Whose Green? Our Green!
April 19, 2012 8:02 AM Subscribe
Having survived the winter, New England's longest surviving Occupy encampment, Occupy New Haven was finally evicted yesterday from the New Haven Green. The camp had held on where others had not because of the Green's unique history[pdf] and status as a privately held park overseen since the 17th century by a group known as "the Committee of the Proprietors of Common and Undivided Lands". The last few months have seen many twists and turns including numerous legal maneuvers, last minute reprieves, an attempt to enlist the support of the Quinnipiac tribe and finally, allegations of rape in one of the encampment's tents. In the end, only thirteen Occupiers remained for the final showdown.
More detailed coverage from the New Haven Independent.
More detailed coverage from the New Haven Independent.
Aftger some time, New Haven folks ignored the remaining few on the Green...but as the ads say:
But Wait! May 1 a whole new 99% operation will take place in places.
posted by Postroad at 8:16 AM on April 19, 2012
But Wait! May 1 a whole new 99% operation will take place in places.
posted by Postroad at 8:16 AM on April 19, 2012
Do the Quinnipiac even live like Quinnipiac anymore?
posted by spicynuts at 8:18 AM on April 19, 2012
posted by spicynuts at 8:18 AM on April 19, 2012
Oh, awesome, now that it is warm out again we all get to look forward to every single website on the internet covering urban camping every day.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 8:21 AM on April 19, 2012
posted by Threeway Handshake at 8:21 AM on April 19, 2012
The movement needs a new focus in the "I'm bored of this already" world. I like the ideas I've seen floating, mass volunteering. If targeted correctly could highlight the problems that are out there quite well, while making it impossible to criticize. Should maintain same branding.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:38 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by Ironmouth at 8:38 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Photo in story of woman at camp raising hand to speak with hammer and sickle ring on right hand, definitely not helping.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:40 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by Ironmouth at 8:40 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
As Officer Hartman, the son of a Holocaust survivor, observed the scene, one protester called him a “Nazi.”
I'd say there are any number of elements here that aren't helping.
posted by cribcage at 8:42 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
I'd say there are any number of elements here that aren't helping.
posted by cribcage at 8:42 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Destigmitizing the one thing that could save us is definitely helping.
I like the mass volunteering idea in concept, but a huge influx of people at the symptom points (soup kitchens, etc) doesn't really do much to change the system. Maybe they could "volunteer" at the stock exchange to help carry money (to a soup kitchen), etc.
posted by DU at 8:43 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I like the mass volunteering idea in concept, but a huge influx of people at the symptom points (soup kitchens, etc) doesn't really do much to change the system. Maybe they could "volunteer" at the stock exchange to help carry money (to a soup kitchen), etc.
posted by DU at 8:43 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Oops that "one thing" was socialism, not calling people Nazis.
I like how all the "not helping" comments are going in one direction, too. Like...you know that rapes occur at places that aren't Occupy camps, right?
posted by DU at 8:44 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I like how all the "not helping" comments are going in one direction, too. Like...you know that rapes occur at places that aren't Occupy camps, right?
posted by DU at 8:44 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
urban camping
That may be what most media cover, but that is not the only thing happening. Tidal covers a lot of great ground; there's a new Tumblr called What Concrete Results Has Occupy Wall Street Accomplished? which has some good links, particularly pertaining to the disruption of foreclosure auctions; Occupy demonstrators have organized a huge number of organizations for a mass demonstration on May 1st.
It's really not just about sleeping bags.
posted by davidjmcgee at 8:45 AM on April 19, 2012 [7 favorites]
That may be what most media cover, but that is not the only thing happening. Tidal covers a lot of great ground; there's a new Tumblr called What Concrete Results Has Occupy Wall Street Accomplished? which has some good links, particularly pertaining to the disruption of foreclosure auctions; Occupy demonstrators have organized a huge number of organizations for a mass demonstration on May 1st.
It's really not just about sleeping bags.
posted by davidjmcgee at 8:45 AM on April 19, 2012 [7 favorites]
Destigmitizing the one thing that could save us is definitely helping.
I like the mass volunteering idea in concept, but a huge influx of people at the symptom points (soup kitchens, etc) doesn't really do much to change the system. Maybe they could "volunteer" at the stock exchange to help carry money (to a soup kitchen), etc.
That's not volunteering. That's just protesting again. I'm reading Richard Reeves Richard Nixon and you get the feeling it is a fine line and that you have to be careful to keep the message on focus and not alienate the mass of Americans who are who you are trying to connect with.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:46 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I like the mass volunteering idea in concept, but a huge influx of people at the symptom points (soup kitchens, etc) doesn't really do much to change the system. Maybe they could "volunteer" at the stock exchange to help carry money (to a soup kitchen), etc.
That's not volunteering. That's just protesting again. I'm reading Richard Reeves Richard Nixon and you get the feeling it is a fine line and that you have to be careful to keep the message on focus and not alienate the mass of Americans who are who you are trying to connect with.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:46 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
while making it impossible to criticize
I would have thought that after Swift Boat it was understood that nothing, however virtuous, is impossible to criticize. If Jesus came back to earth, eliminated cancer, and put Freaks and Geeks back on the air, I promise you there'd be a well-organized campaign painting him as a pawn of the tobacco lobby and Big Apatow.
posted by escabeche at 8:46 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
I would have thought that after Swift Boat it was understood that nothing, however virtuous, is impossible to criticize. If Jesus came back to earth, eliminated cancer, and put Freaks and Geeks back on the air, I promise you there'd be a well-organized campaign painting him as a pawn of the tobacco lobby and Big Apatow.
posted by escabeche at 8:46 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
Americans are entrenched in a conservative-generated frame. That frame needs to be smashed because it can't be altered from the inside. You can call that "alienation" if you want.
posted by DU at 8:49 AM on April 19, 2012 [5 favorites]
posted by DU at 8:49 AM on April 19, 2012 [5 favorites]
In any movement, there is always going to be a fringe. It's a simple matter to locate the freaks of the fringe, highlight them, and paint them as somehow representative of the movement.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:49 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:49 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
I would take OWS more seriously if they started actually doing meaningful things. Setting up tents in parks and disrupting subway service doesn't actually accomplish anything. Not even "awareness." Everybody is already aware of inequality. Even right-wingers, which is why you have people like "Joe the Plumber" running around, not to mention their literal marches on Washington. (It is a farce and a coverup most of the time from their side, but it still goes to show that people are "aware" and it is definitely a populist idea.)
Why not try to make meaningful changes like:
Run people for local offices, if there's enough of you voting for them, they'll win. On a longer scale, you can run people for higher offices. "Act locally" right?
Don't like banks? Start your own credit union and do banking the right way. The one I belong to was started by a few IBMers with extremely little cash. That fucking NY OWS bookstore was making national news. Why not channel that type of energy into building something that is not totally ephemeral?
Or basically anything. What Occupy turned into, no matter what it started out as, was a bunch of urban campers essentially baiting cops. All coverage turned into "look at these asshole cops!" I'm not going to be able to take another summer of cop-on-protester violence. Everybody already knows that cops are assholes. That dead horse has already been beaten many times over.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 8:52 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Why not try to make meaningful changes like:
Run people for local offices, if there's enough of you voting for them, they'll win. On a longer scale, you can run people for higher offices. "Act locally" right?
