Those are the folks I truly respect but, when I bring up them I hear, 'they're not on the Forbes list' or 'they're not American so they don't count.'
Usually lithium helps with that sort of thing.
In all seriousness maybe someone did say that and it was silly if they did. The Forbes 400 is a list of extreme cases which have some instructive value but obviously carry risk of not seeing the forest for the trees.
Talking about the 99% versus the 1% can have this problem too. 1% wasn't selected because it's a well researched bright line between economic privilege, it was selected cause it looks good on a protest sign and we are the 99.9% isn't as catchy. And yes the 1% to the 0.1% is very stark too.
But obviously there are areas where we can agree. For me the top 3 would be Mitt Romney and Warren Buffet shouldn't be paying a lower tax rate than you do, something needs to be done to address the crippling debt many people find themselves in, and I would actually like to demonize corporate executives who fire thousands of workers and/or drive their companies in to the ground while racking up million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes.
Obviously something is very wrong with how things are being distributed. We won't get very far if we get hung up on trying to define our terms.
So there appears to be a dust-up over at the park. I was walking back from eating lunch at the Japanese bakery near Rym's work, and there was a lot of noise. I goes to investigate and there were 8 hundred people! And many cops in riot gear. And the cops formed a line and were pushing the people who were jumping over barricades and shouting and stuff. I took a video in case the police did anything bad, which they didn't except the typical pushing line. I also saw a wikileaks van.
I'm getting really tired of seeing shit like "All the cops are just workers for the one percent, and they don't even realize they're being exploited." (cite)
But Nuri, they do work from the government which is tied closely with big business. (I totally agree with you, though.)
If you don't define your terms someone else will define them for you.
Even worse when you define them poorly. a CS debate team defined weapons of mass destruction as 'anything that can kill a large number of people.' Their opponents then immediately pointed out cheesecake fell under their argument as a weapon of mass destruction from heart disease.
If you don't define your terms someone else will define them for you.
Even worse when you define them poorly. a CS debate team defined weapons of mass destruction as 'anything that can kill a large number of people.' Their opponents then immediately pointed out cheesecake fell under their argument as a weapon of mass destruction from heart disease.
If I got to choose how I died this would be # 2, the first would be temporarily
It's a lame thing to do. It's being annoying on purpose. I know protesting is about being loud, but this is actually harming in ways that have nothing to do with the original idea.
Good thing we arrested those women fighting for voting rights in 1917 for obstructing traffic. :-p I mean what does the ability of women having to vote have to do with letting traffic run normally in D.C.
It's a lame thing to do. It's being annoying on purpose. I know protesting is about being loud, but this is actually harming in ways that have nothing to do with the original idea.
I think the idea there is that if you piss off enough people who are kind of "meh" about taking action, then they will take action to stop whatever is pissing them off. In this case, the protesters are hoping that the action taken will be to insist that the protesters GET their change so they will shut up and go home.
Whether or not that's how it will work, we will see.
At what point do the priorities of fixing your government outweigh those of your personal self-interests?
I agree with your sentiment completely, but I still find myself asking:
What are the specific changes the Occupy movement wants to see implemented? I absolutely agree that the massive consolidation of wealth into the hands of a few is a huge problem. The ridiculous income gap is a huge problem. But what specific approach does the Occupy movement want to take?
If this is a campaign to simply raise awareness, they're shooting themselves in the foot by being a pain in the ass.
Jason was right in saying that comparisons to the civil rights movement are fundamentally flawed - the civil rights movement had specific goals. Women obstructing traffic in 1917 had a specific goal with a cohesive message.
At what point do the priorities of fixing your government outweigh those of your personal self-interests?
I am willing to make sacrifices for my beliefs IF I feel that these sacrifices have some tangible effect. I don't think that the actions they propose will help at all! Think about it. How do we make a society that has good public works, shared resources, and respects the common man? By breaking shared public systems and interfering with the common man! This is the problem I have with you guys telling me that I am bad for saying that "occupy the subway" is stupid. It's the same as the stupid conservatives that say that if you criticize America than you are unpatriotic.
