|
On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized.
Black and white thinking is unhealthy
|
On September 27 2011 03:09 Hawk wrote:If the nukes start voting on bills, it would make sense to protest at the factories. Otherwise, it would still be stupid. You go to the source of the problem. And there is no bug in the system. It's that the laws that govern the financial sector are decidedly pro big money because so many of those politicians are benefiting from the laws they enact, either due to funds and promises from lobbyists, or from their own ventures. It's dumb to say they're guilty of anything when the government, the elected body tasked with protecting its people and not fucking them over as they do when they bend to the financial district, failed catastrophically in many ways. Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:06 No_Roo wrote:On September 27 2011 02:56 Hawk wrote:On September 27 2011 02:36 Madkipz wrote:
The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
So protest the idiots on capitol hill that enable them through laws or lack thereof, not the people who are acting within the confines of the box as drawn up by politicians. Protest the assholes that line their pockets with money from lobbiests from corporations. The anger is directed at the wrong group, and the group that all these random hippies are directing their rage at are just laughing because they aren't affected in the slightest bit. They're not up for election. They've already got the money they need to do what it is that they do. Politicians, especially those entering an election year, are the ones who are have a lot at stake when people get pissed off, and the ones who have the actual power to change things. It's baffling how much energy is being wasted on a futile and worthless protest The suggestion is that 'the top 1%' has at this point throughly rigged the political system, the protesters have as a result gone to a physical manifestation of the source (wall street) rather than a physical manifestation of the symptom (capitol hill). Seems reasonable. That accomplishes nothing though. The politicians enable it. Voters have clout over politicians in the form of election. They do not have any power over the financial sector. You enact change by threatening to take away a career politician's cushy pay, health benefits and perks and force him to work like you. As stupid and discombobulated as the movement was, look at the Tea Party. They brought their rage to the politicians and the polls, not to a place they don't have power. Politicians don't give a shit until they feel you're about to fuck up their status quo, and getting pissed at Wall St. don't challenge that
I wasn't commenting on efficacy, frankly I think the location is mostly irrelevant. I was just explaining the reason that they chose that location. If someone believes the financial sector is the source of the problem, then choosing this location seems perfectly rational.
|
On September 27 2011 03:16 BillClinton wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized. Black and white thinking is unhealthy
When you say black and white thinking is unhealthy, do you mean that black and white thinking is healthy? If not, isn't it true that you are saying black and white thinking is "white" (unhealthy) and not "black" (healthy). And if that's true, aren't you guilty of such thinking as well?
|
On September 27 2011 03:47 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:16 BillClinton wrote:On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized. Black and white thinking is unhealthy When you say black and white thinking is unhealthy, do you mean that black and white thinking is healthy? If not, isn't it true that you are saying black and white thinking is "white" (unhealthy) and not "black" (healthy). And if that's true, aren't you guilty of such thinking as well?
The problem is you only see black and white thinking in terms of black and white, the person you quoted doesn't seem too. Tthe statement "black and white thinking is unhealthy" is properly abstracted and safe from your semantics.
|
On September 27 2011 03:51 No_Roo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:47 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On September 27 2011 03:16 BillClinton wrote:On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized. Black and white thinking is unhealthy When you say black and white thinking is unhealthy, do you mean that black and white thinking is healthy? If not, isn't it true that you are saying black and white thinking is "white" (unhealthy) and not "black" (healthy). And if that's true, aren't you guilty of such thinking as well? The problem is you only see black and white thinking in terms of black and white, the person you quoted doesn't seem too. Tthe statement "black and white thinking is unhealthy" is properly abstracted and safe from your semantics.
Really? Is he safe from the principle of non-contradiction too? Because that'd be news to, just about, every philosopher except G. Priest.
|
On September 27 2011 03:41 No_Roo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:09 Hawk wrote:If the nukes start voting on bills, it would make sense to protest at the factories. Otherwise, it would still be stupid. You go to the source of the problem. And there is no bug in the system. It's that the laws that govern the financial sector are decidedly pro big money because so many of those politicians are benefiting from the laws they enact, either due to funds and promises from lobbyists, or from their own ventures. It's dumb to say they're guilty of anything when the government, the elected body tasked with protecting its people and not fucking them over as they do when they bend to the financial district, failed catastrophically in many ways. On September 27 2011 03:06 No_Roo wrote:On September 27 2011 02:56 Hawk wrote:On September 27 2011 02:36 Madkipz wrote:
The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%.