Don't like banks? Start your own credit union and do banking the right way. The one I belong to was started by a few IBMers with extremely little cash. That fucking NY OWS bookstore was making national news. Why not channel that type of energy into building something that is not totally ephemeral?
Or basically anything. What Occupy turned into, no matter what it started out as, was a bunch of urban campers essentially baiting cops. All coverage turned into "look at these asshole cops!" I'm not going to be able to take another summer of cop-on-protester violence. Everybody already knows that cops are assholes. That dead horse has already been beaten many times over.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 8:52 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I suspect what you suggest, threeway handshake, is what it will turn into. It was a short-lived gesture of protest, but a lot of friendships were made, alliances forged, and tactics discussed. We're at the end of the first stage of the Occupy movement. I suspect the next stages will be quite interesting.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:54 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:54 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Would that be the Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union?
posted by spicynuts at 8:55 AM on April 19, 2012
posted by spicynuts at 8:55 AM on April 19, 2012
Centrist faux-sympathizers doing ideology-and-rhetoric policing to impose their personal idea of what's "helping" on a deliberately broadly inclusive left popular-front movement are the very least helping people of all. Haven't we covered this already a thousand times?
If you think the problem with Occupy is either (1) that it needs to "keep the message on focus" to gain more traction inside the institutional media-political sphere, or (2) that it's a bunch of dirty hippie "urban campers," then you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
posted by RogerB at 8:55 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
If you think the problem with Occupy is either (1) that it needs to "keep the message on focus" to gain more traction inside the institutional media-political sphere, or (2) that it's a bunch of dirty hippie "urban campers," then you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
posted by RogerB at 8:55 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
As Officer Hartman, the son of a Holocaust survivor, observed the scene, one protester called him a “Nazi.”
I don't know this guy personally to have an opinion, but just because your parent was a survivor does not make you immune to being an asshole. There are plenty of examples throughout history of people who survived atrocities, or their decendents, themselves committing atrocities. It's about time we stop hiding behind this bullshit and start judging people on the content of their own characters and the mertis of their actions.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 9:01 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
I don't know this guy personally to have an opinion, but just because your parent was a survivor does not make you immune to being an asshole. There are plenty of examples throughout history of people who survived atrocities, or their decendents, themselves committing atrocities. It's about time we stop hiding behind this bullshit and start judging people on the content of their own characters and the mertis of their actions.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 9:01 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
An enemies list! This is helpful. Who else is on it?
posted by anotherpanacea at 9:02 AM on April 19, 2012 [13 favorites]
An enemies list! This is helpful. Who else is on it?
posted by anotherpanacea at 9:02 AM on April 19, 2012 [13 favorites]
Ok then, if the focus is that narrow then put me down as an enemy Occupy.
posted by ob at 9:03 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by ob at 9:03 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
Actually, I'm just a reader of MetaFilter. (This is still an FPP, yes? Not a protest-assembly or sabotage thread?)
posted by cribcage at 9:03 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Actually, I'm just a reader of MetaFilter. (This is still an FPP, yes? Not a protest-assembly or sabotage thread?)
posted by cribcage at 9:03 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
The thing about the 99% its that its a large enough minority to find more than a few jackasses in it. Can we refrain from judging the occupy movement by the actions of a few? And to that end, let's stop furthering the narrative that 13 remaining people in New Haven are making the 99% look bad.
posted by cotterpin at 9:04 AM on April 19, 2012
posted by cotterpin at 9:04 AM on April 19, 2012
Oh god not this again. Another rehash of the same arguments. I don't think phrases like "enemy of Occupy" are either helpful or valid, but if someone's going to be making the "dirty hippies camping out" arguments again then I reserve the right to think you are either an idiot or actively antagonistic to the movement's ideas.
posted by stagewhisper at 9:08 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
posted by stagewhisper at 9:08 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
. If Jesus came back to earth, eliminated cancer, and put Freaks and Geeks back on the air, I promise you there'd be a well-organized campaign painting him as a pawn of the tobacco lobby and Big Apatow.
The one True Messiah would resurrect Firefly.
(Every right-thinking person knows this)
posted by madajb at 9:22 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
The one True Messiah would resurrect Firefly.
(Every right-thinking person knows this)
posted by madajb at 9:22 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I would take OWS more seriously if they started actually doing meaningful things.
They are doing something meaningful, though: they're giving a voice to frustrated and disaffected people who have been harmed by the structural economic violence of the global hegemony. Social movements aren't just technocratic endeavors to fix broken things, they're a way to rally people and make them part of something big and important to generate the energy to make real change.
Run people for local offices, if there's enough of you voting for them, they'll win. On a longer scale, you can run people for higher offices.
That is a great suggestion! But keep in mind that the Republican/Democratic system will not tolerate the presence of outsiders in the halls of power.
Don't like banks? Start your own credit union and do banking the right way.
I would agree with this, but then I'm an economic conservative who likes the idea of banks getting out of excessively complex and perversely incentivizing financial instruments and back into the business of investing in real things. But some people, especially on the Occupy side of the political spectrum, probably consider banks themselves inherently problematic. One may consider this perspective too radical, but isn't it important to have a space in which to denaturalize institutions that we take for granted in order to more critically evaluate them?
What Occupy turned into, no matter what it started out as, was a bunch of urban campers essentially baiting cops.
Why is it so important to minimize and denigrate what Occupiers have done and continue to try to do?
If power and hegemony are never challenged, they will continue to grow; and equally importantly, we won't know the contours of the force the establishment is willing to project upon its own citizens if we never contest our own domination. If people are punished simply for existing in a space like a public park, in what sense do we live in a free society?
posted by clockzero at 9:24 AM on April 19, 2012 [11 favorites]
They are doing something meaningful, though: they're giving a voice to frustrated and disaffected people who have been harmed by the structural economic violence of the global hegemony. Social movements aren't just technocratic endeavors to fix broken things, they're a way to rally people and make them part of something big and important to generate the energy to make real change.
Run people for local offices, if there's enough of you voting for them, they'll win. On a longer scale, you can run people for higher offices.
That is a great suggestion! But keep in mind that the Republican/Democratic system will not tolerate the presence of outsiders in the halls of power.
Don't like banks? Start your own credit union and do banking the right way.
I would agree with this, but then I'm an economic conservative who likes the idea of banks getting out of excessively complex and perversely incentivizing financial instruments and back into the business of investing in real things. But some people, especially on the Occupy side of the political spectrum, probably consider banks themselves inherently problematic. One may consider this perspective too radical, but isn't it important to have a space in which to denaturalize institutions that we take for granted in order to more critically evaluate them?
What Occupy turned into, no matter what it started out as, was a bunch of urban campers essentially baiting cops.
Why is it so important to minimize and denigrate what Occupiers have done and continue to try to do?
If power and hegemony are never challenged, they will continue to grow; and equally importantly, we won't know the contours of the force the establishment is willing to project upon its own citizens if we never contest our own domination. If people are punished simply for existing in a space like a public park, in what sense do we live in a free society?
posted by clockzero at 9:24 AM on April 19, 2012 [11 favorites]
they're giving a voice to frustrated and disaffected people who have been harmed by the structural economic violence of the global hegemony
OK, great! Now what?
But keep in mind that the Republican/Democratic system will not tolerate the presence of outsiders in the halls of power.
