Look at What Happens to Peaceful Protesters in the States

[daiquiri]

Originally Posted by CatBuilder

I was taking Daquiri's post as a more general, folklore type post with George Washington being a metaphor for the uprising, rather than as a real person.

Exactly what I meant.

Originally Posted by troy2000

Now you're just being silly. George Washington never pitched a tent and blocked traffic as a political protest in his life...

As said above.

Originally Posted by CatBuilder

Look, I'm not arguing that the Occupy Wall Street movement is good. It's pretty dumb, if you ask me. The target (Wall Street) isn't the enemy of the people. The movement is not well guided and they obviously don't understand macroeconomic principles.

What they are is pissed off at is that there is no more opportunity in the USA, unless you're born into money, or willing to do illegal things or become a hooker. All this, while at the same time, there is a lot of wealth in the hands of a very few, with those few controlling the government. This is a valid systemic problem, IMO.

That's the heart of the problem. The principles and laws governing the world economy.

See, we can call this movement dumb and these people childish idealists, communists, anarchists, socialists, we can call them whatever you want. But the fact is - these persons don't identify themselves anymore with the economical and political society governed by current rules (or lack of rules), and are expressing their disapproval through sit-ins and more or less peaceful protests. They believed that they have a right to protest and express their disapproval, but it turns out that they actually don't.

They are simple persons who feel the social and economical injustice of the current system and want to see it changed for better. They are not qualified nor entitled to re-write the economical legislation - politicians and economists are. Their governments have a duty to listen to these people and to act in such a way to improve their lives and social conditions.

Pepper-spraying protesters is a wrong answer to these problems. Starting to work actively on a new economical framework is a correct action.

The rules can be changed, if you have ever been engaged in any sport you will surely be well-aware of this fact. There is nothing wrong in changing the rules of the game from time to time if the players, the spectators and the sport in general will benefit from more balanced and thrilling matches thanks to the new rules. It happens all the time in every sport.

[CatBuilder]

Dave: since you are against the first amendment, I would have to argue that you are anti-American. I have no political agenda. Democrats and Republicans are all sheep, especially the extremist ones. You, sir have the agenda.

Daquiri's most recent post is another example of why I've always found myself to identity more closely with people from Europe than from the USA. Notice his careful, independent thinking process that seeks truth. He doesn't enter the discussion with some preconceived notion then try to warp reality to fit his opinion. He looks at fact and reality, then arrives at a logical conclusion. The problem with many of my fellow Americans is they don't think. They just emote.

Also, see that his conclusion seeks a productive solution to the problem through understanding and reason.

"just spray those commies, they deserve it." does not further any helpful solution or improvement. This is where Americans, as a people have failed badly. There is no common goal of further improvement to the society (or roads, or bridges, or education, or health care, or business climate, etc). Before you jump in, please note I also favor smaller government. Many Americans have been indoctrinated into a pair of political ideologies and have lost the ability to think. That is crippling the country.

Great post, Daquiri. I agree 100%.

[hoytedow]

The Bill of Rights does not apply exclusively to protest movements.
Your right to swing your fist stops at my nose. Your right to interrupt the rights of non-protesting students to have access to the classes they paid for, or an employee to arrive in peace to his job is non-existent. Disturbing the peace, no matter how "peacefully" done is unlawful.
People don't want their lives disrupted by your juvenile antics.

[daiquiri]

Originally Posted by hoytedow

People don't want their lives disrupted by your juvenile antics.

You mean - you don't want.

I, for example, do recognize that those folks are doing something for me too, because I do think that this world has taken a wrong path and I do think that some action needs to be undertaken in order to change the state of things.
Yes, they are doing it in an uninformed and ill-organized way, childish if you want, but at least they are doing something. Raising their voices. In some countries it has led to turmoils and political changes (for better or for worse, we'll wait and see), in some other the system is much more robust and harder to change.

But many things will change in the years to come, you can bet on that. Once the people see that there's a movement going on, they will start asking themselves questions. Why is this happening? What do these folks want? Is it something that regards me too? What can I do, how do I contribute? That's how it goes, slowly and step by step. You personally can choose not to be part of it because it doesn't fit your view on the world, but you can't deny others a right to take the opposite decision.

Cheers

[bntii]

"A valid systemic problem"

"the heart of the problem- the principles and laws governing the world economy"

"Pepper-spraying protesters is a wrong answer to these problems. Starting to work actively on a new economical framework is a correct action."


Really?
Its broken and we would fix it if they would only let us speak...

The only systemic problem I see is the continued discomfort bred of a economic downturn.


"What they are is pissed off at is that there is no more opportunity in the USA, unless you're born into money, or willing to do illegal things or become a hooker."

