Occupy Together

[Lowerdeck]

I don't think I had just one demand when I first started about a year ago. And the more I learn in this past year, the longer the list grows.

Certainly I've learned a lot about Monsanto, it's disgusting amount of involvement with the US government, and the remarkable evil the company produces.

[iamthehorn]

Sept 25, 2012 19:54:14 GMT -5 Lowerdeck said:

Certainly I've learned a lot about Monsanto, it's disgusting amount of involvement with the US government, and the remarkable evil the company produces.

What in particular?

[Lowerdeck]

How much do you know about them?

[iamthehorn]

They use patent laws to protect their seeds and grow cycles. They're also extremely litigious and use tax havens to avoid most of their global tax.

[LoveLuckLaughter]

Anything brought to you by the makers of Agent Orange, styrofoam, Saccharine, and Bovine growth hormones cannot be good.

[r]

I hate Monsanto for so many reasons, but suing farmers who have had their crop contaminated by a Monsanto product is so Quacked.

[LoveLuckLaughter]

But really. I suggest the documentary "David vs. Monsanto", which outlines how Monsanto has been terrorizing farmers for decades now due to their litigious outlook. They do patent their seeds, and therefore farmers cannot reseed, they must purchase their seeds each year from Monsanto. If neighboring farmers are found with any of Monsanto's plants in their fields, they can be sued. And it ruins the seed that these farmers have been creating for years.

Part of Monsanto's claim to fame is creating plants that are super resistant to Roundup, which Monsanto makes. So now they have cornered the market on weed killer and seed that is resistant to said weed killer, so you can imagine how much of this shiz farmers must be able to spray on their crops. Now, just as we have seen in the medical field due to anti-biotics, we are seeing "mega-weeds" that are resistant to Round-up. A recent study has linked Monsanto GMO corn to cancer in a study involving rats. Note that this is also the company who brought us cancer causing saccharine, as well as the demonic Agent Orange. They are unconscionable. We aren't talking a glorified Mendel here, this is truly Frankenfood.

There is concern that Monsanto's GMO products are responsible for Colony Collapse of honeybees. There are direct links to the die off on honey bees in locations adjacent to GMO fields.

You are consuming Monsanto products in many products you consume, from Pepsi to Kelloggs cereal. And they don't even have to tell you so that you can at least make a free choice as a consumer as to whether or not you would like to expose yourself to these products. They are likely breaking anti-trust laws, as their genes are currently responsible for 80% of the commercial corn supply and 95% of commercial soybeans. They are ruthless with their stamping out of competition.

They currently have dozens of previous staff members in many governmental positions, so are able to influence policy at their will.

[LoveLuckLaughter]

Sorry, that was a bit disjointed.

[kdögg]

Sept 25, 2012 19:25:53 GMT -5 @superfurryanimal said:

What is your one demand?

That was, after all, the question Occupy teased in the run-up to last September 17th...

Actually, it wasn't. While trying to be brief you could at least get everything right.

"What is OUR one demand" Which is clearly a rhetorical devise. It's really not that hard. Did it really take you a year to repeat the same Faux News line of thinking that was repeated over and over again?[/quote]

Wait, what? You think I'm getting my information on that from Fox? Dude, I blow my vuvuzela at Mike Tobin and yell "Fox Lies!" when they're airing live.

How can you accuse me of hearing that line of thinking from Fox News when this exists?

I'm sorry, but if Occupy uses "our" in stating it, I am grammatically correct in using "your" when I ask Occupy about it.

Oh, and for the record, I did not wait a solid year until I started criticizing Occupy. I think the written record of this thread will show that, and the written record in my Scott Walker thread will show that I was writing about Occupy before it had its own thread here.

I'm standing by my original intent there, and I will be brief in restating it:
Occupy is too unfocused to be effective.

[kdögg]

Okay, now I'm going to go after one of the points I was getting at when I hinted at having a point-by-point response in me earlier.

Anarchists?
Anarchists?
C'mon, man!

You really mean to tell me having them on your side is good news?