Have you happen to have noticed what the Christian Coalition and Tea Party have done to the Republican Party over the last twenty-five or so years?
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 9:30 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
OK, great! Now what?
But keep in mind that the Republican/Democratic system will not tolerate the presence of outsiders in the halls of power.
Have you happen to have noticed what the Christian Coalition and Tea Party have done to the Republican Party over the last twenty-five or so years?
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 9:30 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Isn't it possible to both sympathize with the goals of, say, implementing more progressive taxation and better social safety nets, and also disagree with the notion that one must "smash the conservative-generated frame" in order to achieve these things? That is, agreeing with the ends but believing the means are at times counterproductive? Does that make one an enemy of the movement, or just someone with some reservations?
Maybe I'm the naive one, but I tend to think there's plenty of room left to sell America on single-payer insurance, on progressive taxation, on better unemployment benefits, and so on, by demonstrating to the median voter that the people who stand to benefit from these things are people just like themselves, and not folks looking to make radical ideological changes or subvert what this country already stands for.
posted by dixiecupdrinking at 9:31 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Maybe I'm the naive one, but I tend to think there's plenty of room left to sell America on single-payer insurance, on progressive taxation, on better unemployment benefits, and so on, by demonstrating to the median voter that the people who stand to benefit from these things are people just like themselves, and not folks looking to make radical ideological changes or subvert what this country already stands for.
posted by dixiecupdrinking at 9:31 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
99%...98%...97%...96%
posted by banshee at 9:34 AM on April 19, 2012 [9 favorites]
99%...98%...97%...96%
posted by banshee at 9:34 AM on April 19, 2012 [9 favorites]
OK, great! Now what?
That is the question of our time, not a reflection of failure on Occupy's part. This is why it's important to talk about it. The fact that we don't have an answer yet means we should keep talking.
Personally, I'm interested in the possibilities inherent in dropping out of the dollar economy and using alternative methods of exchange to create a space and a community which is not, ab origine, beholden to the people who control wealth.
But keep in mind that the Republican/Democratic system will not tolerate the presence of outsiders in the halls of power.
Have you happen to have noticed what the Christian Coalition and Tea Party have done to the Republican Party over the last twenty-five or so years?
Yes, and they started as extremely wealthy and influential outsiders, and now they're part of the establishment. Any patriarchal, pro-privilege, authoritarian ideology can find a place in American politics.
posted by clockzero at 9:37 AM on April 19, 2012 [5 favorites]
That is the question of our time, not a reflection of failure on Occupy's part. This is why it's important to talk about it. The fact that we don't have an answer yet means we should keep talking.
Personally, I'm interested in the possibilities inherent in dropping out of the dollar economy and using alternative methods of exchange to create a space and a community which is not, ab origine, beholden to the people who control wealth.
But keep in mind that the Republican/Democratic system will not tolerate the presence of outsiders in the halls of power.
Have you happen to have noticed what the Christian Coalition and Tea Party have done to the Republican Party over the last twenty-five or so years?
Yes, and they started as extremely wealthy and influential outsiders, and now they're part of the establishment. Any patriarchal, pro-privilege, authoritarian ideology can find a place in American politics.
posted by clockzero at 9:37 AM on April 19, 2012 [5 favorites]
Isn't it possible to both sympathize with the goals of, say, implementing more progressive taxation and better social safety nets, and also disagree with the notion that one must "smash the conservative-generated frame" in order to achieve these things?
Yes! Occupy is a deliberately inclusive popular-front movement! You can be a reformist or a radical in Occupy, that's part of what makes it great! The problem is that many right-liberals can't live with that and want it to be an exclusive liberal movement, which they try to enforce by tone- (and content-) policing the "unhelpful" language and ideas of people to their left.
posted by RogerB at 9:38 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Yes! Occupy is a deliberately inclusive popular-front movement! You can be a reformist or a radical in Occupy, that's part of what makes it great! The problem is that many right-liberals can't live with that and want it to be an exclusive liberal movement, which they try to enforce by tone- (and content-) policing the "unhelpful" language and ideas of people to their left.
posted by RogerB at 9:38 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Have you happen to have noticed what the Christian Coalition and Tea Party have done to the Republican Party over the last twenty-five or so years?
Besides forcing those who wish to be elected to change their rhetoric not much. I mean look at who the republican nominee is: an elitist Mormon. Romney can talk the talk as good as Obama can...ok not as good. When the rubber meets the road, if elected, Romney will continue the authoritarian policies implemented by Bush II and codified by Obama.
posted by AElfwine Evenstar at 9:50 AM on April 19, 2012
Besides forcing those who wish to be elected to change their rhetoric not much. I mean look at who the republican nominee is: an elitist Mormon. Romney can talk the talk as good as Obama can...ok not as good. When the rubber meets the road, if elected, Romney will continue the authoritarian policies implemented by Bush II and codified by Obama.
posted by AElfwine Evenstar at 9:50 AM on April 19, 2012
Yes, and they started as extremely wealthy and influential outsiders, and now they're part of the establishment. Any patriarchal, pro-privilege, authoritarian ideology can find a place in American politics.
They were "influential" in the evangelical circuit and were the new rich former Dixiecrats and they took on the most patriachal, privileged, authoritarian organization and won with mostly a grass roots effort by people disenfranchised by the elite within the party. These were the people who weren't considered good enough for the country club and they've turned it into a NASCAR track in a short 25 years!
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 9:55 AM on April 19, 2012
They were "influential" in the evangelical circuit and were the new rich former Dixiecrats and they took on the most patriachal, privileged, authoritarian organization and won with mostly a grass roots effort by people disenfranchised by the elite within the party. These were the people who weren't considered good enough for the country club and they've turned it into a NASCAR track in a short 25 years!
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 9:55 AM on April 19, 2012
Romney will continue the authoritarian policies implemented by Bush II
Right, the ultimate product packaged to be sold to the Christian Coalition. If the CC hadn't taken over the party we would still be seeing candidates like Bob Dole. Now even a previously "thoughtful centrist" Republican has to pledge to dismantle HUD to get the nod!
If you want to see liberal ideas pushed by the Democrats, then take over the party from the inside rather than complaining about how its too elitist for your voice to be heard. There are plenty of people with money to back you up too.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:01 AM on April 19, 2012
Right, the ultimate product packaged to be sold to the Christian Coalition. If the CC hadn't taken over the party we would still be seeing candidates like Bob Dole. Now even a previously "thoughtful centrist" Republican has to pledge to dismantle HUD to get the nod!
If you want to see liberal ideas pushed by the Democrats, then take over the party from the inside rather than complaining about how its too elitist for your voice to be heard. There are plenty of people with money to back you up too.
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:01 AM on April 19, 2012
Centrist faux-sympathizers doing ideology-and-rhetoric policing to impose their personal idea of what's "helping" on a deliberately broadly inclusive left popular-front movement are the very least helping people of all. Haven't we covered this already a thousand times?
If you think the problem with Occupy is either (1) that it needs to "keep the message on focus" to gain more traction inside the institutional media-political sphere, or (2) that it's a bunch of dirty hippie "urban campers," then you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
Really? The fact that I disagree with you personally makes me a faux-sympathizer? As if your opinion is somehow more important or better than mine, based on the fact that you disagree?
