Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 29, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates






The Sixth Extinction


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Occupy Movement Invades West Coast Ports

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Dec 13, 2011
Poster by R. Black

Protesters successfully shut down some operations in three major ports spanning the Western United States on Monday. Coordinated action in Washington, Oregon and California was designed to interfere with commerce, bolster the spirits of the evicted and—why not?—inconvenience Goldman Sachs.

AP via Google:

The movement, which sprang up this fall against what it sees as corporate greed and economic inequality, focused on the ports as the “economic engines for the elite.” It comes weeks after police raids cleared out most of their tent camps.

Protesters are most upset by two West Coast companies: port operator SSA Marine and grain exporter EGT. Investment banking giant Goldman Sachs Group Inc. owns a major stake in SSA Marine and has been a frequent target of protesters.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By ardee, December 16, 2011 at 3:56 am Link to this comment

Foucauldian, December 15 at 8:52 am

We have rather differing definitions of kindness I fear. Backstabbing beyatch comes readily to mind, frankly.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 15, 2011 at 9:52 am Link to this comment

ardee, December 15 at 3:18 am

Thanks, ardee.  I’m pulling through.  Also have
repaired the relationship with Shenon.  She was kind
enough to respond.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, December 15, 2011 at 9:22 am Link to this comment

Rethinking Occupation of the Rose Parade & Game:

Will there be an Occupy Float? 
This might be a chance to have a little fun & show the Movement in a positive, even festive light.
A chance to catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

At first glance, occupying a football game sounds like an invitation to violence. 
But THIS year’s Rose Bowl Game features Wisconsin vs. Oregon. 
Being more than casually familiar with the respective campuses at Madison and Eugene, I can tell you there would be a platform for support.
Again, it’s something that would have to be pulled off without disrupting the game itself or those who didn’t want to participate.

Tying up traffic would be dangerous and counter-productive.

There has already been a little Occupy action in Pasadena this year:
http://www.insidesocal.com/nwpasadena/2011/10/occupy-the-rose-bowl.html

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, December 15, 2011 at 9:04 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, you write:
“The term 99% is emblematic…”

Yes, and the 99% vs. 1% branding is a tactical stroke of genius. 
I was remiss in not mentioning it in my last post, although I have elsewhere.
It is the Occupy Movement’s best move so far.

And, yes, those who look at it strictly in math terms (99% = less than $342,000/yr income or $1,200,000 net worth) are missing much of the intent, which is to cast a wide net in search of support.

But you also write:
“They do not have to better understand its constituency.  It is the constituency.  The
interruptions the Occupiers are engaged in are short lived and the inconvenience or the loss of a day or two wages might piss off some, it appeases the anger of a whole lot more.” 

Here we disagree.
 
When we’re hearing
“We Are the 99%” and
“Whose port? OUR port!”
then it becomes incumbent that any “inconvenience or a day or 2 or lost wages” is born by those who voluntarily sacrifice that as support for the Movement.

Not by the force of the Movement (well-intended or not)upon those it claims to represent.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 15, 2011 at 7:26 am Link to this comment

“It is utterly amazing, when you stop to think about it, how so few can create so much havoc and misery” - gerard November 7 at 8:39 pm


Toppling the global market system will create terrific food shortages on every continent on earth. Within 2-3 days store shelves will be depleted. Within a week we will all witness a paradigm change in behaviors. Neighbor will turn against neighbor. It is very likely millions would die.

Report this

By ardee, December 15, 2011 at 4:18 am Link to this comment

Foucauldian, December 14 at 6:36 pm

We haven’t a choice as to who responds to our efforts, or what sort of response is forthcoming.

I am sorry for your present economic condition and hope the New Year brings you more economic security.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 8:14 pm Link to this comment

Right, it’s been a tug of war of late.

Perhaps we can change that.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 8:05 pm Link to this comment

Sorry Foucauldian - If you presented an idea I would be happy to
engage.  I hadn’t noticed that you actually put anything forth to
discuss.  But from one who is puffed up to another I’d say you had
your share of going for the personal.  It was hard not to notice your
basketful of criticisms.  But then you must enjoy contention as it can
be seen in your comments on other forums.  Do enjoy yourself. 

I truly am sorry for your current situation.  That is a circumstance far
away from these rather detached electronic halls.  It is my hope it
changes for the better as soon as possible.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 7:46 pm Link to this comment

And to close it off, by way of answering your rather
ill-put if not ignorant question concerning a
possible discrepancy between my actions and words,
let me just say I happen to be destitute at the
moment, a condition I surely hope to get out from
under very soon.  So yes, Shenon, all I can do at
present is write.

Nuff said.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

Whatever you say, Shenon.  Apparently you’re too
puffed up to disengage from the personal and to
discuss ideas.  Try somebody else for a change.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 7:29 pm Link to this comment

The term 99% is emblematic.  They do not have to better
understand its constituency.  It is the constituency.  The
interruptions the Occupiers are engaged in are short lived
and the inconvenience or the loss of a day or two wages might
piss off some, it appeases the anger of a whole lot more. 

The Occupiers do need to pay attention as well, in addition to
the closing ports events, and the Occupy Homes, and Occupying
government, which they are doing in the Washington D.C.  But they
must concentrate on Congress and in particular the Republican
enablers of the Financial/Corporate criminals in their offices as well
as in the Capitol rotunda, and Occupying the culprits’ offices.  These
locations ought to be permanent Occupy installations since that is the
only place where actual changes can take place.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 7:01 pm Link to this comment

Foucauldian, December 14 at 2:56 pm – Apparently you just can’t
help yourself.  I guess it is much ado about nothing if it is only a
moot point to you.  The implications of your self-awareness where
I am not????  “I wasn’t patronizing you either, though no doubt ?
you must feel I was.  And why?”
  It might be your condescending
demeanor?  Or your pretensions that Father Foucauldian knows best? 
Or your treatment that my beliefs are inferior or, how was it you put
it, my failed paradigm?  Did you say that out of being offended?  I
don’t agree that suffering is good for the soul.  There is no such thing
as the soul, and the notion that suffering is good is a religious belief for
which I find extravagantly irrational.  It is taxing to wend through your
semantics which is not given in the clearest expression.  I found this
particularly descriptive of what you were trying to say about a distinction
between a default ideological position and one’s wishes.  You’ve accused
me of failing to make it.  But it was in the most equivocal of terms.  You
certainly see yourself in a loftier position than po’little ole liberal me,
such a groveling caliban I am.  But I do know this, of course, if you
were in such an elevated position it would be your responsibility to do
something to bring about a more desirable state of affairs.  M’thinks you
shrink from action, m’dear.  That is a common inclination of a gascon.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, December 14, 2011 at 6:57 pm Link to this comment

Occupy Movement’s good moves:
—Keeping it Non-Violent
—Time’s Person of the Year (as Protesters, world wide)
—Not challenging Ol’ Man Winter, moving westward

Occupy Movement’s errors:
—Blocking West Coast ports (much credibility lost)
—Occupying Black Friday (minimal losses, but bad idea)

IMax, S.Podvall, bhawk, Maani & others are correct when they question the wisdom of a strategy that disrupts commerce and the daily routine of the citizenry.

If the Occupy Movement claims a 99% constituency, they need to focus on a better understand of them.

Hint:  Occupy Rose Parade, another bad idea.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 6:09 pm Link to this comment

oddsox – you are most welcome.  I checked my links and found that
the first one did not work and also found out why.  It was an error on
my part putting together the url incorrectly.  I fixed it and it is still a
good link and you might find it entertaining a bit, if such a website
can be entertaining.  Lots of information with more than a dozen
resources provided to backup its graph illustrations and data.  My
quote came from a post made about four comments in.  I checked
out the three other “here” links in my earlier post and they worked
just fine on my computer/browser set up.

This is the corrected link to Infographic:  here  I’ll check it out before I
post it in this forum.

