Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Debt is up to $49,000 per every American man, woman, and child.
And people continue to act like there's nothing wrong, or criticize those who are trying to do SOMETHING.
That is a problem that OWS is failing to address. Their ambitions would bring about much more spending, not less. Yet another reason they don't have my support.
Your grasp of what revolutions are is based on nothing at all. The Russian Revolution was 75 years in the making. Even Hitler spent time in prison before the Nazis took over Germany. Read the history of the French Revolution and notice how many times it was crushed before it took off the royal heads.
Not true, here's some info for you to read about those revolutions:
You're closest with what you said about Hitler, but after the initial brief prison time he gained power by winning elections like any other candidate. It wasn't a "revolution."
And we all know about Hitler's rise, which resulted in over 50 million people dead.
So I'm not sure why you're citing these as examples for OWS to follow. Successful, meaningful revolutions had precise goals. See the American Revolution, which began with extremely precise grievances beyond "freedom and stuff".
"Colonists galvanized around the position that the Stamp Act of 1765, imposed by Parliament of Great Britain, was unconstitutional. The British Parliament insisted it had the right to tax colonists. The colonists claimed that, as they were British subjects, taxation without representation was illegal. The American colonists formed a unifying Continental Congress and a shadow government in each colony, though ostensibly claiming loyalty to the monarch and a place in the British Empire. The American boycott of directly taxed British tea led to the Boston Tea Party in 1773. London responded by ending self-government in Massachusetts and putting it under the control of the British army with General Thomas Gage as governor. In April 1775 Gage learned that weapons were being gathered in Concord, and he sent British troops to seize and destroy them.[10] Local militia, known as 'minutemen,' confronted the troops and exchanged fire (see Battles of Lexington and Concord). After repeated pleas to the British monarchy for intervention with Parliament, any chance of a compromise ended when the Congress were declared traitors by royal decree, and they responded with a declared independence forming a new sovereign nation external to the British Empire, the United States of America, on July 4, 1776. (emphasis mine)"
Wait, wait, wait. Portland? This is the NYC forum.
And I have also been to many OWS protests and meetings and talked to protesters here in NYC (the origin of the movement, by the way). And it is exactly as I described. Judging by the reports coming out of other cities they're not so different in their lack of direction or knowledge, general disorder and uncleanliness, and immaturity.
I would hope that you have views and thus associate yourself with the movements that agree with you, not allow a movement to make decisions for you...
I am aware of what forum this is, but you are also aware that this isn't just a New York thing right? I have seen a number of protests here in Portland, as well as have visited the park in NYC, and have seen protests there during my last visit.
So basically you are calling the group "young people?" This need for change has hopefully been what gets people inspired with government and how things are being run and how they might be corrected. There has been a huge disconnect with politics in this country and plenty of people would rather ignore it and not worry about what is happening and that is where things get dangerous. People should pay attention to their government and should react to what they do, this is a reaction of young people who are unhappy with the current situation of our country, who have also been hit very hard with debt and lack of opportunity. That is not okay, and they know that, but you have to start somewhere to make these changes and bringing an awareness to issues is where you start.
If no one brought gay marriage up as an issue, then no state would of ever legalized it.
As for who I associate with, I am not forming my views because of OWS, I am just enjoying seeing my views come to fruition like this and I am excited to see where all this might go.
That is a problem that OWS is failing to address. Their ambitions would bring about much more spending, not less. Yet another reason they don't have my support.
There have not been any policies laid out by the OWS crowd.
Without basic information I fail to see how you can draw the analysis that government spending would increase.
I am aware of what forum this is, but you are also aware that this isn't just a New York thing right?
I am aware that OWS goes beyond NYC, but I was simply surprised that a Portlander was posting in the NYC forum about it and not in the Portland forum about it. Not that it really matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe
There have not been any policies laid out by the OWS crowd. Without basic information I fail to see how you can draw the analysis that government spending would increase.
I wrote a whole response to you but basically was saying the same thing over and over again. OWS is a socialist movement, as evidenced by its core group of people who actually camp and by its published documents. Socialism leads to greater spending, not less. But that was a relatively minor political point. The real issue is their conduct.
----------------
Some things are obvious about this movement.
1) It has failed thus far (see lack of policy change or influence on elections)
2) Its core consists mostly of socialists or other radical leftists (see OWS leaders and any published documents)
3) It has no specific goals agreed upon by the majority of supporters
4) It does not have an understanding of how to effectively protest
Regarding #4: You can't protest against problems, you have to protest for solutions. Successful movements want to accomplish something besides complain loudly about a problem. You have to have a solution before you complain. See the Tea Party, which probably never gained equal numbers to OWS but accomplished far more for two reasons: 1) the protesters had solutions in mind and to accomplish them they 2) nominated and elected candidates for public office. They thus accomplished far more with less than OWS, who merely wants to complain and not actually do anything.
This is because people don't want to listen to complaints. They just don't. They want to hear solutions! It's a simple psychological truth about humanity. If you want somebody's attention and support, you have to couple any complaints with solutions or people will just turn you off.
It's really hard to turn your neighbors volume down by just sitting there and complaining about it. You have to get up off your behind and prosecute the solution.
