flannelowl: heymikewaskom: aletdownsquid: ...

17th November 2011

Photo reblogged from Flannel Owl's Nest with 27 notes

flannelowl:

heymikewaskom:

aletdownsquid:

Jay-Z’s has an OWS inspired clothing line, MTV has a reality show in the works, and news media outlets are getting rich from the added viewers. When a “movement” continually benefits its opposition, and when it hurts the people it aims to support— how much of the 99%’s taxpayer dollars have been used to pay for the needed law enforcement, public works and environmental services to facilitate these protests, how many municipalities are having to move funding from social services—at what point do we start to question its effectiveness?
I believe in people’s right to assembly, and this has helped call attention to some serious problems with the U.S. tax code and our economy. The question is not whether we need reform…we do. The question is, “Does this course of action bring about the desired result?” No. OWS has been misguided since its inception, targeting not the law makers who have created the policies but the corporations, which represent the interest of people themselves. Attacking the rich for being rich, attempting to circumnavigate the Democratic process in a civil manner, cannot work and will never change anything.
Last night at the Columbia Statehouse I saw a protestor get arrested in the rain. She was carrying a sign with a butchered quote from Goethe that read, “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” I agreed with her completely.

100% agree. I support the cause, the notion, but dislike the way they’re going about it. It’s Interesting that I’m in the 99% and these protests are taking place 3 blocks from my restaurant and actually hurting my business.

Well of course large corporations and people like Jay-Z are trying to make money off of OWS. That’s what capitalism does: it exploits. Nature of the beast. Corporations have provided plenty of good things in our lives, but by their very nature they exist to continually exploit whatever they can to make a profit, because it is illegal for them to not make a profit. This sort of thing can become hugely problematic if it runs unchecked.
The government has increasingly stripped regulations, and corporations (WHICH DO NOT REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE, THEY REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF CAPITAL—IT IS GOVERNMENT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE, HOW HAVE WE GOTTEN THIS BACKWARDS???) have done more than their fair share to ensure that government carries out this deregulation, acting in the form of large donations and by strategically placing their employees in the government itself.
If OWS is not directly targeting lawmakers, I imagine it is because the lawmakers don’t matter—they are replaceable, as they are often replaced when they lose their utility to corporate interests. OWS is targeting the financial district because that is where the real power lies; it has taken over this country on a systemic level, replacing our government with one that no longer represents us. If you don’t understand this, you are severely missing the point.
I’m not saying OWS is perfect, but it’s pretty much the biggest and most impressive public uprising that’s happened in this country in ages. I personally am overjoyed every time I read a news report about how OWS is throwing a wrench into the system as it is, because the system we’ve been living under for my entire life is not friendly to the masses of this country, and it’s been getting worse every year, like a steam-roller that keeps pressing what it can out of the people and the environment. It needs to be stopped, and the only way that is going to happen is by the people standing in its way. If you sit back and throw insults at the protestors or you get angry that not every single protestor acts in the way you expect them to act, you are, again, severely missing the point.
If OWS is costing city governments money, that’s regrettable, but keep in mind that the cities themselves are deciding how they spend this money (and most cities, states, etc have recently been looking for any way they can to divert money away from social spending). If they think they need hundreds of cops in riot gear out there, that’s their decision, but it doesn’t mean people shouldn’t go out and demonstrate their rights (or lack thereof). But go back to the Civil Rights era, back in the 1960s. Watch the videos of police officers beating and fire-hosing black people who were marching for their rights. Are you concerned that those people who are getting hosed down and attacked by dogs are costing the city precious money? Are you concerned that by standing up for their rights they are taking money away from social programs? (Those attack dogs cost the city a lot of money, after all, as did the water from the fire hoses!) People are fighting for their rights right now, and the city governments are going to do what they deem necessary; the majority of their actions, so far, have been to limit peoples’ ability of free expression, thus showing their hand as shills of the financial industry powers-that-be. Keeping people down is surely expensive, but the fact that that’s how this is being handled by city governments (in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security) demonstrates exactly why people need to continue fighting for their rights, no matter what it costs.
You say, “The question is not whether we need reform…we do,” and I disagree. Reform is a small thing, little piecemeal changes to existing policies. We need more than that: we need reclamation. We need to reclaim the government for the people of this country, and take it out of the hands of people corporations who-whether maliciously or not—alter our laws just to enhance their quarterly profit earnings. Maybe there’s a better way to do that, but I haven’t seen or heard any better ideas yet, much less from people like you guys blogging on tumblr.
If your lobster roll restaurant is losing some business because there’s a protest nearby, I’m sorry, but remember that there are people in this country who are dying of starvation, children who would never eat food if they weren’t provided lunches at school, people who are being tossed out of their homes, and a ton of people who can’t find any jobs (McDonald’s and Wal-Mart can’t hire everyone, after all) and who could never even dream of what a lobster roll tastes like.

