Topic

Occupy Wall Street et al

Out of curiosity, anyone here participating in Occupy Wall Street or any of the solidarity events in other cities? I've slightly participated in Occupy Albuquerque.

Posted 15 months ago by Ooloi Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

  • What is it about? (I'm European).
    Posted 15 months ago by Miriamele Subscriber! | Permalink
  • So what did you do in Albuquerque?
    Posted 15 months ago by Ferond Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It's sort of a response to the recession, government bailouts of banks/financial institutions/etc., inequitable taxation (particularly with regard to corporations), and other equity issues. This is what the Web site says:

    "Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants." https://occupywallst.org/

    In Albuquerque, the protest started yesterday at noon and is still going. The protesters marched between two banks that were beneficiaries of the bailout (or at any rate the corporations they belong to were) and briefly occupied various busy intersections. After several hours, they voted to keep it going & set up camp at the university for the night. From the accounts I've heard/read, the police here were totally friendly to the protest, and one even said he's part of the 99% (a slogan of the protests).

    I wasn't there for any of that. I followed the goings on via Twitter. Later, I went to a poetry fundraiser for Occupy Wall Street, where I heard about the camping out, so I brought some water over for those folks and stuck around for a little while (but not overnight). Today there's a planning meeting at noon and then more protesting at 5 p.m.
    Posted 15 months ago by Ooloi Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Gotta love a free country where people can protest and not get shot or run over by tanks
    Posted 15 months ago by Artilect Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Sure, but getting teargassed isn't particularly pleasant.
    Posted 15 months ago by Ooloi Subscriber! | Permalink
  • There's a lot worse going on than teargassing, if you can believe the reports on the Web site, and Artilect, have you ever heard of Jackson State and Kent State? And what about the fact that now any American can be arrested, without any charges, without any evidence, without any phone call or any other rights, without any notification to anyone, and secretly sent to a torture camp, on nothing but the word of the president that she's a terrorist suspect? Note, suspect. You don't think that has any dampening affect on free speech and assembly?

    Only if you trust the president with your life, in a country where it's financially impossible for anyone who is not subservient to global corporate interests -- openly and shamelessly contemptuous of America's constitution, laws, heritage, and highest principles and values -- to even be a candidate. In other words, if you trust global financial/construction/weapons/pharmaceutical/entertainment/indoctrination/Caspian/plundering/pillaging/murdering interests with your life, then you might feel safe saying what you think in public, and participating in protests and demonstrations.

    Which I don't approve of anyway.

    As a patriotic American living in China for the last three years, I feel far less threatened by the (allegedly) communist government here than I have by the government of my country since 2011, although that isn't the reason I came here.

    (later) Please excuse my outburst.

    (Crack!) Back, Jim, back into your cage! (Crack!)
    Posted 15 months ago by Ferond Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Free country... that's an interesting concept of the US. We're noticeably more free than Russia or China (sorry, Ferond, but a country that arrests artists like Ai Weiwei for disagreeing with them and has been known to harvest the organs of political prisoners while destroying their environment at many times the rate of the rest of the world in the name of progress- it just doesn't strike me as an especially awesome place to live), but that's clearly not saying much. We use federal law-enforcement to enforce the wills of corporate interests, have the ability (and apparently the will, as shown with Aulaqi) to assassinate our own citizens, while warrant-less wiretaps and full-body scanners are par for the course "for our safety". But somehow many Americans still think they have the moral high ground.

    It's not that I think protests are bad- I just think they're useless. They're predicated on the idea that our country is actually run by consensus, and that everybody has a say, whether they've padded any campaign coffers or not. How many protests have there been that have been held up as awesome victories... while completely failing to achieve their ends? Most of 'em, I daresay. Arrest isn't a cool thing, it's a pain in the ass no matter how you spin it. Setting yourself on fire? Album cover photo. Getting maced by an NYPD knucklehead? Viral video, paid leave for the scum who did it, etc. While I sympathize with and understand the discontent behind Occupy Wall Street, it's happened before, and it'll happen again, world without end, amen. There are things to be done, I just don't think this is it.
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Djabril, I don't see anything to disagree with there, just a clarification. I said that I feel less threatened by this government than I do by my own, but I'm not saying anything about how Chinese citizens feel, or what their life is like. I can say that the ones I know don't look like they feel any more threatened or oppressed here than I do.

    As far as my own life is here is concerned, it's excruciatingly difficult, but at this point that's entirely due to not knowing the language or having any constant companions who do, not being able to get all the hardware I need from one store and, since we moved from Shanghai to Guilin, not having any Starbucks or Subway.
    Posted 15 months ago by Ferond Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Djabril, when people stop protesting the bad actions of their government, they have given up a direct voice and a chance to let other people, in disparate areas, circles, groups, industries, time zones, etc. know that they aren't alone in their beliefs. 