I saw LD mention them however many times (in Oakland, in Boston, elsewhere) in his response. It sounds as if they're tolerated more than they should be. He used variations of the word four times in the same post he talked about Occupy kicking out the Free Staters from their movement.
Not to mention the ideological incompatibility I see when there's a faction advocating no government within a larger whole advocating better government.

At least the Free Staters have a stated objective and a plan to change the status through electoral processes and (theoretically) leading by the example that their agenda will prove itself superior. I'll be damned if I see that from Occupy.

Now, LD shared a link which showed Vermin Supreme had the support of about half of the 20% write-in vote faction of the Occupy electorate.

Vermin Supreme?
Vermin Supreme?
C'mon, man!

A tenth of you people think the guy with a boot on his head promising free ponies is the way to go? I mean, yeah, it's good for some lulz... but still...
And you wonder why you're not taken seriously?



You complain that people say you're like homeless people, that you're looking for handouts, that you don't have a job... let's talk about my friend Jenna for a bit.

Jenna is my friend by way of our Wisconsin protests, but recently moved to NYC to be involved with Occupy. Some of you may recall my posting about her and sharing some of her pictures about this time last year in my Walker thread. (Note to SFA: See? Early advocate criticizing you here.)
I couldn't make it out there for OWS last year, but I knew a handful of people going from Madison. Jenna was among them.
I sent her off to Wall Street with a care package. $150, a few ready-made gas masks in case of spray, some snacks, assorted pieces of camping gear I thought would come in handy.

I have not crossed paths with her since around the time of the recall election.
We were, however, both in Charlotte for the DNC last month. Myself as a delegate, she as an Occupier there to protest me.
I touched base with her ahead of time. We made tentative plans to meet for a drink or something. She said she couldn't promise to meet up because she was low on funds, but definitely made it known she wanted to sneak into my hotel for a shower if she could get one. She was employed (at a head shop, no less) back in Madison but these days styles herself an unemployed activist who earns her living via online donations.
I'm not saying all of you Occupy people meet stereotypical criteria... just the one I personally know best.


From my eyewitness experience at the Democratic National Convention, you guys weren't there worth a damn. I couldn't get in or out of that convention center without having some pro-lifer wave a poster of a dead fetus in my general election. I was more likely to hear protesters say that Obama isn't American or not to believe the liberal media. I didn't see anything that even looked like an Occupy protest until the final day on my way in to the arena for the Obama speech.
That event was originally scheduled to be in Bank Of America stadium in Charlotte, which is one of the biggest banking centers of the country outside of NYC and you guys had ample heads-up to prepare and plan.
I have to admit you guys let me down. I had been hoping to cross a police line and talk to protesters while I was there, but there weren't any of you in sight. I talked to exactly two of you. I could pull a bigger protest out of my ass on short notice.
Now, if all y'all in Occupy really did have your shiz together, where the hell were you?

I know I've given the advice, I think even in this thread, that your local Democratic Party is likely ripe for the taking. I told you to Occupy the Democratic Party.
And you know what happened then?
I went and quacking did it. It's possible and, dare I say, necessary.
Would've been nice to have had some backup...

I mean, you guys do realize these oligarchs you're railing against are in the midst of hijacking our two-party system with designs on replacing it with something even worse... right? I know it ain't perfect, but that oftentimes-lousy Democratic Party is all that stands between We The People and fascism at this point.


I'm writing you from about fifty miles up the road from the Wisconsin capitol in Madison, site of the Original Occupy in which I was a participant. We did things different here. We had people in the streets, we occupied a physical center of power - arguably a more relevant one than Occupy, we aired our grievances... and then we harnessed that energy, we put our agenda on a ballot - as did other states, and we tried to do something about it.

Madison has an Occupy too. Had? It's nowhere to be seen these days. It didn't take off, but didn't get busted up so soon 1. because Madison's a city that both knows how to protest and tolerate it, and 2. because it was in the parking lot of a vacant business. Rallies & marches for a week or two, then basically just camping out in the old car lot. Fizzled out pretty quick.

Now, I'm going to lay it out for you like this...