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, December 14, 2011 at 5:13 pm Link to this comment

Hey Shenonymous:  belated thanks for the links (didn’t work but the google ref. did)
I noticed on Scheon’s survey that 14% of the protesters were “students” and none were retired (or Republican, which makes sense). 
Coupled with the 32% retired at Tea Party rallies (thought so), this explains much of the employment disparity, thanks.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 4:19 pm Link to this comment

redteddy, December 13 at 7:32 pm

“My point is that there isn’t that laser focus needed
around ONE issue, one doable achievable goal that the
entire country can galvanize itself around.”

Let me ask you a question, redteddy.  Suppose now you
were one of the leaders, the mover and the shaker. 
What do you think that one overriding issue ought to
be?

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 3:56 pm Link to this comment

Wasted all your eloquence, Shenon, on a moot point. 
I haven’t accused you of belonging to one class or
another, so it’s not my fault you projected.  I
only claimed you were a proponent of a bourgeois
ideology, an ideology I consider defunct.  If you
want to make that as basis for your self-
identification, be my guest, but that’s not what I
said.  So yes, I was as direct as I needed to be,
no more and no less.

I wasn’t patronizing you either, though no doubt
you must feel I was.  And why?  Only because you
thought I was pegging you one way or another. 
Nonsense!  In any case, it’s a rather lame charge
to level at anyone simply because they may disagree
with you.

Nor have I even alluded to any ignorance on your
part; in fact, quite the opposite is true, and have
spoken to your education, erudition and so forth. 
So here’s just another example of you piling things
up so as to attain the desirable kind of effect. 
Which isn’t to say even the smartest people can’t
be beholden to a failed paradigm.  So if that’s
your basis for your outrageous claims concerning my
patronizing and demeaning attitude, so be it.

It’s much ado about nothing, if you ask me.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 14, 2011 at 3:18 pm Link to this comment

I once took fancy to a girl who was a Pol dancer
She had a flair for the melodrama, making me a prancer

I may finish this poem someday, maybe tomorrow
since we broke up, I am filled with sorrow

Tis to be why I feel so damn sad
as she ran off with another lad

Reading her note as long as she wrote
I find myself sliding into a Soporific moat

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment

Poor poor Foucauldian – yes you do have a flair for the melodrama,
”my father was an actor on Polish ?national stage, second only to the
Russian stage, ?so unwittingly perhaps, I’ve absorbed the flair; ?but
what’s your[s] (sic)?”
  Way….ellll as an Eyetalian, it is in my Commedia
dell’arte genes or is it jeans?  5 Yuks If I were as ignorant as you
claim you would not find me the formidable opponent you also claim. 
Qu’est-ce que c’est ... indeed.

Whatever is your motivation to speak as you do to me is psychologically
yours, but, your penchant for patronizing is what leads you down the
self-deceiving primrose path of hyperbole.  Your class mentality (the
accusation of petite bourgeoisie mentality) is revealing of your small
and obsolete universe.  The petite bourgeoisie, if that is what you wish
to name-call me (do be more direct as you promised), originally were
the lower middle-class. Later, closer to now, Marx et al, used the term
to describe the social class that includes shopkeepers and employees
of government.  As a teacher, I suppose I could be considered an
employee of government, but it is local government and they are the
ones who decide my length of employment, the immediate quality of
my life, not the larger entity “national” government.  It is the local
proletariats that have more control than that of which they are
conscious.

The only thing we teachers intend to and do for the most part is to
produce better minds.  It is counter to the Marxist view that teachers are
the antithetical warriors against Fascism and they, the teachers, stand
shoulder to shoulder with the ordinary citizen to combat totalitarianism,
into the abyss which anarchists often fall.  It is said that the petite
bourgeoisie is situated somewhere between the workingmen and the
capitalists.  I am personally not completely against capitalism, but do
advocate a modified socialized capitalism, an amalgamation of the two
economic systems.  But that is another large topic not within the scope
of this very forum and has been dealt with at length on older forums. 
Perhaps elsewhere, as an update, it better would be.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 2:36 pm Link to this comment

Anyway, the term petite bourgeoisie is terribly dated!  It shows an
anachronistic mindset.  I find it boring to try to rehash not only
the ostensible meaning but Marxism in general.  And yes, I do have
and have read Marx’s Capital Volumes 1 and 2.  A neo-Marxism
might show sociologically a better economic/political system, but I
thoroughly doubt anything that smacks of anarchism is better than
democracy which does not really fit in with Marxism.  The idea of
direct democracy would quickly unseat the authoritarianism of the
central committees of Marxist government. Marxism is fundamentally
antithetical to liberal democracy.  This unrealistic utopia, called America,
has been a republic form of democracy since the Federalists, and along
with it at the local and state level direct democracy exists. 

I have explicitly made my “wishes” clear time and again to have, in fact, a
liberal government, which is identical to my ideological liberal economic
point of view, so your accusation is empty.  I am quite consistent.  What I
am willing to do in order for my wishes to come true is not within the
scope of your knowledge and so you are ill equipped to judge what I do
in fact fail or succeed to do.  Again, a sign of your patronizing
tendencies to make tissue-weight accusations.  It is also a sign of your
arrogance which is characteristic of intellectuals who are out of touch
with reality. 

One does not have to taste arsenic to understand what a deadly poison it
is.  So it is with anarchism.  Of course I do not understand it from the
point of view of an anarchist. I am not one, never have been, nor ever will
be.  It has its rules and shape of disorder however and that is all I need
as much as does all the other critics of its chaotic nature.  I have given
that its emotional genesis does get the sedentary moving and has a place
in instigating human collective behavior, but it becomes detrimental as
its history has shown everywhere in the world where it reared it ugly
head.

I speak as a modern-day liberal because I am a liberal of this century,
this decade, this year.  I am not a relic from French intellectualistic
anarchism that has never actually caught on anywhere for any significant
amount of time, that history which fits exactly in with my view.  Of
course you would resort to claiming I am in the grasp of illusion as
my perspective does not dovetail in with your own. It is egotistical of you
but you are blinded by your own hubris and are quite unable to see that. 
The liberal perspective is precisely what has been moving this country as
a government of the people almost its inception.  It has never been the
government of the rich until the onslaught of Reagan Republicanism. 
Your standpoint on things is not surprising given your own glaciated
ideology of revolution and from any perspective it is revolution for the
sake of revolution, certainly not a revolution that involves the reality of
the people’s needs and desires.  Those are made poignant by the 99%ers
and their testimonials here

Traps often are of one’s own making.  My character is as it always has
been as everyone who knows Shenonymous these many four years as a
truthdipper would not disagree, and so I as She will remain, unless you,
or anyone else, can make a better more reasonable case for me to agree
with otherwise.  I’ve seen no coherent argument yet.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 12:55 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 14 at 7:52 am

PART II

As to the rest of your comment, an observation or
two.  My “acerbic” demeanor – my term, by the way -
—was but a one-time thing; and the purpose was,
only “to smoke you out,” as the saying goes.  I’ve
seen you posting on this thread and wanted to
resume our bitter-sweet relationship because you’re
a formidable opponent.  And since you wouldn’t make
the first step, I took the intitiative.  But
“acerbic” I’m definitely not.  It’s not in my
character and you ought to know it. 

“Repayment for any kindness given.”  Just a figure
of speech.  You did respond in a rather hostile
manner in the course of our last encounter on the
TD thread (simply because I dared question your
unqualified remarks on the basic conservatism of
the people of NY), but that’s water under the
bridge as far as I’m concerned.

I think both of us have got to realize that
postings on any public bulletin board, and TD is no
exception, necessarily involves certain posturing,
if only because no one wants to lose face.  It’s
not the same as private communications, and we’ve
got to be aware of the limitations of the medium
(and human nature as well).  I’ll do my best not
to fall for this trap and can only hope you’ll make
an effort too.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 14 at 7:52 am

PART I

Shenon, Shenon, Shenon,

Your occasional proclivity for melodrama matches,
indeed, even surpasses mine.  At least I have a
valid excuse:  my father was an actor on Polish
national stage, second only to the Russian stage,
so unwittingly perhaps, I’ve absorbed the flair;
but what’s your?  It is thus, I submit, that both
of us descend from the sublime to the ridiculous,
although in my instance,  I’m well aware when I’m
doing it and why.