This is the long term distribution of wealth in the US:



If this distribution is causing the "systemic problem" it has been here for a long time.

The current prospects for 'opportunity' has nothing to do with the "1%" problem.
Find another explanation.

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by daiquiri

You mean - you don't want.

I, for example, do recognize that those folks are doing something for me too, because I do think that this world has taken a wrong path and I do think that some action needs to be undertaken in order to change the state of things.
Yes, they are doing it in an uninformed and ill-organized way, childish if you want, but at least they are doing something. Raising their voices. In some countries it has led to turmoils and political changes (for better or for worse, we'll wait and see), in some other the system is much more robust and harder to change.

But many things will change in the years to come, you can bet on that. Once the people see that there's a movement going on, they will start asking themselves questions. Why is this happening? What do these folks want? Is it something that regards me too? What can I do, how do I contribute? That's how it goes, slowly and step by step. You personally can choose not to be part of it because it doesn't fit your view on the world, but you can't deny others a right to take the opposite decision.

Cheers

Ballots, not bullets.

These people voted and things did not go the way they wanted, so they throw a tantrum. Hard to feel empathetic.

[hoytedow]

Socialism just doesn't work no matter who runs it.

Eventually the money runs out and the lazy have to go back to work or starve. Software doesn't carry lumber or lay foundations or put roofs on houses. Software doesn't grease bearings or change oil. Software doesn't pick lettuce. Stop blaming technology for people not wanting to work.

[CatBuilder]

Originally Posted by bntii

"A valid systemic problem"

"the heart of the problem- the principles and laws governing the world economy"

"Pepper-spraying protesters is a wrong answer to these problems. Starting to work actively on a new economical framework is a correct action."


Really?
Its broken and we would fix it if they would only let us speak...

The only systemic problem I see is the continued discomfort bred of a economic downturn.

Your potential career got outsource due to a long term see-saw of macroeconomics cat- not the social injustice of stratified wealth in this country.
Are you even sure that is the reason for your choices?

One of my clients is a physicist in charge of a large lab here.
He could land you a job tomorrow in your field.
Interested?

"What they are is pissed off at is that there is no more opportunity in the USA, unless you're born into money, or willing to do illegal things or become a hooker."

This is the long term distribution of wealth in the US:



If this distribution is causing the "systemic problem" it has been here for a long time.

The current prospects for 'opportunity' has nothing to do with the "1%" problem.
Find another explanation.

What? I'm not talking about myself here. I'm talking about the rights of peaceable assembly. I'm not part of the movement. Read back. I said I didn't agree with it.

I am pro- us constitution. 1st amendment.

Thanks for the offer, but i highly doubt you are so powerful as to dictate the HR moves of your client. That's just idle talk. They would probably dump you as a vendor if you started pushing the issue of getting me a position at the lab.

I changed careers many years ago, now and I'm happy in my life. Thanks for thinking of me, though.

[CatBuilder]

Originally Posted by bntii

Bit of a high horse eh cat when this comes from you:





U
Only the hookers and thieves are working in the US?

Your statement is not a "fact" has no basis in "reality" amnd seems a fine example of a "preconceived notion" from a person who is "emoting" not thinking.


You would fit right in at one of the 1% rallies?

Chanting "hookers and thieves, why not me"

Hookers and thieves why not me
hookers and thieves why not me
hookers and thieves why not me
hookers and thieves why not me......



I'm just hitting below the belt to make a point cat but these are the facts as I see it for you:

A bright guy who took profits off the markets and is using them to build what will be a successful business.

This to me is a story of "opportunity's" which exists in the US and a person is succeeding because of them..

When I get off my phone and can type a proper response, ill address this. You are missing the point. It's about the right of assembly. If we want to delve into the systemic problem, its not about 1%, its about who controls the government economic policy and ghe systemic problem there. There is more subtlety to it.

A democracy (or republic) can only work if it does the bidding of the majority of its population. If a minority is calling the shots, disenfranchising the majority, the government is doomed to fail. We see this happening all over the world right now. It's happening here, too. People were lulled into complacency by good economic times. Now they are noticing these systemic problems and starting to take action.
Lastly, hookers, etc, was just colorful speech. To bring a point home, like the George Washington post. Obviously not to be taken literally. More nuance, I know.

[bntii]

Fine cat- that whole post of mine was unnecessarily personal/specific/mouthy.

Thanks for not bristling-I deleted it on my side..


"When I get off my phone and can type a proper response, ill address this. You are missing the point. It's about the right of assembly. If we want to delve into the systemic problem, its not about 1%, its about who controls the government economic policy and ghe systemic problem there. There is more subtlety to it."

Thanks- that would be an interesting avenue for this thread as:

1) I don't find the 'right of assembly' being violated in these cases
2) The voice of the movement is present in political social discourse and can not be claimed to be censured as a reason for the lack of action.
3) I don't really understand the subtlety of the movement.

