Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kaijyuu]

3) Want equality? How about you stop interfering with the working class' ability to get to work? If you really care about equality of opportunity you should stop skewing against those who are trying hard to make a wage.

Disagree here. The less those people work, the less their work benefits those that abuse their labor.


Also, the homeless sure as hell better be being "lumped in" with the occupy protesters, as they're some of the most negatively affected. Why do we even have homeless in one of the richest countries in the world?

[SalmonGod]

The bad:
1) A lack of a singular, clear message or goal. (it is mostly bitching for bitching's sake. Want to make a difference? Structure, develop a unified manifest and apply political pressure through the channels that get things done. Right now the protestors are fapping off about a dozen wildly ranging topics to tourists and bored journalists.)

Also going to disagree with this, as it's one of the most often repeated slander myths.

1.  There is no singular, clear message that encompasses all the problems we face and potential solutions.

2.  There are strategic reasons for refusing to be pigeon-holed into a single-issue character.

3.  I'm not sure what you mean by "channels that get things done".  The #1 reason the Occupy movement exists is because it's so obvious today that those channels only get things done for the upper classes, so your statement doesn't make much sense in context.  The other issue is that many protest movements get pacified by being co-opted into party platform as a minor side-note issue that never gets addressed, OR institutions agree to address grievances, only to drown the process in beaurocracy until the media stops paying attention and those concerns can again be safely marginalized.

4.  Just because people participate in protests doesn't also mean that they never participate in more concrete action when they are not protesting.

[hemmingjay]

3) Want equality? How about you stop interfering with the working class' ability to get to work? If you really care about equality of opportunity you should stop skewing against those who are trying hard to make a wage.

Disagree here. The less those people work, the less their work benefits those that abuse their labor.


Also, the homeless sure as hell better be being "lumped in" with the occupy protesters, as they're some of the most negatively affected. Why do we even have homeless in one of the richest countries in the world?

Those that work pay taxes. Those taxes pay for a lot of the care of those who can't or won't work. If you had your way, the businesses would be stopped by protestors who would then become homeless.  If they stop working, then the tax revenue dries up. How does your concept help anyone? Sadly, it is as simple of an economic principle that exists besides supply/demand. I won't address the homeless issue further because it can be difficult to describe the specific stratum of local homeless that have piggybacked on the agenda. I am not speaking of the homeless who have been negatively affected by the economic collapse we are experiencing. They have my deepest sympathy and regard, but the majority of them are trying to find work and are not at the protests.

[hemmingjay]

The bad:
1) A lack of a singular, clear message or goal. (it is mostly bitching for bitching's sake. Want to make a difference? Structure, develop a unified manifest and apply political pressure through the channels that get things done. Right now the protestors are fapping off about a dozen wildly ranging topics to tourists and bored journalists.)

Also going to disagree with this, as it's one of the most often repeated slander myths.

1.  There is no singular, clear message that encompasses all the problems we face and potential solutions.

2.  There are strategic reasons for refusing to be pigeon-holed into a single-issue character.

3.  I'm not sure what you mean by "channels that get things done".  The #1 reason the Occupy movement exists is because it's so obvious today that those channels only get things done for the upper classes, so your statement doesn't make much sense in context.  The other issue is that many protest movements get pacified by being co-opted into party platform as a minor side-note issue that never gets addressed, OR institutions agree to address grievances, only to drown the process in beaurocracy until the media stops paying attention and those concerns can again be safely marginalized.

4.  Just because people participate in protests doesn't also mean that they never participate in more concrete action when they are not protesting.

You have been very well spoken but it is neither slander or a myth. It is a simple, factual statement. The civil rights movement was a success because it embraced a lot of propaganda methodology such as having a unified stance as well as working with the establish government. The proper channels that I spoke of are in fact government. Yes, we have had a corrupt, self serving ruling class of politicians in this country for 40+ years and getting anything done through it is hard and often laden with numerous setbacks. By supporting politicians who publicly agree with your stance and helping them into office as a unified front of support, you increase your own ability to be heard. Most likely it will take several "generations" of politicians and a devote work ethic on the part of the dissatisfied population, but like the civil rights movement, progress will be gradual and probably not felt overnight.

This revolutionary, anarchistic, borderline destructive movement globally has not been working out so well. The countries that have tried it recently are showing that they are much worse off now. Perhaps 20-30 years from now things will have stabilized and become a utopia, or more likely they will follow the traditional course after a revolution, which is the new regime becomes as corrupt as the old.

As for # 4, I wholeheartedly agree.

And to be clear, I have no grievance with the protest on a whole, I just find it to be ineffectual and potentially more harm than good. I want the issues resolved as much as anyone, I just disagree with this course of action. I am however moved by your passion.

[kaijyuu]

@ hemingjay's reply to my post
Ooh I got a good quote for this.

If the machine becomes so odious, you throw yourself on the gears until it stops working.

We've a machine here that needs to be stopped. It can then either be rebuilt or modified, whichever you deem more plausible, but either way something has to change and it won't change if the current situation is allowed to continue.

[hemmingjay]

@ hemingjay's reply to my post
Ooh I got a good quote for this.

If the machine becomes so odious, you throw yourself on the gears until it stops working.

We've a machine here that needs to be stopped. It can then either be rebuilt or modified, whichever you deem more plausible, but either way something has to change and it won't change if the current situation is allowed to continue.

If you clog the gears of the machine with the corpses of the working classes who will rebuild it and for whom will the new machine serve?
BTW, I do agree it needs to change. However, destroying the economy to modify something you dislike will certainly cause more suffering. Globally.

