the country, people do not see the disparity of wealth and what it means in their lives. They don't see it because the fabulously wealthy do not flaunt their wealth in small town Oklahoma -- even if they happen to own some land or a house there.

OWS has brought the reality about what Reaganism, the Wall Street mania for speed trading and computer trading and the crash of October 2008 have meant to the country.

If we didn't have OWS, we would have to invent it. OWS can be criticized for having created such a ruckus, but that criticism fails in my view because it is only thanks to OWS that our politicians are aware of the fact that we are not happy with the way the rich steal from the poor, the rich take their profits and shove their losses -- their garbage on the government and the rest of society.

OWS changed the conversation in the country. And unlike the Tea Baggers, OWS grew up out of the discontent in the country and not out of some high-budget think tank.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
70. Spot on.
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 10:19 AM
Aug 2012

I'm fairly rural and OWS (what little was know of it from the TV & radio) was marked off as petulant trust fund kids from Berkeley with nothing better to do and criminals.
However, even if they haven't noticed OWS they are starting to notice the changing weather. I have started to perceive even a little anger at the elements they can plainly see are responsible for changing the land they claim to love. Some are even a little sad they have assisted by voting for local candidates and investing in the companies they allowed in.
For this I am truly thankful. Preserving and, dare I say, conserving the natural landscape they have lived their lives in is important to them after all. I had my doubts.
It's only a matter of time before they fully come around. I just hope it is not too late by then.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
73. Thanks. That's great news.
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 05:31 PM
Aug 2012

I wish that the people in rural areas had listened to the warnings of experts about the environment years ago.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
49. That's strange, because all polls taken on OWS showed that over 80% had heard of them
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 02:39 PM
Aug 2012

and their message in the first few months of their existence and for the most agreed with it, even if they didn't agree with them occupying public places eg.

And nearly everyone I know, since we're using anecdotes to prove points, knows who they are and what their message is.

Tell me, how on earth could anyone NOT what the message is considering what they call themselves OCCUPY WALL STREET!

Only a few extremists on the far right would make themselves look that stupid, to say 'but, but what is the message of OCCUPY WALL STREET? DUH! as some of them like to say.

That's like asking 'But who is buried in Grant's Tomb'? Lol!

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
97. Blame your media, I can tell you right now
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 02:49 PM
Aug 2012

and there is more, they have moved to phase two, and at least locally they are a major difference in local politics already.

This is a corporate media meme, and the corporate media has it in it's interest NOT to cover OWS accurately, or for that matter labor.

nc4bo

(17,651 posts)
7. The movement could only be ignored for so long by M$M
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:08 AM
Aug 2012

Like it or not the movement received attention and the message resonated.

The conversation went from to they have a point and because their message was harmful to the 1%, negative incidences were covered more than the message itself. Too late, that message got out anyway.

Some heard it loud and clear.

 

salinen

(7,288 posts)
5. Hmmm
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:05 AM
Aug 2012

IMO the baggers are the most powerful political and social movement to appear in decades. They have been fashioned for many years by hate radio and fox and have evolved into a force that may overtake an entire political party.

It's past time to consider the baggers as an apparition. They are here, they are mean, they are violent, they hate, and they are prideful.

Dangerous as in Weirmar dangerous.

 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
10. Weimar had proportional representation in its Reichstag. U.S. has 'winner take all'
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:12 AM
Aug 2012

system. So I doubt tea-baggers willl ever be 'Weimar dangerous' in that sense.

 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
21. Um, in the Weimar Republic a poltiical party needed to only secure about
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:47 AM
Aug 2012

5% of the popular vote in national elections to secure at least some representation in its national assembly (the Reichstag). In the U.S., a candidate must win a plurality of the vote in any legislative race to be seated in the House or Senate. So if the teabaggers receive 5% of the vote nationally but none of its candidates receive pluralities in the specific legislative elections, no teabagger will be seated in the House or Senate.

Since most public opinion polls show that teabagger support has peaked and started to decline, I fail to see how the teabaggers are 'Weimar dangerous' (to quote the post to which I was responding with its typo silently corrected). Yes, teabaggers may win individual house and senate seats, but they lack the strength to seize the reins of government the way the Nazi Party did in 1933.

N.B. I'm assuming this is what Salinen meant when he wrote 'Weirmar dangerous' (sic).

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
61. It is a myth that proportional representation had anything to do with the Nazis taking power.
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 01:08 AM
Aug 2012

Growing to be the largest party did, however.

German industrialists and bankers decided to back the Nazis. That was the proximate cause.

