[tenderman100]

Yep, even on this board, the OWS advocates/apologists/supporters/sympathizers were out in force.

And now?

OWS? RIP.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/w...6/ows-rip/

Quote:

Remember when Occupy Wall Street was sweeping the nation? The media branded it the left’s answer to the Tea Party, the start of a grand national mobilization; depending on who you ask, half of America once supported the OWS protestors, double the amount who back the Tea Party. The Huffington Post even launched a separate page devoted entirely to coverage of OWS.

How the mighty have fallen.

Despite generally favorable coverage from the MSM (something the Tea Party has never had), OWS has essentially fallen apart. It is not a significant presence on the streets; it is not a significant presence in Democratic Party politics; it is not a significant presence in the national conversation.

Yep, you bet. It's dead. It was Dead on Arrival, but a lot of folks simply couldn't see why.

Just to bring back the giggles, listen to Congresswoman Stepford:

"It's young! It's spontaneous!! It's focused!! And it's going to be effective!!"

[Roosh]

I was just thinking about this today. I guess the critics were right in that not having demands would lead to its downfall. I think they also went way too left, not really resonating with mainstream America.

[Goldin Boy]

I knew from jump street OWS was just slacktivism. They had no direction so the elites never had anything to worry about. I blame the overall softness of American society: The kids wanted change but don't want to work or think hard to take steps to effect it. And the pervasiveness of the media has cripple the critical thinking skills of the masses(i.e fake twitter deaths every week)

The funniest part to me was how people acted shocked when cops maced and tased defenseless people as if local and fed gov't don't have a history of beating and killing protesters that goes back to factory strikes in the late 18th century.

You can swap "Kony 2012" for OWS and say the same thing, smh.

[speakeasy]

Meanwhile the Tea Party seem to be dead too.

All the issues of inequality addressed by OWS are just as pervasive now as when the movement was at its peak. Nothing has changed.

[Screwston]

I knew those pussies wouldn't last when I saw protesters on the news getting maced and acting like they were being stabbed to death.

[tenderman100]

(05-16-2012 06:58 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

Meanwhile the Tea Party seem to be dead too.

All the issues of inequality addressed by OWS are just as pervasive now as when the movement was at its peak. Nothing has changed.

Au contraire.

The Tea Party is mobilizing at the grass roots level. They are actually trying to have an impact on electoral politics, as opposed to vandalizing businesses, defecating on police cars, and spreading disease in unsanitary camps.

Ask Orrin Hatch and Richard Lugar if the Tea Party is dead.

Of course, they're not. They just don't get the attention of the sleazebag media.

[Roosh]

Quote:

The Tea Party is mobilizing at the grass roots level.

Don't you mean at the Koch level?

[kosko]

(05-17-2012 05:02 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

The Tea Party is mobilizing at the grass roots level.

Don't you mean at the Koch level?

While Soros was largely funding OWS. lol. Big money is always needed; neither was a organic accident.

OWS left itself open to hijack by not having a program, leadership, and demands.

OWS shows the flaws in the Consensus-model which the left is trying to push as a alternative to democracy. Consensus gets nothing done. You need direction or leadership in groups without it the process gets bogged down into a mess. OWS now has largely been absorbed by the radical socialist groups and may do stuff during the Conventions this Summer but I would't count on it.

[Samseau]

Honestly guys, the economy has improved recently (although god knows if this will last), but among my young friends:


1. They have jobs
2. They better off than they were 2 years ago


So as long as those conditions are persistent, we aren't going to see revolts. Printing 5 trillion had its intended effect; and with Europe collapse, the American recovery could be sustained.

Or not. Who knows? I think 2012 will be a good year for America (compared to 2008, 2009).

[Kitsune]

Protesting doesn't get you ahead.. getting yourself ahead does.

[teh_skeeze]

I would have gone to OWS, but they were too pussy to be Greek about it.

[46.]

(05-17-2012 07:08 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(05-17-2012 05:02 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

The Tea Party is mobilizing at the grass roots level.

Don't you mean at the Koch level?

OWS left itself open to hijack by not having a program, leadership, and demands.

OWS shows the flaws in the Consensus-model which the left is trying to push as a alternative to democracy. Consensus gets nothing done.

Yup. Also the Tea Party really mobilized well as a politcal force getting people elected (Koch $ and organization). They scared the mainstream Republicans, if nothing else. OWS, unfortunately (I'm on their "Side") hasn't done this yet. Hell let's at least pressure Senators and Reps who get the big Wall Street donations, which created the imbalanced playing field.

It may have something to do with the fact that Tea Partiers aren't constantly taking massive rips off 4 foot Graffix bongs.

[teh_skeeze]

(05-17-2012 01:00 PM)46. Wrote:  

(05-17-2012 07:08 AM)kosko Wrote:  

(05-17-2012 05:02 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Quote:

The Tea Party is mobilizing at the grass roots level.