I'm not saying your bad, I'm just saying the complaints come off hollow to me. These people are pushed to protest and act out because they feel left behind and hopeless. Most of these people live under crushing debt or have been out of work for way to long. (of course some are hipsters and douche-bags but whatever) I can't really feel for young professionals who are actually doing pretty well complaining that they are delayed a few minutes or hours because these desperate people who either can't find work or can't survive in their situations are blocking their way for a day or two (they only planned to block the subways and transits for one day). If we can't put up with some inconvenience for one day then we might as well all just give up. (obviously they've been at it for more then one day but not in a big attempt to disrupt transportation) I'm sure if they see the negative press it garners they will change tactics.
So if someone physically pushes me because they are downtrodden and desperate, does that make it okay to do? People riot because of similar frustration and resentment. That doesn't mean riots are the way to solve your problems. See, you guys are missing the point! I am not saying they should not be mad, or protesting, or any of these kinds of things. I agree with them, I sympathize. I just do not understand why they are suggesting they hurt me in order to attain their goals. I see this as a move that will merely hurt their cause. I admit that I have been lucky. I am very happy to have a job. I am very thankful for that. I do have tons of student debt, I am very frustrated by the way politics in this country is going, and abhor the fact that corporations are granted power beyond what they should. But I am doing well, and am thankful for that. I just will fight in a way that does not block normal people from the jobs they are lucky enough to have.
If they push you, that's wrong but if they stand in your way and block access to something because they are blocking it for everyone, that's a little different then singling you out and being physical. Staging a sit in in the subway is neither a riot or physical violence.
I just will fight in a way that does not block normal people from the jobs they are lucky enough to have.
I argue that the way you have mentioned that you fight (letter writing and campaigning in local elections) does little to nothing to actually solve the problem. Unless you are throwing around millions of dollars, more than likely your voice is lost or outright ignored. The people in power want people like you. Just happy enough to not fight or cause any real problems they can't ignore.
How does Occupy's fighting get to those politicians, then? How does making random people angry at you, the protester, solve these problems? By shutting down the subway, they are hurting the MTA, the kind of social program government organization they want to promote. Also, Andrew, are you out there? How do you fight? Got any suggestions?
It's all about getting press. Get people talking; "Ooh, what is OWS?", "Why are they protesting", "How come CNN/FOX/MSNBC keep talking about these people?". This very thread is the goal, it's about getting people to acknowledge the problem. This might seem very "Duh" to people like you and me, but I assure you, the vast majority of the nation does not understand.
I'm curious, did you run into any problems today getting to work? Would you think about walking to work instead of taking the subway? What about biking?
To those who say "They don't have a clear central message" or "There are better ways to protest", and are in NYC, if you agree that there needs to be change, why are you not helping organize or form those other protests? Now that the park has been broken up, I think it would be awesome if they started flash-protesting. Use social media to organize a different protest site everyday.
How does Occupy's fighting get to those politicians, then? How does making random people angry at you, the protester, solve these problems? By shutting down the subway, they are hurting the MTA, the kind of social program government organization they want to promote. Also, Andrew, are you out there? How do you fight? Got any suggestions?
As Nuri said, you get enough people annoyed and out of their comfort zone, and something might get done. Whether that works or not and whether they have demands that can be accomplished has yet to be seen. The problem with the 99% vs 1% is the protesters only really make up .01% they need more people to react a critical mass. Most people are busy with some sort of life be it great or crappy so they don't really think much since they are just trying to survive as well. The point is if you get them pissed that something is going on a fraction of them might get more engaged.
I do not live in NYC. I just think that deriding them for doing a sit-in is not really the right attitude. Also, attacking me for my action or lack thereof is besides the point.
Sitting in is fine. Sitting on the subway train is fine. Sitting on the platform is fine. Actually interfering with the operation of the subway train is NOT FINE.
You people who do not live in NYC can't possibly understand. You do not fuck with the trains. There's a reason that it's a 7 year minimum felony to interfere with an MTA employee. The trains need to run as much on time as possible. If someone tries to hold up a train by preventing doors from closing, I'll be glad when the MTA police (yes they have separate police) take them away.
Unlike you people with cars, we New Yorkers depend on public transportation for our livelihoods. Even a quiet midnight train can have 100s of people on it. Rush hour trains may have over 1000 per train. When you delay the trains, or even the buses, you are crossing the line. It's like crashing your car on purpose to create traffic on the highway. It's not an effective means of protest, nor an acceptable one.