Only a couple of points, for the record.  Having no
sympathy with petty bourgeois mentality is hardly
the same as deriving joy from anyone’s suffering. 
Moreover, I’ve got a long way to go before I reach
the kind of revolutionary zeal we tend to associate
with the leading figures during the Reign of
Terror, and I doubt I ever will.  I’m too much of a
humanist for that.

Nonetheless, it’s undeniable that the petty
bourgeois are the enemy of the Republic, not quite
on the same scale we attribute to our business and
political elites but an enemy still (for in their
passive acquiescence, they allow the latter to do
their bidding). 

So yes, from a strictly tactical standpoint, the
standpoint of revolutionary principles, pure and
simple, with a mind to a revolutionary ideal, it
would be a desirable thing if the classes I speak
were to fall on harder times.  Suffering, we all
know, is good for the soul, and a necessary
precondition for waking people up to the world of
injustice around them.  There is, however, a
crucial distinction to be made between one’s
default ideological position, and one’s wishes
perhaps, and what the person is willing to do in
order for those wishes to come true, and you failed
to make it, Shenon.  Not only are those two
different states of mind not contradictory; they
are, in fact, most human.  And I haven’t crossed
the line (yet), Shenon, nor have I given any
indication I ever would.  Besides, it’s not up to
me, really, to bring about the desirable state of
affairs.  I’m quite content to leave such matters
to the unfolding march of history.  Que Sera, Sera!

Then you speak of anarchism as though you had
really known it.  But don’t you realize, you’re
speaking as an outsider looking in, not as someone
who has internalized it in the form of the key
principles and tenets of anarchistic thought –
the political philosophy which has emerged as a
result of abject failures of past political
thought-systems, dissected, considered, and
analyzed, the only political philosophy that makes
any kind of sense at this historical moment.  Just
like you, I resisted it at first, but eventually
have gone the whole route and yes, crossed the
Rubicon.  That’s the effect that radicalization has
on people:  once you embark on radical thought,
there’s no turning back.  You can’t go back to
darkness once you’ve seen the light.

And then you speak of “effecting the real [and
meaningful] changes.”  But again, you speak from
the perspective of a classical or modern-day
liberal, as a proponent of liberal democracies as
they’re understood today – the very ideology which
glorifies the capitalist system by making us
believe that whatever real or imaginary ills we may
suffer in the real economic can be more than made
up through our politics. 

Not only do I consider this article of faith as
some kind of grand illusion – if only because the
relationship between a liberal State and the
underlying economic system is a symbiotic one – but
more to the point, the kind of real and meaningful
changes you envisage are neither real nor
meaningful enough given my standpoint on things.

Report this

By gerard, December 14, 2011 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment

IMax again comes in with his direst threats:“What you wish to see will cause global suffering. Suffering the likes of which the world has not seen in thousands of years.”
  This is the Age of Dire Threats Par Excellence! For decades, Dire Threat #1 has been nuclear holocaust. Now Dire Threat #2 is Global Warming and Climate Change. World poverty and population increases has been Dire Threat #3 for decades.
  Yet nothing definitive has been done about any of them. Therefore it would seem that Dire Threats do not work toward elimination of Dire Threats.
  Seems unlikely that OWS actions are at the Dire stage yet. Maybe the “direst” threat they have made is the attempt to unify the 99% of people whom the 1% has been abusing for years.
  Now here’s Dire Threat for IMax: Suppos nothing substantial is changed by the OWS Movement and they recede into history. The System continues “business as usual” with all its exploitations, injustices, losses of rights, brainwashing propaganda, inadequate educatonal systems,quibblings
among politicians, assinine TV “debates” and obscene elections and illegal imprisonments.”  Now there are some Dire Threats staring us in the face for sure!
  What does IMax propose in answer to these huge
“dire threats”? Has he developed a systematic and “well-resourced” answer to even one of them? His previous suggestions to “Occupy Congres” and other government agencies attempts to deflect efforts to the secondary source of our problems. Yes, butl— Haven’t they themselves already been bought off by the primary villains behind the scenes whose business it seems to be to steal from the poor and give to the politicians and themselves? 
  So much for Dire Threats.

Report this

By balkas, December 14, 2011 at 10:36 am Link to this comment

in iran, it is personal supremacism, but with a peculiar godology, stupid!!
and in u.s, it is also personal supremacism, but with a diff godology.
and no godology gladhands, let alone stands another differing godology.
american one being much stronger econo-militarily will in the end prevail
[unless a benevolent comet strikes us dead first]
talmudism or mosheism is also an ideology or an ism; however, it too
differs from u.s’ religious ism.
it’s end, in infinity of time, is an ergodic event [having zero chance of
surviving] will also evanesce.

but even human life on earth is going to end. it, too, is an ergodic event.
and that’s very good news!!

now a word from santa. this year, after i begged him for decades, santa will
for the first time ever visit every tent, lean-to, shanty town, shed, doorway,
refugee camp, back alley, bench, etc.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 14, 2011 at 8:52 am Link to this comment

Your schadenfreude, Foucauldian, Dec. 13 5:27pm, a delight taken
in the suffering of others, is well-noted.  I’ve no fear in confronting
you directly or your acerbic demeanor. 

I don’t recall requiring repayment for any kindness given. Your being
utterly pissed is going without any coherent details, however. So be it.

I’ve no hard feelings, only condolence for your position that has no
substantial history except violence and rage and an intellectualism
that has been rather sterile. 

Anarchism might be useful to awaken a sleeping consciousness, but it
takes wisdom to know when to put the rage away and translate it into
serviceable advantage.  The energy of ferocious anarchists is really in the
whole scheme of things momentary and it potency has to be channeled
into observable benefit or the people lose interest and often turn against
the uncontrollable mob.  This is why OWS, if they are to beguile the 307
million Americans to sympathize with their cause, which in turn is
representative of the people’s cause, will need to recalibrate and recast
itself towards effecting the real changes that were the original reason for
its existence.

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 14, 2011 at 6:50 am Link to this comment

@Manni

“I want to make it clear that, while scuffles with the police may be what is
bringing support numbers down for the Occupy movement, that was not what I
was talking about - though if what you were suggesting is that it is the
PERCEPTION that OM members are INCITING such incidents, rather than the
reality that most (though certainly not all) such incidents have been provoked by
law enforcement, that has brought their support numbers down, then I agree
with you on that point.”

Its not a point I made and the excerpt from the link isn’t stating that people
blame OWS for the clashes with police as it doesn’t point out why general
support is down but only that it has fallen since the continuous clashes with
police.  I believe there is less support simply because there is no clear message
to galvanize the nation and nothing pointing out towards how the movement
intends to change the status quo other than public protests that some are
beginning to find destructive. Shutting down a port without the support of ILWU
is counterproductive since the shut down costs Goldman nothing but interferes
with the livelihood of working class people.  I mean I’m just saying.

Report this

By louiss123, December 14, 2011 at 5:49 am Link to this comment

Jeez, the arrogance of some of you. What you are witnessing is the death of
OWS. When they target(indirectly)truck drivers and longshormen, they lose all
credibility.
Actually keeping people from making money before christmas time? Really? 
You know more than these illiterate truck drivers huh? Because you are an
intellectual? because you have read Che’s life story, huh? Because you know the
real deal whats going on? Childish crap.
OWS should plop themselves down in front of the attorney generals office and
demand he bust the big banking heads(60 minutes will but OWS wont?).
If this is an anti-capitalist deal then you are finished.
If ANY OWS person votes for Obama, then you are just wasting valuable time.
If you won’t vote for Ron Paul, the only candidate who would be against “crony”
capitalism, then you are operating out of fear and emotion.
Robert Sheer is rational, why aren’t you?

Report this

By ardee, December 14, 2011 at 3:47 am Link to this comment

Foucauldian, December 13 at 4:43 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller,

Nothing wrong with your browser, just that the
hyperlink didn’t post in full.  Still don’t know how to work with tiny urls.  I asked, but no one offered help.

Thought I had previously.

Simply log into tinyurl.com and the steps are simplicity itself.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 8:38 pm Link to this comment

I agree with you in spirit, my man.  I’ll respond
more fully tomorrow.  Watching some movies and got to
recharge. 

