OCCUPY

[Michael Hardner]

Google "Occupy donations"

http://www.google.ca/m/search?hl=en&tbs=nws%3A1&aq=f&oq=&aqi=-k0d0t0&fkt=4936&fsdt=9924&cqt=&rst=&htf=&his=&maction=&q=occupy+donations

...

And an interesting note ...

Occupy in red states/blue states: The anti-Wall Street protest movement gnores party lines as demonstrations spread to all 50 states

I don't see evidence in this of 'broad' support. Wide reaching? Yes, but not broad.

If the first donation is typical, then 5000 have donated $80 each to OWS.

That's not a lot of support, percentage wise.

[bush_cheney2004]

I am not interested in discussing any issues with you any longer!

I will not respond to any future comments you make.

Buh bye....Go Canada!

[Guest Derek L]

No, and Watergate can't change what Nixon meant in his time. Nixon mattered at many different levels, had "gravitas", and shook his world with American power. Lastly, he had the decency and honor to resign his office in disgrace.

Well that’s point. In general terms, all the positive things Nixon achieved, were tarnished with Watergate……As I’ve said, in a what-if-world, sans Watergate, Nixon would have been regarded as one of the better Presidents of the 20th century.

[Michael Hardner]

Not as long as any can say they have the right for peaceful assembly and association.

Of course you don't. Gramps didn't like all them dang hippie protesters neither.

Not sure what your point is on #1. I don't see this changing opinion.

And... I don't dislike protests but I don't think these ones will achieve much.

[bush_cheney2004]

Well that’s point. In general terms, all the positive things Nixon achieved, were tarnished with Watergate……As I’ve said, in a what-if-world, sans Watergate, Nixon would have been regarded as one of the better Presidents of the 20th century.

Whoa...Nixon is still regarded as one of the better presidents of the 20th century. History has rehabilitated his image on balance to include Watergate as the last chapter in a long book.

[Guest Derek L]

I said "supported housing", not lockup, and your ignorant and derogatory attitude toward mental illness is noted.

Ask the police ... they'll tell you how often they take mentally ill people to lockup just to protect them. The police have become the new frontline workers in the mental health field.

You’re the moral benchmark? Didn’t you refer to myself as approaching “loony tune” territory/land the other day? Your connotation of mental illness and a cartoon series is noted.

As for “supported housing”, what happens when the patients choose not to return?

[Guest Derek L]

Whoa...Nixon is still regarded as one of the better presidents of the 20th century. History has rehabilitated his image on balance to include Watergate as the last chapter in a long book.

Well I suppose we’re arguing on two different wave lengths……Subtract that last chapter on the Nixon history, and his record would be garnered with an even higher esteem….

[bush_cheney2004]

Well I suppose we’re arguing on two different wave lengths……Subtract that last chapter on the Nixon history, and his record would be garnered with an even higher esteem….

Well trying to keep this on topic, Nixon dealt with protests on a scale that makes OCCUPY child's play. I don't think these wannabes with iPhones have any idea what that experience was really like. It is even more remote and removed for those in Canada.

[Shwa]

Not sure what your point is on #1. I don't see this changing opinion.

People have the right to peaceful assmembly and freedom of association. On what grounds can anyone argue that what they are doing is somehow wrong?

And... I don't dislike protests but I don't think these ones will achieve much.

That is because you are still waiting for the big-hammer protest message like in the storied days of yore. But one can easily argue that they have already achieved much in just a few weeks, national news coverage, in depth magazine articles, blogs, websites, people chatting about it on Internet forums, messages of social responsibility getting out there every day.

[bush_cheney2004]

People have the right to peaceful assmembly and freedom of association. On what grounds can anyone argue that what they are doing is somehow wrong?

There are conflicts with unlawful behaviour for public safety and damage to property.

That is because you are still waiting for the big-hammer protest message like in the storied days of yore. But one can easily argue that they have already achieved much in just a few weeks, national news coverage, in depth magazine articles, blogs, websites, people chatting about it on Internet forums, messages of social responsibility getting out there every day.

And yet the protests of "yore" achieved much more with far less in the way of such organizing tools. These clowns have changed nothing.

[Michael Hardner]

People have the right to peaceful assmembly and freedom of association. On what grounds can anyone argue that what they are doing is somehow wrong?

I don't know, since I haven't made that argument. I wouldn't want to paraphrase the words of others here.

That is because you are still waiting for the big-hammer protest message like in the storied days of yore. But one can easily argue that they have already achieved much in just a few weeks, national news coverage, in depth magazine articles, blogs, websites, people chatting about it on Internet forums, messages of social responsibility getting out there every day.

Sure... but where to go from here?

[dre]

Not sure what your point is on #1. I don't see this changing opinion.

And... I don't dislike protests but I don't think these ones will achieve much.

I dont think they will change opinion neccessarily but they might raise awareness. Theres actually pretty broad mainstream support for some of the ideas being expressed. According to polling data Iv seen a large majority of people have no faith in our financial system at all. They dont believe its honest, they dont believe its sustainable.

As the financial system continues to collapse around us, and our leaders continue to do the exact same things that didnt work for the Roman Empire or Nazi Germany, and try to wash away the problems by printing and borrowing ever increasing sums of money, theres going to be more and more pissed off people, and more and more unemployed people, and a steady chain of events for people to react to.

Protests such as these will serve as a clearing house for public rage.

[bush_cheney2004]

.... They dont believe its honest, they dont believe its sustainable.