You know what? There in Madison? There was a clear choice between Occupy in that parking lot seven blocks from capitol and our other style of activism which forces ballot measures, ends careers and provides pushback which alters or prevents actual legislative outcomes.
You know what? There in Madison? Occupy had their ass handed to them when activists had their choice of how to go about things.
Call it the free market at work.
This is in liberal Madison, which can protest with the best of them and is largely sympathetic to Occupy's aims. Give people of that mindset the choice, and they can and do choose a style of activism with more tangible results.
There's activism which airs its grievances, and there's activism which seeks to redress grievances.
I'm telling you, Occupy... be less of the former and more of the latter.

Put something on a ballot.
Get a law overturned.
Run some candidates.
Do something.

You can't advocate for ending a system without proposing a viable alternative. Otherwise you're no better than those damned anarchists you shouldn't be pallin' around with.

Well, no quacking shiz. We have both been apart of this thread from the beginning. Which is why I brought it up to begin with. Whatever, dude. I'll know better next time. I forgot I was dealing with a badass here. The best path is hide in the shadows and let you decide what is right and wrong.

P.S. You are being a weeniehead to LD right now. Quack you and I mean that.

[kdögg]

I'm allowed to be disappointed in Occupy.
I think we need something like this to succeed or else we're all fucked.
Hence my disappointment.

I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from activism so much as I am trying to advocate for certain approaches based on my somewhat similar personal experience.

I assure you I'm not trying to be a dick here even if I'm coming across as one, if that's worth anything. Not my intent.

[Lowerdeck]

So, Occupy isn't perfect. And yea there are anarchists and freeloading bums, but not all of it is. And we're don't always have a coherent focus.

You suggest that Occupy should take over the Democratic party. A lot of Occupiers distrust both parties, see Obama as Romney Lite and whoring himself out to the same bidders - Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Monsanto, etc...

How do you get past that? How are Occupiers to believe that the Democrats will actually take us seriously and let us help change the system?

[jimmyroo]

I agree with Mr. Forward here. You need to play the game if you want to win it. Sure there is no reason to trust the Democratic party...but that's not the point. The point is to force them to trust you...to force them to NEED you. Then you can make some real change.

Change comes from within the system in this country, not without. It's easy to get disheartened - I certainly am. But the key thing to remember is that no one is stopping you but yourself. That's the beauty of this country. Mad props to Mr. Forward for becoming a delegate. That's how real change happens.

[Lowerdeck]

When I first found out about Occupy and joined, I was hoping to make a difference and some change for the better.

The longer I stay, the more disillusioned I've become. We're focused on a million issues. Sketchy people are all over the place. 9-11 Truthers are rampant. Nobody seems to really know what to actually do to stop anything bad, our direct actions suck. Hartford has one Sunday outside a fundraiser for Paul Ryan, the best idea we came up with was standing 3/4ths a mile away holding signs for people to see zipping up and down the mountain at 50-60 mph.

I got a letter from the town Democratic committee. I think we need to Occupy that. Nobody in CT Occupy wants to touch Linda McMahon, even though she stands against everything we're for. We're pretending to be non-partisan and I don't know why. The right mostly hates us, and we're mostly left of the Dems if not outright anarchist. And then there's Black Bloc which just Quacks everything up.

Help me?

[kikosanchez]

^^ I'm highly unqualified to speak on Occupy's activities in general, but I do have experience with a similar group in college - the Progressive Student Alliance. During my term with them, they were highly focused on protests and disseminating information. Ok, nothing wrong with that. But when I brought up practical solutions such as speaking to the budget council and presenting them with an alternate budget to support a living wage for the university's employees, they hadn't even started down that road whatsoever. A lot of talk, very little working with the administration and coming up with real solutions.

So my advice would be to focus on local elections and to get congressman voted in that support your cause. Run fundraisers for consumer protections lobbyists (?). At some point, the movement has to have a solution or a charismatic leader that can vocalize central points of the movement to the general public. There's a good reason occupy has done little in its time, few everyday people know what it's about, it's too decentralized on principles and concerns. It's truly a clusterquack of interests.

[Lowerdeck]

www.democracynow.org/2012/9/27/the_united_states_of_alec_bill


Must watch for anyone with any sort of political interest. Bill Moyers did a really good show this week on ALEC and the type of stuff they're pulling across the country - especially in places like Tennessee, Wisconsin, Arizona, North Carolina, and other Republican dominated states.