When you delay a train, you also delay the trains behind it. The one train car you hold up might hear your message, but not the other cars. Certainly not the two trains that are now stuck in the tunnel behind that one. If 600 people are stuck for even one minute, that's ten hours of time you have taken from people's lives.
What do you say to the person who was taking the train to the hospital? The person who missed their flight? The person who got fired for being late to work? The person who works hourly and just lost an hour of wages? The person who got sick on the train, but couldn't get off? The people who were stuck in a car with a smelly hobo? The people who have to pay a huge fee for not picking their kids up from daycare on time? The kids who don't get to school on time?
You aren't New Yorkers, you just don't understand. Fucking with the trains will be the opposite of an effective protest. It will just make everyone hate you instantly. Remember, we have crazy homeless people, mariachi bands, and break-dancers on our trains all the time asking for money, and we don't even notice them. If you get on a train and rant about the 99%, you will be completely ignored. Only tourists will remember you. If you try to delay the train, the MTA Police will be the least of your worries. You will get your ass kicked by other New Yorkers well before they arrive. Even New Yorkers who are sympathetic to your cause will not stand to have you fuck up the train. The train is not the evil, the bank is, so GTFO.
There are plenty of other protesting methods you can use that are very effective. But under no circumstances are you to fuck with the trains.
... Doesn't that rant prove that fucking with the trains is a very effective method? Why would you stage a protest that can easily be ignored?
Right now people seem to be sympathetic to the protesters and anti-police. Fucking with the trains won't make a difference in their effectiveness outside of NYC. Media attention is the only thing that matters out there. Within NYC it will make everybody switch sides and root for the cops. If you think that is a good idea, I'd love to hear an explanation as to why. What looked like brutality yesterday will suddenly look like justice, even to people like me.
As Nuri said, you get enough people annoyed and out of their comfort zone, and something might get done.
In this case, bullshit. What are they going to do? Vote Democrat? That's a forgone conclusion here.
The OWS people here have already conveyed their message 100%. They don't stand out to us in the city except when they break things, and breaking things just turns the entire city against them. It doesn't help that this is a city that is hugely sympathetic to their vague cause and which definitely isn't going to the Republicans any time soon.
Usually Civil Disobedience is used to cause the general population some sort of inconvenience again like I've said many times to draw attention to themselves and their cause. Doing this in the most public and disruptive way without causing "direct" harm is one of the more effective way to do so. Going after the sick and young well.. I assume you are straw-manning the argument for fun and not seriously because that would cause much more of a negative reaction then ever disrupting the subway for a day. (and in other cities major thru-ways, which is what the people on facebook were bitching about in Philly) I would note again, that this was a one day event (at least planned) if they brought it down for a week that would be a bad move, but it looks like they targeted three hours in one day.
Comments
In all seriousness maybe someone did say that and it was silly if they did. The Forbes 400 is a list of extreme cases which have some instructive value but obviously carry risk of not seeing the forest for the trees.
Talking about the 99% versus the 1% can have this problem too. 1% wasn't selected because it's a well researched bright line between economic privilege, it was selected cause it looks good on a protest sign and we are the 99.9% isn't as catchy. And yes the 1% to the 0.1% is very stark too.
But obviously there are areas where we can agree. For me the top 3 would be Mitt Romney and Warren Buffet shouldn't be paying a lower tax rate than you do, something needs to be done to address the crippling debt many people find themselves in, and I would actually like to demonize corporate executives who fire thousands of workers and/or drive their companies in to the ground while racking up million dollar bonuses and golden parachutes.
Obviously something is very wrong with how things are being distributed. We won't get very far if we get hung up on trying to define our terms.
I know protesting is about being loud, but this is actually harming in ways that have nothing to do with the original idea.
Whether or not that's how it will work, we will see.
What are the specific changes the Occupy movement wants to see implemented? I absolutely agree that the massive consolidation of wealth into the hands of a few is a huge problem. The ridiculous income gap is a huge problem. But what specific approach does the Occupy movement want to take?
If this is a campaign to simply raise awareness, they're shooting themselves in the foot by being a pain in the ass.