How about explaining how you are going to make this work to everyone's benefit? Not just naming "enemies" who agree with you on most points. It must feel nice in that ivory tower, but we lose when you screw up.
You need to read up on the '60s. You know all those crazy ass conservatives who have controlled government from 2001-2009? They came from a powerful and well-thought out exploitation of frustration with a movement much larger and much more organized in the 1960s and '70s than Occupy is today. This is real life, not some novel. If you aren't winning, you're losing. And we lose if you screw up. You got some sort of revolutionary plan that can even come close to making it better? I'd love to see it.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:04 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
If you think the problem with Occupy is either (1) that it needs to "keep the message on focus" to gain more traction inside the institutional media-political sphere, or (2) that it's a bunch of dirty hippie "urban campers," then you are an enemy of Occupy, not an ally or sympathizer.
Really? The fact that I disagree with you personally makes me a faux-sympathizer? As if your opinion is somehow more important or better than mine, based on the fact that you disagree?
How about explaining how you are going to make this work to everyone's benefit? Not just naming "enemies" who agree with you on most points. It must feel nice in that ivory tower, but we lose when you screw up.
You need to read up on the '60s. You know all those crazy ass conservatives who have controlled government from 2001-2009? They came from a powerful and well-thought out exploitation of frustration with a movement much larger and much more organized in the 1960s and '70s than Occupy is today. This is real life, not some novel. If you aren't winning, you're losing. And we lose if you screw up. You got some sort of revolutionary plan that can even come close to making it better? I'd love to see it.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:04 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
I don't know this guy personally to have an opinion, but just because your parent was a survivor does not make you immune to being an asshole. There are plenty of examples throughout history of people who survived atrocities, or their decendents, themselves committing atrocities. It's about time we stop hiding behind this bullshit and start judging people on the content of their own characters and the mertis of their actions.
I don't see how using the 20th's century's iconic incarnation of evil as a general slur applied indiscriminately constitutes judging people on the content of their own characters and merits of their actions.
posted by Salamandrous at 10:23 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I don't see how using the 20th's century's iconic incarnation of evil as a general slur applied indiscriminately constitutes judging people on the content of their own characters and merits of their actions.
posted by Salamandrous at 10:23 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I'll have faith in Occupy Wall Street when Jon Corzine is behind bars.
posted by weinbot at 10:31 AM on April 19, 2012
posted by weinbot at 10:31 AM on April 19, 2012
They were "influential" in the evangelical circuit and were the new rich former Dixiecrats and they took on the most patriachal, privileged, authoritarian organization and won with mostly a grass roots effort by people disenfranchised by the elite within the party. These were the people who weren't considered good enough for the country club and they've turned it into a NASCAR track in a short 25 years!
So, what is your point? I don't mean that sarcastically. Do you mean that if they took on the Republican party and became a dominant force, Occupy-allied folks can do something similar with the Dems? Because I think there are a slew of character differences that set Occupy and the radical evangelical coalition apart which could get in the way.
posted by clockzero at 10:34 AM on April 19, 2012
So, what is your point? I don't mean that sarcastically. Do you mean that if they took on the Republican party and became a dominant force, Occupy-allied folks can do something similar with the Dems? Because I think there are a slew of character differences that set Occupy and the radical evangelical coalition apart which could get in the way.
posted by clockzero at 10:34 AM on April 19, 2012
try to enforce by tone- (and content-) policing the "unhelpful" language and ideas of people to their left.
Who's policing whom? Weren't you the one naming enemies above? I say that the people with enemies lists are the true enemies of Occupy! (/performative contradiction)
posted by anotherpanacea at 10:41 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Who's policing whom? Weren't you the one naming enemies above? I say that the people with enemies lists are the true enemies of Occupy! (/performative contradiction)
posted by anotherpanacea at 10:41 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Maybe I'm the naive one, but I tend to think there's plenty of room left to sell America on single-payer insurance, on progressive taxation, on better unemployment benefits, and so on, by demonstrating to the median voter that the people who stand to benefit from these things are people just like themselves, and not folks looking to make radical ideological changes or subvert what this country already stands for.
That is what the Occupy movement was doing, but for-profit news media does not make money when it reports the truth. They make money when they create controversy and sell more advertising with more eyeballs, so we don't hear about all of the pretty reasonable demands to have our civil liberties protected while striving for a more equitable society for all Americans. They zoom to the shot of the guy who looks like he was designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes, because that's pretty much what he wants to look like. He gets the attention, the media gets more eyeballs, and everyone else loses.
In the same way that literature is evil, mass media is also evil because they charged with gathering an audience instead of reporting the truth. The quickest way to get attention is to appeal to baser elements of human nature, and so that's what every single major media outlet does.
But this isn't just limited to corporate outlets. The complete displacement of actual morality with moneyed morality is now a part of American culture. You can be the worst kind of asshole, but as long as your business is technically legal and you're making money, you are a winner. You are revered for your intellect. You are worshipped for your wealth. "Business is Business" perfectly encapsulates our new morality. It excuses us from feeling guilty about enriching ourselves to the detriment of our neighbors.
Throwing a family out on to the street? Business is business. Destroying local culture and jobs with your national chain? Business is business. Suing a smaller company into oblivion with your team of lawyers? Business is business. Denying insurance coverage for life-saving treatment on a technicality? Business is business.
(Now we are moving to the next ideological step towards fascism: rules are rules. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. We have absolute respect for authority, even if the authorities are absolutely wrong. Just look at the difference on what we spend enforcing park rules versus financial regulations: we arrested thousands of people for violating curfew and trespassing on public/private property, and how many members of Wall Street have been arrested, or even subpoenaed? Madoff only went to jail because his ponzi scheme was technically illegal.)
We also have the false idea that the wealthy are solely responsible for their fortune. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if any member of the Fortune 1000 were born in sub-Saharan Africa, they would likely be dead or spend the majority of their lives searching for water. There's no such thing as a self-made man or woman. Their wealth is possible only in nations that have infrastructure as America does. But, since they are either delusional, naive, or sociopathic, the wealthy who want to keep all of the upside and not give anything back continue to spread the lie that they deserve all of their money. They think kids who grow up in neighborhoods the wealthy won't even drive through have an equal opportunity. It's the most pathetically transparent claim I see repeated on a day to day basis, but the poor don't have a power structure to make the truth known. Otherwise they wouldn't be poor.
So, why does anyone expect any different result when a bunch of young people are asking corporate news outlets to pay attention because mistreating the poor is morally wrong? Because massive inequality is unjust? There's no money in giving them a platform, so their platform is irrelevant. They are irrelevant. Money talks; morality walks. That's the unfortunate truth, and why there are radical elements at Occupy. This country needs radical ideological changes, because right now we stand for power, privilege, exclusion, and indifference, and we need to start standing for something else.
posted by deanklear at 10:47 AM on April 19, 2012 [10 favorites]
That is what the Occupy movement was doing, but for-profit news media does not make money when it reports the truth. They make money when they create controversy and sell more advertising with more eyeballs, so we don't hear about all of the pretty reasonable demands to have our civil liberties protected while striving for a more equitable society for all Americans. They zoom to the shot of the guy who looks like he was designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes, because that's pretty much what he wants to look like. He gets the attention, the media gets more eyeballs, and everyone else loses.