 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
65. Proportional representation had something to do with the Nazis taking power, as Hitler would not
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 03:29 AM
Aug 2012

Last edited Sat Aug 11, 2012, 11:17 AM - Edit history (1)

have been a plausible candidate for Hindenburg to appoint Chancellor (with Papen's connivance) without the Nazi Party having won more than 30% in parliamentary elections in the early 30s.

As for German industrialists and bankers having decided to back the Nazis, I do think that the bankers and industrialists along with traditional Prussian and Hessian conservatives believed that they could control or co-opt Hitler once they had brought him into the government. That they in turn would be controlled and co-opted by Hitler probably never entered into their calculations.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
68. The Nazis were largest party in both 1932 parliamentary elections (July & November)
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 07:59 AM
Aug 2012

In a winner-take-all system, they would have been in power immediately. Because of proportional representation, they were blocked from taking power until they found a willing partner in January 1933. So you're making the opposite point: the only effect of PR per se was to delay the seizure of power.

This is important, because the mere association of a PR system with the almost unique case of a popular extremist movement determined to take power by any means regardless of law has been used (wrongly) as a propaganda bludgeon against PR.

As for the industrialists and bankers who chose to back the Nazis and write the letter to Hindenburg urging Hitler's appointment, whatever they may have imagined about their ability to control Hitler once he was chancellor is irrelevant to the fact that their support was key in getting him there.

 

coalition_unwilling

(14,180 posts)
71. Your point is valid for a hypothetical winner-take-all system with multiple viable parties. I might
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 10:31 AM
Aug 2012

merely observe that a hypothetical winner-take-all system with only two major parties (like ours) might have blocked the Nazis from power (assuming their 32% of the vote nationally was not substantially augmented by neo-Nazi Centre Party and deluded Labor Party voters). If, as common sense suggests, Centre and Labor had flocked to the single non-Nazi alternative, the Nazis would have lost in a landslide in any winner-take-all race.

N.B. I actually favor PR over our current antiquated and dilapidated system with its legacy throwbacks to antebellum fashion (got to keep the slaveowners happy) and anti-democratic stylings (California and Wyoming have equal representation in the U.S. Senate).

As for myself, I see the elite's support of the Nazis as 'necessary, but not sufficient.' It took a weasel like von Papen whispering in Hindenburg's ear to provide the necessary gravitas to make Hitler Chancellor.

Puregonzo1188

(1,948 posts)
75. When the Nazis first came to power the Social Democrats and Communist had a combined majority.
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:03 AM
Aug 2012

They refused to link up against the Nazis and they subsequently came to power.

This very likely could have happened with first past the vote. I don't know.

KharmaTrain

(31,706 posts)
17. Amen My Friend...
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:31 AM
Aug 2012

I usually avoid OWS threads as they tend to be more polarizing than enlightening. You hit a major point that has been my major contention with OWS. While it's wonderful to be politically energized and want to express your frustration/anger, the way to gain results is not by sitting in drum circles, it's organizing voters and pushing politicians to listen and then accept objectives of the group (or councils or whatever you want to call them). It's working to get results inside the system as opposed to standing outside and being ignored. This is what teabaggers have been able to do with the heavy funding of right wing corportists who have been able to convince people to vote against their best interests. Both groups are similar as they're throwing "political tantrum"...just one group IS being heard, the other is still struggling to find a voice.

The fact the teabaggers are dominated by corportists is a very good comparison to Weimar as people's frustrations were used to specific political advantage leading to disastrous results. Unfortunately I expect you (and me) to get jumped on in this thread cause we're not "getting it"...



Cheers...

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
50. But the Baggers are not a 'movement'. They were a creation of big money interests
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 02:43 PM
Aug 2012

in order to speed up the process of privatizing everything and ridding the country of all Social Safety Nets and the Republicans apparently needed a push to get the job done faster. They are Republicans.

OWS is a Social Justice Movement, a grass roots movement that is International also. It is not attached, as the Baggers are, to any political party.

I agree that the Bagger creation by Wall Street interests is a dangerous thing. Any time Big Money creates an entity to go after the People's Interests, it is very dangerous for the people.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
53. The Weimar Republic lasted less than 15 years
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 03:04 PM
Aug 2012

The US is well north of 200. That makes quite a difference.

Democracy doesn't exist in a vacuum, nor can it be imposed overnight. It requires a solid foundation of laws, customs, and basic belief in it to survive. Those take a lot of time to develop. Weimar was relatively deficient in all of those things and was also saddled with terrible economic problems. And on top of all of that, they then had to contend with the Great Depression.

