Support NeoGAF

[Messypandas]

Embarrassing companies is way better than just sitting in the street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wmpeSbSNPl4#t=1008s

 

[Baraka in the White House]

I fucking hate when people try and equate OWS to some struggle or something...

I never understood this gripe when Manos made it and I still don't now. It reeks of circular logic such that no movement is successful (and thus worthy of not being shit on) until it succeeds.

It was certainly a struggle, if not a particularly effective one in the end for myriad reasons.

 

[DY_nasty]

I never understood this gripe when Manos made it and I still don't now. It reeks of circular logic such that no movement is successful (and thus worthy of not being shit on) until it succeeds.

That's not it at all. Its when people try to make OWS into more than it really was and move the goalposts in what OWS aimed to do.

Saying that they raised awareness but lets be real, the Truth ads about smoking did more with less wasted effort and resources. Now people are going on about how they were "dismantled" by getting the same attention from government agencies that all organized groups of protestors get and its just silly.

 

[Kinyou]

Sounds ok to me. They monitored the situation to make sure no crazies capitalized on the ruckus to do something horrible like blow up building or what not. Seems like the prudent thing to do.

The coordination with the banks sure gives me a little weird feeling though.

 

[kame-sennin]

I never understood this gripe when Manos made it and I still don't now. It reeks of circular logic such that no movement is successful (and thus worthy of not being shit on) until it succeeds.

That's the point. Conservatives and many liberals only acknowledge the success of social movements after they're over.

Now people are going on about how they were "dismantled" by getting the same attention from government agencies that all organized groups of protestors get and its just silly.

They had camps that were literally taken apart. That is what "dismantling" means. We can't have a discussion if you don't agree with what words mean or if you are completely unaware of major news events pertaining to the subject at hand.

 

[Enron]

I always liked how people pointed to this - a group of people who disagreed with Occupy's methods - as an indicator that Occupy were dangerous wannabe terrorists.

Except this is exactly what the FBI was worried about. Not necessarily Occupy itself, but more extremist members hiding and conspiring within the ranks.

 

[DominoKid]

Feds got info on everything.

 

[DY_nasty]

They had camps that were literally taken apart. That is what "dismantling" means.

Tents?

Or something else that I've missed. I don't recall some homes being torched, members threatened at gun point, jobs targeted, or anything like that.

 

[ironichaos]

Enough to be considered an organized group of protestors which is enough to get an eye on you. No one's being persecuted.

I fucking hate when people try and equate OWS to some struggle or something...


Encampments like what?


And no, its not semantics when you say nationwide violent crackdown. Its just not. This country has seen things like that before. Other countries have. Don't just throw shit like that around.

Before
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/18/occupy-wall-street-crackdowns_n_1101685.html

After
http://m.guardiannews.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

 

[Deified Data]

Populist liberal movements cannot survive with a Democrat in the White House. Liberal complacency is the most dangerous threat to a just society, and this thread has it in droves.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

That's not it at all. Its when people try to make OWS into more than it really was and move the goalposts in what OWS aimed to do.

Saying that they raised awareness but lets be real, the Truth ads about smoking did more with less wasted effort and resources. Now people are going on about how they were "dismantled" by getting the same attention from government agencies that all organized groups of protestors get and its just silly.

The dismantling of the camps was handled by local police at the behest of the mayors of each city (legally and with proper notice or not, I can't say.) I do recall more than one report of city officials chomping at the bit to sweep the protests under a rug and an unusually heavil militarized police presence wherever these OWS people went which rubbed me the wrong way. The group(s) may not have made the most united front in the history of protest but between the heavy-handed police response and a media campaign that happily painted the entirety of the event as just a bunch of homeless (dangerous??) undesirables OWS had something of an uphill battle on its hands.

 

[radios shipping overview]

How is that movement going BTW?

It's been doing a fantastic job with Sandy relief efforts, putting Red Cross, government, and other organizational aid to shame.

It's amazing to see (first-hand) what it can do with a defined common goal.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

It's amazing to see (first-hand) what it can do with a defined common goal.