In the same way that literature is evil, mass media is also evil because they charged with gathering an audience instead of reporting the truth. The quickest way to get attention is to appeal to baser elements of human nature, and so that's what every single major media outlet does.
But this isn't just limited to corporate outlets. The complete displacement of actual morality with moneyed morality is now a part of American culture. You can be the worst kind of asshole, but as long as your business is technically legal and you're making money, you are a winner. You are revered for your intellect. You are worshipped for your wealth. "Business is Business" perfectly encapsulates our new morality. It excuses us from feeling guilty about enriching ourselves to the detriment of our neighbors.
Throwing a family out on to the street? Business is business. Destroying local culture and jobs with your national chain? Business is business. Suing a smaller company into oblivion with your team of lawyers? Business is business. Denying insurance coverage for life-saving treatment on a technicality? Business is business.
(Now we are moving to the next ideological step towards fascism: rules are rules. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. We have absolute respect for authority, even if the authorities are absolutely wrong. Just look at the difference on what we spend enforcing park rules versus financial regulations: we arrested thousands of people for violating curfew and trespassing on public/private property, and how many members of Wall Street have been arrested, or even subpoenaed? Madoff only went to jail because his ponzi scheme was technically illegal.)
We also have the false idea that the wealthy are solely responsible for their fortune. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if any member of the Fortune 1000 were born in sub-Saharan Africa, they would likely be dead or spend the majority of their lives searching for water. There's no such thing as a self-made man or woman. Their wealth is possible only in nations that have infrastructure as America does. But, since they are either delusional, naive, or sociopathic, the wealthy who want to keep all of the upside and not give anything back continue to spread the lie that they deserve all of their money. They think kids who grow up in neighborhoods the wealthy won't even drive through have an equal opportunity. It's the most pathetically transparent claim I see repeated on a day to day basis, but the poor don't have a power structure to make the truth known. Otherwise they wouldn't be poor.
So, why does anyone expect any different result when a bunch of young people are asking corporate news outlets to pay attention because mistreating the poor is morally wrong? Because massive inequality is unjust? There's no money in giving them a platform, so their platform is irrelevant. They are irrelevant. Money talks; morality walks. That's the unfortunate truth, and why there are radical elements at Occupy. This country needs radical ideological changes, because right now we stand for power, privilege, exclusion, and indifference, and we need to start standing for something else.
posted by deanklear at 10:47 AM on April 19, 2012 [10 favorites]
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a punk headbutting the bottom of a boot, forever.
posted by fuq at 10:51 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by fuq at 10:51 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
I'll have faith in Occupy Wall Street when Jon Corzine is behind bars.
What does this bit of snark even mean? OWS is no admirer of Corzine and his ilk, and have been actively trying to get people like Corzine held responsible for their actions. Why are you insinuating otherwise?
posted by stagewhisper at 10:54 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
What does this bit of snark even mean? OWS is no admirer of Corzine and his ilk, and have been actively trying to get people like Corzine held responsible for their actions. Why are you insinuating otherwise?
posted by stagewhisper at 10:54 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
This country needs radical ideological changes, because right now we stand for power, privilege, exclusion, and indifference
Granting your premise, what does camping out in urban parks do to reverse this dynamic? What does "giving people voices" - especially when "people" invariably means white, educated people from middle and upper-middle class backgrounds - do to reverse it?
You have a concern for the poor. How do you square that with Occupy's rather flagrant efforts to stop poor people from going to work?
posted by downing street memo at 10:55 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Granting your premise, what does camping out in urban parks do to reverse this dynamic? What does "giving people voices" - especially when "people" invariably means white, educated people from middle and upper-middle class backgrounds - do to reverse it?
You have a concern for the poor. How do you square that with Occupy's rather flagrant efforts to stop poor people from going to work?
posted by downing street memo at 10:55 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Now we are moving to the next ideological step towards fascism
It can't happen here amirite...
Seriously though incipient fascism has been a big part of American politics since WWII. As George Carlin once noted: the Nazis may have lost WWII, but make no mistake fascism won. The fascist elements in our government have been expanded during the Bush II years and now during the Obama regime they are being codified and are now the new status quo. Incrementalism folks, it's the name of the game.
Granting your premise, what does camping out in urban parks do to reverse this dynamic?
What does going to work everyday without question like a "good American" do to reverse this dynamic?
posted by AElfwine Evenstar at 10:57 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
It can't happen here amirite...
Seriously though incipient fascism has been a big part of American politics since WWII. As George Carlin once noted: the Nazis may have lost WWII, but make no mistake fascism won. The fascist elements in our government have been expanded during the Bush II years and now during the Obama regime they are being codified and are now the new status quo. Incrementalism folks, it's the name of the game.
Granting your premise, what does camping out in urban parks do to reverse this dynamic?
What does going to work everyday without question like a "good American" do to reverse this dynamic?
posted by AElfwine Evenstar at 10:57 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Stagewhisper, that's what I'm saying. Corzine is a free man and he shouldn't be, and OWS has not succeeding in changing that. This is the lowest-hanging fruit, and they can't reach it.
The reality, of course, is that nobody can.
posted by weinbot at 11:06 AM on April 19, 2012
The reality, of course, is that nobody can.
posted by weinbot at 11:06 AM on April 19, 2012
Granting your premise, what does camping out in urban parks do to reverse this dynamic? What does "giving people voices" - especially when "people" invariably means white, educated people from middle and upper-middle class backgrounds - do to reverse it?
This is a disingenuous mischaracterization of what types of people have been folded into OWS and provided with a larger platform to air their grievances and start working collaboratively on solutions. Here in NYC there are 91 working groups that have been meeting regularly throughout the winter. Underneath those working groups are multitudes of affiliate groups made up of people from every borough and community in the greater NYC area. They are not being "given voices", they are part of the core of OWS (a ever-expanding segment, by the way) and they have control over their own voice. Their voices and the voice of OWS as a whole are not two separate things. Did you ever spend any extended time in Zuccotti park or participate in any actions? The crowds were extremely diverse and resembled a cross-section of the city itself.
posted by stagewhisper at 11:08 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
This is a disingenuous mischaracterization of what types of people have been folded into OWS and provided with a larger platform to air their grievances and start working collaboratively on solutions. Here in NYC there are 91 working groups that have been meeting regularly throughout the winter. Underneath those working groups are multitudes of affiliate groups made up of people from every borough and community in the greater NYC area. They are not being "given voices", they are part of the core of OWS (a ever-expanding segment, by the way) and they have control over their own voice. Their voices and the voice of OWS as a whole are not two separate things. Did you ever spend any extended time in Zuccotti park or participate in any actions? The crowds were extremely diverse and resembled a cross-section of the city itself.
posted by stagewhisper at 11:08 AM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
OWS has not succeeding in changing that
Whenever this is said, about ANYTHING, I think it's really vitally important to add in: Yet.
Goodness gracious, Occupy has existed for seven months. Look, patience is not (to put it mildly) my strongest suit, but let's give it a little time, yeah?
posted by davidjmcgee at 11:10 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
Whenever this is said, about ANYTHING, I think it's really vitally important to add in: Yet.