More apt modern comparisons to Weimar would be places that are new to Democracy, such as Russia or Iran. Not coincidentally, many of them aren't doing so hot in the democracy department right now.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
9. We get it. Give OWS a gold medal.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:10 AM
Aug 2012

Maybe then they'll stop talking about themselves all the time. (Doubt it.)

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
36. LOL! You are definitely going to hold the DU record for most anti-Occupy posts by a country mile.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 12:03 PM
Aug 2012

It is odd, and intriguing, that any DUer would, very apparently, despise such a clearly left wing progressive movement with such intensity and persistence.

Are you a proponent of the ideology of the Third Way and its goals?

Are you pro-Wall St.?

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
11. nonsense. yes, coining the one percent line distilled the
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:13 AM
Aug 2012

inequality argument, but that's really about it. If you think that they invented the argument, well, that's just absurd.

And Mitt's luggage would have been just as heavy without OWS.

But beyond that, the TP has taken, in large part, control of the republican party. At the very least they're a major influence. They've successfully run candidates.

OWS is not much of a movement and in politics it's but a very, very small influence.

Thank them if Obama wins? They'll have had virtually nothing to do with it.

I'm sorry, but your op is wishful thinking- fantasy.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
23. Your argument is an exercise in SHEER DENIAL.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:51 AM
Aug 2012

By moving the national political toward inequality and not the poor put-upon rich, OWS has laid the groundwork for Dems with a spine to make a major resurgence for working class advocacy.

OWS is holding the Democratic Party's feet to the fire.



 

cali

(114,904 posts)
25. No, my argument is factual.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:55 AM
Aug 2012

you're living in fantasy land if you believe that OWS is having a major influence on the dem party.

onenote

(42,690 posts)
46. Which of the following is true:
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 02:25 PM
Aug 2012

The TP has pushed many repubs and Democrats further to the right.

OWS has pushed many Democrats and Repubs further to the left.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
48. OWS has pushed a number of Dems to the left.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 02:33 PM
Aug 2012

Also, Elizabeth Warren is in full support of OWS.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
55. The people who turn up at Democratic Club meetings are the same ones
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 03:17 PM
Aug 2012

who turned up pre-OWS. But the enthusiasm now is much greater in Democratic circles than it was post-Obama, 2010 and that is, in great part, due to OWS and to Madison, Wisconsin's union movement.

OWS has brought new life to the Democratic Party. Nobody talks about it directly, but it's there when you go to meetings. If OWS can do it, so can we who are active in the Democratic Party.

OWS changed attitudes. It really cheered a lot of us up. It has given us new hope after Obama's rather drab first two years. I think it has also given Obama a little boost. I say that because he is focusing much more on the injustice of economic inequality than he did even in 2008. He is still talking about bringing people together, but I think that OWS and other changes in the economy, etc. have made Obama more aware of the fact that you can't bring people together as long as one segment of them is bullying and oppressing the other. Can't be done. Obama did not seem to recognize that until this year.

So, I think OWS has made a big, big difference.

midnight

(26,624 posts)
12. OWS has helped bring together people to help those being illegally thrown out of their homes...
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:21 AM
Aug 2012

Portland, OR – Sunday night, August 5th, at approximately 11pm, six officers from the Portland Police forced their way into a newly created community center inside of a duplex owned by Alicia Jackson, and arrested one person inside. The duplex was reclaimed earlier in the day by approximately 250 people from the surrounding community during a neighborhood block party. The duplex was built on land that belongs to Ms. Jackson, which had been illegally foreclosed on by the banks in 2011.

“The neighbors have shown that they support this community center and are opposed to this duplex contributing to the gentrification of this neighborhood. The police came in tonight protecting the banks and the developers that are selling out our community and profiting out of the pockets of working people,” says Alicia Jackson. “Developers should not be allowed to profit from stolen land.”

Ms. Jackson had self-evicted from her home, adjacent to the duplex, in late 2011 after a long period of intimidation from the banks and financial institutions. After her illegal foreclosure, the bank sold her home and land, which was then divided and sold to a developer who then built the duplex. The community reclaimed Ms. Jackson’s home on May 1st, 2012. She has been living in the home with the support of her neighbors since then. Ms. Jackson is a member of the Black Working Group and has been organizing with her neighbors to stop the gentrification in NE Portland. The Black Working Group and Blazing Arrow Organization supported Annette Steele in defending her home against eviction on Friday, July 27th.