I am a economic cycle kind of guy- I am hesitant to lay out an argument for 'systemic fault'
I could be wrong.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Dave Gudeman

If I had known that the woman really was a protester who got sprayed, then your interpretation might make sense. But I did not know this and was explicitly expressing my doubt about it.

I don't have the time or desire to answer your whole post, particularly when we've already covered that ground once. But I'll answer this paragraph as a typical part of it.

Why would you say a woman with her face orange from pepper spray, and dripping whatever milky liquid she'd been drenched with in an effort to counteract it, looks like a homeless person who had just barfed?

That isn't even a rational interpretation of the scene, much less a likely one. And as omnipresent as the photo has been in the news and on the internet, I doubt Cat saw any need to supply references. The same goes for the still from the video.

I believe you should do at least a modicum of checking, before you jump the gun and start casting doubt on the honesty of a fellow member's post. Which is what any reasonable reader knew you were doing, no matter what you're claiming now.

Yeah, yeah, I know. You meant no such thing, you were just digging for the truth, you have nothing but love in your heart, I'm prejudiced against you and twisting your words, etc....

[troy2000]

Speaking of Photoshopped pepper-spray cops, the one in that video is taking a stroll through art history. People online are inserting him into famous paintings, especially those that have people sitting or lying on the ground, like Edouard Manet’s “Le Dejeuner sur l’Herbe.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...BmhN_blog.html

[CatBuilder]

Thanks Bntii. We actually usually agree on everything in those other threads - you know - America's Default and other ones like that.

I'm back on a computer now and in from the boat building, so I figure I'll make a proper response. I was not very clear posting from my phone, so let's try it again... inline in red, just to get people riled up. People get more angry when they are subjected to red, right?

Originally Posted by bntii

Fine cat- that whole post of mine was unnecessarily personal/specific/mouthy.

Thanks for not bristling-I deleted it on my side..


"When I get off my phone and can type a proper response, ill address this. You are missing the point. It's about the right of assembly. If we want to delve into the systemic problem, its not about 1%, its about who controls the government economic policy and ghe systemic problem there. There is more subtlety to it."

First, I just want to say I do not understand the movement to the level needed to fully understand their mission and motives. It's only what I read in the news. I do understand the people (and the general types of people) who are in the movement. I also understand how our country works and why (even if they are attacking the wrong thing like Wall Street) these people are upset. I do not know everything about the formality of the movement, but I do understand where their anger comes from. That, I can shed a little light on.

Thanks- that would be an interesting avenue for this thread as:

1) I don't find the 'right of assembly' being violated in these cases

IMO, the right of assembly is violated when someone is prevented from peaceable protest. For the ultra conservatives out there, think of a picket line at an abortion clinic. That impedes the rights of the people going to something like planned parenthood to get a pap smear. It impedes the rights of people going for abortions. It impedes traffic, both foot and vehicular in the parking lot. HOWEVER, agree with the anti abortion protesters or not, they have a right to be there. It's the same with these *enrolled* students at their own university. Bntii, I would imagine, by reading your posts, that you have an education. You may recall what a college campus is like. It's not a place that works anything like a normal town. It's a very open, easy going and safe environment to explore your higher learning and have some fun while you're at it. Anyone reading this thread, just picture your own college campus. Now, if you sat down and had a sit in at your old alma mater, would police have come along and pepper sprayed you? Not a chance!

This was a huge misstep by the police involved and both the sprayer and his boss were both placed on leave due to this trampling of the students' rights. There aren't many people out there who would say it was OK for some campus police to pepper spray the students for sitting in at their school. That sort of sit in is expected. Heck, if I remember some big nights at my school where we *deserved* pepper spray. I do recall a campus wide party where the cops came through town to try to break it up. We sent 'em packing and some kids lit a couch on fire in the middle of main street. It was mayhem. But, the police used good judgement and actually did control the crowd and/or arrest people breaking the law, but the actual assembly of the mob was not illegal. Plus, I come from a state that values freedom and human rights, so that's why I get so upset when I see it squashed.

I see the right of assembly being violated because the police ordered students, on their own campus, to disband and go home. That is not acceptable behavior on a college campus and would extend to say that's not acceptable behavior anywhere, according to the First Amendment.



2) The voice of the movement is present in political social discourse and can not be claimed to be censured as a reason for the lack of action.
I agree. I don't think the speech itself was violated. Just the right to assemble.


3) I don't really understand the subtlety of the movement.

