Support NeoGAF

[Choke on the Magic]

He's talking about the privatisation of public spaces.

I went to China in the summer and I would have to say, from what I saw, the public have a greater ability to utilise public space than Europeans/Americans, from what we have witnessed recently.

really? Bet if this shit were going on in China this would happen all over again.

 

[Alucrid]

How is this a serious suggestion? What could people possibly do in a day (short of committing incredible violence) that would do ANYTHING to overthrow billion dollar companies?

This is a real problem with Americans, they can say they don't like something and then when it becomes their turn to give up some of their comfort for the greater good it's like 'hey whoa now come on I want to take lovely strolls in the park I'm okay with wall street robbing me as long as I don't have to smell bad smells...' I mean it's ridiculous.

What can they do in a week? A month? A year? Are they supposed to live there for a decade?

 

[BruiserBear]

As for the crackdown, I guess it was inevitable, but definitely a bullshit move by Bloomberg to do it at 2am. Exercise of police power should always be as transparent as possible.

When would be a better time to do it? 12 noon, when the entire downtown area is filled with people doing work, and getting to where they're going?

2am was the obvious time to do this. Catch the squatters off guard, don't interrupt day to day activity in the city, and you clean it up in time for the morning rush.

How is this a serious suggestion? What could people possibly do in a day (short of committing incredible violence) that would do ANYTHING to overthrow billion dollar companies?

This is a real problem with Americans, they can say they don't like something and then when it becomes their turn to give up some of their comfort for the greater good it's like 'hey whoa now come on I want to take lovely strolls in the park I'm okay with wall street robbing me as long as I don't have to smell bad smells...' I mean it's ridiculous.

You can show up and have daily protests all you want.

Also, I don't accept the premise that Wall Street is robbing me. If I was going to protest all that has gone wrong with this country in the past few years I'd be starting with occupy the congress. They set up bad policies which allowed the housing crisis to occur. They create laws that could keep lots of these bad things from happening, but they don't, because lobbyists and outside interests keep them from doing the right thing.

Wall Street would be a small concern in my big picture.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

What can they do in a week? A month? A year? Are they supposed to live there for a decade?

Well considering the people there I'd say a decade is being kind of generous.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Also, I don't accept the premise that Wall Street is robbing me. If I was going to protest all that has gone wrong with this country in the past few years I'd be starting with occupy the congress. They set up bad policies which allowed the housing crisis to occur. They create laws that could keep lots of these bad things from happening, but they don't, because lobbyists and outside interests keep them from doing the right thing.

Wall Street would be a small concern in my big picture.

The lobbyists and outside interests that you refer to IS largely Wall Street.

 

[Azih]

but they don't, because lobbyists and outside interests keep them from doing the right thing.

And these lobbyists are funded by who? Who are these outside interests?

Edit: As Beer Monkey answered above. It's Wall Street. Or at least the 1% of the richest Americans whom Wall Street symbolizes.

Going after the puppet is kinda pointless wouldn't you agree?

 

[Choke on the Magic]

What can they do in a week? A month? A year? Are they supposed to live there for a decade?

Exactly. You've gotten worldwide attention. Go home and perhaps organize another protest. "Organize" so you can keep the BS out of your protest. Campaign for individuals who you support, and fucking vote and look for a job.

 

[Angry Fork]

really? Bet if this shit were going on in China this would happen all over again.

So as long as police don't use tanks they can do whatever they want whenever protests get too 'out of hand, disturbing the peace' (which is kind of the point of them anyway)?

 

[Azih]

and look for a job.

A lot of the protestors *have* full time jobs. It's an irrelevant point anyway.

 

[ReBurn]

The lobbyists and outside interests that you refer to IS largely Wall Street.

Banks should be held responsible for their bad behavior. But ultimately Congress should be held responsible for their bad behavior as well. That's why Occupy as a movement to get corporate money out of politics is so important.

Lobbying as a way to fund campaigns is bad lobbying. Lobbying as a way to try to introduce facts into the political process is not bad lobbying. There is so much anecdotal reasoning in the legislation that many people in congress introduce that interest groups are often necessary to clear the BS from the air. But when they start paying for perks for people in Congress the waters get so muddy.