During the day on Sunday, August 5th, Alicia Jackson hosted a block party on her street in NE Portland where the community and neighbors helped to reclaim and liberate the duplex built on her land. The duplex was intended by the neighbors to be transformed into a community center for people, specifically youth of color, that would house an edible food garden, community fitness center, and meeting space for organizing against gentrification and violence in the neighborhood. These home and community center liberations are part of a broader movement to fight foreclosure and defend the historic people of color communities in north and northeast Portland. The duplex had not been inhabited since construction.

http://occupywallst.org/

P.S. So I think you will be correct, because this movement is bringing people together to help those who need it, and even those not protesting are aware that we need to move away from the Wall Street mantra of tax cuts will create jobs mantra..
So this could swing into a bigger support for Obama that without them could of been wiped out by the tea baggers..



Blanks

(4,835 posts)
16. The tea party was sponsored by Fox News.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:30 AM
Aug 2012

When Michelle Bachmann dropped out of the race (as the tea party candidate) because she wasn't getting the votes; that showed how much support the tea party has in this country. A lot on Fox News; not really all that much among voters.

I'm sure if the Occupy movement had its own 24 hr TV ad campaign; its message would be more clear.

I'd like to see more from the Occupy movement; I hope they're active again in the fall.

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
13. Yes, the Occupy Caucus in Congress has really accomplished so much!
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:22 AM
Aug 2012

Oh, I forgot, there is no Occupy Caucus in Congress. There is (unfortunately) a substantial Tea Party Caucus, however, and they've held the entire nation and every progressive piece of legislation hostage for the past two years:

The caucus chair is Michele Bachmann of Minnesota. Of a total possible 435 Representatives, as of March 31, 2011 the committee has 61 members, all Republicans.[15]
Sandy Adams, Florida
Robert Aderholt, Alabama
Todd Akin, Missouri
Rodney Alexander, Louisiana
Michele Bachmann, Minnesota, Chair
Roscoe Bartlett, Maryland
Joe Barton, Texas
Gus Bilirakis, Florida
Rob Bishop, Utah
Diane Black, Tennessee
Michael C. Burgess, Texas
Paul Broun, Georgia
Dan Burton, Indiana
John Carter, Texas
Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
Howard Coble, North Carolina
Mike Coffman, Colorado
Ander Crenshaw, Florida
John Culberson, Texas
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Stephen Fincher, Tennessee
John Fleming, Louisiana
Trent Franks, Arizona
Phil Gingrey, Georgia
Louie Gohmert, Texas
Vicky Hartzler, Missouri
Wally Herger, California
Tim Huelskamp, Kansas
Lynn Jenkins, Kansas
Steve King, Iowa
Doug Lamborn, Colorado
Jeff Landry, Louisiana
Blaine Luetkemeyer, Missouri
Kenny Marchant, Texas
Tom McClintock, California
David McKinley, West Virginia
Gary Miller, California
Mick Mulvaney, South Carolina
Randy Neugebauer, Texas
Rich Nugent, Florida
Steven Palazzo, Mississippi
Steve Pearce, New Mexico
Mike Pence, Indiana
Ted Poe, Texas
Tom Price, Georgia
Denny Rehberg, Montana
Phil Roe, Tennessee
Dennis Ross, Florida
Ed Royce, California
Steve Scalise, Louisiana
Tim Scott, South Carolina
Pete Sessions, Texas
Adrian Smith, Nebraska
Lamar Smith, Texas
Cliff Stearns, Florida
Tim Walberg, Michigan
Joe Walsh, Illinois
Allen West, Florida
Lynn Westmoreland, Georgia
Joe Wilson, South Carolina
[edit]Members of Senate Caucus

Jim DeMint (South Carolina)[5]
Mike Lee (Utah)[5]
Jerry Moran (Kansas)
Rand Paul (Kentucky)[5

If your raison d'etre is to remain outside the political system, and to live in a park, you're never going to accomplish much beyond a slogan (a good one, but it was conceived by a single ad man).

midnight

(26,624 posts)
64. Frazzled you make an impressive point... I'm wondering if that list would not be so long if not for
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 01:23 AM
Aug 2012

thirty years of ALEC sponsored bills and Koch paid rallies... Remember OWS is coming up on their first year anniversary... And their rallies have been Koch blocked with Goldman Sachs police dept... I think given the short amount of time, and the pittance of money tOWS has, they have made an impressive national presence for themselves.. Remember the Koch boys are working with the second generation of the John Bircher's who essentially morphed into AlEC ... And that is one secret entity that was been beaten out of the bushes in Wisconsin by a Madison Professor. This brave man almost lost his job for letting the Wisconsin people know who was writing these bizarre laws. Well anyways, the OWS movement took off not to long after the Wisconsin people roared...

And another good point you make about no OWS presence in Congress... I think the one who stands most audibly as a voice of the 99% is Bernie Sanders.. We don't have much right now, but what we have is this wonderful caring man...