Jason was right in saying that comparisons to the civil rights movement are fundamentally flawed - the civil rights movement had specific goals. Women obstructing traffic in 1917 had a specific goal with a cohesive message.
This is the problem I have with you guys telling me that I am bad for saying that "occupy the subway" is stupid. It's the same as the stupid conservatives that say that if you criticize America than you are unpatriotic.
See, you guys are missing the point! I am not saying they should not be mad, or protesting, or any of these kinds of things. I agree with them, I sympathize. I just do not understand why they are suggesting they hurt me in order to attain their goals. I see this as a move that will merely hurt their cause.
I admit that I have been lucky. I am very happy to have a job. I am very thankful for that. I do have tons of student debt, I am very frustrated by the way politics in this country is going, and abhor the fact that corporations are granted power beyond what they should. But I am doing well, and am thankful for that. I just will fight in a way that does not block normal people from the jobs they are lucky enough to have.
By shutting down the subway, they are hurting the MTA, the kind of social program government organization they want to promote.
Also, Andrew, are you out there? How do you fight? Got any suggestions?
I'm curious, did you run into any problems today getting to work? Would you think about walking to work instead of taking the subway? What about biking?
To those who say "They don't have a clear central message" or "There are better ways to protest", and are in NYC, if you agree that there needs to be change, why are you not helping organize or form those other protests? Now that the park has been broken up, I think it would be awesome if they started flash-protesting. Use social media to organize a different protest site everyday.
You people who do not live in NYC can't possibly understand. You do not fuck with the trains. There's a reason that it's a 7 year minimum felony to interfere with an MTA employee. The trains need to run as much on time as possible. If someone tries to hold up a train by preventing doors from closing, I'll be glad when the MTA police (yes they have separate police) take them away.
Unlike you people with cars, we New Yorkers depend on public transportation for our livelihoods. Even a quiet midnight train can have 100s of people on it. Rush hour trains may have over 1000 per train. When you delay the trains, or even the buses, you are crossing the line. It's like crashing your car on purpose to create traffic on the highway. It's not an effective means of protest, nor an acceptable one.
When you delay a train, you also delay the trains behind it. The one train car you hold up might hear your message, but not the other cars. Certainly not the two trains that are now stuck in the tunnel behind that one. If 600 people are stuck for even one minute, that's ten hours of time you have taken from people's lives.
What do you say to the person who was taking the train to the hospital? The person who missed their flight? The person who got fired for being late to work? The person who works hourly and just lost an hour of wages? The person who got sick on the train, but couldn't get off? The people who were stuck in a car with a smelly hobo? The people who have to pay a huge fee for not picking their kids up from daycare on time? The kids who don't get to school on time?
You aren't New Yorkers, you just don't understand. Fucking with the trains will be the opposite of an effective protest. It will just make everyone hate you instantly. Remember, we have crazy homeless people, mariachi bands, and break-dancers on our trains all the time asking for money, and we don't even notice them. If you get on a train and rant about the 99%, you will be completely ignored. Only tourists will remember you. If you try to delay the train, the MTA Police will be the least of your worries. You will get your ass kicked by other New Yorkers well before they arrive. Even New Yorkers who are sympathetic to your cause will not stand to have you fuck up the train. The train is not the evil, the bank is, so GTFO.
There are plenty of other protesting methods you can use that are very effective. But under no circumstances are you to fuck with the trains.
The OWS people here have already conveyed their message 100%. They don't stand out to us in the city except when they break things, and breaking things just turns the entire city against them. It doesn't help that this is a city that is hugely sympathetic to their vague cause and which definitely isn't going to the Republicans any time soon.
Usually Civil Disobedience is used to cause the general population some sort of inconvenience again like I've said many times to draw attention to themselves and their cause. Doing this in the most public and disruptive way without causing "direct" harm is one of the more effective way to do so. Going after the sick and young well.. I assume you are straw-manning the argument for fun and not seriously because that would cause much more of a negative reaction then ever disrupting the subway for a day. (and in other cities major thru-ways, which is what the people on facebook were bitching about in Philly) I would note again, that this was a one day event (at least planned) if they brought it down for a week that would be a bad move, but it looks like they targeted three hours in one day.