Fist 666 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 occupy a job search website so your solution to the problem is to get a job? thats incredible. so simple, yet... you've clearly completely missed the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 The mad does have 50 million and the ears of millions of people, I can easily think of bigger idiots than him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWiF407 Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 just heard 1%'er michael moore, net worth of 50m or more, is calling for people richer than him to 'give back' 1 million dollars to the US government for them to squander. great idea. i've never heard of a bigger idiot in my life than michael moore. Have you ever heard of Glenn Beck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 GB may be a gigantic idiot, but moore definitely takes the cake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Michael Moore is the reason why occupy sf has to remain unarisotilian. I've never cared for his documentaries that really stretch the truth too far. If occupy sf allows Moore to be the voice of occupy us, eventually he will contribute to discrediting the validity of the movement. On a similar note I wouldn't recommend to anyone to go to Cuba for healthcare unless they like being treated in a world war ii era hospital. Everything they use are soviet hammy downs. I probably have pictures somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 i dont know man, anything moore gets attached to would immediately be discredited. but that being said, all one has to do is listen to the average occupier to know that the movement has already been discredited. when ones entire belief system is based on class warfare and jealousy, they dont really bring anything to the table. the basis premise they hold is as follows: corporations control the govt. (cant really deny that) so we need the govt to control the corporations. (a bit circular, no?) we are protesting corporations, yet the corporations arent the ones throwing us in jail, maiming us, shooting people in the head till they are brain dead with rubber rounds, enforcing stupid govt laws against what we are doing. govt can save us. to me, that logic just makes absofuckinglutely no g'damn sense whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fist 666 Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 corporations control the govt. (cant really deny that) so we need the govt to control the corporations. (a bit circular, no?). in theory our government equally represents the best interests of the citizens, (real people, not corporation-people) in reality our government represents the best interests of the corporations and banks. in reality a corporations primary concerns are profit and expansion. this isn't circular reasoning. corporations, by nature, don't care about the citizens. our government, by corruption, doesn't care about the citizens. reform and regulation are a must. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 in theory our government equally represents the best interests of the citizens, (real people, not corporation-people) in reality, it never does that in reality our government represents the best interests of the corporations and banks. uhhhhhhhh in reality a corporations primary concerns are profit and expansion. true. how do they profit? by satisfying consumers, UNLESS they seek to use the state to get favors, corporate welfare, monopoly protections, protection from competition and regulations (they necessarily benefit bigger guys over smaller guys), etc. this isn't circular reasoning. corporations, by nature, don't care about the citizens. our government, by corruption, doesn't care about the citizens. i'd argue govt by nature doesnt care about citizens. if they DID, they wouldnt be going around the world fighting 'tyranny' they'd turn the guns on themselves and let americans live free once again. the key point is a corporation exercises no control over a people. walmart isnt locking up the protesters and shooting them with rubber bullets. walmart isnt hiring cops arresting people for camping in public parks. for some reason, the more statist type ideologues cannot grasp that there is a HUGE difference between being beaten, robbed or raped, and walmart existing and enticing you with cheap chinese junk that you are perfectly free not to buy. corporations must satisfy their customers if they are to stay in business and no one forces anyone to deal with any corporation, UNLESS you want to talk about govt taking your money to bail out GM or *insert company du jour* governments necessarily exist to infringe on freedom. they are truly the negation of liberty. reform and regulation are a must. im in favor of regulation, its just a matter of who does the regulating that i take issue with. if the market regulated the banking sector, we wouldnt have moral hazard, we wouldnt have bail outs and banks who engaged in bad practices, would be out of business. this is a much harsher 'regulation' than incentivizing banks to engage in bad risky behavior with no fear of loss because of implicit bail out agreements, bailing them out when they gambled and lost, and letting them keep on doing the same thing. absent the federal reserve and federal regulatory apparatus, there wouldnt of been a crisis and there would be no OWS. govt is always regulating the last crisis that they caused. they continually closed the barn doors after the horses got out. every intervention = 10 more unintended consquences that must then be corrected by 10 more laws for each problem. they are simply diseases masquerading as their own cure. they are breaking peoples legs, handing them crutches and then saying...'see, if it wasnt for us, you wouldnt be able to walk!' its insane and people need to take off the class warfare blinders and open their eyes, and finally, embrace freedom. i think deep down, the OWS peeps are capitalists at heart, they just dont know it yet. years of indoctrination by govt schools and media complex have turned americans into marxists. they are protesting some legitimate things. however, they need to realize they are protesting fascism and not capitalism and laissez faire. one thing is for sure, this seems to be the first stages of the real collapse. riots will be next. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The general strike is go, and I'm on my way downtown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 AoD a lot of the concepts you relate to OWS arent correct. I posted a link a couple times that answered what OWS is. I'm on a phone so I can't link it without sending you to npr's mobile website, but it was a response to theprotestor's post. OWS isnt looking to the government to solve the problems on wall street. Basically the opinions of individuals does t really matter, because this isn't a movement, it's a venue for a new form of paticipatory democracy. The only things anyone has really agreed upon is that corporate personhood and the private sector controlling the public sector isnt good. Everything else is stlil in the air. I personally don't agree with 90% of the shit I hear, but I'm more than happy to put it up to a vote and if 90% agree with something I'll let it stand. If 90 of the country wanted to burn down all the middle schools and put 11-13 year old at work in the fields I'd be for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprotester Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Well, it's dead in Australia. I'm in a major city now and there ain't fuck all going on. I guess when the figures came out showing the gap between rich and poor has consistently been getting smaller in this country over the last ten years has finally shut them up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 OWS isnt looking to the government to solve the problems on wall street. Basically the opinions of individuals does t really matter, because this isn't a movement, it's a venue for a new form of paticipatory democracy. The only things anyone has really agreed upon is that corporate personhood and the private sector controlling the public sector isnt good. Everything else is stlil in the air. I personally don't agree with 90% of the shit I hear, but I'm more than happy to put it up to a vote and if 90% agree with something I'll let it stand. If 90 of the country wanted to burn down all the middle schools and put 11-13 year old at work in the fields I'd be for it. this is the problem and is exactly why i view OWS as i do. 'participatory democracy' is nothing but a fancy word for force. in reality it means if 90% of the country wants to rob the other 10%, its all good. if 90% of the country wants to enslave the other 10% its ok. democracy is a very bad form of government as it has absolutely no respect for individual liberty. it is literally mob rule. i agree there isnt one unified position with all the protesters. however, of all the exchanges and all the people speaking at these events, one thing is clear, the rhetoric is generally marxist. the rhetoric demonizes capitalism and the entrepreneur and demonizes any one who has succeeded. all the people i've heard talking are calling for some form of control on freedom in one way or another. i dont think there is much denying that corporations have a huge influence in the political theater. but i find an opposite solution than what most OWS types do. i say dont let govt have the power to do what they do for corporations. if you concede to let government have the power to bail people out, they will do it, even if the power is only for the 'poor' to be bailed out. i say get rid of the power to bail out corporations as well as any other mercantilist policy. lets not forget, crony capitalism is exactly what spawned adam smith's book, wealth of nations. so im with you on the crony capitalist part, but where we differ is thinking the state or any form of 'participatory democracy' can 'fix' these issues. as for the corporate personhood thing, i think this needs to be defined. it sounds good on the surface, but it also means that the mom and pop gas station on the corner, because they are a 'corporation' cant put a sign up in the yard saying *insert whatever here.* or they cant use the property in a certain way, or whatever. I do agree the govt grants corporations liability protection which wouldnt exist in the free market. but simply saying that a group of people that call themselves a 'corporation' have no rights just needs to be defined before i could form an alliance with these people @ OWS on this issue. does this also mean that any news corporation like the NY times or huffington post can no longer exist, because they are exercising free speech? the overall theme seems to be that citizens united needs to be over turned, when all this did was made it legal for a group of people to put out a movie about a political candidate around election time. i dont see how in the world, the left couldnt support this all around. the aclu did from what i recall, because the first amendment says 'congress shall write no law....' not 'congress shall write no law abridging free speech or the press, unless you are a group of people other groups of people dont like.' 