 

[travisbickle]

really? Bet if this shit were going on in China this would happen all over again.

I'm not comparing any of this to Tianamen square, weren't there like hundreds of thousands protesters there? Just that the privatisation of public space has stopped the public from appropriating that space, compared to what I saw in China where the public were gathering together dancing, singing, playing games, exercising in groups of 50-100+ in the public squares.

 

[Angry Fork]

What can they do in a week? A month? A year? Are they supposed to live there for a decade?

The more people go there, the more other people are inconvenienced, the more people will want to change something other than just getting protestors out of there. As long as it takes, or as long as the will to continue is there.

You can show up and have daily protests all you want.

Also, I don't accept the premise that Wall Street is robbing me. If I was going to protest all that has gone wrong with this country in the past few years I'd be starting with occupy the congress. They set up bad policies which allowed the housing crisis to occur. They create laws that could keep lots of these bad things from happening, but they don't, because lobbyists and outside interests keep them from doing the right thing.

Wall Street would be a small concern in my big picture.

So who pays/bribes the congressman? And I don't know how one can say this doesn't happen all the time it seems.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

public were gathering together dancing, singing, playing games, exercising in groups of 50-100+ in the public squares.

You've never spent a day in New York City have you or Union Square more specifically?

 

[SmokyDave]

A lot of the protestors *have* full time jobs. It's an irrelevant point anyway.

I sincerely doubt that.

"Morning boss! I won't be in for a few weeks, I'm off to live in a park."

 

[Choke on the Magic]

So as long as police don't use tanks they can do whatever they want whenever protests get too 'out of hand, disturbing the peace' (which is kind of the point of them anyway)?

I'm not supporting police brutality, I was commenting on a previous post comparing China having a better public forum than the US and Europe. You've completely taken me out of context.

I personally don't think OWS has been a positive thing at all, but it doesn't mean I think they should get beat the hell up. This is of course as long as they don't strike law enforcement.

 

[empty vessel]

Banks should be held responsible for their bad behavior. But ultimately Congress should be held responsible for their bad behavior as well. That's why Occupy as a movement to get corporate money out of politics is so important.

Lobbying as a way to fund campaigns is bad lobbying. Lobbying as a way to try to introduce facts into the political process is not bad lobbying.

I don't disagree that "fact lobbying" is useful. But because lobbying is so corrupting generally, strict limits should be put on fact lobbying by corporations (who have no rights anyway). All corporate interaction with representatives should take place at the request of representatives (not vice versa) and should occur on the record and in public (i.e., in hearings). All direct contact between corporations and government representatives should be barred on pain of revocation of charter (for corporations) and impeachment (for representatives).

Aside from restrictions on transfers of money (which I don't consider speech), I don't think any restrictions can lawfully be or should be placed on individual citizens' direct contact with representatives.

I sincerely doubt that.

"Morning boss! I won't be in for a few weeks, I'm off to live in a park."

The way the occupation works in practice is that people come in and out. Many don't sleep in the park at all. And even those who sleep tend not to do so every night. In this sense, occupation is a fitting word, because the protest movement literally controls the space, and the movement's members freely come and go. This is what gives the movement its staying power.

 

[jorma]

I'm not supporting police brutality, I was commenting on a previous post comparing China having a better public forum than the US and Europe. You've completely taken me out of context.

I guess that's what you get for completely taking travisbickle out of context..:O

 

[BruiserBear]

The lobbyists and outside interests that you refer to IS largely Wall Street.

And these lobbyists are funded by who? Who are these outside interests?

Edit: As Beer Monkey answered above. It's Wall Street. Or at least the 1% of the richest Americans whom Wall Street symbolizes.

Going after the puppet is kinda pointless wouldn't you agree?

I guess you both need a lesson on how this country operates. The congress sets the rules by which we all play. THEY HAVE THE POWER to change the rules by which Wall Street operates. They are the ones who are truly in control.

The entire concept of occupying Wall Street to me is just absurd.