    Occupy Wall Street may not inspire you to stand up and be counted with them, but don't dismiss the effect it may be having on others.

    The fact that it is "leaderless" should be considered a wake-up call considering how many people are now talking about it, not just in the US but around the world.  These are people connected by a belief, not a membership.

    I think America needs more of it.

    Mind you, I'm just coming down from a Naomi Wolf reading binge ("The End of America", "Give Me Liberty") so I might be coming off a little preachy =)
    Posted 15 months ago by Nymity Subscriber! | Permalink
  • ETA: Below post is slightly offtopic, it's not about greed of the 1% (IMO there will always be rich and poor, can't change that, but maybe you could change what the rich, that 1%, do with their cash. You could say they hold more responsability towards the earth (and it's inhabitants) because of it.)

    Here's the offtopic part:
    Well the controlling thing is something of the modern time.
    Internetcookies, tracking, profiles, monitoring internet behvaviour (Deep packet inspection), closing people off from the internet (France), lots of phonetaps (seems the Dutch have the most phonetaps per person), rules to have to keep communication data for a while, videosurveillance in cities and on roads, automatic roadtax paying by having your car scanned on the highway (ok that isn't a fact yet here, but there was serious talk of it), fingerprints in passports, full body scans at airports...

    It looks more and more that this so called freedom we live in, with al these measures taken "for the sake of safety" are creating more and more of a prison in which we are constantly watched.
    1984.
    People say it's ok to be taped because they have nothing to hide. How I hate that argument. I am no criminal, you won't see criminal activities from me, but still I do not want to be monitored like I'm a suspect, like I'm potentially guilty.

    Seems terrorist succeeded into locking us all up in our own institute of "freedom".

    Another edit:
    A bit after I posted here what it was about, it was here in the news at 20:00. (I didn't listen too much though, worldnews makes me kinda sad and sometimes depresses me too much, I rather stay happy and be happy and optimistic to the world around me, as I can hardly change what happens elsewhere. There's lots to do in the world closer to me still.)
    Posted 15 months ago by Miriamele Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Miriamele, as strange as it may sound, your post really cheered me up! It took away the knots in my stomach. Your posts have a healing touch for me.
    Posted 15 months ago by Ferond Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +1 Miriamele: "People say it's ok to be taped because they have nothing to hide. How I hate that argument. I am no criminal, you won't see criminal activities from me, but still I do not want to be monitored like I'm a suspect, like I'm potentially guilty."
    Posted 15 months ago by Ooloi Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Nymity: I just watched a talk by Naomi Wolf, and I think she might be wrong. The shift she's talking about might not be ahead of us. It might have already happened, if not exactly in the way that she envisioned. If you want to understand why I think that, do a Web search on Caspian pipelines on the Web site of the US Energy Information Administration, study what you find, especially about Afghanistan, and then ask yourself why the media, and politicians of both parties, and even their loudest critics, have been so silent about the Caspian oil and gas pipeline projects.
    Posted 15 months ago by Ferond Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Nymity: I don't mean "protest", as in "disagree with"; I mean "protest" as in picket and expect that to be all one needs to change the way things are. A lot of activists seem to think going to a rally and chanting a slogan are enough to get broad, sweeping alterations effected to national policy; almost as many seem absolutely flummoxed when such methods of "sticking it to the Man" fail to do what they thought they would. I definitely agree that the government needs to know what its citizens think- and while voting is one way, it's kind of a crapshoot, as are public protest (which often merely results in misdemeanor disturbing-the-peace charges and cease-and-desist orders). I don't think raising awareness in the citizenry is a waste of time, I think expecting politicians and corporations to have a sudden change of heart because people are getting arrested on the Brooklyn Bridge is. I think making lasting change will require more hands-on means than that- whether it's fielding your own viable candidate (not that the 2-party system won't immediately shut them down) or mass labor shutdowns (what's gonna make more difference to policymakers- hipsters on a sidewalk, or industry and materials manufacture screeching to a halt?).
    I don't despise or disagree with the people involved in OWS- like I said before, I get it. I'm just of the opinion that there are better ways to get your point across.
    @Ferond: okay, I understand what you mean- it just sounded odd to me. And at least you live in one of the most beautiful parts of China :)
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Protests are, generally, useful in bringing an issue to light and a plea for addressing an injustice of some form.

    The problem is that OSW will not derail the economic inequality present in America. 100 or 100,000 protesters change nothing about what corporate executives award themselves for bonuses. A disturbing aspect is that there has been, until this weekend, relative silence - very little media coverage (not all THAT surprising, when the media are essentially corporate entities in the thick of it all); and, additionally, that the millionaires in Congress are basically sitting on their thumbs.