Hope you understand.

Report this

By Maani, December 13, 2011 at 8:34 pm Link to this comment

She:

Well, hello there.  It seems we disagree on the smaller point, but agree on the larger: legislation is what matters, and it takes “good” elected official (is there such a thing?  LOL) to do that, so yes: it all comes down to who we vote for.  This also speaks to the red herring issue of a third party: what makes anyone think that the actual candidates in that third party will be any “better” than anyone else?  I’m not saying they might not, but there is certainly no guarantee.

redteddy:

While I thank you for your support of my statement, I want to make it clear that, while scuffles with the police may be what is bringing support numbers down for the Occupy movement, that was not what I was talking about - though if what you were suggesting is that it is the PERCEPTION that OM members are INCITING such incidents, rather than the reality that most (though certainly not all) such incidents have been provoked by law enforcement, that has brought their support numbers down, then I agree with you on that point.

Peace.

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 8:32 pm Link to this comment

@Foucauldian

You asked, I’m not certain, though, what you mean by news being ?“not
positive.”  Where do
you stand?

Well I believe in OWS and I was hoping that they would really be able to
galvanize the hard working suffering people in this nation to force much
needed political change but that won’t happen if its perceived as either aimless
or destructive.  You
say that the labor movement was never cutting edge (perhaps with the
exception of the Wobblies) and this is true but neither are the majority of
Americans (the
99%).  OWS has not only to appeal to the masses the way it had in the beginning
but it also has to foster active participation, in order to do that there needs to
be
more of a specific political aim other than pissing off working people.  The
labor movement is important to the long term success of OWS. There are still
too many people who, even if they understand what OWS is fighting against do
not know what OWS is advocating.  Even OWS doesn’t really know what it is
advocating.  There are too many working groups fighting for everything from
election finance reform to saving the environment, there is even a pro smokers
caucus.  My point is that there isn’t that laser focus needed around ONE issue,
one doable achievable goal that the entire country can galvanize itself around.

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 8:28 pm Link to this comment

@Foucauldian

You asked, I’m not certain, though, what you mean by news being ?“not positive.”  Where do
you stand?

Well I believe in OWS and I was hoping that they would really be able to galvanize the hard working suffering people in this nation to force much needed political change but that won’t happen if its perceived as either aimless or destructive.  You
say the labor movement was never cutting edge (perhaps with the exception of the Wobblies) and this is true but neither are the majority of Americans (the
99%).  OWS has not only to appeal to the masses the way it had in the beginning but it also has to foster active participation, in order to do that there needs to be
more of a specific political aim other than pissing off working people.  The labor movement is important to the long term success of OWS. There are still too many people who, even if they understand what OWS is fighting against do not know what OWS is advocating.  Even OWS doesn’t really know what it is advocating.  There are too many working groups fighting for everything from election finance reform to saving the environment, there is even a pro smokers caucus.  My point is that there isn’t that laser focus needed around ONE issue, one doable achievable goal that the entire country can galvanize itself around.

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 8:27 pm Link to this comment

@Foucauldian

You asked, I’m not certain, though, what you mean by news being ?“not positive.”  Where do
you stand?

Well I believe in OWS and I was hoping that they would really be able to galvanize the hard working suffering people in this nation to force much needed political change but that won’t happen if its perceived as either aimless or destructive.  You
say that the labor movement was never cutting edge (perhaps with the exception of the Wobblies) and this is true but neither are the majority of Americans (the
99%).  OWS has not only to appeal to the masses the way it had in the beginning but it also has to foster active participation, in order to do that there needs to be
more of a specific political aim other than pissing off working people.  The labor movement is important to the long term success of OWS. There are still too many people who, even if they understand what OWS is fighting against do not know what OWS is advocating.  Even OWS doesn’t really know what it is advocating.  There are too many working groups fighting for everything from election finance reform to saving the environment, there is even a pro smokers caucus.  My point is that there isn’t that laser focus needed around ONE issue, one doable achievable goal that the entire country can galvanize itself around.

Report this

By do over, December 13, 2011 at 8:24 pm Link to this comment

It’s the banks stupid !  People understand confronting the big banks directly.  They do not understand confronting a secondary bank owned port.  If you want to broaden the base of supporters, stick with creative ways of confronting the banks directly.  Banks are the villians and our oppressors.  Domestic and foreign policy are made by the banks, not politicians.  Stay away from political parties and go after the big banks until they are cut down to size.

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 7:51 pm Link to this comment

@Maani who wrote: The Occupy movement will not endear itself to a wider
swath of the 99% - and may in fact turn them off - if they are PERCEIVED (reality
or not) as causing “harm.”


And you’re right.  From a link of another poster, a poll taken in November:

“The poll, released today, show 30 percent of voters surveyed view the
movement favorably, 39 percent unfavorably, with an additional 30 percent not
hearing enough to have an opinion.  It’s one of the first national polls to
suggest voters are growing skeptical of Occupy Wall Street- and it comes as
police have clashed with protesters in several cities.  Previous national polls
have shown a plurality of adults supporting the movement…The poll found that
Occupy Wall Street’s negatives aren’t quite as high as the Tea Party’s
unfavorables, but aren’t far off. Just 31 percent of voters view the Tea Party
favorably, 45 percent unfavorably, and 24 percent haven’t heard enough.

http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2011/11/poll-voters-viewing-occupy-
wal.php


Not a good sign at all.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 7:47 pm Link to this comment

Well, now I see where you stand.  And my answer is—
sure it’s not good for OWS, but we can’t be appeasing
the fat cats.

Screw the fat cats!  Ultimately, they’re against the
people.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 7:43 pm Link to this comment

According to script, redteddy.  The labor movement in
the US was never on the cutting edge, always
kowtowing, better working conditions and higher pay
were the only things on the agenda.  Nothing
revolutionary about that.  In fact, it had sold out
from the start, but an alternative, the industrial
alternative to slavery.

I’m not certain, though, what you mean by news being
“not positive.”  Where do you stand?

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 7:37 pm Link to this comment

@IMax who wrote:

“The Port of Los Angeles is the nation’s busiest shipper of containers. Long Beach
is second, and Oakland is fifth. Yesterday’s coordinated attempt to shut down
trade throughout the United States has made clear that Occupy Wall Street is
prepared to cripple the U.S. economy to prove a point.”

They didn’t even remotely come close to crippling the economy, they shut down
the port for the morning shift only which meant delays. It would take more than
that to cripple the economy.  The fact that they did this even though the Unions
asked them not to is a bad show in my view.  It means they are no longer working
hand in hand with the 99%. Union participation can only strengthen Occupy and to
risk losing that support will only hurt the movement in the long run.

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 7:26 pm Link to this comment

Here is what the ILWU had to say about the shut down and it wasn’t positive:

“The West Coast ports will be blockaded on December 12th in solidarity with
longshoremen and port truckers struggles against EGT and Goldman Sachs,”
the west coast port shutdown website says.

The action has caused controversy, with the ILWU publicly disowning the
protest last week – communications director Craig Merrilees telling the
Guardian that the union was “not supporting that at all”.

“[Occupy organisers] have been very disrespectful of the democratic decision-
making process in the union and deliberately went around that process to call
their own action without consulting workers,” Merrilees said.

It’s the second time they’ve done it. The first time they had very little support
from workers in their so-called general strike [the Occupy Oakland action on 2
November].

“This is being promoted by a group of people who apparently think they can
call general strikes and workplace shutdowns without talking to workers and
without involving the unions.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2011/dec/12/occupy-west-coast-
ports-shut-down

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 7:14 pm Link to this comment

IMax,

The people are already in harms way regardless of my
wishes.  I don’t regard it as a matter of anything I
desire, only as a consequent of the march of history,

Report this
redteddy's avatar

By redteddy, December 13, 2011 at 7:04 pm Link to this comment

Goldman Sachs nor the port loses any money from this, the workers may be hurt
but not the company.  GS has insurance for ‘loss of productivity’ which covers any
monetary losses.