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 There is Marxist rhetoric, but also libertarian rhetoric, and sometimes both at the same time. It's a democracy so those who vote early and often move the occupation in that direction. And mob rule is a term used by Aristotelian ruling classes to describe civil disobedience. When the ruling class is 90% of the population there's no mob. Your biggest issue becomes making everyone as educated as everyone else. That's why discussion is so important to OWS. And if anything that OWS does disenfranchises anyone, all you need to do is show up at the general assembly and voice your case. Like all democracies, if you don't vote, chances are you won't like the outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Looks like I left just in time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 We shut down the port this afternoon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup forgot his password Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Since when is occupy oakland trying to shut down ALL commerce? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ribcage22 Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 government reps are trustees and not delegates. The original creators of our government made it this way because at the time the people who had opinions were intelligent and wise, and didnt rule based on passion, but what was best for the country because of how much they had invested in it. Now the people who rule this country do it rule based on whats best for themself, they have the ability to act as a "trustee" but have distorted priorities. Most have nothing invested in the country, except for their name in politics. Idk what these protests are accomplishing? I dont get it? What does it do for anyone? What did shutting down the port in oakland accomplish? All I can think of is disruption of a major cash flow into oakland. How does stopping money coming into our city help it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 ok who did this? sik k br0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Did you read these articles? Or did you just listen to an NPR podcast summarising them? haha I have had a look at the first; "Environmental Accounting for Pollution: Methods with an Application to the United States Economy". It is problematic precisely on the point I had highlighted earlier; the attribution of arbitrary values, which is discussed in Hayek's "The Use of Knowledge on Society". Muller Mendelsohn, & Nordhaus offer empirical valuations of environmental and health concerns which only hold truth in so far as their valuation is matched by the valuation of broader society. Without acceptance of this valuation, it is redundant to extrapolate outwards and declare the 'true' cost of pollutants. This is exactly Hayek's point; to try to universalise centrally collated data is epistemologically impossible, as any centralised system of valuation cannot account for the subjectivity of individuals within society. So where this article attributes a value to visibility hampered by pollution, then makes calculations based on this value, while in theory the calculations may be sound, at best they will reflect the value of visibility in the context the data was derived. Which, if put into practice by way of legislation, would still need to be subject to periodic reconfiguration if it was to be a 'true' depiction of the value of pollution rather than just another tax. Anyway, Ill take a look at the other article later, but as far as I am concerned, you are still yet to address the concerns of the two articles I posted earlier; Hayek's problem of knowledge distribution and Mises's problem of calculation under price distortion. We were asked to continue this in another thread, remember? http://www.12ozprophet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=139335 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Fuck Yea Oakland! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 There is Marxist rhetoric, but also libertarian rhetoric, and sometimes both at the same time. It's a democracy so those who vote early and often move the occupation in that direction. And mob rule is a term used by Aristotelian ruling classes to describe civil disobedience. When the ruling class is 90% of the population there's no mob. Your biggest issue becomes making everyone as educated as everyone else. That's why discussion is so important to OWS. And if anything that OWS does disenfranchises anyone, all you need to do is show up at the general assembly and voice your case. Like all democracies, if you don't vote, chances are you won't like the outcome. despite this voting nonsense, the majority can still take my rights. why do you refuse to acknowledge this? what does it matter if 90% vote to kill me and i vote not to? im still dead. my position is my life isnt up for a vote. you think people should be able to decide what rights people have and force everyone into this mold. this is very dangerous, it is very tyrannical and very anti liberty. im 100% in favor of civil disobedience. im simply not in favor of 90% of the population forcing their will on others. and why is it 90%? why not 50.00000000000001%? the only 'democracy' im in favor of is unanimous consent. if someone doesnt consent, they should be exempt from what ever policy, action, whatever the 'mob' wants. that is liberty. lets illustrate this: 3 robbers walk up to you door. they demand your stuff or your life. you say, GTFO. they say, well, wait here a second, we are democratically inclined philosophical robbers. lets put this to a vote. we heard you favor democracy. 3 robbers vote to take your stuff. you vote no. they take your stuff. because you are on this nonsense about 'democracy' you must let them. i would shoot back. see the difference? i defend liberty, you defend whatever the majority wants. *feel free to insert something about how the majority would never do that right about now* (even though that is what government through democracy does every day...takes peoples property and rights at gun point) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Idk what these protests are accomplishing? I dont get it? What does it do for anyone? What did shutting down the port in oakland accomplish? All I can think of is disruption of a major cash flow into oakland. How does stopping money coming into our city help it? from what i see, its just about people getting pissed and just flailing their arms wildly and spinning their wheels not really accomplishing anything. they should be occupying the inside of the state capitols, courthouses and federal reserve buildings with rifles if they wish to accomplish anything and take on the real enemy of the people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOOGLE? Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Since when is occupy oakland trying to shut down ALL commerce? They weren't. At least half (if not more) of the local businesses I saw were not only open but rather busy. The strike was specifically directed at big business, not mom and pop stores. In fact, they covered this in the GA and were very clear about their intentions. So I have around 250 images from yesterday and the occupation in general. I've thought it over and I decided I don't want to post them on 12oz but you can see them here. If anyone wants to repost them here or elsewhere, go right ahead...I'd like to get credit for them but it's really no big deal. I have my reasons for doing things this way, mainly because I'm going to be taking a lot of photos and I don't have the time to go through them and pick the good ones....so I'm leaving that up to you. For the record, I don't endorse most of what happened late last night. I live here, I might write on stuff but I don't shit where I sleep...most, if not all, of the major damage was caused by people who not only have had nothing to do with the occupation but aren't even from Oakland. I think I'm going to be getting involved with something super cool today but I can't talk about it here because it's kind of sketchy and might end badly...maybe I'll tell you about it later if we can pull it off. Yesterday was fucking awesome. If your city holds a general strike I highly recommend checking it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 from what i see, its just about people getting pissed and just flailing their arms wildly and spinning their wheels not really accomplishing anything. Dude...it took us three weeks to SHUT DOWN A FUCKING PORT. We're just getting started, give us a break. I agree that there is a lot of bureaucracy replacing bureaucracy but my guess is people haven't evolved past that, along with a host of other bad habits that should probably be unlearned. I can take care of myself just fine, so I choose to ignore all of the politicking. Some people embrace it. As long as I can continue to act autonomously (as I have for most of my life) then I'm not too concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 i didnt mean that its taking a long time to accomplish anything, i mean that shutting down a port is the stupidest thing i've ever heard. i dont think shutting down ports, breaking whole foods and wells fargo windows and destroying property is making me believe that this 'cause' is worth fighting for. i dont even understand what its trying to accomplish. i dont see how trying to destroy markets and disrupt commerce is any how remotely related to bringing liberty to americans. lets hope the koreans that were shooting at people after the riots in the 90's dont start defending themselves again. but since you are actively involved in this, and seem to be halfway knowledgeable about stuff, i'd be interested in hearing exactly what you are trying to accomplish. what exactly you are protesting. and exactly what your 'demands' are and what is the indicator that you have 'won.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelofdeath Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 thanks for further supporting my original views on the OWS, mercer. i find it funny that people keep trying to tell me that OWS means something totally different than what is being represented at the events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shai Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 but since you are actively involved in this, and seem to be halfway knowledgeable about stuff, i'd be interested in hearing exactly what you are trying to accomplish. what exactly you are protesting. and exactly what your 'demands' are and what is the indicator that you have 'won.' What am I trying to accomplish? I see something good happening in my city and I want to help out. Since I'm not easily bought or sold, I have no demands nor am I trying to win anything. I just happen to have skills that apply to the situation so I'm putting my efforts there while seeing everything strictly from my own point of view. People are finally beginning to set class issues aside and talk about what's affecting them, which is something I've been waiting for my whole life. So if there was anything I would like to accomplish, it would be to keep that going....communication is easily the biggest threat there is, plus it's easy and (usually) free. I would say my personal politics are not exactly in line with what most of the people downtown believe but that's not up for discussion most of the time. Usually we're too busy trying to figure out what the next move is going to be. That's pretty much what it comes down to...I'm too busy to worry about the details, there's shit that needs to get done and I needed something to do that was in line with some of my ideals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercer Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 thanks for further supporting my original views on the OWS, mercer. i find it funny that people keep trying to tell me that OWS means something totally different than what is being represented at the events. You're welcome, I knew you were right all along also if that helps too dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.