Don't you mean at the Koch level?

OWS left itself open to hijack by not having a program, leadership, and demands.

OWS shows the flaws in the Consensus-model which the left is trying to push as a alternative to democracy. Consensus gets nothing done.

Yup. Also the Tea Party really mobilized well as a politcal force getting people elected (Koch $ and organization). They scared the mainstream Republicans, if nothing else. OWS, unfortunately (I'm on their "Side") hasn't done this yet. Hell let's at least pressure Senators and Reps who get the big Wall Street donations, which created the imbalanced playing field.

It may have something to do with the fact that Tea Partiers aren't constantly taking massive rips off 4 foot Graffix bongs.

The problem with OWS and those types is that they are trying to work outside of the system. They understand that the system is broken, but they don't want to fix it. They want something new (mostly communism).

I was talking with some OWS types in Miami once, and I was talking about how I hate cops, but do really well in front of a judge. Their response was that judges are elected officials, and therefore against them. You just can't get through to these kids. They want you to be open minded, but will shut you out if you hold a dissenting opinion.

[Chad Daring]

(05-17-2012 09:44 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Honestly guys, the economy has improved recently (although god knows if this will last), but among my young friends:


1. They have jobs
2. They better off than they were 2 years ago


So as long as those conditions are persistent, we aren't going to see revolts. Printing 5 trillion had its intended effect; and with Europe collapse, the American recovery could be sustained.

Or not. Who knows? I think 2012 will be a good year for America (compared to 2008, 2009).

I think this is the issue right here.

I was all for the OWS thing and did what I could to support, but while I dont have much, I still have enough that losing it would be a big deal. People have to bottom out before something like OWS is gonna be effective.

People gotta be poor, not broke.

[Veloce]

The demands have to be clear, which OWS rejected. Their major claim for protest was a "mass redistribution of wealth".

Seriously? What, you want the government to step in, seize the nations private assets redistribute them in the form of what, roads, schools, and a book of food stamps for every family? Gimme a break. I'm not saying capitalism is the end all be all or that we're on the right track. But if you're going to go through the effort of mobilizing a movement and get people to show up, there should be an expected end result. If you're just showing up to bitch and complain about the rich white man, you deserve to choke on mace.

[Rurik]

(05-17-2012 03:06 PM)Chad Daring Wrote:  

(05-17-2012 09:44 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

Honestly guys, the economy has improved recently (although god knows if this will last), but among my young friends:


1. They have jobs
2. They better off than they were 2 years ago


So as long as those conditions are persistent, we aren't going to see revolts. Printing 5 trillion had its intended effect; and with Europe collapse, the American recovery could be sustained.

Or not. Who knows? I think 2012 will be a good year for America (compared to 2008, 2009).

I think this is the issue right here.

I was all for the OWS thing and did what I could to support, but while I dont have much, I still have enough that losing it would be a big deal. People have to bottom out before something like OWS is gonna be effective.

People gotta be poor, not broke.

Hunger, in particular, tends to make more gutsy political movements.

I don't really see the economy getting better. The stock market went up, but then that's not directly tied to the economy. Most people are still having a hell of a lot of trouble finding jobs, outsourcing is still bad, and we still have a lot of problems to solve in our post-industrial society.

America will probably slide gradually into a more third world type country over the next 20 to 40 years with much more inequality and slum like living, shared housing, hokey transportation methods, and reduced means. That's just my general view of things, though I don't claim to know much about economics. Most of the world is "third world", so don't expect the elites to give a shit when America goes that direction.

OWS and the Tea Party are both very weak, and I question the integrity of both. Whether they were real movements, or just manufactured to manipulate people, I don't know.

[Blackhawk]

2012 will be better because of the way Congress purposely turns up the economy during Presidential Election years and then turns it down afterwards to save for the next one.
Just as 2013-2014 will suck, probably bringing back OWS or some other sort of protest containing the same people. Because Congress will be putting money aside for 2016.

That's the way it works. You could almost set your clock by it.

[Chad Daring]

I wouldn't say America is going to go 3rd world, you're underestimating how bad third world is. The worst ghetto slums in this country aren't as bad as average 3rd world cities.

I think what we will see is what we consider the "ghetto" to spread. Crime will go up, neighborhoods will go down. This will make the rent cheaper so people will actually willingly move to these areas simply because its affordable. This will gentrify the "ghetto" a little and you'll see a balance.

There will always be outliers tough, the REALLY bad areas will be REALLY bad, while the rich neighborhoods will just build bigger fences.

[Keyser Söze]

The fizzling of OWS was due to two factors: bad protester organization and excellent police organization.

If the protesters had been able to cause significant disruptions in New York, perhaps occupying buildings or blocking large numbers of streets and bridges, more would have happened. However, the police, who use advanced technology to monitor and infiltrate civilian groups, were able to quickly snuff out any attempt to do this.