Which was why it was so annoying to see Occupy not pull that off. If they had written up a sensible list of solid aims then they probably would have been able to achieve more. But that's fractious leftism for you

 

[MetatronM]

From the OP:



If that doesn't sound like a potential violent reaction to ANY sort of protesting, how else would you guys interpret it?

If it was a reaction to ANY sort of protesting then they would have crushed OWS on September 17, 2011. That didn't happen. They drafted those plans in case something happened that necessitated it. No such thing happened, so they didn't act on those plans.

I'm as happy as anyone to jump on any kind of police state bullshit, but this just seems like the FBI doing its job to me. A group of malcontents starts organizing a protest for a future date and whips up a large amount of online support well in advance of the event...sounds like something law enforcement ought to be aware of in advance. Such a gathering, even if intended to be peaceful, could easily become combustible under the right circumstances, so it's only prudent to be prepared.

This sounds like due diligence that's being worded to make it sound as scary and "fascist" as possible.

 

[PezDispenser]

Tents?

Or something else that I've missed. I don't recall some homes being torched, members threatened at gun point, jobs targeted, or anything like that.

Your goalposts are disappearing into the horizon.

 

[DY_nasty]

Your goalposts are disappearing into the horizon.

Goalposts like what?

I don't understand the point of defending OWS instead of just calling it what it is and learning from their mistakes. It does nothing for you. You want to say "dismantled", I'm thinking dismantled at an organizational level - not having your tent kicked over on orders from the government with advanced warning and riot police are not a heavy militarized presence. Violent nationwide crackdown? Just no. That's just blatantly disingenuous.

OWS was run like shit, fell apart not because of some conspiracy but because of non-existent leadership, wasted all of its momentum, burned bridges everywhere it went, and only accomplished one of its "goals" in the vaguest of terms.

What's the point of making excuses for them?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Goalposts like what?

I don't understand the point of defending OWS instead of just calling it what it is and learning from their mistakes. It does nothing for you. You want to say "dismantled", I'm thinking dismantled at an organizational level - not having your tent kicked over on orders from the government with advanced warning and riot police are not a heavy militarized presence. Violent nationwide crackdown? Just no. That's just blatantly disingenuous.

OWS was run like shit, fell apart not because of some conspiracy but because of non-existent leadership, wasted all of its momentum, burned bridges everywhere it went, and only accomplished one of its "goals" in the vaguest of terms.

What's the point of making excuses for them?

Perhaps no one has walked away with more of a "meh" feeling from the outcome of OWS than me but it seems equally disingenuous to pretend like their failure was entirely their own and flippantly disregard every obstacle as an excuse.

 

[ironichaos]

If it was a reaction to ANY sort of protesting then they would have crushed OWS on September 17, 2011. That didn't happen. They drafted those plans in case something happened that necessitated it. No such thing happened, so they didn't act on those plans.

I'm as happy as anyone to jump on any kind of police state bullshit, but this just seems like the FBI doing its job to me. A group of malcontents starts organizing a protest for a future date and whips up a large amount of online support well in advance of the event...sounds like something law enforcement ought to be aware of in advance. Such a gathering, even if intended to be peaceful, could easily become combustible under the right circumstances, so it's only prudent to be prepared.

This sounds like due diligence that's being worded to make it sound as scary and "fascist" as possible.

This isn't due diligence. Spending significant resources on monitoring and shutting down peaceful protesters, homeless people and hippies - that's just a waste of money. Instead of investigating and prosecuting the crooks that caused the 2008 financial collapse...which subsequently caused the civil unrest that fueled the creation of Occupy Wall Street. Our government chose to use those resources to extinguish a peaceful movement. Yeah, that's a real winner for democracy.

 

[DY_nasty]

Perhaps no one has walked away with more of a "meh" feeling from the outcome of OWS than me but it seems equally disingenuous to pretend like their failure was entirely their own and flippantly disregard every obstacle as an excuse.

Obstacles are going to be there for any kind of movement. You absolutely cannot be self-defeating though. They cut their own legs out.

This isn't due diligence. Spending significant resources on monitoring peaceful protesters, homeless people and hippies - that's just a waste of money. Instead of investigating and prosecuting the crooks that caused the 2008 financial collapse...which subsequently caused the civil unrest that fueled the creation of Occupy Wall Street. Our government chose to use those resources to extinguish a peaceful movement. Yeah, that's a real winner for democracy.