Here is a short news piece from PBS on how GS makes its money:
http://www.financedocumentaries.com/2011/06/how-does-goldman-sachs-
make-its-profits.html

They are a trading house primarily dealing in hedge funds. The port shut down
isn’t going to cost GS anything more than the nickel you dropped on the floor…if
that.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 13, 2011 at 6:41 pm Link to this comment

Foucauldian, - “I’m not recommending a return to the Dark Ages…”

-

Yet you seem eager to risk near Dark Age conditions, likely to effect billions of people, for the chance at this ‘fresh start’ that very few are clamoring for.

Make no mistake. What you wish to see will cause global suffering. Suffering the likes of which the world has not seen in thousands of years.

I remain unclear how you justify such risks with other people’s lives.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 6:27 pm Link to this comment

Thanks, Shenon.

And please forgive the acerbic tone.  You started it,
remember? 

But I’m not exactly repaying your kindness, though
for a time I was utterly pissed.  On second thought,
however, I’ve come to the conclusion that the
confrontational approach will serve us best.

No hard feelings, of that I can assure you.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 6:19 pm Link to this comment

Foucauldian, Dec. 13 4:43 pm for your Democracy Now Link:
http://tinyurl.com/7qk7rst

FYI in the future:  Visit http://tinyurl.com/ Follow instructions.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 6:01 pm Link to this comment

...  rebuilt…

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 5:58 pm Link to this comment

Retrenchment simply means nation-states going their
separate ways, breaking free of the financial
stronghold that is being exerted at present by the
banking system on their sovereignty.  An artificial
stronghold, I hasten to add, funny money.
b
Let the nation-states rebuild on their own, I say,
and recapture self-sufficiency.  The international
trade and commerce aspect will follow later,
rebuild on a more solid foundation.

I’m not recommending a return to the Dark Ages,
only a fresh start.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 13, 2011 at 5:48 pm Link to this comment

Foucauldian, - “Global economy, IMax, is a proposition that’s not either to believe or not to believe.  It’s here.”

-

If you look again you’ll see that all I wrote falls within the context of a global economy.

What do you intend by “a degree of retrenchment”?

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 5:43 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller,

Nothing wrong with your browser, just that the
hyperlink didn’t post in full.  Still don’t know how
to work with tiny urls.  I asked, but no one offered
help.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 5:38 pm Link to this comment

Global economy, IMax, is a proposition that’s not
either to believe or not to believe.  It’s here.

Still, we may well see a degree of retrenchment,
especially if the Eurozone folds.  In fact, the odds
are rather good, and to tell the truth, I’m looking
forward to that eventuality.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 13, 2011 at 5:29 pm Link to this comment

Foucauldian,

We’ll disagree on the inevitability of a total system failure.

I believe, in a global economy, any complete collapse of the U.S. market will, literally, cause billions of people to suffer in ways that have not been seen in several thousand years.

There are those who believe this suffering is acceptable, there are those who are unaware of the inevitable pain and starvation upon such a collapse, and there are those who believe the suffering of billions of human beings is not worth this social experiment which only a small number of people wish for to begin with.

The Congress conceived of the laws which govern American corporate culture (which, it’s important to note, does not govern corporations anywhere else). The Congress can change with term limits, bans on ALL lobbying after holding state or federal office, limit elections to public financing (no more $billion dollar Wall St. funded campaigns), and if we can harness this energy to move more than 12-14% of adult Americans to actually enter a polling station every two years we all could display the strength and resolve to overturn ‘Citizens United’.

What I offer is not sexy, I know. But it is doable and very powerful. An added benefit is that we won’t cause people in Sudan and India to starve to death in order to accomplish things Portland, Oregon or Bangor, Maine.

Strengthen democracy. Occupy the U.S. Congress.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 13, 2011 at 5:17 pm Link to this comment

Foucauldian I am familiar with Rocky_Anderson and the Justice Party. His platform would be mine if I was running, even so I feel the third party thing is a vote for the GOP in any case right now, unless something dramatic happens and he or others gets more traction then the guy from Texas who ran many years ago and dropped out, (cannot remember his name) he took votes away from the GOP.

FYI: By the way I could not get your link to work, but just may be my lousy server?

steven, you may want to check out my link below it tells how abused the independent truckers have it and how they relate to the Occupy movement, but as most things it is not black and white, I happen to find Occupy’s movement very important in the grand scheme of things! Sure they may make some mistakes, as long as Occupy can learn from them unlike the GOP, who seems to be a walking a fornicating mistake and they are incapable of learning from mistakes because they have never made any in their knuckle dragging minds! (Not all Repulcians by the way just most)!

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 5:15 pm Link to this comment

I’d say it’s a greater crime, if not intellectual
sloppiness, to make distinction without difference
than to ignore them.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 5:04 pm Link to this comment

Yes, that is the trite complaint of those who cannot make
distinctions, or rather those who do not want to make
a clear separation for expedient purposes of their own. 

There is no argument that some Democrats do not adhere to
their liberal creed, and have been instrumental in the morass
in which our country finds itself, but that betrayal is not the
political intention of all Democrats.  Democrats are committed
to an egalitarian government of the people by the people.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 4:57 pm Link to this comment

A second party—because the existing two are one
and the same—was posited only as the best of the
worst scenario.  The fact they might bring havoc to
the electoral process is the least of my concerns. 
The electoral process hasn’t produced anything of
significance in the past thirty years, and it’s a
folly to suppose the situation would change.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 4:49 pm Link to this comment

The Occupiers do not plan to hang out indefinitely.  Nor do they
want to “close” the ports. Their ingress at the ports is temporary.
They are making a huge statement, giving a knock on the American
collective head to notice the injustices that are going on and that the
ports are one of the loci of trade that feeds the avaricious Corporate
Cannibal Monsters. 

Third parties in this country at critical moments are a chimera and
doomed to cause the worst kind of havoc of slushing elections.  It
is one thing for an electorate to flex their voting muscle but another
to drain the strength of a liberal government, and absolutely would
enable libertarians that would asphyxiate all social programs.  If an
authoritarian Republican Party government is wanted, then by all means
listen to the hucksters of third parties who would only siphon off votes
that would go to defeat the anti-democracy Republicans.  Even Bernie
Sanders sees the absolute folly in that course of action.  It is exactly what
Republicans want to see happen.  Third-party idolizers can find more
promise and success, if that indeed is what they want,  at grass roots
level, in local elections, and if they are seen there to work for the people
they can then ascend to higher orders of politics.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 4:29 pm Link to this comment

Steven,

to exert sufficient pressure.  Nothing will get
done without attaining the critical mass.

The second-party solution, the people or justice
party, is perhaps the best of bad alternatives, but
it’d surely be an improvement.  (See the subsequent
comment.)  But I have better ideas, which have to
do with rendering the entire political and economic
system obsolete by constructing an alternative one
which pays it no mind, by strategic withdrawal. 
It’s about to die of attrition in any case.

But you’ve already tipped your hand, sort of, when
you referenced today’s OWS protesters as perhaps
“occupying” their parents’ basement prior to now. 
If you didn’t mean in in a derogatory kind of way,
you should be careful about your use of words.

In any case, I have no problem with that, even if
the situation was as you describe.  It takes time
to take water to its boiling point No wine before
its time is another adage I can think of..

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 4:20 pm Link to this comment

Sorry… that comment was meant to say: 
What is expected needs to be spelled out, clearly. And that is precisely
what OWS has failed to do,
if we are indeed to use the momentum
of the Occupy Movement.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment

Hi Maani… Guess I have to disagree with you and the others.  I have
clearly agreed that OWS ought to occupy the government, but I take
issue more with the Republican partisans in government. 

The reality is as i said, it is not merely a perception or an appearance
of realtiy.  Some will disagree with Occupy that it interferes with their
lives, but others will see that Occupy represents something bigger
than individual lives.  It is a Movement on behalf of the entire
population who are not in the 1%.  Of course some of the 99% will
counter-protest that they do not want to be represented by The
Movement, and if in their mind they are not, then naturally they are
not.  The term 99% is a metaphor and needs to be understood as that
by the conscious ones in our society.  Those who are unconscious
cannot be helped except by default, along with the stream of all the
others. 

