OCCUPY WALL STREET

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Toughy

It's relevant because of racism, which is one of the hallmarks of corporate greed (in the US). It alo speaks to the militarization of our police (as was pointed out in the article). How in the hell do you think the CIA funds itself?

This is so true. The U.S. puts so many of its citizens in jail compared to, well actually compared to anywhere. In January 2010 the rate of incarceration was 743 adults per 100,000. Guess how many were white compared to POC. Now that the prison systems are privatized it is such a money making operation that nothing is likely to be legalized. The more jailed the better. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

Whenever they declare war on inanimate objects like drugs, terrorism and poverty they are really just finding new ways to continue unchallenged and overly funded with their war on the poor. It's just their fancy way of declaring class warfare.

[GeorgiaMa'am]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

This is so true. The U.S. puts so many of its citizens in jail compared to, well actually compared to anywhere. In January 2010 the rate of incarceration was 743 adults per 100,000. Guess how many were white compared to POC. Now that the prison systems are privatized it is such a money making operation that nothing is likely to be legalized. The more jailed the better. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

Whenever they declare war on inanimate objects like drugs, terrorism and poverty they are really just finding new ways to continue unchallenged and overly funded with their war on the poor. It's just their fancy way of declaring class warfare.

Exactly. And we have a governor in Georgia who thinks we should use prison labor to take over all the farm labor jobs that were left when the illegal immigrants were driven out. - The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[ruffryder]

Thanks for the clarification Toughy. I don't see how legalizing drugs aids the OWS movement still. I think it would bring more financial problems still to the middle class and those that can't afford the medication they need now and aid as you say the CIA, law enforcement, and the rich and corporations are the ones who deal it. hmmm.. As for racism. I'm not seeing that either. The people in this movement that are being discriminated against are the middle class and poor and they are the ones being made to pay more for services and product, it doesn't matter what race they are only that they are in a certain income bracket and being taken advantage of. I guess if you could explain further I may see it how legalizing drugs helps anyone that is protesting for equal financial and corporate rights. Thanks.

I would love to see people not vote in the next election, especially for President. How we get people to not vote is another question and not going to happen. I do think OWS will think of something to protest though when election time comes up and I can't wait to see that and what happens.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

I don't see how legalizing drugs aids the OWS movement still. I think it would bring more financial problems still to the middle class and those that can't afford the medication they need now and aid as you say the CIA, law enforcement, and the rich and corporations are the ones who deal it. hmmm.. As for racism. I'm not seeing that either. The people in this movement that are being discriminated against are the middle class and poor and they are the ones being made to pay more for services and product, it doesn't matter what race they are only that they are in a certain income bracket and being taken advantage of. I guess if you could explain further I may see it how legalizing drugs helps anyone that is protesting for equal financial and corporate rights. Thanks.

I would love to see people not vote in the next election, especially for President. How we get people to not vote is another question and not going to happen. I do think OWS will think of something to protest though when election time comes up and I can't wait to see that and what happens.

I think it is not so much about what will aid the OWS Movement as it is about what will aid the poor and the middle class. The movement is a resource, a means to an end, not an end in itself. In that spirit, the spirit of what is best for the 99%, legalizing drugs would eliminate the excuse to continue with the kind of duplicity our government and its friends engage in, as well as the excuse to lock up unprecedented amounts of U.S. citizens. It would free up amazing amounts of money and it would put a cramp in the continued militarization of the police, at least until they found another excuse in the form of another inanimate object or ideology to declare war on. In this particular instance, the war on drugs, race is important because it is our sisters and brothers of color who pay the heaviest price. Actually, it is always our sisters and brothers of color who pay the heaviest price. So in my opinion you cannot over emphasize racism. I don't think you can over emphasize any ism. They are all connected. An intricately woven tapestry of control and subjugation. Our freedom is irrevocably bound up in each other and our recognition of this tapestry, our connectiveness, and how we must make use of the strength we have together. Alone we are powerless but together our power would be awe inspiring.

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I think it is not so much about what will aid the OWS Movement as it is about what will aid the poor and the middle class. The movement is a resource, a means to an end, not an end in itself. In that spirit, the spirit of what is best for the 99%, legalizing drugs would eliminate the excuse to continue with the kind of duplicity our government and its friends engage in, as well as the excuse to lock up unprecedented amounts of U.S. citizens. It would free up amazing amounts of money and it would put a cramp in the continued militarization of the police, at least until they found another excuse in the form of another inanimate object or ideology to declare war on. In this particular instance, the war on drugs, race is important because it is our sisters and brothers of color who pay the heaviest price. Actually, it is always our sisters and brothers of color who pay the heaviest price. So in my opinion you cannot over emphasize racism. I don't think you can over emphasize any ism. They are all connected. An intricately woven tapestry of control and subjugation. Our freedom is irrevocably bound up in each other and our recognition of this tapestry, our connectiveness, and how we must make use of the strength we have together. Alone we are powerless but together our power would be awe inspiring.