Please.

Its common practice for extremists to fit in or direct a peaceful protest in order to create a setting where they can do damage. Its not even about them. Its any group.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Obstacles are going to be there for any kind of movement. You absolutely cannot be self-defeating though. They cut their own legs out.

External factors be damned?

 

[ironichaos]

Goalposts like what?

I don't understand the point of defending OWS instead of just calling it what it is and learning from their mistakes. It does nothing for you. You want to say "dismantled", I'm thinking dismantled at an organizational level - not having your tent kicked over on orders from the government with advanced warning and riot police are not a heavy militarized presence. Violent nationwide crackdown? Just no. That's just blatantly disingenuous.

OWS was run like shit, fell apart not because of some conspiracy but because of non-existent leadership, wasted all of its momentum, burned bridges everywhere it went, and only accomplished one of its "goals" in the vaguest of terms.

What's the point of making excuses for them?

Because it would be like expecting a startup to compete with Google. Occupy was going to have growing pains competing with the likes of Fox News, the Democrat and Republican parties, the financial industry, and basically everything else that is a cog in the wheel of our current system of capitalism.

It's possible Occupy could have grown into something better...but we'll never know since the government coordinated its shutdown. Ron Paul capitalists are all about hands-off, laissaz-faire, letting the markets do their own thing...but as soon as something comes along to threaten that model, it needs to be shuttered and tossed aside.

 

[PezDispenser]

Goalposts like what?

I don't understand the point of defending OWS instead of just calling it what it is and learning from their mistakes. It does nothing for you. You want to say "dismantled", I'm thinking dismantled at an organizational level - not having your tent kicked over on orders from the government with advanced warning and riot police are not a heavy militarized presence. Violent nationwide crackdown? Just no. That's just blatantly disingenuous.

OWS was run like shit, fell apart not because of some conspiracy but because of non-existent leadership, wasted all of its momentum, burned bridges everywhere it went, and only accomplished one of its "goals" in the vaguest of terms.

What's the point of making excuses for them?

I'm not making any excuses for them. You were arguing over whether or not it was dismantled, and your reasoning is apparently that it couldn't have been, since nobody's homes were burned down and nobody was threatened at gunpoint?

I won't disagree with you that it was run like shit. But from what I remember, the movement was growing exponentially before every person and piece of equipment were forcibly removed from just about every major protest site across the country (the majority of which were being occupied well within the scrutiny of the law) over the course of about one week. Directly after these events, the movement was declining in a tailspin. But nobody was burned alive so I guess this doesn't count as a dismantling.

It just seems clear to me that there was a concerted effort to stamp out the protests, which ended up being a primary factor in its puttering out. What's the point of pretending that never happened?

 

[CyclopsRock]

I don't understand the issue re "private banks" - isn't it just that they were potentially in danger? Certainly, on the UK during similar protests some banks and shops belonging to companies that avoided tax were targeted violently by protesters. I imagine they were prewarned by the Police, as some opted not to open on those days.

 

[Wazzim]

EDIT: nvm, no interest in discussing atm.

 

[DY_nasty]

I'm not making any excuses for them. You were arguing over whether or not it was dismantled, and your reasoning is apparently that it couldn't have been, since nobody's homes were burned down and nobody was threatened at gunpoint?

I won't disagree with you that it was run like shit. But from what I remember, the movement was growing exponentially before every person and piece of equipment were forcibly removed from just about every major protest site across the country (the majority of which were being occupied well within the scrutiny of the law) over the course of about one week. Directly after these events, the movement was declining in a tailspin. But nobody was burned alive so I guess this doesn't count as a dismantling.

It just seems clear to me that there was a concerted effort to stamp out the protests, which ended up being a primary factor in its puttering out. What's the point of pretending that never happened?

I'm not the one who said violent nationwide crackdown

that entire rhetoric does nothing but further damage them

And they could've moved. Most if not all of their "removals" were just them getting kicked out of the places they were sitting in on. They didn't even want to move. What did they expect? And then all the instances of them getting permits and overstepping their bounds... Look, an organization like this being "dismantled" will always mean, or should always mean, being hit at its organizational levels NOT having some non-violent protest asked to move. That's nothing. You get up and you move to a different spot. That's not being dismantled and I'm not sure in what context that could ever fit the description.