Goodness gracious, Occupy has existed for seven months. Look, patience is not (to put it mildly) my strongest suit, but let's give it a little time, yeah?
posted by davidjmcgee at 11:10 AM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
While we're sort of on the subject of "transform from within!" vs. "bring down the walls!" here's a four-year-old essay (that I read for the first time today) by current NY State Attorney General Schneiderman about the difference between (and need for both) Transactional and Transformational Politics.
Almost all of us are capable of taking examples of good public policy and placing them in a transformational progressive framework. But history teaches that the overwhelming majority of elected officials follow movement builders outside government when it comes to the new and risky. So it's time for progressive activists to focus their demands on transformational as well as transactional work. Once you recognize it, demand it and reward it, it will happen.posted by davidjmcgee at 11:25 AM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Well, what are you waiting for? Go get him.
Emphasis mine. And there we have one of the major problems in a nutshell.
posted by stagewhisper at 11:40 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Emphasis mine. And there we have one of the major problems in a nutshell.
posted by stagewhisper at 11:40 AM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
The emphasis might as well have been mine. I'm criticizing your movement, you're defending it.
I'm not going to do anything IRL for your movement because I have other concerns in my life. Moreover, nothing I've seen from OWS has compelled me to take an interest so far, and they don't really have anything particularly interesting up their sleeves. I want to be wrong, but I'm not.
posted by weinbot at 11:56 AM on April 19, 2012
I'm not going to do anything IRL for your movement because I have other concerns in my life. Moreover, nothing I've seen from OWS has compelled me to take an interest so far, and they don't really have anything particularly interesting up their sleeves. I want to be wrong, but I'm not.
posted by weinbot at 11:56 AM on April 19, 2012
Fair enough, and I respect your honesty about your level of interest. I just hope you're actively doing something useful to take down Corzine yourself since it seems to be an issue you do care very much about, to the point where you're using that as a barometer of whether or not to have faith in OWS.
posted by stagewhisper at 12:07 PM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
posted by stagewhisper at 12:07 PM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Sometimes, Archimedes' lever is time. Change does not happen fast, and it never comes easy.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:13 PM on April 19, 2012
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:13 PM on April 19, 2012
No, I'm not, because like I said, I got other stuff going on. What I'm saying is that if OWS is interested in reducing wealth disparity, ending private ownership of our legislative system, and prosecuting financial fraud, then Jon Corzine should be target number one. Mr. Corzine is probably sitting on his veranda right now drinking a Fanta.
posted by weinbot at 12:20 PM on April 19, 2012
posted by weinbot at 12:20 PM on April 19, 2012
Seven months?! Martin Luther King got rid of segregation in a matter of *weeks* without any messy civil disobediance or people making a scene by being around in public places they shouldn't be. Also, Jon Corzine is the source of all economic inequality. He's like the Brain Bug for all of capitalism.
posted by fuq at 12:34 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
posted by fuq at 12:34 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
should be target number one
I happen to think that breaking up Band of America is more important in both the short- and long-term than ZOMG JAILING CORZINE RIGHT NOW. But we can disagree about that, and still think that Corzine should be in jail, right?
posted by davidjmcgee at 12:36 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I happen to think that breaking up Band of America is more important in both the short- and long-term than ZOMG JAILING CORZINE RIGHT NOW. But we can disagree about that, and still think that Corzine should be in jail, right?
posted by davidjmcgee at 12:36 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Um. Bank of America!
Never break up Band of America!
posted by davidjmcgee at 12:37 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Never break up Band of America!
posted by davidjmcgee at 12:37 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
If we just put Jon Corzine in jail, Bank of America will fall apart on it's own. You do know that, by design, if you think going after Jon Corzine is important you can go to OWS and tell them to do that and they'll probably orm a working group and you can get to wwork on it.
Of course, the most effective way to prosecute Jon Corzine is to do something else entirely.
posted by fuq at 12:42 PM on April 19, 2012
Of course, the most effective way to prosecute Jon Corzine is to do something else entirely.
posted by fuq at 12:42 PM on April 19, 2012
Granting your premise, what does camping out in urban parks do to reverse this dynamic? What does "giving people voices" - especially when "people" invariably means white, educated people from middle and upper-middle class backgrounds - do to reverse it?
White, educated people from middle and upper class backgrounds are the only ones who can afford the free time and resources to protest. That's how bad it is. Yes, it took them a long time to recognize the injustice, but that doesn't mean they are incorrect for realizing the facts. They're just late to the party.
You have a concern for the poor. How do you square that with Occupy's rather flagrant efforts to stop poor people from going to work?
That is a regurgitation of talking points against the civil rights movement. The purpose of civil disobedience is to stop business as usual from being business as usual.
posted by deanklear at 12:46 PM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
White, educated people from middle and upper class backgrounds are the only ones who can afford the free time and resources to protest. That's how bad it is. Yes, it took them a long time to recognize the injustice, but that doesn't mean they are incorrect for realizing the facts. They're just late to the party.
You have a concern for the poor. How do you square that with Occupy's rather flagrant efforts to stop poor people from going to work?
That is a regurgitation of talking points against the civil rights movement. The purpose of civil disobedience is to stop business as usual from being business as usual.
posted by deanklear at 12:46 PM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
I need to go do something other than argue politics over the internet, but it's telling how people ignore the minorities in OWS. There's a people of color working group that holds a lot of political power in the movement and there's plenty of minorities, but, you know, minorities being invisable is embedded in our society so I'm not supried that a lot of people in their thread are either a) working from old information prior to the big racial consciousness kerfuffle which is convenient for ignoring minorities or b) people chose not to see minorities as usual.
Of course, I only know the New York OWS and I was there that day when they held a large muslim prayer in Zucotti so maybe I'm just uninformed.
Wait, actually, Jon Corzine.
posted by fuq at 12:53 PM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Of course, I only know the New York OWS and I was there that day when they held a large muslim prayer in Zucotti so maybe I'm just uninformed.
Wait, actually, Jon Corzine.
posted by fuq at 12:53 PM on April 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
Fuq, you're being dense on purpose. Corzine is no brain bug, and you can coo and cluck and make jokes at my suggestion of arresting him, but you're not doing yourself any favors.
I chose Corzine because he is a great symbol of political corruption and financial fraud. Plus he's a Democrat so it wouldn't look like OWS is only going after those on the right. He's a good start, not the be all and end all. And it would also be orders of magnitude easier than taking down a bank that is fully supported by the US government, but If you would prefer to go after Bank of America first, have at it. Lemme know when you've made them collapse.
The point is that I'd care about your pavement parties a lot more if it seemed like they were doing more than signwaving and playing drums. Great, you had a Muslim prayer. Cool, a library. The Supreme Court also just made invasive strip searches legal for minor arrests and the Senate just rejected the taxation of billionaires.
You have no power and no clue on how to get any.
Also lollin at the MLK reference.
posted by weinbot at 1:57 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
I chose Corzine because he is a great symbol of political corruption and financial fraud. Plus he's a Democrat so it wouldn't look like OWS is only going after those on the right. He's a good start, not the be all and end all. And it would also be orders of magnitude easier than taking down a bank that is fully supported by the US government, but If you would prefer to go after Bank of America first, have at it. Lemme know when you've made them collapse.
The point is that I'd care about your pavement parties a lot more if it seemed like they were doing more than signwaving and playing drums. Great, you had a Muslim prayer. Cool, a library. The Supreme Court also just made invasive strip searches legal for minor arrests and the Senate just rejected the taxation of billionaires.