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
67. But OWS has no intention of working inside government
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 07:51 AM
Aug 2012

That has been one of the few expressed positions of the movement. It is essentially anarchist in its outlook, spurning government institutions in equal measure to the economic system. Besides, even if a member wanted to run, OWS is just not a moniker they could hang their hat on for a general public. Chalking sidewalks and camping in public parks are just not the kinds of relevant experiences or causes that the average voter wants to see in a candidate.

In my (humble) opinion, OWS was a good idea that burnt itself out through its own excesses and indifference to real-world political and policy concerns. It's too bad, but that is the reality of the moment. It doesn't even have much support on a place like DU. And the Kochs have nothing to do with that.

midnight

(26,624 posts)
78. My humble suggestion-keep reading what you can about OWS. It is a world wide movement regardless if
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:09 AM
Aug 2012

you feel D.U. supports it... And the apathy you feel means the Koch boys are getting their moneys worth.... Just saying...

"Hundreds of protesters are expected to descend on Washington Tuesday for its "Occupy Congress" effort. But this time, they don't want to just rail against the system — they plan to work within it."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71411.html

Occupy Congress ~ #J17 ~ 17th January 2012 ~- 'Let us all Unite'

&feature=player_embedded

jillan

(39,451 posts)
18. The teabaggers are heavily funded by the Koch Bros and more. OWS does not have the $ behind
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:34 AM
Aug 2012

them.

It makes a big difference when you have millionaires buying your seat in Congress for you.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
19. sure, but that doesn't make the claim in your op any more accurate
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:39 AM
Aug 2012

the sad fact is that the TP has had and continues to have a far, far, far greater impact on the political front than OWS.

 

UnrepentantLiberal

(11,700 posts)
32. OWS never intended to become politicians.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 11:45 AM
Aug 2012

It was simply an attempt to bring awareness to the fact that Washington DC is controlled by Wall Street. In that they succeeded. They had a real impact on the political dialog in this country.

The Tea Party is not a real movement. It was funded by the Koch brothers from day one. It was designed to move the Republican Party to the right. In that it succeeded.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
40. The fact is, Democrats are supposed to represent OWS.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 12:36 PM
Aug 2012

We are the 99%. We, the People.

It's so ironic that you totally missed this. It would almost be funny, if it weren't so ineffably sad.

These are some of the Democrats who have genuinely represented us.



The fact is, Democrats are supposed to represent OWS:

Declaration of the Occupation of New York City
This document was accepted by the NYC General Assembly on September 29, 2011

As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.
They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.
They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.
They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.
They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.
They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.
They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.
They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.
They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.
They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.
They have sold our privacy as a commodity.
They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press.
They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.
They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.
They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.
They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit.
They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.
They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.
They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.
They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.
They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.
They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.*

To the people of the world,

We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.

Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.

To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal.

Join us and make your voices heard!

Patiod

(11,816 posts)
20. Even my Republican friends throw around "the 1%"
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 10:40 AM
Aug 2012

One Republican friend is on the verge of losing her construction business, and says "I call my new marketing strategy 'the 1% plan' -- we sell work to the 1%, because they're the only ones with any money anymore."

Another Republican friend who is struggling with her business heard that and agreed with her, saying she has moved from marketing a useful consumer product to marketing over-priced skin care products to the very rich.

So the concept that all the money has pooled at the top has gotten through to everyone, even Republicans, and OWS get the credit.

Southerner

(113 posts)
27. Has the OWS movement figured out how to balance the budget?
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 11:07 AM
Aug 2012

IMHO, NOTHING else matters until we tackle that huge problem.

Douglas Carpenter

(20,226 posts)
35. for the first time in a generation - OWS made the subject of inequitable distribution of wealth a
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 12:00 PM
Aug 2012

mainstream part of the discussion. They didn't invent the idea. But they sure as hell did bring it back to life. A subject that mainstream and respectable Democrats had been avoiding like the plague for a long, long time.

TahitiNut

(71,611 posts)
43. OWS is 'movement' politics while Teat Party is electoral politics.
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 01:06 PM
Aug 2012

Bizarrely enough, each lacks the other side ... OWS has no electoral component and the Teat Partiers have no viable policy component. (Knee-jerk reactionaries are often like that.)

cecilfirefox

(784 posts)
47. No, and drop the fantasy. One side mobilized and elected 60+ people to congress, the other side
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 02:32 PM
Aug 2012

sang songs and sat in parks.

Really, really? I give them credit for coining the terms 99% and 1%, people know what that means now... But no, its not comparable. At. All.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
51. There is no comparison between a real Grassroots, International Social Justice movement
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 02:51 PM
Aug 2012

and a Creation of Big Money that is attached to a Political Party.