That's not a protest being stamped out. There are plenty of instances throughout history where a protest or group is stamped out.

 

[kame-sennin]

I'm not making any excuses for them. You were arguing over whether or not it was dismantled, and your reasoning is apparently that it couldn't have been, since nobody's homes were burned down and nobody was threatened at gunpoint?

I won't disagree with you that it was run like shit. But from what I remember, the movement was growing exponentially before every person and piece of equipment were forcibly removed from just about every major protest site across the country (the majority of which were being occupied well within the scrutiny of the law) over the course of about one week. Directly after these events, the movement was declining in a tailspin. But nobody was burned alive so I guess this doesn't count as a dismantling.

It just seems clear to me that there was a concerted effort to stamp out the protests, which ended up being a primary factor in its puttering out. What's the point of pretending that never happened?

It makes it easier to dismiss the movement.

 

[DY_nasty]

It makes it easier to dismiss the movement.

It dismissed itself.

This is forum is filled with the base of the group. 18-25 year olds that lean heavily to the left - and even here OWS is hardly taken seriously. Imagine how the rest of America feels about it.

 

[Yen]

They had to stop protesting to get in line for the latest iphone

Yeah, they probably drank coffee too, the hypocrites!

 

[PezDispenser]

I'm not the one who said violent nationwide crackdown

that entire rhetoric does nothing but further damage them

And they could've moved. Most if not all of their "removals" were just them getting kicked out of the places they were sitting in on. They didn't even want to move. What did they expect? And then all the instances of them getting permits and overstepping their bounds... Look, an organization like this being "dismantled" will always mean, or should always mean, being hit at its organizational levels NOT having some non-violent protest asked to move. That's nothing. You get up and you move to a different spot. That's not being dismantled and I'm not sure in what context that could ever fit the description.

That's not a protest being stamped out. There are plenty of instances throughout history where a protest or group is stamped out.

The instances where they overstepped their bounds were a handful of rogue cases, and you're making it seem like it was the norm. It wasn't.

And "why didn't they just move?" Lol. Did you miss the part where I pointed out that the vast majority of their encampments were completely legal? Why should they just be content to uproot and move their entire, fully legal operation for no apparent logical reason with 24 hours or less of notice? Are you familiar with the concept of a protest at all?

 

[ironichaos]

Obstacles are going to be there for any kind of movement. You absolutely cannot be self-defeating though. They cut their own legs out.


Please.

Its common practice for extremists to fit in or direct a peaceful protest in order to create a setting where they can do damage. Its not even about them. Its any group.

What? So maybe NeoGAF should be monitored...since it's a group of people. Especially those Nintendo fans and their Operation Rainfall shenanigans. They sound shady.

It's a silly waste of resources to especially use on an, according to you, poorly organized ineffectual group. I feel it's money that would be better allocated to combatting the source of the problem - 2008 financial collapse and subsequent growing inequality. There will always be bad people in the world which is why we have courts to determine guilt. But as a society we need to be careful we don't give away too many of our freedoms and privacy to the government to protect us from the bad people...because who then will protect us when those in government are the bad people

 

[Baraka in the White House]

It dismissed itself.

This is forum is filled with the base of the group. 18-25 year olds that lean heavily to the left - and even here OWS is hardly taken seriously. Imagine how the rest of America feels about it.

You don't think overall perceptions of OWS were shaped at all by factors other than the fact that it lacked organization and ultimately petered out?

 

[PezDispenser]

This is forum is filled with the base of the group. 18-25 year olds that lean heavily to the left - and even here OWS is hardly taken seriously. Imagine how the rest of America feels about it.

Think about all of the things that the rest of America "takes seriously." If you're not sure what those are, turn on your TV and spend a few seconds on each channel, walk through a mall or listen to some recent top Billboard hits.

Then think about how much weight that statement actually holds.

 

[Timedog]

The FBI was monitoring my friends because they had a zine called The Communist Manifesto, that was just random funny stuff and had nothing to do with Communism.