[kikosanchez]

Meh, don't really mind it other than the fact that they aren't considered lobbyists, thus providing for more transparency.

[Lowerdeck]

*sigh*

[Lowerdeck]

Our big plan for today:




Uh... what are we really doing?

The MoveOn people at least did some street theater "Millionaires For McMahon" nearby. We just stand around with signs on the side of the road as people zip up and down the mountain.

And of course, conservatives are already biznatching we're working for Obama and the Dems, that we wouldn't protest Obama fundraisers. Except we have, and well...







Then someone recently linked:

www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/why-i-refuse-to-vote-for-barack-obama/262861/


I would say about half of Occupy, or at least those I know in it, do not support Obama or Democrats at all - and see them as evil, not as much as Republicans, but still serving the 1% over the 99.

[kdögg]

Wish I had more time to give my thoughts in relation to LD's recent posts.

Long story short: All the torches & pitchforks outside don't matter if the castle is impenetrable.

Obvious, perhaps, but important to reiterate is something the political science student hears several times along the way in regards to the motivations of elected officials: Goal #1 is getting reelected.


With that in mind, I hope everyone took the time to look into the Bill Moyers ALEC report LD linked to in Reply #436.

[kdögg]

Sept 26, 2012 17:36:01 GMT -5 Lowerdeck said:

You suggest that Occupy should take over the Democratic party. A lot of Occupiers distrust both parties, see Obama as Romney Lite and whoring himself out to the same bidders - Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Monsanto, etc...

How do you get past that? How are Occupiers to believe that the Democrats will actually take us seriously and let us help change the system?

As I said above, electeds' goal number one is reelection. We wouldn't have the term "lame duck" if that weren't the case.

You've mentioned, and I think this is an exact quote, "our direct actions suck." I'm saying if you've got the people and the purpose, you could redirect that.

Look at the Tea Party. No, seriously.
Yeah, I know where their backing comes from. There's plenty in there to provide a blueprint for other aims, though.

Look what they did.
It was originally in opposition to a particular policy. (Yes, it got hijacked by monied interests soon after, but remember it started with a specific populist grievance.)
They focused on state capitols.
They dominated those town hall meetings in 2009 and had the effect of watering down the Affordable Care Act from what it could've been.
They ran primary candidates further from the center within an established party, and they volunteered for their own when they were on the ballot.
I know it wasn't good for the country, but look at what they did for themselves over the past 2-3 years - by more conventional means.

Now imagine what would have happened if Occupy had followed those tactics since its inception. I think there might have been different results.

It's a fight against money in politics, right?
You can't have a battle on different fields.
The money's in the politics.
So where do you need to go?
We're not playing offense unless we're on their turf.

If I may drop some #lyricspam into this...
About however since our forefathers came on this land, we've been coddling those we should be running through
Please don't wait around for them to come and shake hands, they're not gonna be waiting for you

[Lowerdeck]

I'd argue that the Tea Party was set up by monied interests, and not hijacked. That had way too much establishment from the getgo. And there's also evidence which shows the Tea Party was being formed months before that tirade at the Chicago board. After Obama got elected but before his inaguration.

[Lowerdeck]

I asked a few fellow Occupiers about your comments and what they thought of it.

Me: Someone I know suggested Occupy take over the Democratic party in order to get its agenda done. That it's ripe for the taking and we should use it like the Tea Party took Republicans.

Friend 1: i thought that was your idea for a second. i was so concerned

Friend 2: Because it won't work. The Democratic machine is too powerful.

[kdögg]

Oct 3, 2012 21:38:52 GMT -5 Lowerdeck said:

I asked a few fellow Occupiers about your comments and what they thought of it.

Me: Someone I know suggested Occupy take over the Democratic party in order to get its agenda done. That it's ripe for the taking and we should use it like the Tea Party took Republicans.

Friend 1: i thought that was your idea for a second. i was so concerned

Friend 2: Because it won't work. The Democratic machine is too powerful.

Did you give any details as to the source? Curious.
Also curious as to how you replied to the "Democratic machine is too powerful" comment.

If the Democratic establishment machine is so powerful it can't be taken on and lose, then please explain to me why Hillary Clinton never had her "inevitable" coronation and we have Obama as president instead?