 

[Choke on the Magic]

I don't disagree that "fact lobbying" is useful. But because lobbying is so corrupting generally, strict limits should be put on fact lobbying by corporations (who have no rights anyway). All corporate interaction with representatives should take place at the request of representatives (not vice versa) and should occur on the record and in public (i.e., in hearings). All direct contact between corporations and government representatives should be barred on pain of revocation of charter (for corporations) and impeachment (for representatives).

Aside from restrictions on transfers of money (which I don't consider speech), I don't think any restrictions can lawfully be or should be placed on individual citizens' direct contact with representatives.

Well after the Gifford shooting that's exacty what your going to get.

 

[dave is ok]

I guess you both need a lesson on how this country operates. The congress sets the rules by which we all play. THEY HAVE THE POWER to change the rules by which Wall Street operates. They are the ones who are truly in control.

The entire concept of occupying Wall Street to me is just absurd.

They are indebted to the real power in this country by the time they get elected. You think they're going to write some tough regulations on the same people who they need to fund their re-election in a couple of years?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

I guess you both need a lesson on how this country operates. The congress sets the rules by which we all play. THEY HAVE THE POWER to change the rules by which Wall Street operates. They are the ones who are truly in control.

Don't be dense. The revolving door between our legislators and the financial industry/business world is very well known and documented.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I don't disagree that "fact lobbying" is useful. But because lobbying is so corrupting generally, strict limits should be put on fact lobbying by corporations (who have no rights anyway). All corporate interaction with representatives should take place at the request of representatives (not vice versa) and should occur on the record and in public (i.e., in hearings).

...

Aside from restrictions on transfers of money (which I don't consider speech), I don't think any restrictions can lawfully be or should be placed on individual citizens' direct contact with representatives.

So you don't actually believe in free speech then, why am I not surprised at the least by your statements.

All direct contact between corporations and government representatives should be barred on pain of revocation of charter (for corporations) and impeachment (for representatives).

That is really fucking disturbing.

 

[Choke on the Magic]

I guess that's what you get for completely taking travisbickle out of context..:O

If I'm taking him out of context, then what's the point in a thread about a protest gone awry?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

If I'm taking him out of context, then what's the point in a thread about a protest gone awry?

That's even ignoring his hilarious comment on free space access in China vs the US.

 

[empty vessel]

So you don't actually believe in free speech then, why am I not surprised at the least by your statements.

Of course I do. I just don't believe that corporations are citizens. Per the traditional American understanding of corporations, they are extensions of the government, and, no, the government does not have rights.

That is really fucking disturbing.

I am sorry if you have aspirations to one day use the privileges conferred by incorporation to influence the American government at the expense of the democratic will of its citizens. Its not something I would expect you to care about, given your highly authoritarian worldview.

 

[venne]

I guess you both need a lesson on how this country operates. The congress sets the rules by which we all play. THEY HAVE THE POWER to change the rules by which Wall Street operates. They are the ones who are truly in control.

The entire concept of occupying Wall Street to me is just absurd.

No way they bite the hand that feed them.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tag=re1.galleries

 

[wonderkins]

really? Bet if this shit were going on in China this would happen all over again.

Tank Man has an exalted position in the Hero's Pantheon. That dude has huge balls. HUGE.

 

[Choke on the Magic]

I'm not comparing any of this to Tianamen square, weren't there like hundreds of thousands protesters there? Just that the privatisation of public space has stopped the public from appropriating that space, compared to what I saw in China where the public were gathering together dancing, singing, playing games, exercising in groups of 50-100+ in the public squares.

How is regular use of a park compared to squating/protesting for over a month in a park?
Are the protesters of OWS dancing, singing, playing games, exercising in groups of 50-100?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Of course I do.

No you don't. Your comments about Fox News in the past and it not deserving first amendment protection is proof of that.

I just don't believe that corporations are citizens.

Supreme Court says your wrong though and that's what matters in the end.

I am sorry if you have aspirations to one day use the privileges conferred by incorporation to influence the American government at the expense of the democratic will of its citizens. Its not something I would expect you to care about, given your highly authoritarian worldview.