 

[kame-sennin]

It's a silly waste of resources to especially use on an, according to you, poorly organized ineffectual group.

Occupy Wall Street should be ignored because it is a small, ineffective, and unserious.

Occupy Wall Street should be monitored by the FBI because it is rapidly growing, widely supported, and potentially dangerous.

 

[Enron]

Your goalposts are disappearing into the horizon.

Kind of like OWS.

 

[DY_nasty]

The instances where they overstepped their bounds were a handful of rogue cases, and you're making it seem like it was the norm. It wasn't.

And "why didn't they just move?" Lol. Did you miss the part where I pointed out that the vast majority of their encampments were completely legal? Why should they just be content to uproot and move their entire, fully legal operation for no apparent logical reason with 24 hours or less of notice? Are you familiar with the concept of a protest at all?

They were asked to move. Like any other sit in. If a gtfo gets signed off on, then its not legal anymore. You can get a permit to protest. Even the KKK does it. They know not to cross fences though. And their "encampments"... man, you are being REALLY generous about that.

What? So maybe NeoGAF should be monitored...since it's a group of people. Especially those Nintendo fans and their Operation Rainfall shenanigans. They sound shady.

It's a silly waste of resources to especially use on an, according to you, poorly organized ineffectual group. I feel it's money that would be better allocated to combatting the source of the problem - 2008 financial collapse and subsequent growing inequality. There will always be bad people in the world which is why we have courts to determine guilt. But as a society we need to be careful we don't give away too many of our freedoms and privacy to the government to protect us from the bad people...because who then will protect us when those in government are the bad people

This is too dumb.

Think about all of the things that the rest of America "takes seriously." If you're not sure what those are, turn on your TV and spend a few seconds on each channel, walk through a mall or listen to some recent top Billboard hits.

Then think about how much weight that statement actually holds.

The Tea Party is taken more seriously than OWS. Let that sink in.

But before anything else, realize that I'm posting out of general disappointment for a colossal waste of time and effort for something I wanted to agree with and support. Instead of clinging to BS and making excuses (Every single movement for change EVER has faced obstacles. These are trivial ones being named. Its an insult to every other protest who did see some shit to say that it went through anything close to a "violent nationwide crackdown" when it didn't. They got slapped up by hall monitors and told to stay off the grass and they collapsed under the weight of their own unread pamphlets) just call it what it is.

A general failure. And make the next one count because this one is a joke when you consider the potential thrown away. Most people don't even bother responding to OWS arguments at this point.

 

[DY_nasty]

Occupy Wall Street should be ignored because it is a small, ineffective, and unserious.

Occupy Wall Street should be monitored by the FBI because it is rapidly growing, widely supported, and potentially dangerous.

Are you seriously confused?

Any group of over 100 people is likely to get feelers sent out. At least try and look into shit yourself before assuming the world is out to get you.

 

[CyclopsRock]

Occupy Wall Street should be ignored because it is a small, ineffective, and unserious.

Occupy Wall Street should be monitored by the FBI because it is rapidly growing, widely supported, and potentially dangerous.

Maybe all the later actions and experiences were not foretold?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

The Tea Party is taken more seriously than OWS. Let that sink in.

Why, in your opinion, is the Tea Party taken more seriously (is it taken seriously, especially recently?) than OWS?

 

[teruterubozu]

Why, in your opinion, is the Tea Party taken more seriously (is it taken seriously, especially recently?) than OWS?

After Boehner's BS for the last few days, I'd say the Tea Party is still in his pants.

 

[DY_nasty]

Why, in your opinion, is the Tea Party taken more seriously (is it taken seriously, especially recently?) than OWS?

They can actually stay organized and stick to their plans long enough to get money and not alienate their supporters.

I don't even agree with them. I know few who do. But are they more organized than OWS? By far.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

The FBI was monitoring my friends because they had a zine called The Communist Manifesto, that was just random funny stuff and had nothing to do with Communism.

I have the actual Communist Manifesto on my Amazon wishlist...

*checks for bugs*

Edit: The only reason the Tea Party was as successful as it was is because it quickly got co-opted by the right wing.