This person has a fundamental flaw in his knowledge and reasoning. Democratic governments represent the people and are accountable to the people. Corporations do not represent the people nor are corporations accountable to citizens. Democratically elected governments answer to the citizens. Corporations do not answer to citizens. Corporations only answer to the executive officers and board members. Sadly the way laws and regulations have been hollowed out or taken away from the billions of dollars of lobbying that corporations have done over the past couple decades, corporations are barely even accountable to their stock holders. Now corporations are after our government. The supreme court’s decision on the Citizens United case is the worse decision made by the supreme court. Their decision allows for a legal attack on our democratic process. Corporations acting on their own or as a group can now use unlimited amount of funds in national elections down to local elections. You voice as a citizen will be drowned out by corporate backed PACS dispensing a sea of funds for people running for office that answer to the PACS and not caring about the citizens.

I read an article recently how a nationally backed PAC for school vouchers has gotten involved in a local education council election in a town in NC. A person running for reelection was interviewed. During the first time he ran a couple of years ago, he and his wife ran the campaign and expensives were a few thousand dollars. This time he has had to get a team of people and the campaign expensives are tens of times larger at the minimum. And, he isn’t keeping up with the amount of money spent by that nonlocal PAC or going to pro voucher person who is running a campaign.

heymikewaskom:

aletdownsquid:

Jay-Z’s has an OWS inspired clothing line, MTV has a reality show in the works, and news media outlets are getting rich from the added viewers. When a “movement” continually benefits its opposition, and when it hurts the people it aims to support— how much of the 99%’s taxpayer dollars have been used to pay for the needed law enforcement, public works and environmental services to facilitate these protests, how many municipalities are having to move funding from social services—at what point do we start to question its effectiveness?

I believe in people’s right to assembly, and this has helped call attention to some serious problems with the U.S. tax code and our economy. The question is not whether we need reform…we do. The question is, “Does this course of action bring about the desired result?” No. OWS has been misguided since its inception, targeting not the law makers who have created the policies but the corporations, which represent the interest of people themselves. Attacking the rich for being rich, attempting to circumnavigate the Democratic process in a civil manner, cannot work and will never change anything.

Last night at the Columbia Statehouse I saw a protestor get arrested in the rain. She was carrying a sign with a butchered quote from Goethe that read, “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.” I agreed with her completely.

100% agree. I support the cause, the notion, but dislike the way they’re going about it. It’s Interesting that I’m in the 99% and these protests are taking place 3 blocks from my restaurant and actually hurting my business.

Well of course large corporations and people like Jay-Z are trying to make money off of OWS. That’s what capitalism does: it exploits. Nature of the beast. Corporations have provided plenty of good things in our lives, but by their very nature they exist to continually exploit whatever they can to make a profit, because it is illegal for them to not make a profit. This sort of thing can become hugely problematic if it runs unchecked.

The government has increasingly stripped regulations, and corporations (WHICH DO NOT REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE, THEY REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF CAPITAL—IT IS GOVERNMENT THAT IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE PEOPLE, HOW HAVE WE GOTTEN THIS BACKWARDS???) have done more than their fair share to ensure that government carries out this deregulation, acting in the form of large donations and by strategically placing their employees in the government itself.

