Young Writers Society

I'm indifferent to it. I mean, good for them for doing something to raise awareness, but ehhh... I mean, I don't see the huge problem. No matter how much money people have, we all end up dead. What's the huge deal. You don't need a ton of money to be happy, work with what you've got. I hope I don't sound like an idiot, I'm not overly familiar with OWS, but I think that same thing I said would apply.

You obviously don't know anyone who has been evicted from their home because they were laid off or because their kid got sick. You obviously don't work, or try to get work. You obviously don't have debt from school. And it's not merely about money. It's about power... democracy.

Lumi wrote:Unless people stop camping out in city streets and propose solutions to the problem, then I don't think anyone supporting or taking part in OWS is really thinking critically.

I'm with Snoink. The people have a point, and I feel for them. I've been hunting a job for the past year in different venues while in and out of college, and there's nothing, even in the minimum wage pool. But you don't see me grabbing my buddies and protesting in Atlanta. So until one of these protests turns into "look at how we can fix this", they're pointless. Just giving a bigger venue to antagonize wealthy people and policemen.

I mean, really. I'm convinced at this point that the bulk of the jobless middle class will do anything to get a pair of devil horns drawn on Capitol Hill.

Anyway, it'd be interesting to see the demographic of college majors that's present in the OWS mobs. I doubt you'd find many engineering/biochem/pre-pharmacy folks in the lot. English majors, psych majors...things that America has no job market for. There's a context to be understood about society that I don't think a lot of ambitious folks get. And it's a huge fulcrum shift in the job market. Yeah, it sucks, but it doesn't have to suck if you have the right gear under your belt.

No one's camping in streets... and people have been proposing solutions. But I'll agree with you that perhaps Americans are too in love with liberal arts. But! You shouldn't have to be a chem major to pull in eight bucks an hour.


EDIT:

So until one of these protests turns into "look at how we can fix this", they're pointless. Just giving a bigger venue to antagonize wealthy people and policemen.

Read my posts, they're not pointless. We should be antagonizing the 1% and the sell-out politicians. We should be keeping check on the pigs who disgrace their uniforms.

Kamas, you're better than this.

Called being a devil's advocate my friend, thanks for biting

What I think more specifically is the problem with OWS is: Their list of demands are so individual that coming to a consensus on a list of demands. The diversity and numbers of OWS is what makes it a strong movement, but there are different terms between each person. The vagueness of their policy is all that's keeping the masses together. They can't specify themselves past "change" and letting the government they aren't happy.

Until they come forth and present a pinpointed and articulate argument. And they organize themselves to clarify those protesting for stupid reasons, or who's concerns aren't legitimate - what they're here for. Of course then the issue arises that OWS is advocating against...?
Social inequality? Economic inequality? Unemployment? Corporate greed? Corporate corruption? The influence of corporations on government? Bringing down Fox News? (though I would support the latter)

Don't go back and say that to movement has direction, or ground. Any sort of decision on what they truly stand for it going to turn OWS into a horrifically socialist political party that will only be supported by public funding they've proposed an amendment for.

for reference:



Don't kid yourself, money is still the loudest thing out there, and fighting to settle these inequalities will be an even messier fight. (And having the wealthy pay their fair share won't cover the gap, having them pay more then their fair share is just destructive to the entire OWS ideology.)

Life's been rough these past few years. But first, OWS needs to 1. Think about what their demands are. 2. if they're realistic and will actually get done and not make a bigger mess.

Maybe when OWS figures out what they even want, I'd support them. At this point, all they're doing is being a nuisance.

Jas wrote:Maybe when OWS figures out what they even want, I'd support them. At this point, all they're doing is being a nuisance.

I'll quote myself to spare you from the act of reading the posts preceding yours:

I said it's not as prominent as what they disagree with. Of course they want things. End the wars, stop the austerity measures, etc.

There's already been legislation introduced thanks to them. Legislation to overturn the Citizens United ruling. It would even deny corporations personhood. Moreover, they have changed the national discussion. You can't be a defeatist. Things do change and can again.

To cast us off as nuisances is down right lazy.

Don't go back and say that to movement has direction, or ground. Any sort of decision on what they truly stand for it going to turn OWS into a horrifically socialist political party that will only be supported by public funding they've proposed an amendment for.

We already have a socialist nation. The wealth redistribution simply goes upwards. Could you explain why you're so scared of them forming anything practically political?

Like I said before, I think the only way they can really institute change is if they are the change. Call me naive, but would it be possible for the protesters to form an actual, structured political party with an agenda? It seems like they aren't going far enough with this; how about getting some large national organisation - the ACLU, the big unions - to fund a campaign? I understand that they want to be decentralized and leaderless, but it looks like it works against them in this instance.

tr3x wrote:Like I said before, I think the only way they can really institute change is if they are the change. Call me naive, but would it be possible for the protesters to form an actual, structured political party with an agenda? It seems like they aren't going far enough with this; how about getting some large national organisation - the ACLU, the big unions - to fund a campaign? I understand that they want to be decentralized and leaderless, but it looks like it works against them in this instance.

Well, I think we'll see something more like this come election season, assuming the movement survives that long. What is more likely to happen is politicians running on the platform of OWS, similar to the phenomenon of "Tea Party Candidates," who, despite their identity, were part of the GOP. I suspect that some of the liberals with spines (Elizabeth Warren), the true conservatives (Ron Paul?), and definitely the independents (Bernie Sanders for one), will be running in favor of OWS. The president? *rolls eyes* It's really just a matter of what candidates adopt the OWS platform for votes.