I am aware that OWS goes beyond NYC, but I was simply surprised that a Portlander was posting in the NYC forum about it and not in the Portland forum about it. Not that it really matters.
I have been posting on the NYC forum for a little while now, I love the city, and I will be living there in a couple months, so there really shouldn't be any surprise with me posting here. I am sure you will see me post more here in the future as well.
Quote:
I wrote a whole response to you but basically was saying the same thing over and over again. OWS is a socialist movement, as evidenced by its core group of people who actually camp and by its published documents. Socialism leads to greater spending, not less. But that was a relatively minor political point. The real issue is their conduct.
Well that is arguable, if that were true then Republicans would also be labeled as socialist for their number of policies that also increase government spending, which is a whole other topic, but seriously both sides want to increase spending, they just want to do it for their own things....so are you telling me both parties are socialists?
Which if the conduct is what bothers you the most, then you must also hate violence being used against protesters if you don't like any negative conduct....but then again, how the conduct has been can be very subjective from person to person.
Quote:
Some things are obvious about this movement.
1) It has failed thus far (see lack of policy change or influence on elections)
2) Its core consists mostly of socialists or other radical leftists (see OWS leaders and any published documents)
3) It has no specific goals agreed upon by the majority of supporters
4) It does not have an understanding of how to effectively protest
Regarding #4: You can't protest against problems, you have to protest for solutions. Successful movements want to accomplish something besides complain loudly about a problem. You have to have a solution before you complain. See the Tea Party, which probably never gained equal numbers to OWS but accomplished far more for two reasons: 1) the protesters had solutions in mind and to accomplish them they 2) nominated and elected candidates for public office. They thus accomplished far more with less than OWS, who merely wants to complain and not actually do anything.
This is because people don't want to listen to complaints. They just don't. They want to hear solutions! It's a simple psychological truth about humanity. If you want somebody's attention and support, you have to couple any complaints with solutions or people will just turn you off.
It's really hard to turn your neighbors volume down by just sitting there and complaining about it. You have to get up off your behind and prosecute the solution.
Actually one could argue that the Tea Party's success could be thanked to the amount of money that the 1% pumped into it, which includes media coverage from Fox News as if that channel was the flagship of the Tea Party....I do remember those days.
Also, this all comes back to my point I made earlier, I don't think this has anything to do with conduct, you simply would not support this movement because you see it as a socialist liberal movement and nothing else. They could all be out there in suit and ties, saying please and thank you, with a well documented plan and you still would be against it because you have defined it as socialism.
Well that is arguable, if that were true then Republicans would also be labeled as socialist for their number of policies that also increase government spending
I think you misread my post. I said socialism leads to greater spending, not necessarily that greater spending leads to socialism. It certainly can, but I was talking about something specific.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Which if the conduct is what bothers you the most, then you must also hate violence being used against protesters...
Violence being used against protesters? Are you one of those guys chanting "F*ck the police!" because somebody provoked the cops and got pepper sprayed for it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
Actually one could argue that the Tea Party's success could be thanked to the amount of money that the 1% pumped into it, which includes media coverage from Fox News as if that channel was the flagship of the Tea Party....I do remember those days.
OWS has gotten much more media coverage than the Tea Party ever did.
Also, this all comes back to my point I made earlier, I don't think this has anything to do with conduct, you simply would not support this movement because you see it as a socialist liberal movement and nothing else. They could all be out there in suit and ties, saying please and thank you, with a well documented plan and you still would be against it because you have defined it as socialism.
Well, I think I'm the expert in why I support or don't support movements, not you. In one sense, though, you're right: I'd still be against the movement if it were openly socialist but well-conducted because I'm against socialism. But I wouldn't criticize their conduct, just their politics. OWS is not that movement, however.
I think you misread my post. I said socialism leads to greater spending, not necessarily that greater spending leads to socialism. It certainly can, but I was talking about something specific.
Violence being used against protesters? Are you one of those guys chanting "F*ck the police!" because somebody provoked the cops and got pepper sprayed for it?
OWS has gotten much more media coverage than the Tea Party ever did.
Well, I think I'm the expert in why I support or don't support movements, not you. In one sense, though, you're right: I'd still be against the movement if it were openly socialist but well-conducted because I'm against socialism. But I wouldn't criticize their conduct, just their politics. OWS is not that movement, however.
Well that is arguable, if that were true then Republicans would also be labeled as socialist for their number of policies that also increase government spending, which is a whole other topic, but seriously both sides want to increase spending, they just want to do it for their own things....so are you telling me both parties are socialists?
Neither party has the interests of the people in mind. You probably find it interesting that I say that and still refuse to support OWS. But here's a quote that sums up why:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gtownoe
There have not been any policies laid out by the OWS crowd.
Unlike the Tea Party, which sprung out of the same frustration being expressed by people with different mindsets than the OWS crowd, this rabble hasn't figured out how to appeal to a wider audience. The only support they have recieved is the support of people who fall into the same political leanings. They will not accomplish anything unless they can attract people who would not normally agree with them.
They will not accomplish anything unless they can attract people who would not normally agree with them.
Very true, and that is why conduct and "being appealing" is so important - the lack of such things has been principle cause of their failure thus far.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