So protest the idiots on capitol hill that enable them through laws or lack thereof, not the people who are acting within the confines of the box as drawn up by politicians. Protest the assholes that line their pockets with money from lobbiests from corporations. The anger is directed at the wrong group, and the group that all these random hippies are directing their rage at are just laughing because they aren't affected in the slightest bit. They're not up for election. They've already got the money they need to do what it is that they do. Politicians, especially those entering an election year, are the ones who are have a lot at stake when people get pissed off, and the ones who have the actual power to change things. It's baffling how much energy is being wasted on a futile and worthless protest The suggestion is that 'the top 1%' has at this point throughly rigged the political system, the protesters have as a result gone to a physical manifestation of the source (wall street) rather than a physical manifestation of the symptom (capitol hill). Seems reasonable. That accomplishes nothing though. The politicians enable it. Voters have clout over politicians in the form of election. They do not have any power over the financial sector. You enact change by threatening to take away a career politician's cushy pay, health benefits and perks and force him to work like you. As stupid and discombobulated as the movement was, look at the Tea Party. They brought their rage to the politicians and the polls, not to a place they don't have power. Politicians don't give a shit until they feel you're about to fuck up their status quo, and getting pissed at Wall St. don't challenge that I wasn't commenting on efficacy, frankly I think the location is mostly irrelevant. I was just explaining the reason that they chose that location. If someone believes the financial sector is the source of the problem, then choosing this location seems perfectly rational.
I disagree majorly about the location being irrelevant. Why not go protest on the beach them so you can get some color while you sit around all day??
And as far as efficiency, I think it's most certainly called into question by the actions. I mean, look at the reactions. There's plenty of people who think they're a bunch of idiots because there's not even a specific goal. What use is a protest without some kind of goal?
|
On September 27 2011 03:16 ryanAnger wrote:
One of the primary problems with this protest in particular is that there doesn't really seem to be an apparent goal. I mean, I understand the point of the protest, the idea that our government is controlled by the 1% with the money, but they aren't proposing any solution to the problem. They have no ultimatum. Normally, when protests or strikes take place they have an end that they want to meet, and a means in mind to get there. Im seeing no means in this.
Oh they have a goal alright, its those hour long debates and discussions they have with each others. They want to raise the awareness then go back to their own states once something cool has been figured out and then begin rallying for real`s or at least that was my impression of their plan after visiting the occupywallstreet site and looking into it for a good 30 minutes.
|
On September 27 2011 03:53 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:51 No_Roo wrote:On September 27 2011 03:47 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On September 27 2011 03:16 BillClinton wrote:On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized. Black and white thinking is unhealthy When you say black and white thinking is unhealthy, do you mean that black and white thinking is healthy? If not, isn't it true that you are saying black and white thinking is "white" (unhealthy) and not "black" (healthy). And if that's true, aren't you guilty of such thinking as well? The problem is you only see black and white thinking in terms of black and white, the person you quoted doesn't seem too. Tthe statement "black and white thinking is unhealthy" is properly abstracted and safe from your semantics. Really? Is he safe from the principle of non-contradiction too? Because that'd be news to, just about, every philosopher except G. Priest.
You are setting up a straw man. That's highly disrespectful, Don't do that.
|
On September 27 2011 04:05 No_Roo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:53 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On September 27 2011 03:51 No_Roo wrote:On September 27 2011 03:47 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On September 27 2011 03:16 BillClinton wrote:On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized. Black and white thinking is unhealthy When you say black and white thinking is unhealthy, do you mean that black and white thinking is healthy? If not, isn't it true that you are saying black and white thinking is "white" (unhealthy) and not "black" (healthy). And if that's true, aren't you guilty of such thinking as well? The problem is you only see black and white thinking in terms of black and white, the person you quoted doesn't seem too. Tthe statement "black and white thinking is unhealthy" is properly abstracted and safe from your semantics. Really? Is he safe from the principle of non-contradiction too? Because that'd be news to, just about, every philosopher except G. Priest. You are setting up a straw man. That's highly disrespectful, Don't do that.