 

[kame-sennin]

But before anything else, realize that I'm posting out of general disappointment for a colossal waste of time and effort for something I wanted to agree with and support.

Not supporting a movement for social justice because the movement is filled with hippies reflects more poorly on you than the actual movement.

Its an insult to every other protest who did see some shit to say that it went through anything close to a "violent nationwide crackdown" when it didn't. They got slapped up by hall monitors and told to stay off the grass and they collapsed under the weight of their own unread pamphlets) just call it what it is.

Spare us your righteous indignation. People were bound so long they soiled themselves, they were put into a coma after being shot in the head with a gas canister, they vomited pepper spray, they were beaten. People who were actually there suffered quite a bit in an attempt to make change. You don't agree with their methods, that's fine, but don't be disingenuous.

 

[ironichaos]

You don't think overall perceptions of OWS were shaped at all by factors other than the fact that it lacked organization and ultimately petered out?

Fox News and basically every other national news network had nothing but pleasant things to say about Occupy Wall Street. Top headlines included, "Well-groomed hippies protest financial corruption and inequality"...and "R.E.I. launches its OWS advertising campaign to show off its latest line of high tech city camping tents - camp in the city with style".

Or not...OWS was a threat to business as usual and was treated by big media as such. If you wanted to get an honest perspective about the movement you had to look to independent bloggers. Otherwise if your source of news was Fox or CNN you were left with the impression that Occupy equals smelly people in tents.

We're so quick to allow our government to extinguish OWS...DY_nasty, what happens when a legitimate (by your standards) movement comes along and the same thing happens. Will you still argue they deserved it?

 

[empty vessel]

Didn't they find a group of kids that were participating in the OWS movement that thought they were blowing up some bridge in Cleveland?

No, the FBI convinced a group of kids to blow up a bridge in Cleveland.

It dismissed itself.

It was repressed. There's a significant difference.

 

[DY_nasty]

It was repressed. There's a significant difference.

What protest isn't?

lol

 

[CyclopsRock]

I live less than a mile from the Occupy London site. I disliked basically everything about it, including the people (and whilst the place did smell like shit, that isn't why I disliked them). It is entirely possible to come to that conclusion without Fox or 'big media' spinning it.

 

[kame-sennin]

We're so quick to allow our government to extinguish OWS...DY_nasty, what happens when a legitimate (by your standards) movement comes along and the same thing happens.

That's the joke. Any movement that attempts to make change by going outside the system (OWS) is illegitimate. But any movement that attempts to make change by working within the system gets squelched by corporate corruption (The Tea Party).

 

[ironichaos]

They were asked to move. Like any other sit in. If a gtfo gets signed off on, then its not legal anymore. You can get a permit to protest. Even the KKK does it. They know not to cross fences though. And their "encampments"... man, you are being REALLY generous about that.



This is too dumb.


The Tea Party is taken more seriously than OWS. Let that sink in.

But before anything else, realize that I'm posting out of general disappointment for a colossal waste of time and effort for something I wanted to agree with and support. Instead of clinging to BS and making excuses (Every single movement for change EVER has faced obstacles. These are trivial ones being named. Its an insult to every other protest who did see some shit to say that it went through anything close to a "violent nationwide crackdown" when it didn't. They got slapped up by hall monitors and told to stay off the grass and they collapsed under the weight of their own unread pamphlets) just call it what it is.

A general failure. And make the next one count because this one is a joke when you consider the potential thrown away. Most people don't even bother responding to OWS arguments at this point.

The Tea Party is funded by the billionaire Koch brothers and advertised by Fox News.

If my startup had that kind of support I might be able to compete with Google too.

 

[PezDispenser]

OWS/Tea Party really isn't a fair comparison to make. The Tea Party naturally struck a chord with any wealthy party who felt like not paying as much taxes, and benefited by having sympathizers in prominent positions in politics and in the media.

OWS, on the other hand, seemed to threaten nearly any party in any position of power (at least on the surface) and so it naturally drew nothing but criticism from the media and opposition from all angles.

I think you'd find it hard to argue that the Tea Party faced or overcame anything close to the levels of opposition that OWS was faced with as soon as it gained the slightest bit of traction.