The Teabag entity is merely a well-funded political strategy made up ONLY of Republicans and it is part of the Republican Party. It was created by Republicans For Republicans. It is not a 'movement' although they tried to sell it that way until people began doing some digging and found out who was behind it.

To try to compare the two makes no sense. There simply is not comparison.

Social Justice Movements also have more longevity than these politically created entities even though they may have short term success. The issues that brought about the Civil Rights Movement and OWS ensure that they will last until those issues are resolved, and they will not always be successful along the way.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
63. "The Tea Party" is an old, old part of the Republican Party...
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 01:22 AM
Aug 2012

So there's no surprise in their ability to elect "60-plus" people to Congress.

The Tea Party was embraced by the Republicans, because it was little more than a rebranding of the conservative wing in the wake of a disastrous 2008 election performance. It was financed by the usual Republican backers to the tune of more than a hundred million dollars, and lead by Republican politicians. It followed the model of Gingrich's "Contract With America" to stir up hysteria about a "socialist" president and deficits and use it to capture the House.

The question is, why did it even work? What lameness in the initial year of Obama allowed this disastrous shift in initiative back to the Republicans? How did the millions on the street for Obama turn into crickets, while thousands of Tea Partiers were treated as though they were millions?

And what's wrong with (most of) the Democrats? Why aren't they interested in organizing and supporting their own base, the way the Republicans did? Why do they push away calls for equality and social justice?

When the Democrats embrace and pander to OWS, and when OWS gets a hundred million dollars from rich sponsors overnight to throw around, then we can make your comparison.

Teamster Jeff

(1,598 posts)
58. Electoral politics by itself has given us a congress..
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 03:49 PM
Aug 2012

with single digit approval ratings. Americans rightly believe that Congress if populated by useless, low character hacks who are unable or unwilling to address our problems. People are pissed! If some want to get in the streets (OWS) and raise some hell I say more power to them.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
56. That's pretty difficult to argue
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 03:18 PM
Aug 2012

As has been pointed out, the tea party has people in Congress. Even when they've lost their races, they have made their will known by winning primaries or challenging sitting congresspeople who were supposedly 'safe.' You could even argue they've had effects that benefit Democrats. Without Sharon Angle and Christine O'Donnell, you'd probably have two less Democratic senators right now.

They jumped into electoral politics immediately, while OWS has stayed aloof from electoral politics. OWS probably has had some effect on discourse and the way certain issues are framed. But some effect on discourse isn't the same as tangible things like what bills are proposed or make it through Congress. Besides, the tea party has had its own effect on discourse too. I don't know whether they've had as much as OWS has, but they've had some.

Plus, the tea party had a head start. They've been around for a few years, while OWS isn't even a year old yet.

DerekG

(2,935 posts)
59. Well, Obama hasn't told us to eat our peas in a while
Fri Aug 10, 2012, 04:03 PM
Aug 2012

At the very least, he knows that if his administration tries any of that austerity shit again, he's gonna have a fight on his hands.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
62. Indeed. And "Teabagger Movement" is a laugh in itself.
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 01:16 AM
Aug 2012

That wasn't a movement, it was a marketing campaign to revive the Republican Party, financed to the tune of more than a hundred million and given constant coverage and usually support by the corporate media.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
84. Yep,
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 01:07 AM
Aug 2012

Just as the Third Way is corporate-created and financed.

(They don't seek the media coverage, though, because of not wanting their actual policies to be trumpeted around to people who think they are Democrats...)

 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
66. I'm one of the guys that decry OWS as a waste of potential.
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 03:47 AM
Aug 2012

Because of the anti-voting and anti-political involvement. However, before the initial occupation both "sides" were talking austerity. It wasn't a question of if it was going to happen, it was a question of how deep to cut. The 99% campaign is one of the best in recent history and did change the conversation.

For all the wasted potential afterward, they did have a great debut.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
74. So get out there and show them how to do it.
Sat Aug 11, 2012, 10:05 PM
Aug 2012

First, you are very mistaken about "anti-political involvement." Politics goes far beyond the electoral show. Occupy is extremely involved, that is why it was so effective.

Second, the relative effectiveness ended mainly because of a state crackdown on everyone's right to free assembly.

Third, you are also mistaken about "anti-voting." Occupy is not involved in electoral politics, but this doesn't necessarily mean anti-voting.

Fourth, the "Tea Party" was embraced by the Republican Party and received tens of millions of dollars in funding. And this is because other than a brief period, this was an astroturfed sham - a rebranding of the conservative Republicans.