    Change will occur, sadly, when it becomes more advantageous to change than persist. That is, the millionaires are actually affected in some way - fines, imprisonment, regulation OR when our conscience/obligation to others as a productive society outweighs our habits (a more rational/aware version of the above - we change because we understand something, not because we're being punished).
    Posted 15 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @TK-855: Exactly. That ^^^.
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Ooloi: Regarding 'nothing to hide' - I hate that argument. If you have nothing to hide, I expect you to conduct all your correspondence via post card, have no drapes/curtains/blinds on your windows, and an unlocked front door.

    Everyone expects privacy, even if we're not 'doing anything wrong' - your bedroom, your bath, even your dinner table are spaces where you expect privacy. The 4th Amendment is predicated on privacy.

    And it's ironic in the extreme that protesters are videotaped, but corporate executives want their privacy in terms of how much they make, etc.
    Posted 15 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @TK-855: And how many cases there have been in the last couple of years where civilians get thrown in jail for "obstructing justice" because they videotaped a cop abusing the power of their office (nevermind that it's routine for them to tape you).
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I woke up this morning thinking about red herrings.
    - Moore
    - Wolf
    - Chomsky
    - Protest and resistance movements
    - Lobbies
    - Party politics
    - Defamation campaigns against one or another of the global industries
    - Defamation campaigns in general
    - "Fascism," and other emotionally charged labels (like "red herring"?)
    - My posts in this thread

    - all diverting attention from what really needs to be done, like learning to improve the community life in a neighborhood, and what Miriamele does, for example.

    I'm gone. Feel free to send me an email. See my profile.
    Posted 15 months ago by Ferond Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Djabriil: Cameras and the ability to record are becoming quite the issue - most of us now have cameras in some form (mostly via smart phones), and I certainly don't like the suggestions that we (locally or federally) make it illegal to record police officers. I can see where the presence of a person behind a camera makes it less than objective (as opposed to a fixed-position security camera), but still. The jury's still out on lapel- or earpiece- mounted cameras worn by the officers.

    In the end, it becomes a 4th Amendment issue for the citizen. Is a camera recording your presence at an event a violation of your privacy? (Or, for that matter, is it a violation of your right to assembly via the 1st Amendment?)
    Posted 15 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • It's not even just lapel-cams, though (though BART is apparently thinking of outfitting their officers with them, and I can't say I blame 'em, considering their recent history)- cruisers usually have video-cameras mounted in them to record arrests, traffic stops, that sort of thing, and have for quite awhile. That's what makes the  "citizen-cam" cases of the last few years especially interesting- the police are required (across the US, as far as I know) to record, but if they get filmed, that's a whole different can of worms somehow. The argument I hear the most often is that the police need to record in case of shooting situations, high-speed pursuits, etc., but recording an officer yourself is apparently going to make it harder for them to do their jobs. I call bullshit, pardon my Esperanto. The only thing it makes more difficult for an police officer is the ability to do whatever they want to without any witnesses. I'm not likening LEOs to the Mafia or anything, but I think that it's telling that most of the arrests for obstruction have occurred after an officer was caught doing something they shouldn't have been.
    And camera arrests are only the tip of the iceberg at the moment, I'm afraid.
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm well aware of the Hawthorne Effect (the presence of an observer affects the event/observed) - to that end, it's not just the LEO being observed, it's the citizen (and/or suspect). That is, does the presence of a camera encourage a protester to act differently, refuse orders to disperse, etc. - as well as an inhibitor to LEO's reluctant to use force while being recorded? (They don't have to be doing anything wrong, but being recorded does have an effect ... think of it as the instant replay for sports, and how play review was slowly, grudgingly accepted)

    I've seen claims of police brutality, and several have been conveniently edited (by turning off the camera and/or looking away) to omit the provocation that came before. I've seen protesters 'doing nothing wrong' but using highly aggressive body language, and then wondering why the police react with force.

    But I also think restricting a citizen's right to record a public servant is not where we want to go.