You have no power and no clue on how to get any.
Also lollin at the MLK reference.
posted by weinbot at 1:57 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
You have no power and no clue on how to get any.
The point is that I'd care about your pavement parties a lot more if it seemed like they were doing more than signwaving and playing drums. Great, you had a Muslim prayer. Cool, a library. The Supreme Court also just made invasive strip searches legal for minor arrests and the Senate just rejected the taxation of billionaires.
Okay then, I see now where you're coming from. I hope someday us powerless losers who let your civil liberties be further eroded while you enjoyed your "other things you have going on" can some day impress a Powerful Non-Loser guy such as yourself enough that you'll care. But I get the sense you'd rather we even stop trying, so it's a bit of a quandary. Lulz.
posted by stagewhisper at 2:32 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
The point is that I'd care about your pavement parties a lot more if it seemed like they were doing more than signwaving and playing drums. Great, you had a Muslim prayer. Cool, a library. The Supreme Court also just made invasive strip searches legal for minor arrests and the Senate just rejected the taxation of billionaires.
Okay then, I see now where you're coming from. I hope someday us powerless losers who let your civil liberties be further eroded while you enjoyed your "other things you have going on" can some day impress a Powerful Non-Loser guy such as yourself enough that you'll care. But I get the sense you'd rather we even stop trying, so it's a bit of a quandary. Lulz.
posted by stagewhisper at 2:32 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
That is a regurgitation of talking points against the civil rights movement. The purpose of civil disobedience is to stop business as usual from being business as usual.
Yeah, the two situations are not at all parallel. The leadership and overwhelming percentage of the rank and file of the civil rights movement were people agitating for their own civil rights, i.e. they were black.
Occupy is led by hard-left academic types, overwhelmingly white and/or otherwise privileged in nature, and claims to speak for another group (workers). The port action in Oakland illustrated that, in fact, they do not speak for that group, as port workers wanted to go to work on that day and as port unions didn't participate.
The civil rights movement was an authentic movement made up of people speaking for themselves. Occupy is a movement of one kind of people taking on the mantle of another kind of people for PR reasons. Not the same thing.
posted by downing street memo at 2:46 PM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Yeah, the two situations are not at all parallel. The leadership and overwhelming percentage of the rank and file of the civil rights movement were people agitating for their own civil rights, i.e. they were black.
Occupy is led by hard-left academic types, overwhelmingly white and/or otherwise privileged in nature, and claims to speak for another group (workers). The port action in Oakland illustrated that, in fact, they do not speak for that group, as port workers wanted to go to work on that day and as port unions didn't participate.
The civil rights movement was an authentic movement made up of people speaking for themselves. Occupy is a movement of one kind of people taking on the mantle of another kind of people for PR reasons. Not the same thing.
posted by downing street memo at 2:46 PM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
NYC Credit Union Honors Occupy Wallstreet at Fundraiser
Occupy Groups Reimagine The Bank, "The group is looking to partner with or acquire an existing financial institution to create the Occupy Bank — democratic, transparent, accessible, competitive — but it shouldn't maximize profits over everything."
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one paying attention.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:49 PM on April 19, 2012 [6 favorites]
Occupy Groups Reimagine The Bank, "The group is looking to partner with or acquire an existing financial institution to create the Occupy Bank — democratic, transparent, accessible, competitive — but it shouldn't maximize profits over everything."
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one paying attention.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 2:49 PM on April 19, 2012 [6 favorites]
Occupy is led by hard-left academic types
Who?
posted by davidjmcgee at 2:57 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Who?
posted by davidjmcgee at 2:57 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
That is what the Occupy movement was doing, but for-profit news media does not make money when it reports the truth. They make money when they create controversy and sell more advertising with more eyeballs, so we don't hear about all of the pretty reasonable demands to have our civil liberties protected while striving for a more equitable society for all Americans. They zoom to the shot of the guy who looks like he was designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes, because that's pretty much what he wants to look like. He gets the attention, the media gets more eyeballs, and everyone else loses.
but this is the thing--that's the way the media is. Its like complaining that it rains. You have to make your movement work with the world as it is, instead of letting it all hang out and then blaming the media for it. Give the people who look like they were designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes out of the encampment.
When did the anti-Vietnam protests work? When the people marching in them looked like the rest of America. Why did the civil rights protests work on TV? Because the protesters wore their Sunday best. TV does this. You cannot expect to have those people around and win. It isn't about expressing yourself, its about winning. Because if you aren't there to win, why the hell are you there?
posted by Ironmouth at 3:25 PM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
but this is the thing--that's the way the media is. Its like complaining that it rains. You have to make your movement work with the world as it is, instead of letting it all hang out and then blaming the media for it. Give the people who look like they were designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes out of the encampment.
When did the anti-Vietnam protests work? When the people marching in them looked like the rest of America. Why did the civil rights protests work on TV? Because the protesters wore their Sunday best. TV does this. You cannot expect to have those people around and win. It isn't about expressing yourself, its about winning. Because if you aren't there to win, why the hell are you there?
posted by Ironmouth at 3:25 PM on April 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Gosh, imagine what it'd be like if the authorities were so busy they had no time to worry about shutting down camps.
posted by Twang at 3:37 PM on April 19, 2012
posted by Twang at 3:37 PM on April 19, 2012
Give the people who look like they were designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes out of the encampment.
A couple of things wrong with this. The first is the very idea that OWS start arbitrarily throwing people off the sidewalks and out of the gatherings based on how palatable the average Joe finds their aesthetic presentation. The second is squaring throwing people out of the group based on how they look with any sort of claim to a higher moral ground. I mean, come on. Even if this was a reasonable and not at all shitty thing to do, you think this wouldn't play as exclusionary fascism in the media?
posted by stagewhisper at 3:47 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
A couple of things wrong with this. The first is the very idea that OWS start arbitrarily throwing people off the sidewalks and out of the gatherings based on how palatable the average Joe finds their aesthetic presentation. The second is squaring throwing people out of the group based on how they look with any sort of claim to a higher moral ground. I mean, come on. Even if this was a reasonable and not at all shitty thing to do, you think this wouldn't play as exclusionary fascism in the media?
posted by stagewhisper at 3:47 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
I would take OWS more seriously if they started actually doing meaningful things. Setting up tents in parks and disrupting subway service doesn't actually accomplish anything. Not even "awareness." Everybody is already aware of inequality.
They really are not.
posted by St. Sorryass at 3:48 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
They really are not.
posted by St. Sorryass at 3:48 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
Occupy is a movement of one kind of people taking on the mantle of another kind of people for PR reasons. Not the same thing.
Once again you are making things up to fit the narrative you'd prefer.
posted by stagewhisper at 3:51 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Once again you are making things up to fit the narrative you'd prefer.
posted by stagewhisper at 3:51 PM on April 19, 2012 [1 favorite]
Why did the civil rights protests work on TV? Because the protesters wore their Sunday best.
One of OWS biggest tactical blunders in my opinion was when they all didn't start wearing business suits. I remember way back, after the big cleaning action, some group proposed that the occupiers always wear business attire. Some established counterculture artsy crew even offered to donate and even tailor the suits. Well, the General Assembly didn't take them up on their great offer. Suits would have taken things to a whole level re: appearing on the news, NYPD profiling, using restrooms, etc. OWS really blew it. If OWS had been able to get everyone in suits and quit it with the fucking drumming Jon Corzine would probably be jail in right now. I dress appropriately for court when I do occupation stuff.