No Tr3x, considering unions are nearly dead. (The latest figure stands at 11.9%, of American workers) it seems silly to appeal to a dying breed.

And inkwell, don't vulgarize my words. I'm far from afraid of this movement, as I said it's hard to take it seriously with the movement put parallel to faces and words like these. Let them combine with the Tea Party and eat their cake and guillotine their Mary Antoinette.

OWS is going up against powerful and well-entrenched corporate interests, and turning themselves in something political in which they have to define their specific interests is going to divide OWS and stunt this "awareness raising" with a further mess and laughable presentations at the television. Turning into some political party would be a joke, it would demolish everything OWS has made concrete and only further my distaste for the movement.

OWS is going up against powerful and well-entrenched corporate interests, and turning themselves in something political in which they have to define their specific interests is going to divide OWS and stunt this "awareness raising" with a further mess and laughable presentations at the television. Turning into some political party would be a joke, it would demolish everything OWS has made concrete and only further my distaste for the movement.

What exactly has OWS made concrete? I watched the video you linked to, and I'm sure as hell that that isn't the ideology behind the movement. That man was quite obviously an idiot looking for a handout - the movement is about ending corporate influence of government. When you have people like that corrupting the image of OWS, it turns into a farce - that we seem to agree upon.
So isn't the only way to make legitimate demands and act for change through actual political power? Wouldn't an organized political party with an actual agenda be able to make it's demands much clearer? If you have smart, informed people who know what they're talking about leading such a movement, doesn't it become more than 'them dang hippies stirring up trouble?'

tr3x wrote:Like I said before, I think the only way they can really institute change is if they are the change. Call me naive, but would it be possible for the protesters to form an actual, structured political party with an agenda? It seems like they aren't going far enough with this; how about getting some large national organisation - the ACLU, the big unions - to fund a campaign? I understand that they want to be decentralized and leaderless, but it looks like it works against them in this instance.

They could, but then they would follow in the footsteps of the Tea Party movement, and that might be ineffective. The best movements are the ones that shake up all the political parties, not just centralize into one political party.

What exactly has OWS made concrete?

Very little. There are some stats out there that should raise concern, and it makes it hard for those legitimate concerns to be seen under people, like the one who I linked above, who are smothering the protest.

So isn't the only way to make legitimate demands and act for change through actual political power? Wouldn't an organized political party with an actual agenda be able to make it's demands much clearer? If you have smart, informed people who know what they're talking about leading such a movement, doesn't it become more than 'them dang hippies stirring up trouble?

Keep in mind OWS is spreading itself thin over just about anything. A political party needs specific interests and then it will either break up the movement, the numbers that gives it strength in the first place, or branch into a million little parties that are voiceless. It's going to self destruct, and though I'm completely indifferent to the future of this movement or whatever it is these days it's an even greater waste of time to have pointless lobbying from insignificant parties.

Kamas wrote:No Tr3x, considering unions are nearly dead. (The latest figure stands at 11.9%, of American workers) it seems silly to appeal to a dying breed.

And inkwell, don't vulgarize my words. I'm far from afraid of this movement, as I said it's hard to take it seriously with the movement put parallel to faces and words like these. Let them combine with the Tea Party and eat their cake and guillotine their Mary Antoinette.

Sorry, I got the impression that you're horrified.

Anyway: that video, as said before, is not representative, and just goes to show that there's nothing behind what you're saying. Guillotines for the corporations. They are people after all! :p

OWS is going up against powerful and well-entrenched corporate interests, and turning themselves in something political in which they have to define their specific interests is going to divide OWS and stunt this "awareness raising" with a further mess and laughable presentations at the television. Turning into some political party would be a joke, it would demolish everything OWS has made concrete and only further my distaste for the movement.

I agree with you for now, but somewhere down the line it will politicize directly or indirectly.

Do you think change is unnecessary or impossible?

tr3x wrote:Do you think change is unnecessary or impossible?

What change are you talking about?

Sorry, I got the impression that you're horrified.

Oo, sharp.

Anyway: that video, as said before, is not representative, and just goes to show that there's nothing behind what you're saying. Guillotines for the corporations. They are people after all! :p

It may not be representative of certain core beliefs, but many people like this guy are smothering the movement. Corrupting it with freeloader ideologies (slightly ironic I find). OWS is becoming a double faced movement, the one of varying legitimate loud concerns without much proposals for action (whether I care about those concerns in the first is another question), and one of people who don't know what they're saying, what they want, etc.

I agree with you for now, but somewhere down the line it will politicize directly or indirectly.

When it does, it'll make a mess out of OWS.

Kamas wrote:

Sorry, I got the impression that you're horrified.

Oo, sharp.

Anyway: that video, as said before, is not representative, and just goes to show that there's nothing behind what you're saying. Guillotines for the corporations. They are people after all! :p

It may not be representative of certain core beliefs, but many people like this guy are smothering the movement. Corrupting it with freeloader ideologies (slightly ironic I find). OWS is becoming a double faced movement, the one of varying legitimate loud concerns without much proposals for action (whether I care about those concerns in the first is another question), and one of people who don't know what they're saying, what they want, etc.

I agree with you for now, but somewhere down the line it will politicize directly or indirectly.

When it does, it'll make a mess out of OWS.

I'd beg to differ. Politicizing it will remove such people, advancing OWS' legitimacy. They're the price of having such an open and broad movement.