I'm sorry you're against the first amendment and seek to restrict the basic freedoms of a citizen in this country. It's truly disgusting how you want to destroy the first amendment.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

So you don't actually believe in free speech then, why am I not surprised at the least by your statements.


That is really fucking disturbing.

You would be disturbed...

 

[.GqueB.]

The eviction was for the better. I believe that OWS became more about pride than a message. As I said, I went down there an while the outer area was a great example of protest (kind of), the inner area just wasnt. Inside I witnessed a guy asking for drugs, a shady group who had a dog that seemed to have not been fed for a while (it just looked unhealthy), a shirtless guy just kind of... sitting there. It was hard to watch my girlfriend and I just kind of rushed through it because we didnt want to be in there anymore.

This eviction is a chance for them to regroup, rethink how they approach this protest and change the public view of what they are doing. This is a chance to actually do things rather than just sitting in a park holding up random signs.

I would like to see more along the lines of the mic check videos I saw. I know many of you look down on this but, again, peacefully attending a Q&A will accomplish nothing. They have to make people listen. Politely starting a conversation wont be useful in the least bit (at least not now anyway).

 

[Azih]

I sincerely doubt that.

"Morning boss! I won't be in for a few weeks, I'm off to live in a park."

What seems true and what is true aren't the same things.

http://www.fastcompany.com/1789018/occupy-wall-street-demographics-statistics

 

[travisbickle]

You've never spent a day in New York City have you or Union Square more specifically?

I've spent a short time in New York, I never saw that but you bring up a good point, why did the police feel it necessary to intimidate and use violence against protestors from day one when New York is so used to people gathering in large numbers? what was different?

 

[Choke on the Magic]

Of course I do. I just don't believe that corporations are citizens. Per the traditional American understanding of corporations, they are extensions of the government, and, no, the government does not have rights.



I am sorry if you have aspirations to one day use the privileges conferred by incorporation to influence the American government at the expense of the democratic will of its citizens. Its not something I would expect you to care about, given your highly authoritarian worldview.

But they're owned, operated, and employ US citizens last time I checked. I work for a public owned corporation. One that provides a public service subsidized by the US government. :/

 

[empty vessel]

Supreme Court says your wrong though and that's what matters in the end.

The Supreme Court is obviously wrong. And what's correct is what matters in the end. If the Supreme Court ruled that the government could assign different facilities to different races provided they were separate but equal, is "that what matters in the end"?

 

[BruiserBear]

They are indebted to the real power in this country by the time they get elected. You think they're going to write some tough regulations on the same people who they need to fund their re-election in a couple of years?

Don't be dense. The revolving door between our legislators and the financial industry is very well known and documented.

But my points stands. The people who have the power to change things are in Congress. You're not going to get Wall Street execs to change their ways or step down by sitting in a park for a year. You can however actually get these corrupt people out of congress. THAT is actually possible.

If you had thousands show up in the national mall in Washington DC, and they shamed those who allow these practices to go unchanged, then I think you'd have something, and you'd be less likely to be evicted so fast too.

It just makes more sense to go after those who can actually change things. Of course it's not as leftist and hip sounding as going after those "fat cats", but the truth is congress is your real enemy.

 

[empty vessel]

But they're owned, operated, and employ US citizens last time I checked.

Er, so is the US government itself.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

I've spent a short time in New York, I never saw that but you bring up a good point,

Then you've missed out on a crap ton of spots in New York. Union Square being a great example

what was different?

Those people don't illegally squat and sleep on the premises.

 

[venne]

Supreme Court says your wrong though and that's what matters in the end.

Good thing the Supreme Court never reverses its decisions and that the Constitution is not amendable.

There is no end.

 

[Mercury Fred]

The Supreme Court is obviously wrong. And what's correct is what matters in the end. If the Supreme Court ruled that the government could assign different facilities to different races provided they were separate but equal, is "that what matters in the end"?

Careful, you're oppressing those poor corporate entities by denying them personhood!

 

[Angry Fork]

Supreme Court says your wrong though and that's what matters in the end.