excellent post. ty

[kannon]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I think it is not so much about what will aid the OWS Movement as it is about what will aid the poor and the middle class. The movement is a resource, a means to an end, not an end in itself. In that spirit, the spirit of what is best for the 99%, legalizing drugs would eliminate the excuse to continue with the kind of duplicity our government and its friends engage in, as well as the excuse to lock up unprecedented amounts of U.S. citizens. It would free up amazing amounts of money and it would put a cramp in the continued militarization of the police, at least until they found another excuse in the form of another inanimate object or ideology to declare war on. In this particular instance, the war on drugs, race is important because it is our sisters and brothers of color who pay the heaviest price. Actually, it is always our sisters and brothers of color who pay the heaviest price. So in my opinion you cannot over emphasize racism. I don't think you can over emphasize any ism. They are all connected. An intricately woven tapestry of control and subjugation. Our freedom is irrevocably bound up in each other and our recognition of this tapestry, our connectiveness, and how we must make use of the strength we have together. Alone we are powerless but together our power would be awe inspiring.

If we can't legalize, at least decriminalize.

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by GeorgiaMa'am

Exactly. And we have a governor in Georgia who thinks we should use prison labor to take over all the farm labor jobs that were left when the illegal immigrants were driven out. - The more things change, the more they stay the same.

but this is so tyical of big business when they are the ones that pushed for the visas that specifically are designed to populate the ag culture.

edited to add.....*insert for profit prison here*

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

This is so true. The U.S. puts so many of its citizens in jail compared to, well actually compared to anywhere. In January 2010 the rate of incarceration was 743 adults per 100,000. Guess how many were white compared to POC. Now that the prison systems are privatized it is such a money making operation that nothing is likely to be legalized. The more jailed the better. The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

Whenever they declare war on inanimate objects like drugs, terrorism and poverty they are really just finding new ways to continue unchallenged and overly funded with their war on the poor. It's just their fancy way of declaring class warfare.

well welcome to the world of for profit prisons. human bodies are needed to turn a profit.

[Gráinne]

I hope you don't mind my questions again . I'm honestly not trying to stir things up, or even necessarily oppose all of OWS, but I'm a great pain in the neck, you have to give me that!

1. Let's say that OWS "wins" their #1 priority, whatever that would be. There seems to be so many goals, but let's say something equivalent to the desegregation of the Montgomery buses, or desegregation of Central High School. Both of those changed a great deal of lives, no matter if the people were involved with the civil rights movement or not. What is your "win", and what would it look like to someone not in the movement or associated with banking or politics? How would I know the difference in my daily life?

2. I read a terrifying little book in high school called Animal Farm, which should be required reading. It is Orwell's satire of the Russian Revolution, and I know some would say we're already there in our own country. I know OWS is run apparently without leaders, all are equal, and majority votes and all that. How would the movement, if it grows, handle the human nature to divide up into classes, as the animals do? The novel starts with good intentions and a utopian idea but goes haywire. If you do elect leaders, are they not more powerful themselves by definition?

I can see we'll never agree, but I'm trying to see your side.

[GeorgiaMa'am]

Originally Posted by guihong

2. I read a terrifying little book in high school called Animal Farm, which should be required reading. It is Orwell's satire of the Russian Revolution, and I know some would say we're already there in our own country. I know OWS is run apparently without leaders, all are equal, and majority votes and all that. How would the movement, if it grows, handle the human nature to divide up into classes, as the animals do? The novel starts with good intentions and a utopian idea but goes haywire. If you do elect leaders, are they not more powerful themselves by definition?

I can see we'll never agree, but I'm trying to see your side.

An egalitarian utopia is an extreme ideal. A democratic free market is also an extreme ideal.

However, human beings don't thrive within extreme idealism. It's impossible to come up with a system of government that treats everyone fairly in all circumstances. So humans swing back and forth between ideals - conservatism and liberalism, communism and fascism, fanaticism and atheism, etc. - and I HOPE (and in my more Disney moments I think most people hope) that we continually work toward some kind of moderation and balance.
Unfortunately, sometimes the momentum of a swing in one direction is too much. Then we become entrenched in some extreme and it's harder to get back to the middle.

I'm sure you can think of lots of examples when a group went too far in one direction: Nazi Germany, Jonestown, the Salem Witch Trials. When a movement goes too far in one direction, it loses touch with its source of critical inquiry, and therefore loses its integrity and focus on its original goals. In other words, it becomes a mob.

And since I'm on my soapbox, I'll say I think the U.S. has gotten disturbingly far away from its original goals. What were those? Why, they were written down and called the Bill of Rights. They were limitations on the government to protect personal freedom.