Indeed, as I have also been saying over and over and as Steven
Podvoll has now also articulated, and he seems to be the only one
who also understands, that to get anything changed, to do any tangible
good, no amount of hissy fitting or tantrums by our dear friends in the
Occupy Movement (and you just have to love them for their stamina if
nothing else, but more for their waking up America to the disease with
which the Republicans have infected this nation), or by those who moan
and groan but have not joined The Movement will have indelible
consequences.  Legislation is what is needed and to get legislation
passed you need Congressmen who have the balls to pass it. 

Now we know what kind of sourballs the Republicans have, but too many
Democrats in Congress have shrunken balls, which in effect are just as
bad.  But not all Democrats in Congress have the minimum of balls, and
we do have the hardballsy Bernie Sanders, but he and the few real
liberals are not enough. 

How to indoctrinate the public is the biggest problem we face since it is
only through their vote that Congress can be changed.  They have to
know that their lives are seriously at risk; that they must vote first of all
and second of all to learn what vote is in their real best interests not
what the anti-democracy and vitriolic tightwad Republicans want to ram
down their throats.  And to get them to vote, we must protect their right
to vote as much as it has ever needed protection.  This is a serious
assault on democracy that the Republicans have chronically launched.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 4:03 pm Link to this comment

To hold people accountable is the key, most certainly.  But to
actually hold them accountable takes more than just saying that
is what is needed. No nation can prosper without having the right
people in place doing the right things at the right time.  There are,
theoretically of course, logical steps that can be taken.  What is
expected needs to be spelled out, clearly.  And that is not precisely
what OWS has failed to do, if we are indeed to use the momentum
of the Occupy Movement.  Wall Street and all for what it is a metaphor,
must be informed what is expected before they can be held
accountable…for anything.

Then just because the corporate CEOs and financiers come to know
what is expected doesn’t mean they will do anything to fulfill those
expectations.  They need to be made to commit to doing them.  How
on earth do we do that?
  By taking away their means of increasing
their wealth.

For banks, it is going to credit unions or community bank instead of the
large behemoth corporate banks.  By cutting up credit cards, closing out
credit card accounts and paying them off as would be needed anyway. 
Paying cash and only for what is absolutely necessary will show a
surprising yield in a year.  Soon you will see that you have more cash
than you though without the excessive interests rates and if you can pay
off one credit card or loan with cheaper ones, do it!  It is possible.  There
are many ways to “get back” at the banks.  Yes it is reprisal, reprisal for
all the crap they have pulled.  These are consequences for their shitty
practices. 

They will not do anything on their own.  They must be made to be
responsible.  We are not going to get rid of the capitalist system at least
not in a short time.  Maybe over a longer time with more socialist minded
congressmen but do not fool yourself it will be an overnight epiphany.

There must be other ways that those who have given this a lot of thought
can suggest.  I wish you would!

These are some of the ways to make any institution be accountable that
I’ve heard of:
1.  Involve people who really have authority - Congress
2.  Be specific regarding end results and expected levels of effort –
      a reasonable timeframe
3.  Get a commitment! – from the CEOs or those in charge of the
      financial industry.
4.  Have it put in writing
5.  Emphasize the urgency and just how important it is for the health
      of the country.
6.  Publicize the industry’s commitment. – Use the media and The
      Movement of the People
7.  Agree on a plan for monitoring the industry.
8.  Monitor the industry. – Regularly check results

Know this, the Republicans do not like the democratic process.  They are
authoritarians and do not like the voting process that they know the
people voting in their own best interests would kick them out as fast as
they would any varmint.  And if they are skunks, like I think they are,
they have to be kicked just right without getting stinkypoo on yourself.

The Occupy strategy is now proven to be effective…to a point.  So it’s
tactics ought to be used wherever it is needed but more than occupation
is needed to cause change. 

But you who agree that the world of corporation and finance has taken
advantage of the American people long enough, must get out there and
do all they can to defeat those in Congress who would persist in keeping
their foot on our economic necks.

Report this

By Steven Podvoll, December 13, 2011 at 3:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Foucauldian: You wish to mobilize, but to accomplish what?  If you wish to
mobilize in order to win elections, you had better start thinking about what it
will take to persuade a *majority* of voters to your viewpoint.  If you wish to
mobilize in order to foment an insurrection… good luck with that.  Btw, where
were all these Occupy slacktivists when we really needed them to mobilize, e.g.,
during the 2010 mid-term elections?  I bet quite a number of them were too
busy occupying their parents’ basements, playing video games.

Leefeller: Closing our ports won’t make much of a dent in the trust funds of the
1%, but it sure as hell can affect the lives of millions of American workers,
about 1,000 of my own colleagues among them, thank you very much.

I’m all in favor of civil disobedience.  I think it’s far more effective when the
participants give equal emphasis to the civil aspect as they do the disobedience
aspect.  Take Rosa Parks and her comrades, for example:  Rosa Parks was an
employee of the NAACP; hence, her protest wasn’t some arbitrary, unfocused,
and ad-hoc lark; the tactics she chose were *highly* specific to the injustice she
was protesting and Ms. Parks made no attempt whatsoever to evade arrest,
which btw gave her cause all the more power.

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 3:41 pm Link to this comment

In any case, the following looks like a far better
solution than feeding into the corrupt, two party
machinery:

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/12/13/ex_salt_lake_m
ayor_rocky_anderson

Report this

By Foucauldian, December 13, 2011 at 3:11 pm Link to this comment

“When they’re not trying to cause economic havoc,
they are busy draining the treasuries of state and
local governments.”

I don’t see any problem with that strategy, IMax. 
It’s funny money in any case.  Why not force the
hand of a defunct and bent on self-destruction
economic system rather than wait before it does us
all in?

We’re still a two- or three-tier society, the one-
percenters, those who slave to make a living, and
those who are quickly coming to a realization that
none of it makes any sense.  So no, I have no
sympathy for an exploited truck driver who stands
to lose three hundred some bucks during the X-mas
season, for when push comes to shove, he or she
will stand in the way of any meaningful change
until their own butts are on the line ... not until
then.  So yes, IMax, I contend things will have to
get worse, much worse, before we can expect
meaningful results.  In a word, we haven’t reached
the rock bottom yet.  But rest assured, it’s gonna
happen with OWS’s help or without.

In any case, as I have already expressed this on
another thread, it’s more important to mobilize the
support of African-Americans and our poor who, for
the most part, are still on the sidelines.

Screw the American fat cat, or whoever imagines
himself a fat cat.  And the sooner the better.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 13, 2011 at 2:54 pm Link to this comment

Who is whining now Imax, apparently you are very skilled at it!

Clueless or sincerity poring from those crocodile tears of concern,  I have my suppositions Imax, your little Tea Bag comment on another thread has shown your concern for what it really is! I surmise you are a three dollar bill!

Get the money out, would be a good start, closing the ports would not have been my first choice, but I have no say in our government nor Occupy, so they both do what they feel will help their cause.

Now with this indefinite detention by the military of American Citizens we now can say the real terrorists have won even as they have become crab food!

Report this

By Josh Kinney, December 13, 2011 at 2:25 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Occupy movement is bringing up a fascinating
conversation that shouldn’t be ignored.  Check out my
blog posts:

http://thejkinz.com/2011/12/the-beginning-is-near/

http://thejkinz.com/2011/12/crumbling-pillar-democracy/

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 13, 2011 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment

The Port of Los Angeles is the nation’s busiest shipper of containers. Long Beach is second, and Oakland is fifth. Yesterday’s coordinated attempt to shut down trade throughout the United States has made clear that Occupy Wall Street is prepared to cripple the U.S. economy to prove a point. A point which, unfortunately, the protesters, as a whole, cannot yet articulate.

When they’re not trying to cause economic havoc, they are busy draining the treasuries of state and local governments. It’s been reported that Occupy DC has cost families and laborers of the metropolitan DC area $1.3 million so far. Across the country, Occupy encampments have cost city agencies at least $22 million, and that number will surely rise.

Local government budgets are already tight. So are the family budgets of middle-class Americans who depend on our nation’s business and commerce. Perhaps the Occupiers can afford the luxury of setting aside productive activity for weeks and months to create new burdens for the rest of us, but the real 99 percent cannot.