[kaijyuu]

What.

Let's assume this escalates to violence (even though I don't think it will). Even with a 1 to 1 ratio of corpses, I don't think the working class will be on the losing end. Who will rebuild? Those feasting on the corpses of the rich, of course. The working class.


You seem to think the working class is harmed more than the upper classes by these protests. That is not the case.

[Graknorke]

You seem to think the working class is harmed more than the upper classes by these protests. That is not the case.

It inconveniences the working class while the upper class can just plug their ears and ignore it.
I was dragged along on one of these protest march thingies once, and they really do very little. It's just some walking around, some shouting, and the people who it's meant to be addressed to aren't even there, and if they are, they don't have to pay attention to it. They're in huge glass and metal buildings while the protestors scurry about on the streets carrying banners and throwing themselves on the floor to make a point about war or something.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Let's assume this escalates to violence (even though I don't think it will). Even with a 1 to 1 ratio of corpses, I don't think the working class will be on the losing end. Who will rebuild? Those feasting on the corpses of the rich, of course. The working class.
...
You seem to think the working class is harmed more than the upper classes by these protests. That is not the case.

Okay. No. You don't know anything about ground conflicts in human history if you are under the impression that the violence is felt by the rich and privileged. Who fought the civil war? Aristocrats and abolitionists only? No, it was poor farmers and men who worked for a living. On both sides. Where people die. For a cause they likely aren't personally vested in. See: any conflict in human history.

If you truely think that the rich and powerful wouldn't have their own Loyalist base in a civil war style conflict brought about by neocon and neoliberal extremism; then you're severely disconnected from reality. Basically; keep it at rhetoric and stop advocating 'If the machine becomes so odious, you throw yourself on the gears until it stops working.' as it leads to innocent people dying for a fool's cause.

I'd just like to mention that the people who profit off of a conflict in any area in any time of human history; are those who are already holding the financial and political strings to be able to profiteer off of armed conflict. Aka 'the 1%.' Go look up our current military industrial complex and the intricacies therein if you don't understand how that works.

We have a democracy, we can vote, and our votes tangentially matter; not in the national election but there's a big chunk of our government called congress which is the closest thing to direct representatives we can field. And guess what? They're having votes to change [1/3rds of] the people in those positions this season; so go fucking vote and do something about it.

Note: this all ignores the economic impact of The Great Stupid War^tm and what it'd do to annihilate any semblance of 1st world living as we know it. I'm just annoyed you're advocating people go die for this retarded thinking.

[hemmingjay]

You responded to me:

ME:    3) Want equality? How about you stop interfering with the working class' ability to get to work? If you really care about equality of opportunity you should stop skewing against those who          are trying hard to make a wage.

You: Disagree here. The less those people work, the less their work benefits those that abuse their labor.

That is why I think your movement hurts the working class. Also, the corpses I spoke of were from your quote, not literal.

[kaijyuu]

@Mictlantecuhtli
I'm thinking of a Reign of Terror esque situation, not a conventional war. Tell me, who died there? (well a lot of people did but still)

That is why I think your movement hurts the working class. Also, the corpses I spoke of were from your quote, not literal.

It only "hurts" them in the same way it "hurts" strike breakers by preventing them from working. To change the status quo you might actually have to get in the way of those who are complacent with it, you know.

As for the corpses thing; metaphorically, if something actually DOES get stopped, again the working class aren't going to be much worse off (especially compared to the upper classes). Literally, if there's violence, I think it'll be a reign of terror esque situation, again, and it's not the working class that will be put under the guillotine.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I'm thinking of a Reign of Terror esque situation, not a conventional war. Tell me, who died there? (well a lot of people did but still)

An estimated 40,000 people were killed during the Terror. 84 percent of the victims were middle class, workers, or peasants who had been accused of desertion, hoarding food, or other acts against the government. Eight percent were aristocracy, many of whom belonged to the Convention. The Roman Catholic church was the hardest hit proportionally, with at least 2,400 clergy or church officials being beheaded. The Terror was not limited to Paris: the laws spread out across the country and even to French colonies.

Src: http://www.ehow.com/about_4571610_reign-terror-during-french-revolution.html

As for the corpses thing; metaphorically, if something actually DOES get stopped, again the working class aren't going to be much worse off (especially compared to the upper classes). Literally, if there's violence, I think it'll be a reign of terror esque situation, again, and it's not the working class that will be put under the guillotine.

Yeah, because random public executions of people we disagree with is the correct path. You just proved how asinine your thinking is.. You're the furthest thing away from advocating equality right now when you say that a 'Reign of Terror-eqsue situation' would be preferable to all-encompassing compromise and simple tolerance.

[kaijyuu]

Aaaand you just strawmanned me. I specifically said I did not think that will happen, and no, I would not support it if it did. All I said is if violence DOES erupt, that's the sort I'd expect.


As for those statistics, that's quite true, but I'll point out that it'd have to hit 99% before the death toll hits the lower classes harder than the upper (proportionally). I'm counting the entire 99% in the "lower classes" here, though if you'd prefer I use a different identifier I will.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

As for those statistics, that's quite true, but I'll point out that it'd have to hit 99% before the death toll hits the lower classes harder than the upper (proportionally). I'm counting the entire 99% in the "lower classes" here, though if you'd prefer I use a different identifier I will.

Now you're saying we need to kill 99% of people to have a chance at affecting the elite?

[kaijyuu]

* kaijyuu does not know whether to take you seriously or not.