So all this smack about Canada having the best system in the world isn't true? Say it ain't so, Joe!

[Shwa]

There are conflicts with unlawful behaviour for public safety and damage to property.

Really? Where? That can be attributed to the movement I mean.

And yet the protests of "yore" achieved much more with far less in the way of such organizing tools. These clowns have changed nothing.

They did? Like what?

[bush_cheney2004]

Really? Where? That can be attributed to the movement I mean.

Did they pull permits for public safety?

They did? Like what?

Oh, little things like women's suffrage, civil rights, labor unions, anti-war movements, On-to-Ottawa Trek, stuff like that.

[Shwa]

Did they pull permits for public safety?

Is this as specific as you can be?

Oh, little things like women's suffrage, civil rights, labor unions, anti-war movements, On-to-Ottawa Trek, stuff like that.

I see. And how long did each of those esteemed protests of yore take to achieve their objectives? 3 weeks? A month? A year?

[Guest Derek L]

Well trying to keep this on topic, Nixon dealt with protests on a scale that makes OCCUPY child's play. I don't think these wannabes with iPhones have any idea what that experience was really like. It is even more remote and removed for those in Canada.

With that I can agree on both counts…..And has been stated already in many circles, Nixon was one of the results of the activism in the 60s……and one could even add, that the last true successful occupation by twenty something’s that achieved positive change for the “99%” occurred 67 years ago.

[Michael Hardner]

I dont think they will change opinion neccessarily but they might raise awareness. Theres actually pretty broad mainstream support for some of the ideas being expressed. According to polling data Iv seen a large majority of people have no faith in our financial system at all. They dont believe its honest, they dont believe its sustainable.

Support for the 'ideas' - mainly that the top 1% are winning more personal gains from economic changes over the past years, and that that's not fair.

Ok.

The biggest concessions that we saw from capitalism came when it was challenged by communism. So where does that leave us ?

As the financial system continues to collapse around us, and our leaders continue to do the exact same things that didnt work for the Roman Empire or Nazi Germany, and try to wash away the problems by printing and borrowing ever increasing sums of money, theres going to be more and more pissed off people, and more and more unemployed people, and a steady chain of events for people to react to.

Protests such as these will serve as a clearing house for public rage.

As I said above, it seems like it's a new format for dialogue. But ceaseless protests will eventually just become part of the political and urban landscape and how will the 99% be served by this other than emotionally ?

All of these protests - Tea Party, OWS - are about money in the end, so why don't we talk about what is being spent and why ? I'll tell you - because it's too complicated. Any dialogue that we are to have about the problem already happens today, and the system that results is the system we have.

The political/economic/democratic model we use needs to be restructured somehow. Not an easy question, but there aren't any good answers so far.

[bush_cheney2004]

Is this as specific as you can be?

How much more specific can it be than that? You wanna have a big fancy protest in many cities, you gotta pull a permit so public safety can be supported. But you already knew that.

I see. And how long did each of those esteemed protests of yore take to achieve their objectives? 3 weeks? A month? A year?

A lifetime...these losers don't have what it takes. Not the answer you expected, eh?

[Guest Manny]

Day one of occupy Vancouver saw anywhere from 4-5 thousand people….today, there’s under 100 campers….you call that growth?

Worldwide

[bush_cheney2004]

With that I can agree on both counts…..And has been stated already in many circles, Nixon was one of the results of the activism in the 60s……and one could even add, that the last true successful occupation by twenty something’s that achieved positive change for the “99%” occurred 67 years ago.

...and that's because these wannabees are fundamentally compromised by the very things they are protesting. Hell, the Hippies and Yippies would go on to build today's corporate giants.

[jacee]

I don't see evidence in this of 'broad' support. Wide reaching? Yes, but not broad.

If the first donation is typical, then 5000 have donated $80 each to OWS.

That's not a lot of support, percentage wise.

NONE of them are walking away due to lack of support.

You are losing heart at the first setback, Michael.

Stay strong!

[dre]

I don't know, since I haven't made that argument. I wouldn't want to paraphrase the words of others here.

Sure... but where to go from here?

My guess is they will just keep protesting. If they are right and the financial system is a crooked and unsustainable house of cards, then there will be a string of events that will push people towards protest movements such as Occupy, or the Tea Party. The realestate bubble has only partially burst and SubPrime meltdown part 2 is coming in the next year or so. And we still have a huge credit bubble waiting to burst, and mountains of bad paper and toxic assets. Then we have the rampant fraud within the banking system, and some major players in causing the sub prime meltdown being frog marched in front of the SEC.

This is really no different than some of the protests we saw in countries like Tunisia. These things didnt just materialize over night. They grew over the course of many years, and you can be sure that at various points the public dismissed those protesters, and claimed they were accomplishing nothing as well.

Whether or not the movement grows or fizzles will depend entirely what happens in our economy and financial system over the next 10 years or so.

Edited November 6, 2011 by dre

[Guest Derek L]

Worldwide

Aren’t we talking about the Canadian perversion in this thread? But if you wish to talk about the worldwide aspects…..How’s Occupy Paris doing? Or Occupy Moscow? Beijing? Tehran? Etc

[Guest Derek L]

...and that's because these wannabees are fundamentally compromised by the very things they are protesting. Hell, the Hippies and Yippies would go on to build today's corporate giants.

Indeed. Here’s an interesting take on the leaders (Politburo?) of the “leaderless crowd” on Wall Street and how their half million dollars in donations is used