Occupy your local School Boards, City Councils, County Seats and your State Houses. Occupy the places laws are conceived.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 13, 2011 at 1:25 pm Link to this comment

Manni, You may be correct in your premise, but check this out, like everything it is not black and white!

Comments from truck drivers themselves!

http://cleanandsafeports.org/blog/2011/12/12/an-open-letter-from-america’s-port-truck-drivers-on-occupy-the-ports/

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, December 13, 2011 at 12:04 pm Link to this comment

bpawk, accountability of the politicians is to money sponsered from the hugest bidder, it seems naive or disingenuous to say politicians are accountable to the people?  Republicans in particular is not totality are accountable to money and the Democrats to a lesser amount. We the people need to be on top of politicians and who they get paid by and represent. Take the speaker of the house, he is like a whore for the corporate elite, he may even be an elite, I have no idea of his net worth, but with the insider investing crap which goes on in Congress it is most likely he is not one of the 99 percent in any shape for form.

If one listens to the right wing knuckle draggers here, Occupy is kaput, it is history, it now is not as popular as the Tea Baggers, yes this must be true because it has been stated so from where the sun don’t shine!

It seems to me if we got the money out of politics, got rid of the absurd idea corporations are people and money is speech, just maybe Godman Slacks would not have unprecedented power calling the shots! Occupy is about the lack of fairness and inequality!

As for closing the ports, it seems Occupy is still alive and kicking?  Geez… this means the tea bags are the has bean bags!  One thing about closing the ports they got everyone’s attention and the concept of the 99 percent vs the 1 percent is still in the medias faces. I understand the hardship for some people closing of the ports caused, but the way the politicians are going, the people with jobs now may not have them tomorrow. This sort of reminds me of the analogy;  ‘they came and took my neighbor’,... ‘then they came and took the guy across the street’,....‘next they may come for me’! Most people have a tendency to wake up after the fact! Occupy is just waking them up, even by pissing them off!

Actually I do not know what the hell Tea Bags are doing, maybe they will make a res erection, I have a vision of a tea bag sucking on a Koch/Fox Teat and this may have something to do with the idea money is speech and corporations are people?

Report this

By Maani, December 13, 2011 at 11:46 am Link to this comment

She:

Re your comment about “victims” and “victims,” I must disagree, and agree with comments made by Steven and IMax.

You of all people recognize the difference between reality and perception.  It may well be that shutting down the ports for a day will not adversely affect the “99%” involved as employees at those ports except as a one-day annoyance.  But if they perceive the Occupy movement as interfering with their daily lives, then they are less likely to support the movement - EVEN IF that makes no “logical” sense vis-a-vis the bigger picture.

The Occupy movement will not endear itself to a wider swath of the 99% - and may in fact turn them off - if they are PERCEIVED (reality or not) as causing “harm.”

Peace.

Report this

By Steven Podvoll, December 13, 2011 at 11:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

As for various iniquities, unemployment and poverty are certainly too high and
scoundrels are indeed helping to exacerbate income inequality. However, the
severity of our problems *here* and *now* doesn’t warrant trespass. This isn’t
Dickens’ or Sinclair’s 19th century, much less Paine’s or Voltaire’s 18th. The 99%
here would be the envy of hundreds of millions in various parts of Africa, Asia,
and the Indian subcontinent. Adults are supposed to have a sense of
proportion. I don’t think overstated rhetoric much less fear-mongering, from
the left or the right, contributes constructively to rational dialogue or to the
body politic. However, it seems those who want to take our country back,
whether to the Gilded Age or to the Summer of Love, don’t want to be
encumbered by facts. On the other hand, I do suspect that the great, silent
majority, whether politically informed or not, will eventually come around to
comparing extraordinary claims with their own, anecdotal experiences and (in
this case correctly) deem the incongruities as products of either excess
credulity or outright misrepresentation. And unless one proposes Jacobin
solutions, we need *political* action to halt the regressionist, laissez-faire
trajectory *we* provoked as an unintended consequence of “Woodstock Nation”.
Most reasonable adults would support prudent and pragmatic means of
addressing these issues, and disproportionate recklessness will likely dim
prospects for success. http://decoded.nationaljournal.com/2011/11/poll-
voters-viewing-occupy-wal.php


Btw, I’ve frequently had the opportunity to quote the eminent 1st Amendment
scholar Zechariah Chafee during the OWS kerfuffle; “your right to swing your
arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins.” I would have difficulty
sympathizing with the *perpetrators* if this were occurring across the street
from my workplace or my bedroom window. I would certainly want my
government and police agencies to enforce permit laws.  Those who would deny
the owners *their* rights are effectively advocating for the elimination of private
property.

I do hope all of this works out better than the 1968 DNC in Chicago, but I won’t
hold my breath so long as I see stories like these:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67314.html
These folk apparently have so much respect for the democratic process that
they tentatively plan to disrupt it. I suspect people like this actually covet the
1%, because they certainly don’t give a damn whether a bona fide majority gets
to have a say. I’m sure that will play well on prime-time, too. In any case, *this*
is how the movement started. I would also point out the the 2010 mid-terms
proved that representative democracy works: those who bothered to vote are
now represented, much to my chagrin. Maybe these people involved in the
Occupy movement should have gotten off of their asses at election time.
Finally, to quote John Avlon from the Daily Beast, “It’s not insensitive to say that
comparing the U.S.A. to dictatorships while banging away in a drum circle isn’t
the best way to get taken seriously.” I add to Mr. Avlon’s observation that
wearing silly masks that were initially devised as a marketing tool for an “evil
corporation” probably won’t get you taken seriously, either.

Report this

By Steven Podvoll, December 13, 2011 at 11:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

While we wax nostalgically re. the anti-war protests, let’s remind ourselves of
the actual history:  the protests helped elect Dick Nixon who continued the war
in Vietnam another 6 years and expanded it to Cambodia, as well.  Strategery.

Effecting real change requires either passing legislation or armed insurrection. 
Passing legislation requires winning elections.  Winning elections requires
building consensus between partisans *and* moderates.  Like the Tea Party
before it, but at an even faster pace, the OWS is losing credibility with
moderates. This is partly due to bad press, admittedly, but it’s also due to
comportment within the movement that doesn’t merit credibility.  I can point to
precedents. We shouldn’t expect to elicit markedly different results from tactics
we already tried, as I previously cited, circa 1968. And now that the movement
has adopted as one of their symbols, silly masks from a bad movie made by an
“evil corporation”, I now give them *less* credibility and less credit for cognitive
abilities than I did those who wore flowers and love beads.

And, if by some remote fluke the Occupy movement succeeds in spite of itself, I
suspect the leadership that emerges would more closely resemble Robespierre
than George Washington.

We really need to hold on the the Senate and retake the House.  We need people
who can win elections, not just talking points.  Otherwise we will sink deeper
into Kakistocracy.  Winning elections entails appealing to a majority.  Speaking
solely to the echo chamber won’t cut it.  And the Occupy movement IMO has
the potential to threaten otherwise very credible and desirable candidates. 
Those who fail to embrace the Occupy movement risk alienating the base. 
Those who do embrace the Occupy movement risk wider public perception of
guilt by association; association with people who enable and even facilitate
public comportment which proves them unfit to govern.  The Occupy movement
and guys like Alan “Taliban Dan” Grayson are a godsend to a GOP facing their
own dysfunction and disarray.

We need the general voting public to view Liberals as reasonable adults. 
Reasonable adults are fit to govern.  Reasonable adults don’t throw tantrums. 
They put their noses to the grindstone and do the hard work.

By the way, if the *only* goal is to hold people accountable rather than actually
solve problems, let the reign of terror begin as there’s *plenty* of blame to go
around. The banks and Wall St. traders were certainly complicit. Government
was complicit vis-à-vis not only the gradual repeal of Glass-Steagall, but also
the *well-intentioned* but ill-advised encouragement of inadequately
capitalized mortgages via the Community Reinvestment Act, etc. whereby sub-
prime lending became preferred public policy. Such public policy of
proliferating home ownership for it’s own sake undoubtedly contributed greatly
to the bubble. Finally, borrowers were also complicit, buying more house than
they could afford and then borrowing against their equity to purchase big-
screen TVs. Partisan oversimplifications are unlikely to engender anything more
constructive than tit-for-tat squabbles *at best*.