Also, Occupy Wall Street is not the movement the same way the NAACP wasn't the civil rights movement.
Occupy is led by hard-left academic types
Totally the opposite. I happen to know for a fact that academic community organizers who are think OWS are the bees knees and everything they do is the Next Thing. A particular professor is even writing an article and waxes poetic about crusties. I must admit though I do love to talk about Occupy Wall Street. It's fascinating on many levels. Metafilter is somewhat good at this, which is better than most places. I can't speak for New England, and really the discussion we're having about a wide variety of occupations is a derail. Occupy New England is totally different than Occupy Wall Street/New York. I realized everything I've said defending Occupy might be totally wrong about Occupy New England.
but
if we want to really be serious we should be talking about Antonio Gramsci.
posted by fuq at 4:34 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
One of OWS biggest tactical blunders in my opinion was when they all didn't start wearing business suits. I remember way back, after the big cleaning action, some group proposed that the occupiers always wear business attire. Some established counterculture artsy crew even offered to donate and even tailor the suits. Well, the General Assembly didn't take them up on their great offer. Suits would have taken things to a whole level re: appearing on the news, NYPD profiling, using restrooms, etc. OWS really blew it. If OWS had been able to get everyone in suits and quit it with the fucking drumming Jon Corzine would probably be jail in right now. I dress appropriately for court when I do occupation stuff.
Also, Occupy Wall Street is not the movement the same way the NAACP wasn't the civil rights movement.
Occupy is led by hard-left academic types
Totally the opposite. I happen to know for a fact that academic community organizers who are think OWS are the bees knees and everything they do is the Next Thing. A particular professor is even writing an article and waxes poetic about crusties. I must admit though I do love to talk about Occupy Wall Street. It's fascinating on many levels. Metafilter is somewhat good at this, which is better than most places. I can't speak for New England, and really the discussion we're having about a wide variety of occupations is a derail. Occupy New England is totally different than Occupy Wall Street/New York. I realized everything I've said defending Occupy might be totally wrong about Occupy New England.
but
if we want to really be serious we should be talking about Antonio Gramsci.
posted by fuq at 4:34 PM on April 19, 2012 [4 favorites]
When did the anti-Vietnam protests work?
They didn't.
Yes, the did.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:39 AM on April 20, 2012
They didn't.
Yes, the did.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:39 AM on April 20, 2012
When did the anti-Vietnam protests work?
They didn't.
Yes, the did.
If electing Richard Nixon is your definition of success, I'd hate to see failure!
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:48 AM on April 20, 2012 [1 favorite]
They didn't.
Yes, the did.
If electing Richard Nixon is your definition of success, I'd hate to see failure!
posted by The 10th Regiment of Foot at 10:48 AM on April 20, 2012 [1 favorite]
but this is the thing--that's the way the media is. Its like complaining that it rains.
It's not the way media is everywhere in the world. Most industrialized nations have at least a few subsidized news outlets, so there can be some actual news instead of infotainment and partisanship.
You have to make your movement work with the world as it is, instead of letting it all hang out and then blaming the media for it. Give the people who look like they were designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes out of the encampment.
I didn't say the movement couldn't work. I was saying that's why the public perception of OWS has been damaged. And no, I don't think starting exclusionary policies is the best way to demonstrate how wrong exclusionary policies are. A movement does have to have some sort of principle to last.
When did the anti-Vietnam protests work? When the people marching in them looked like the rest of America.
You mean after the draft started and privileged people had to go war too. Sure.
Why did the civil rights protests work on TV? Because the protesters wore their Sunday best.
Because news media showed the police brutalizing demonstrators after decades of work from a broad base of American society demonstrating injustice through mass action. It didn't happen over a long weekend because all of the sudden black people decided to wear their Sunday best.
TV does this. You cannot expect to have those people around and win. It isn't about expressing yourself, its about winning. Because if you aren't there to win, why the hell are you there?
From this paragraph I can tell that you just don't get it. No one is trying to win anything. They're trying to raise awareness about injustice, and eventually, restore rights to working people that have been taken away from them over the last four decades. The right to having a work/life balance. The right to have the time to take care of family. The right to have health insurance and a pension that isn't liquidated to be handed over to worthless cronies of the board, or eliminated by corporate raiders who bankrupt companies to front run the interest payments while they gut jobs for the sake of temporary improvements to quarterly profits.
If you want to go down to an OWS camp and tell some guy that he doesn't have a voice because he has tattoos, go ahead. I'll continue to fund alternative media and tell facts about OWS, because in America, everyone is supposed to have a say, regardless of what they look like or how much money they have in the bank. Right?
posted by deanklear at 5:36 PM on April 20, 2012 [1 favorite]
It's not the way media is everywhere in the world. Most industrialized nations have at least a few subsidized news outlets, so there can be some actual news instead of infotainment and partisanship.
You have to make your movement work with the world as it is, instead of letting it all hang out and then blaming the media for it. Give the people who look like they were designed in a lab to scare the bejeezus out of average Joes out of the encampment.
I didn't say the movement couldn't work. I was saying that's why the public perception of OWS has been damaged. And no, I don't think starting exclusionary policies is the best way to demonstrate how wrong exclusionary policies are. A movement does have to have some sort of principle to last.
When did the anti-Vietnam protests work? When the people marching in them looked like the rest of America.
You mean after the draft started and privileged people had to go war too. Sure.
Why did the civil rights protests work on TV? Because the protesters wore their Sunday best.
Because news media showed the police brutalizing demonstrators after decades of work from a broad base of American society demonstrating injustice through mass action. It didn't happen over a long weekend because all of the sudden black people decided to wear their Sunday best.
TV does this. You cannot expect to have those people around and win. It isn't about expressing yourself, its about winning. Because if you aren't there to win, why the hell are you there?
From this paragraph I can tell that you just don't get it. No one is trying to win anything. They're trying to raise awareness about injustice, and eventually, restore rights to working people that have been taken away from them over the last four decades. The right to having a work/life balance. The right to have the time to take care of family. The right to have health insurance and a pension that isn't liquidated to be handed over to worthless cronies of the board, or eliminated by corporate raiders who bankrupt companies to front run the interest payments while they gut jobs for the sake of temporary improvements to quarterly profits.
If you want to go down to an OWS camp and tell some guy that he doesn't have a voice because he has tattoos, go ahead. I'll continue to fund alternative media and tell facts about OWS, because in America, everyone is supposed to have a say, regardless of what they look like or how much money they have in the bank. Right?
posted by deanklear at 5:36 PM on April 20, 2012 [1 favorite]
To raise this into full farce mode, I just saw on AJ English that OWS is now calling to literally Free Mumia.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 3:08 PM on April 24, 2012 [1 favorite]
posted by Threeway Handshake at 3:08 PM on April 24, 2012 [1 favorite]
« Older Drifting into a world of limitless dimensions | "the mobile social fin de siècle" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
“We’d like, for a little while, to maybe live as Quinnipiac,” said occupier Ty Hailey.
facepalm.gif
posted by elizardbits at 8:12 AM on April 19, 2012 [10 favorites]