OWS definitely changed the political dialogue though. If it had managed to focus on the greed and criminality of wallstreet without turning it into a cultural struggle, it could have drawn broader public support from all political leanings, as no one likes being bent over a table and sodomized.

[Vitriol]

(05-19-2012 09:15 AM)Chad Daring Wrote:  

I think what we will see is what we consider the "ghetto" to spread. Crime will go up, neighborhoods will go down. This will make the rent cheaper so people will actually willingly move to these areas simply because its affordable. This will gentrify the "ghetto" a little and you'll see a balance.

There will always be outliers tough, the REALLY bad areas will be REALLY bad, while the rich neighborhoods will just build bigger fences.

This has already happened to a certain degree: consistently higher levels of unemployment, little social mobility where you have college graduates working for $8 an hour and living in shitty apartments, and a more desperate populace that is willing to mobilize mass street protests.

Standards of living have been dropping for most people in the U.S. for a few decades now, so I really don't expect this to change or get any better.

[joehoya]

I predict two related phenomena will continue in this country. The first is that income (and wealth) inequality will get MUCH MUCH worse. Everyone focuses on the 1% vs the 99%. IMHO, other than as a catch phrase, this is a pretty useless division. What is REALLY interesting is looking at the top 20% verse the 80%. The cutoff for the top 20% is somewhere around $100K annually. For whatever reason, this seems like the glass ceiling of the middle and lower middle class.

It is astounding to me how many professions make it relatively easy to get into the $100K point within 5 or 10 years at most (some careers get there almost automatically), whereas there are other professions where VERY VERY few (if any) of their members will ever crack that magic number (adjusted for inflation). What we are going to see is a further solidification of the "2 Americas" idea, with many formally middle class people being relegated to the "poor" America. Even more interesting is how many educated people will be trapped in the poor America, not because they don't have enough education, but because they do not have the RIGHT education. For example:

The PhD now comes with food stamps

The old adage of "go to college" is no longer sufficient advice. People MUST be more selective about what they major in, what schools they go to, and how much debt they take on.

This leads to the next phenomena I see growing in this country, lowered social mobility. More people will be stuck in the same socio-economic class (or worse) as their parents were. Many of the doors that were wide open in the '60s and '70s are starting to close. For example, back when my parents when to college in the late '60s, the minimum wage was $1 and college tuition at the flagship state university was $65 per quarter, or $200 per year. It was EASY for kids like my parents to work during the summer and have enough money to pay their tuition for the whole school year.

Now minimum wage is $8.25 in the same state ($7.25 nationally), but tuition at that same school is $5,200+ per quarter, or $15,600+ per year. So, minimum wage is 8 times what it was when my parents were in school, but tuition is 80 FUCKING TIMES MORE. This is at the exact same university.

How many kids in the '60s could work for 8 weeks and have the $200 they need for tuition? Many (including my parents). Now, how many kids can work 2 months and make the $15K they need for tuition? That would be the equivalent of finding a summer job that pays $90K per year.

[Praetor]

Inflation continues to increase at a rapid pace, but even the devaluing of our currency can't match the rate at which GREED continues to grow. I think that is the fundamental problem with our higher education systems and frankly most institutions we have in America.

[Keyser Söze]

(05-19-2012 08:56 PM)Praetor Wrote:  

Inflation continues to increase at a rapid pace, but even the devaluing of our currency can't match the rate at which GREED continues to grow. I think that is the fundamental problem with our higher education systems and frankly most institutions we have in America.

There is nothing wrong with greed as long as you decide what your ideal lifestyle bankroll is per month, and do whatever it takes to get there, whether it is diligently chasing paper or building a cash cow business that is largely outsourced. The greed will help motivate you, and deciding what your goals are at the outset keeps it from consuming you. As long as you don't develop a taste for cristal, blow, and p4p, life is good.

[Basil Ransom]

I'm going to indulge in some solipsism, and assume that many people shared my sentiment - we sympathized with OWS a little because we knew that the bankers made money by screwing people over and then went unpunished for it (read any Matt Taibbi article). We wanted to see the people responsible punished. On top of that, the police were overbearing and prone to punishing harmless protesters (eg, the UC Davis students maced, the women penned up and maced in NYC). For a brief moment, I thought people would realize how flawed law enforcement can be in this country. That didn't happen.

Then OWS didn't accomplish anything, its methods were questionable, its goals non-existent. And people don't want to associate themselves with "those" people. And from the outset, it was so politically charged that people who could have teamed up saw each other as the enemy; mainstream conservatives in this country, generally speaking, are so vapid that nearly anyone who comes under attack from liberals is seen as a hero worthy of conservative support. Meanwhile, the OWS became associated with the radical left, anarchists and marxists - I don't know whether that was true, but it was the perception.