Let's review:

1. Freedom of speech, the press and assembly. OWS, police raids - exactly what we've been discussing here. (I used to work in journalism - the oldest joke in the business was that freedom of the press only belongs to the publisher - in other words, whoever owns the press.)

2. The right to keep and bear arms. Threatened constantly by liberals and conservatives, each in their own way. Easily obtained weapons cause problems. But still - if only one side has all the weapons, the other doesn't stand a chance.

3. Protection from quartering of troops. Well, we do spend a lot of money, and give up a lot of personal freedom, to maintain police forces and the military. But they aren't living in my spare bedroom and eating at my kitchen table - yet.

4. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Did you read those articles just a few posts up explaining how the police don't bother with getting warrants any more? They just send in militarized SWAT units to overwhelm with force. (And anything they seize, as in, "We found half a 20-year-old joint in your scrapbook so we're going to take your house and everything you own and send you to jail and we don't care if it leaves your family homeless," goes to finance their own operations - see #3.)

This is too depressing. Somebody else pick up here, if you wish. I'm getting down off my soapbox - I'm dizzy. If you stuck with me this long, thanks - you went above and beyond the call.

[GeorgiaMa'am]

Ruffryder - Corkey - Toughy!

Before you continue, as you like, may I please just use this as an example:

This is how the power of good, thoughtful, concerned people - which you ALL seem to be - gets sucked out of doing anything good and making any progress.

I wish people wouldn't give their power away by wasting it on matters that can't be solved immediately and which deserve further discussion and deeper reflection to reach a resolution. I wish they would just go to the bar and start a fight over a pool game or something else inconsequential, if what they really want is a fight. Or that they wouldn't go for the easy kill just to get some satisfaction during a discussion about decidedly frustrating matters.

Why wouldn't people who are trying to express themselves give others the benefit of the doubt? Why wouldn't they acknowledge that, although people may sometimes mis-speak, that doesn't discredit the entirety of what they say? Why can't they acknowledge that although others haven't explored some issues, it doesn't make their other beliefs invalid?

These are the only other people in the Entire World who are willing and able to engage with you at This Moment about something that is obviously important to you. I encourage you to appreciate each other, not tear each other down. Save your energy for the real fight.

Now please return to your regularly scheduled lives, and tear me apart as you wish. Or, don't.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by GeorgiaMa'am

Ruffryder - Corkey - Toughy!

Before you continue, as you like, may I please just use this as an example:

This is how the power of good, thoughtful, concerned people - which you ALL seem to be - gets sucked out of doing anything good and making any progress.

I wish people wouldn't give their power away by wasting it on matters that can't be solved immediately and which deserve further discussion and deeper reflection to reach a resolution. I wish they would just go to the bar and start a fight over a pool game or something else inconsequential, if what they really want is a fight. Or that they wouldn't go for the easy kill just to get some satisfaction during a discussion about decidedly frustrating matters.

Why wouldn't people who are trying to express themselves give others the benefit of the doubt? Why wouldn't they acknowledge that, although people may sometimes mis-speak, that doesn't discredit the entirety of what they say? Why can't they acknowledge that although others haven't explored some issues, it doesn't make their other beliefs invalid?

These are the only other people in the Entire World who are willing and able to engage with you at This Moment about something that is obviously important to you. I encourage you to appreciate each other, not tear each other down. Save your energy for the real fight.

Now please return to your regularly scheduled lives, and tear me apart as you wish. Or, don't.

Excuse me, I was answering Ruff, whom I know and not having a discussion with you. I encourage you to take this as good hearted as I answered Ruff. Sometimes it isn't in the delivery but in the readers mind.

[SoNotHer]

I think Toughy and RR are having a good if heated discussion, but I appreciate GeogiaMa'am's post and had to laugh a little. It would be ideal to have this discussion over a pool table and drinks. And yes, Corkey is answering question with a response that I agree with. If America is truly a democracy, then voting is a right. My most recent NAACP letter addresses this.

Of Animal Farm and its messages, it's probably good to keep a few things in context. The book offers a satirical look at early communism. Orwell himself was a critic of Stalin and Stalinist policies, had difficulty finding a publisher for the book because of this, and identified more as a socialist democrat. Through a glass darkly, the book explores the idea of common wealth and equality in a realistic and dystopic vision that ultimately leads to the realization that "some animals are more equal than others."

Of course Orwell gave us another vision in 1984 - that of three super powers, Oceania, Eastasia and Eurasia, in a perpetual state of war with the all-knowing and seeing ministries of truth, peace, plenty and love guiding individual actions, and thoughts ultimately toward a collective resignation of any other love before the love of Big Brother and love itself as an act of dissent. Scary stuff, or at least it is to me, and it feels like we're getting a little too close to this vision in our own realities.