    You refer to BART Police, and there's no doubt the Oscar Grant shooting would have been a different story had it not been for citizens who had cameras to hand. It didn't show the entire story, but it did show (at least, in my opinion) a critical moment in Officer Mehserle's response. A lapel cam would not necessarily have shown us the same, i.e. Mehserle's facial expression.
    Posted 15 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I guess when I think of citizens getting into trouble for using cameras, I think of a state trooper pulling a gun during a traffic stop because of a helmet-cam (admittedly, the guy had been driving a bike in and out of traffic at high speed, but the gun only comes out when the trooper noticed the camera), Miami PD getting belligerent and following a bystander to his car after he witnessed and recorded a pretty impressive display of force against a suspect, the Oregon man arrested for taping an arrest in a public bowling alley, or the Rochester woman arrested for taping from a distance on her own property (after which a warrantless search of her home was performed for no reason). Even more interesting in the last case was the harassment and ticketing of cars belonging to people who were campaigning against the Rochester PD on the woman's behalf.
    When I think of the police reactions to being filmed, it makes me think of Rodney King, and the fact that had the police in that situation not been filmed, nobody would've ever known. Not that the results of their trial were worth a damn, but it put the police under scrutiny and made people think not merely about race, but about what lengths a police officer is permitted to go to, if not officially then in his own mind and behind the shield of a badge. I view cameras used on the police as a tool of accountability, and while filming the Grant shooting from the POV of Mehserle wouldn't have shown his face, it would've shown the body language and the actions of Grant, as well as the actions of the officer more closely and clearly. And if police know they're being filmed, perhaps they'd be less likely to abuse their power and expect to get away with it.
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Actually, a lapel cam might not have shown us much more in the Grant shooting, other than Grant being face down on the pavement when he was shot. I'm not sure the camera is sufficient to show us Mehserle's actions (or establish his state of mind). At any rate, if you want to dispute what's on the camera, subpoena the owner and enter it into evidence. 

    I think a free society needs the freedom of independent observers/cameras in public areas.
    Posted 15 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Actually, a lapel cam might not have shown us much more in the Grant shooting, other than Grant being face down on the pavement when he was shot. I'm not sure the camera is sufficient to show us Mehserle's actions (or establish his state of mind). At any rate, if you want to dispute what's on the camera, subpoena the owner and enter it into evidence. 

    I think a free society needs the freedom of independent observers/cameras in public areas.
    Posted 15 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @ Ferond - I will look for it and make every effort to understand it =)
         Also, if the talk you saw by Wolf was about Letters to a Patriot, then Give Me Liberty would  be the next one and she was scared that her timeline was off too.

    @ Djabril - See? That's why I should never respond on forums at 3am in the morning.

    @ Everyone who has posted - Can I just say how wonderful it is to read all your posts?
         This is one of the few forums I've ever been on (possibly the only one) where a serious discussion and sharing views on an important issue didn't devolve into claims of who was the bigger poo-poo head.

    Hugs to you all.
    Posted 15 months ago by Nymity Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Hugs back atcha :) I may disagree somewhat with certain things, but I respect all of your viewpoints, and I'm also glad a discourse like this can take place without Godwin's Law coming up (yet ;).
    Posted 15 months ago by Djabriil Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Thursday (tomorrow) Portland, OR...Tom McCall's Waterfront Park 2:30pm Under Burnside Bridge
    Occupy march...
    Posted 14 months ago by Cpt Jackie Harkness Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I searched "stomach full" and this is all that came up O-0...

    I was trying to fully understand how the food system works in glitch with regard to how much you can eat in a day and if the type of food eaten/the way it is eaten works...
    Posted 14 months ago by pickmonger Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The Occupy Oakland effort led a general strike throughout Wednesday (and a smaller effort is continuing today) that was marred by the actions of a group of 'black bloc' anarchists - the folks that don masks, smash windows, set fire to things. The OPD responded in kind with tear gas and flash bangs.

    Visible on some of the video are protesters rallying aid and support ('let's get these fires out!') as well as trying to reason with the 'black bloc' crowd. (The name, I'm told, comes from the tactic - everyone dresses in black with a certain uniformity, so that you can't get effective descriptions other than 'some guy in black'.)

    I wonder what will happen when we hit the Day After Thanksgiving - a day largely devoted to commercial excess and the 'official' beginning of the 'Christmas Season' (sorry, standing in line for a sale has nothing to do with honoring Christ Jesus, IMHO). Will there be a dustup between protesters and shoppers? How will a movement against greed react to a day consumed by it?
    Posted 14 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I know none of you guys are repubs, but vote Ron Pual for the primaries just because he stands for the right things. This may require you to swap sides or whatever. (Not that it even matters, both parties are the same.) He may not be about raising taxes, but he wants to end corporatism. Solid guy. I highly recommend listening to some of his speeches.
    Posted 13 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • The system is biased against third-party candidates. Neither Paul nor Nader have a snowball's chance in hell of being elected, no matter how sensible their views may be.

    This is evident in the time-wasting 'supercommittee' addressing the nation's debt. A polarized body chooses partisan members to hammer partisan views, and we're surprised they can't agree?

    I'm beginning to think that when legislators fail to agree on budgets and miss deadlines, we should start fining them or throwing them in jail. Hell, we ought to throw some of them in jail just on principle ...
    Posted 13 months ago by TK-855 Subscriber! | Permalink