This kind of shit is why I don't like to come into this thread. Every time I see it bumped I get the urge to look at the new posts but then I see shit like this and I feel like screaming.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

The eviction was for the better. I believe that OWS became more about pride than a message. As I said, I went down there an while the outer area was a great example of protest (kind of), the inner area just wasnt. Inside I witnessed a guy asking for drugs, a shady group who had a dog that seemed to have not been fed for a while (it just looked unhealthy), a shirtless guy just kind of... sitting there. It was hard to watch my girlfriend and I just kind of rushed through it because we didnt want to be in there anymore.

This eviction is a chance for them to regroup, rethink how they approach this protest and change the public view of what they are doing. This is a chance to actually do things rather than just sitting in a park holding up random signs.

I would like to see more along the lines of the mic check videos I saw. I know many of you look down on this but, again, peacefully attending a Q&A will accomplish nothing. They have to make people listen. Politely starting a conversation wont be useful in the least bit (at least not now anyway).

I agree with the whole concept of regrouping, the camps got people's attention but that's about all they really could do. As much as I hate to say it they're probably going to have to get Tea Party obnoxious to keep from being conveniently forgotten by the media.

Of course, that's going to be hard to do without the money and corporate support the Tea Party had.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

The Supreme Court is obviously wrong. And what's correct is what matters in the end.

No it's you trying to do the run around of the law established by the US Supreme Court because you don't agree with it. It's the law and you need to come to terms with it.

If the Supreme Court ruled that the government could assign different facilities to different races provided they were separate but equal, is "that what matters in the end"?

You mean the doctrine that the Supreme Court later overturned? Unfortunately it was the law of the land from Plessy till it was overturned, it's price we have to pay at times for accepting the rule of law and the fact that bad decision can be made.

 

[Choke on the Magic]

The Supreme Court is obviously wrong. And what's correct is what matters in the end. If the Supreme Court ruled that the government could assign different facilities to different races provided they were separate but equal, is "that what matters in the end"?

Very subjective statement followed by a hypothetical question.

 

[Azih]

I guess you both need a lesson on how this country operates

No need to get condescending. Ask yourself how much money it costs to run for Congress or for Senate? Where does that money come from?

You yourself said:

"but they don't, because lobbyists and outside interests keep them from doing the right thing"

So why not go after the source of the lobbyists and the outside interests that have the most sway over the countries government (i.e the 1%)? That puts pressure on Washington as well.

That's what Occupy is doing and that's what makes it as effective as it has been. Far more effective than the Tea Party who identified Washington as the *only* problem not Washington *and* Wall Street.

 

[Alucrid]

The more people go there, the more other people are inconvenienced, the more people will want to change something other than just getting protestors out of there. As long as it takes, or as long as the will to continue is there.


So who pays/bribes the congressman? And I don't know how one can say this doesn't happen all the time it seems.

So the method ows uses is to inconvenience people enough so they just go "christ, give them what they want"?

 

[Mercury Fred]

The rights of corporations > the rights of citizens

 

[Baraka in the White House]

But my points stands. The people who have the power to change things are in Congress. You're not going to get Wall Street execs to change their ways or step down by sitting in a park for a year. You can however actually get these corrupt people out of congress. THAT is actually possible.

If you had thousands show up in the national mall in Washington DC, and they shamed those who allow these practices to go unchanged, then I think you'd have something, and you'd be less likely to be evicted so fast too.

It just makes more sense to go after those who can actually change things. Of course it's not as leftist and hip sounding as going after those "fat cats", but the truth is congress is your real enemy.

Ah, yeah I definitely agree the pressure needs to be on Washington.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

This kind of shit is why I don't like to come into this thread. Every time I see it bumped I get the urge to look at the new posts but then I see shit like this and I feel like screaming.

Maybe you should work on some breathing technique to control stress and anger issues.

Good thing the Supreme Court never reverses its decisions and that the Constitution is not amendable.

There is no end.

Where did I say it doesn't?

 

[Evlar]

Very subjective statement followed by a hypothetical question.

Hypothetical?