I am a economic cycle kind of guy- I am hesitant to lay out an argument for 'systemic fault'
I could be wrong.
I'm a cycle guy too. NOW. The first one for me (around 2001) was brutal. I came up into the work force in the 1990's and it was boom times. I thought that's how it always was and was never taught about the bust. So, I was caught off guard by the next cycle. Learned a lot from it, after losing everything and changed the setup of my life. I actually enjoyed this most recent downturn. I set everything up to profit from downturns and market rebounds. FUN! I'm sure you had fun too. I was especially happy I was telling people they were nuts for buying houses at those prices and saying they were the best investment you could make. I steered clear of that minefield and was set up to take advantage of this current recession by building the boat in it. Cheap labor, good negotiating power with suppliers, real estate, machine shops, etc... All good stuff and I owe it to the boom/bust cycle. So I am also a fan. I've also moved from the "working class" to the "capital class", but at my meager economic level, it's not that big of a difference. I just use my money in a different way - capital investments and that kind of thing.

So I'm with you. I like the boom and bust too.

However, there is a huge systemic problem and it has nothing to do with boom and bust. It has nothing to do with a particular policy and nothing to do with welfare, handouts or socialism. It has to do with control.

I'm speaking about a theory, rather than what OWS uses as a message, but I suspect those protesters are mad, but often, they aren't quite sure why. They aren't quite sure:

*why they can't get jobs (free trade legislation, globalization legislation),

*why they can't start their lives (were told college was the answer, got educated but have no jobs or way to pay back crushing debt and cannot have that debt removed via bankruptcy)

*why they can vote, but no candidates represent their interests (campaign finance laws, etc...)

*why they can't get one of their own into power (takes a millionaire or much more to run for office these days thanks to campaign finance laws)

*why they vote for a certain president, but it doesn't matter (an old one, but the electoral college)

*why you need a PhD to work at McDonald's (more regulation passed by congress at the request of business)

*why the incomes of the very wealthy are taxed at a much lower rate compared to their own (tax cuts run through congress by the elite)

Do you see a pattern here? These are a sampling of the complaints. There is a definite pattern.

The systemic problem is that a small minority of people in this country control not only the wealth, but control the government. They control the government through their ability to:

*push through campaign finance laws to their advantage
*pass whatever regulation suits their profit motive
*get congress to cut their taxes relative the the average tax payer
*push through free trade/globalization legislation that makes them big money, while costing American jobs for the little guy
*etc... etc...

The average citizen of this country (the 99%) does not have the power to do any of the above. That all didn't matter much before, since the average citizen was not directly affected by the moves of the elite in power. However, in the past 10 or 20 years, the moves the elite have been making have been directly affecting the average or "middle class" type people and they have no power to vote those moves out. They have lost control of the government and have no way to get their agenda through.

So, the 99% (pretty much everyone in the country) no longer has a government that is serving their needs. Instead, that government is doing nothing but squashing their lives down as they pass law after law to benefit the 1% that is in control.

I'm not sure OWS sees it so clearly, or if they do, nobody has really articulated it.

The problem is that 99% of this country is disenfranchised. A democracy or a republic cannot stand if its government is not serving the majority of the people. Any government (look to the middle east) that has a small minority in charge to the detriment of the majority will soon fall.

I think OWS wants to change the way things work, rather than overthrow the government. They are working within the system and using non-violence. I find that very commendable. I would have less patience if I were at one of those protests. I'd surely be arrested, tasered, shot or something for acting out.

But that's what's got a huge mass of people upset here... the fact that the government is no longer "for the people, by the people." They want to put it back the way it was.

PS: Remember, I'm not for the movement, I like boom and bust and I dislike handouts so much that I think there should be a means test on social security! I'm for smaller government and for lower taxes. BUT, I'm also for the US constitution and for the majority. Important things if you want a government to remain in power.

[CatBuilder]

Originally Posted by troy2000

I don't have the time or desire to answer your whole post, particularly when we've already covered that ground once. But I'll answer this paragraph as a typical part of it.

Why would you say a woman with her face orange from pepper spray, and dripping whatever milky liquid she'd been drenched with in an effort to counteract it, looks like a homeless person who had just barfed?

That isn't even a rational interpretation of the scene, much less a likely one. And as omnipresent as the photo has been in the news and on the internet, I doubt Cat saw any need to supply references. The same goes for the still from the video.

I believe you should do at least a modicum of checking, before you jump the gun and start casting doubt on the honesty of a fellow member's post. Which is what any reasonable reader knew you were doing, no matter what you're claiming now.

Yeah, yeah, I know. You meant no such thing, you were just digging for the truth, you have nothing but love in your heart, I'm prejudiced against you and twisting your words, etc....

SWISH! Everybody knows Dave was mocking that 84 year old woman. He's just backpedaling for a very insensitive comment.

[bntii]

Troy- very funny.
Thanks for posting the pic.

Cat- back at you later tonight