If OWS is not directly targeting lawmakers, I imagine it is because the lawmakers don’t matter—they are replaceable, as they are often replaced when they lose their utility to corporate interests. OWS is targeting the financial district because that is where the real power lies; it has taken over this country on a systemic level, replacing our government with one that no longer represents us. If you don’t understand this, you are severely missing the point.

I’m not saying OWS is perfect, but it’s pretty much the biggest and most impressive public uprising that’s happened in this country in ages. I personally am overjoyed every time I read a news report about how OWS is throwing a wrench into the system as it is, because the system we’ve been living under for my entire life is not friendly to the masses of this country, and it’s been getting worse every year, like a steam-roller that keeps pressing what it can out of the people and the environment. It needs to be stopped, and the only way that is going to happen is by the people standing in its way. If you sit back and throw insults at the protestors or you get angry that not every single protestor acts in the way you expect them to act, you are, again, severely missing the point.

If OWS is costing city governments money, that’s regrettable, but keep in mind that the cities themselves are deciding how they spend this money (and most cities, states, etc have recently been looking for any way they can to divert money away from social spending). If they think they need hundreds of cops in riot gear out there, that’s their decision, but it doesn’t mean people shouldn’t go out and demonstrate their rights (or lack thereof). But go back to the Civil Rights era, back in the 1960s. Watch the videos of police officers beating and fire-hosing black people who were marching for their rights. Are you concerned that those people who are getting hosed down and attacked by dogs are costing the city precious money? Are you concerned that by standing up for their rights they are taking money away from social programs? (Those attack dogs cost the city a lot of money, after all, as did the water from the fire hoses!) People are fighting for their rights right now, and the city governments are going to do what they deem necessary; the majority of their actions, so far, have been to limit peoples’ ability of free expression, thus showing their hand as shills of the financial industry powers-that-be. Keeping people down is surely expensive, but the fact that that’s how this is being handled by city governments (in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security) demonstrates exactly why people need to continue fighting for their rights, no matter what it costs.

You say, “The question is not whether we need reform…we do,” and I disagree. Reform is a small thing, little piecemeal changes to existing policies. We need more than that: we need reclamation. We need to reclaim the government for the people of this country, and take it out of the hands of ~~people~~ corporations who-whether maliciously or not—alter our laws just to enhance their quarterly profit earnings. Maybe there’s a better way to do that, but I haven’t seen or heard any better ideas yet, much less from people like you guys blogging on tumblr.

If your lobster roll restaurant is losing some business because there’s a protest nearby, I’m sorry, but remember that there are people in this country who are dying of starvation, children who would never eat food if they weren’t provided lunches at school, people who are being tossed out of their homes, and a ton of people who can’t find any jobs (McDonald’s and Wal-Mart can’t hire everyone, after all) and who could never even dream of what a lobster roll tastes like.

This person has a fundamental flaw in his knowledge and reasoning. Democratic governments represent the people and are accountable to the people. Corporations do not represent the people nor are corporations accountable to citizens. Democratically elected governments answer to the citizens. Corporations do not answer to citizens. Corporations only answer to the executive officers and board members. Sadly the way laws and regulations have been hollowed out or taken away from the billions of dollars of lobbying that corporations have done over the past couple decades, corporations are barely even accountable to their stock holders. Now corporations are after our government. The supreme court’s decision on the Citizens United case is the worse decision made by the supreme court. Their decision allows for a legal attack on our democratic process. Corporations acting on their own or as a group can now use unlimited amount of funds in national elections down to local elections. You voice as a citizen will be drowned out by corporate backed PACS dispensing a sea of funds for people running for office that answer to the PACS and not caring about the citizens. I read an article recently how a nationally backed PAC for school vouchers has gotten involved in a local education council election in a town in NC. A person running for reelection was interviewed. During the first time he ran a couple of years ago, he and his wife ran the campaign and expensives were a few thousand dollars. This time he has had to get a team of people and the campaign expensives are tens of times larger at the minimum. And, he isn’t keeping up with the amount of money spent by that nonlocal PAC or going to pro voucher person who is running a campaign.

Source: aletdownsquid

nom nom nom nom