Fifth, no party has embraced Occupy. Why not?

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
81. Every time I've seen an interview with an OWSer...
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:37 AM
Aug 2012

They stress that they are nonpolitical, that they feel there's no point to voting, and all the usual stuff. I don't know if this is just selective interviewing or what, but there you go.

And that's a problem. I support OWS and what it stands for... The problem is that all it's doing is standing. If they want change, they're going to have to go one of two directions.

1) get involved in the electoral process.
or
2) learn how to engage in direct action protest. Go all Birmingham Lunch Counter or something.

You can't mill around in an aimless herd, with cute signs and drum circles, and actually get stuff done. it's like what's wrong with Greenpeace; "observing" hasn't saved a single damn whale, has it? Similarly, talking about the banksters hasn't really done anything about them, and no politician is going to change that status quo unless forced to do so

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
82. That would be true if you didn't ignore what happened.
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:55 AM
Aug 2012

OWS protests were forcibly removed in a coordinated, nationwide crackdown. They were aiming to stay in the field and peacefully disrupt business as usual in all of these cities, and you can be certain that if the encampments had gone through the winter, this would be a different country today. There would be tens of thousands on the street in Lower Manhattan every day. What happened instead was a revocation of everyone's right to free assembly. The authorities choose if you get to protest.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
85. And why are they bowing their heads to that authority?
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 01:25 AM
Aug 2012

Bull Connor couldn't keep people down with hoses, dogs, and cavalry charges.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
92. Go out and lead the charge, tough one.
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:29 PM
Aug 2012

I've seen a great many people take the violence and persist, and be arrested.

Maybe you missed it in your faithful research by teevee.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
93. By the way, are you comparing today's US urban police to Bull Connor?
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 12:04 AM
Aug 2012

If so, shouldn't your main concern be about their behavior, rather than making cheap points mocking protesters? Or do you approve the use of modern-day Bull Connor tactics - pepper spray, kettling, clubbing, fake-outs and mass arrests - on Occupy protesters?

Your comment is extremely insulting to the fighters for justice then and now, and ignorant of the many years of fighting and pain the Civil Rights movement had to endure, during which unfortunately the Bull Connors prevailed, before it grew to the point of successful resistance that you describe in such a cavalier manner.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
94. Do I approve? You really want to try that?
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 06:08 AM
Aug 2012

Jack, while I'm glad that you and all the other generationally over-privileged white kids have finally discovered police brutality, you might not want to try to use it for every occasion. Just because someone thinks more could be getting done on the part of the protestors, does not mean that they are a supporter of that sort of brutality. it's a false dichotomy you're erecting there, Jack. "Fer us er agin' us" is as fucking stupid coming from you as it is coming from GWB. Don't use that tactic, it makes you look ignorant.

Don't call my comments insulting to movements that you very clearly do not understand, Jack. I can forgive you; they really don't teach this stuff in school (they never have; can't have kids learning about the blacks or the reds, after all!) but you need to understand... the civil rights movement, women's suffrage, the labor movement... these were not born out of people drumming in a fucking park. They came out of action. Both the civil rights and suffrage movements were born out of more litigation than you can imagine. The labor movement was born of workers doing what they felt necessary to secure their rights. All three involves intense political lobbying to get their favored politicians into office (or at least to get their enemies OUT), all three relied heavily on the power of the ballot to secure and protect what htye had and press for more.

And when the cops, the pinkertons, the assholes your dumb ass is trying to accuse me of supporting came out to stop them... did these "fighters for justice" (to use your term) meekly fold up and go home? They might have fled for that day, sure, nobody's going to stick around for an asskicking. But they come back. The men and women in prison keep on struggling - have you ever read "Letter from a Birmingham Jail"? I assure you, the title isn't a metaphor.

But what I see these days, is increasingly a "movement" that doesn't do a whole lot of moving... unless the police tell them to, and then it's all about tugging those forelocks and scurrying off. I see ignorant kids much like yourself rolling their eyes about the notion of becoming politically involved, because, like, that's what the man wants, man.

Like I said, I support the goals of the occupy movement... I think a lot of hte people in it are useless cocks, but I support the goals. My fear is that this movement will end up like the hippies - stagnant and useless, accomplishing nothing becuase the participants refused to do anything, and instead hoped that a lot of posturing and bad singing would magically make things better.

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
95. I do appreciate the part where I'm a kid! Thanks!
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 02:43 PM
Aug 2012

Although untrue, I'll focus on that and ignore your other many unfounded and highly insulting assumptions about me.