Report this

By felicity, December 13, 2011 at 10:42 am Link to this comment

I agree with Imax and bpawk.  During the Nam War, we
took our bodies and signs right to the fence
‘guarding’ the Oval Office - right in Nixon’s face
(or at least as close as we could get to it.) 

Face it, in a capitalist system capital must be
accrued as close to the poison line as possible. 
There must be access to the cheapest labor possible,
to the cheapest natural resources (even in foreign
countries) as possible, and access to a ‘government’
that can be bought in order to make it all possible.
Rein in the government and you rein in the
capitalist.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 10:40 am Link to this comment

Oh, I think Goldman-Sachs are also accountable.  A nurturing
marriage between financial institutions and the government has
existed for a very long time.  And while Democrats have a share
in the guilt, it is obvious that Republicans are the grotesquely
immoveable expanding Gorilla Glue holding the wedded union
together.  If more Democrats are elected to Congress, ones who
genuinely represent the people, not double-dealing self-enriching
chiselers, then government could change for all practical purposes
overnight.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 13, 2011 at 10:16 am Link to this comment

bpawk, December 13 at 8:21 am

Yes, yes, and YES!

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 10:10 am Link to this comment

bpawk, Dec.r 13 8:21 am - You are exactly right!  Go to the source. 
It could be stupendous.  Can the Occupiers can get Washington to
move on the corruption?  Could we make some bets on it?  I’d take
a very hedgy, (laugh laugh) sit on the fence one, but one I hope
I would lose.  Isn’t that worth a belly laugh? 

I think local Occupy-minded need to take it to their Congressional
representatives, House and Senate alike as well as making a big event
out of showing up in Washington offices.  No?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 9:57 am Link to this comment

oddsox - Getting my initial information from here  The stats are even
better for the Occupiers from a survey done by Professor Hector R.
Cordero-Guzman and business analyst Harrison Schultz from the
Baruch College School of Public Affair who puts the unemployment
rate of the Occupy protesters at 13.1%. In other words, about an 85%
employment rate.  More similar data here  And here  are more stats.  Also
survey results for the Occupy Wall Street based on 198 face-to-face
interviews conducted in Zuccotti Park on October 10th and 11th.. here

If interested, a pdf document can be downloaded if google Occupy Wall
Street Survey Topline Douglas E. Schoen, LLC
.

In contrast, a 2010 New York Times CBS News poll found that only 56%
of members of the Tea party were employed (question 105).  The
NYT/CBS poll found 32% of the Tea Party members surveyed were retired
in contrast to Occupiers who tend to be younger and have “occupations,”
i.e., jobs.  However, the Tea Party wasn’t really nationwide popular. It
only looked as if it was due to the news media dwelling on the
phenomenon, and when looking at a narrow slice of the conservative-
minded over the age of 50 it then appeared to be more popular than it
really was.

Imax - There will always be those who can’t see the “bigger picture.” 
Those who, and not necessarily unreasonably, out of fear need to see the
ramifications of the present moment if their families will be affected.  But
there are victims and there are victims. 

Those who will be hurt for the short time of an Occupy event are
“casualties of war,”  but are momentarily collateral damaged.  The
Occupiers are after long-term effects, after those who have hurt the
American populous for decades and promise to continue to swipe a
decent life from them, or if that isn’t a good enough reason, then an
equitable life.  Those corporatocrats are feeling these effects and are
caterwauling so that they may sustain their practices of skinning the
economic hides off ordinary Americans.

The disproportion of the wealth between the 1% and the rest of the
nation is unconscionable and criminal.  Not that making money is bad or
a crime, but not investing in the health of the nation which means the
physical… and mental… health of the population, including sufficient
and adequate education to be able to make “informed” choices and
decisions about life-affecting actions, investing in the nation’s
infrastructure that the rich certainly make use of, and making affordable
housing a possibility without selling one’s soul to destitution is.

I guess policemen, firemen, and teachers will just have to learn to do less
for the less retirement remuneration they can expect.

Report this

By bpawk, December 13, 2011 at 9:21 am Link to this comment

How come nobody is occupying the halls of power i.e. the government in Washington?  The laws are skewed in favour of the rich like Goldman Sachs so go to the enablers - the lawmakers - after all it’s only the government that is accountable to the taxpayer, not goldman sachs et al.

Report this

By GW=MCHammered, December 13, 2011 at 8:59 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

30 Major U.S. Corporations Paid More to Lobby Congress Than Income Taxes, 2008-2010

-29 Major Corporations Paid No Federal Taxes, 2008-2010

-Companies’ Laying Off Workers While Receiving Tax Rebates, Raising Executive Pay

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/264481/20111209/30-major-u-s-corporations-paid-lobby.htm

GO OCCUPY!

Report this
oddsox's avatar

By oddsox, December 13, 2011 at 8:58 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, you write:
“70% of Occupy protesters are employed, compared to 56% of Tea Partiers.  Most of them have families.”

Help me, I’m conflicted: I’ve never known you to just make stuff up, but that stat just doesn’t sound right. 
(Maybe if a huge number of Tea Partiers are retired, perhaps??)
Got a source?

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, December 13, 2011 at 8:10 am Link to this comment

Reportedly Occupy protesters tried to shut down 11 West Coast ports from San Diego to Anchorage in an attempt to “disrupt the profits of the one percent.” According to the Occupiers, our nation’s ports have “become economic engines for the elite” that allow “the 1 percent” to “rip the shirts off the backs of the 99 percent who turn their profits.”

The people who run the Port of Oakland see it differently. They purchased ads in local newspapers on Sunday explaining, “Shutting down the Port of Oakland is a bad idea. Another shutdown will only make things worse—diverting cargo, tax revenue and jobs to other communities. It will hurt working people and harm our community.”

The working people who depend on the Port of Oakland for their livelihoods didn’t want to see the ports shut down either. “I will lose about $350, and at holiday time that hurts,” truck driver Hai Ngo told The San Francisco Chronicle. “It’s just a waste of our time and money, and won’t accomplish anything.”

The Occupiers claim that the target of Monday’s port shutdown is just one firm: SSA Marine, a shipping company owned in part by Goldman Sachs. But a port shutdown is a crude tool that affects all commerce from coast to coast, not just businesses associated with Wall Street.

According to Richard Trumka public service employee pension funds expect to invest $10 billion over the next five years in infrastructure projects. Those pension (retirement) funds fully expect to turn a profit from the fees, taxes, tolls and economic growth such investments produce. $1.2 billion of the allocated pension fund resources has been put into port operations.

I guess policeman, fireman, and teachers will have to learn to do with less upon retirement.

Report this

By Steven Podvoll, December 13, 2011 at 7:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why not?!  Because Goldman Sachs is not the sole customer of these ports.  Like it
or not, many thousands, perhaps millions of working class citizens depend upon
the uninterrupted operation of our ports. 

Why are we so intent on re-engaging the circular firing squad which already cost
us a critical and very close election in 1968?  Is it ADHD or simply the puerile
populism of Peter Pan wannabes?

Report this

By akaKen, December 13, 2011 at 7:28 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This music video shows a multitude of peaceful protesters. I thank you all.

#Occupy (Exodus) http://youtu.be/GAz4ymPrkBk

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 13, 2011 at 6:34 am Link to this comment

70% of Occupy protesters are employed, compared to 56% of Tea
Partiers.  Most of them have families.

Guns too easily kill people in the hands of deranged people.  The
fact that two “apparently” Occupiers were “found in camouflage
clothing with a gun, sword and walkie-talkies who said they were
doing reconnaissance,” are no different from the many Tea Partiers
who carried weapons to the town meetings that was visually
reported all over the news.  No police removed these folks.  What
is going on?  Money is what. 

The Occupiers are definitely focused.  Their focus happens to be on
the greedy corporate and financial world.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.