The Democratic Party of Wisconsin didn't take the lead on our 2011 recalls. That was primarily a bunch of angry teachers with clipboards and petitions filed from outside the party. The party didn't hop on board until they showed enough momentum as to be successful.

Same thing, to a lesser extent, to the Walker recall. That was a partnership between DPW and United Wisconsin, an outside group formed in the wake of Walker's budget bill which was going to do it with or without the Dems. They went about collecting 200K "pledge to sign to recall Walker" signatures before one could legally be filed.

In both of those cases, the Dems didn't act until they were outflanked and there was too much momentum to ignore... and that was done through working within, not outside of, the system.

That goes for the senate recall we started against the GOP majority leader in my district, too. We were a third rail they didn't want to touch more than any of the other state senate recalls. We didn't have funding, we didn't have approval, we didn't have support for 90+% of that effort. We got an inbox in the county Dems office, and "export volunteers" from outside the district for the final three days of signature collection. We needed just shy of 17K signatures to force that one, and we gathered over 20K.

I was the secretary of the committee which filed that unsanctioned fourth state senate recall. It has been suggested to me that, had we not done that, we would not have occupied the senate majority leader during the other recalls concurrent to Walker... and consequently, we may not have regained a one-vote majority in the state senate in another district had we not undertaken that effort.

They won't move if you don't push them.
I'm just saying you need to push them on their turf if you expect them to do anything.
I'm not necessarily saying you have to Occupy the Democratic Party, but to do something through more institutional means. That's how you get their attention.


The way our electoral system is currently designed with winner-take-all districts, there is a natural consequence that this will only leave you with two viable political parties. (See: Duverger's Law.)
The fact of the matter is, third parties are not the way to go. Sorry, but that's the way it is - and this is coming from an unrepentant Nader2K voter, mind you.

So... do you allow the Bipartisan Party continue to do what they do inside the system while you're shouting at them from the outside... or do you get in there and push one of the parties to be better?

There aren't so many other options outside of what I'm suggesting, are there?
Third-party efforts? Futile in the current electoral system - it's putting the cart before the horse in my eyes.
Outright revolution? Against the American military in the Patriot Act, NDAA etc era? Good luck. (On a personal note, I oppose this because if things ever go Lord Of The Flies around here, I'm Piggy.)

What else is there?

Those two alternatives I just suggested are a path of futility and/or going to get you crushed.
I know taking baby steps can be frustrating, but it's better than continued gridlock.
Incrementalism can be a pain in the ass, but it's better than nothing.

I'd rather purge an existing party, make it better and stronger, than be ignored by it.
Is there really another choice?

[Lowerdeck]

I will get back to your reply later when I have time.

But, we are all over this Walmart stuff. Fully supporting striking workers, trying to help support unions here get workers in CT and MA to strike.

[kdögg]

Glad to hear that. Loved seeing Wal-Mart employees are taking action, even though in a lot of instances currently it's a non-union employees' group.
Also speaking as a former employee... God, that place sucks to work.

[Lowerdeck]

The Republican party will most likely have to rebuild if Romney loses and they can't retake the Senate.

I am a supporter of third parties. I think within 10-20 years, one might actually put a run on the big two right now - or there is a party which splits apart. If there is no split, I could see the Ron Paul fanboys and all the money they have pick off some Republicans and create a significant rise in the Libertarian Party. I personally like the Green Party, but I don't know how far they can go.

The other option is a super rich and bored individual who wants to make a run for the White House. Think Trump or Bloomberg, something in the line of Ross Perot in 92.

2016 will be pretty wild.

[Tejas]

Great speech from an unusual source.. Joe Rogan preachinn!

[kdögg]

Curious...
You say you support third parties...
You say it's unlikely to be your preferred Greens...
Then you say it's more likely to come from the Paul branch of the GOP, or perhaps a wealthy individual like Trump or Bloomberg - Republicans both...
Even Perot, perhaps more an independent than either of them, has endorsed Romney...

Exactly how is the third party approach going to work to benefit aims similar to Occupy's, then?
How is that *not* the exercise in futility as I earlier described it?