If you wish to be provoked by kids happily drumming in a park - and why shouldn't they? - and therefore to declare that's all there is to the emergent left movement in the US (whether by the Occupy name or not), this shows only your own choice to be as ignorant of the present as you purport to be knowledgeable of the past. You come across as bitter, unforgiving, and uncharitable, and definitely not one to trust in your perceptions of what today's movement people are doing.

zappaman

(20,606 posts)
96. +100!
Mon Aug 13, 2012, 02:49 PM
Aug 2012

Especially this...

"But what I see these days, is increasingly a "movement" that doesn't do a whole lot of moving... unless the police tell them to, and then it's all about tugging those forelocks and scurrying off. I see ignorant kids much like yourself rolling their eyes about the notion of becoming politically involved, because, like, that's what the man wants, man.

Like I said, I support the goals of the occupy movement... I think a lot of hte people in it are useless cocks, but I support the goals. My fear is that this movement will end up like the hippies - stagnant and useless, accomplishing nothing becuase the participants refused to do anything, and instead hoped that a lot of posturing and bad singing would magically make things better."

Sooo true.

 

MrSlayer

(22,143 posts)
87. I tried. I got crickets.
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 02:11 AM
Aug 2012

When I tried to explain my position at the GA the human mic shut down on me.

There was massive potential and some people got it but mostly it seemed like the "Die Hippie Die" episode of South Park. A lot of whacked out ideas about abandoning currency and starting society over from scratch.

Some good has come of it but it could have been so much more.

patrice

(47,992 posts)
79. OWS & President Obama!!! That's hilarious. The single biggest trait of OWS has been Obama hate.
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:16 AM
Aug 2012

I know a bunch of Occupiers. They forced anyone they suspected of Obama support out of our group. All I ever hear from our Occupy now is, "Obama the Manchurian candidate", "Government evil", "Politics is all lies," "All police are criminals," "They're coming to put us all in indefinite detention," "They're going to take our guns away."

 

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)
83. Before I call bullshit, I'll ask a question to be sure...
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 12:59 AM
Aug 2012

Since I suppose your scenario is not impossible.

Where are you? It's definitely not New York City. Is it Austin? Is it some place where "Occupy" is dominated by some Ron Paul faction? One thing you'd definitely not hear in New York or any other big city would be "They're going to take our guns away."

 

fainaent

(51 posts)
86. I'll be honest - I don't understand
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 01:57 AM
Aug 2012

the reasons for using terms like 'teabagger'. It only seems to further separate groups and keep people from having a real discussion.

jillan

(39,451 posts)
88. First of all, Welcome to DU.
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 04:09 AM
Aug 2012

I think that we started calling them teabaggers because they were so hateful towards liberals - calling us lazy, stupid, welfare queens - thinks like that. Then they showed up to rallies with signs belittling the President, calling him a Marxist, Communist, Fascist, with bones going thru his nose, dressed in a lion cloth. Signs saying that he was a Muslim, send him back to Africa.

When Congress went on recess and went to their districts to discuss the Affordable Healthcare Act, they would interrupt to the point where townhalls couldn't even be held. Constituents would come out to listen to how "Obamacare" would benefit them, and instead they got a three ring circus. They literally stopped any discussion from occurring. We found out that people were being bused in by buses paid for by the Koch Brothers.

There was just so much hatred coming out from their movement, so much pure vile that it crossed a line. And at the same time, much of it was laughable. Seeing people wearing hats with teabags hanging from them holding signs that said "Keep the government out of my Medicare". Between the vulgarity, the pure hatred for our President and for people that support him - and the signs they carried, they became known as teabaggers.

And what is so sad about all this, is alot of what OWS has to say and what the grassroots Teaparty movement has to say is the same thing.
We are all fed up with Wall Street. We are all fed up with lobbyists. We want a government by the people, for the people - not the corporations. While our ideologies are quite different...liberals do believe in equality for all - and yes that does mean some entitlements, there still is common ground there. At what point will that discussion ever happen in this day and age is beyond me.

Hope that answers your question

CabCurious

(954 posts)
90. No, the OWS movement became an unfocused mess without force
Sun Aug 12, 2012, 04:25 AM
Aug 2012

OWS would have gone MUCH better if the protesters had kept focused on Wall Street & banking issues rather than becoming a hodgepodge of "organic, inclusive" talking points. This is often the problem with activist politics on the left. It becomes a cacophony instead of a focused chorus.

Can we say that OWS has completely redefined American politics?

Not yet. It did change the discussion about the 1% though.

Can we say that the OWS movement has taken over the Dem party like the TeaP movement has of the GOP?

No. And it shouldn't.

However, OWS has been successful in changing the discourse.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»OWS has meant just as muc...