Explain how I'm setting up a straw man.
|
On September 27 2011 03:58 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:16 ryanAnger wrote:
One of the primary problems with this protest in particular is that there doesn't really seem to be an apparent goal. I mean, I understand the point of the protest, the idea that our government is controlled by the 1% with the money, but they aren't proposing any solution to the problem. They have no ultimatum. Normally, when protests or strikes take place they have an end that they want to meet, and a means in mind to get there. Im seeing no means in this.
Oh they have a goal alright, its those hour long debates and discussions they have with each others. They want to raise the awareness then go back to their own states once something cool has been figured out and then begin rallying for real`s or at least that was my impression of their plan after visiting the occupywallstreet site and looking into it for a good 30 minutes.
I agree, their primary motivation and goals seem to be very clear with only a few minutes of research, I'm not sure where this proposed confusion is coming from.
|
On September 27 2011 03:53 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 03:51 No_Roo wrote:On September 27 2011 03:47 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:On September 27 2011 03:16 BillClinton wrote:On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized. Black and white thinking is unhealthy When you say black and white thinking is unhealthy, do you mean that black and white thinking is healthy? If not, isn't it true that you are saying black and white thinking is "white" (unhealthy) and not "black" (healthy). And if that's true, aren't you guilty of such thinking as well? The problem is you only see black and white thinking in terms of black and white, the person you quoted doesn't seem too. Tthe statement "black and white thinking is unhealthy" is properly abstracted and safe from your semantics. Really? Is he safe from the principle of non-contradiction too? Because that'd be news to, just about, every philosopher except G. Priest.
Lol I see what you did thar.
Why so hostile?
|
On September 26 2011 23:40 jdseemoreglass wrote:
The majority of people who protest at these things are ignorant of politics and don't give a damn about "democracy" or any other ideal. Half of them are there to see action, the other half just wants to stick it to authority figures. All of them are there to feel self-important and/or victimized.
Totally agree with this, that's how it normally is with these sorts of protest. The people know absolutely nothing and have no clue about politics or anything like that, all they want is to annoy the police and "have fun", this is just an excuse.
I bet some of the protesters are genuine, but too many of them are just total idiots who dont even have a clue as to what they're protesting for.
|
The following is my post on their website. I pretty much don't agree with this protest.
So has this turned into a protest about your victimization by NYPD? Some of the actions of the police may have been wrong, even completely wrong, but what is the message?
You realize that the NYPD is filled with guys who've had their brothers and sisters die in 9/11, an attack on the US financial base. The NYPD is filled with former soldiers who've fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. So all I see on this website is pictures and videos of the NYPD hurting you? Is that your message, victimization?
This protest doesn't make sense. You DON'T actually represent 99%, but more like 0.05% of the population. I don't work on Wall Street, but let's be honest about the numbers. Even if each of the 5,000 protesters represented 100 US citizens each, then you still represent less than 1%. If it's really the top 1%, then you should protest every successful actor, musician, surgeon, tv cook, reality celebrity, athlete, basically anyone with any form of financial success.
The top 1% makes around $350k to $400k. This is very successful SMALL and medium business owners. That's who's greedy? Your local successful clothing shops, home improvement shops, the mechanics, your dentist, etc. They're all greedy, I guess, as every human is greedy about some things.
It isn't greed that makes things bad. Adam Smith discovered that competing greedy people could create a competitive marketplace that actually benefits the consumers and society. It's counter-intuitive, but an absolutely beautiful concept that he discovered. This economic freedom to compete in a non-centrally regulated environment, without subsidies and bailouts, is what allowed the US to become such a great country.
The problem is that our money is now devalued by the Federal Reserve, and the government subsidizes everything, creates entitlement programs, and is the central body to regulate so many industries. When you allocate all the power and influence into a single body, then that body becomes susceptible to corporate interest rather than the people. Is that what you're protesting, because you guys are very far from Washington D.C. The people who voted for the bailout are in Congress, along with the President. The citizens voted for representatives who implemented the bailouts, so you guys should be protesting politicians or fellow citizens.
Or maybe it's devaluation of the dollar that you are protesting. If so, go to Washington DC. There's a bank there that devalues the dollar, funds the bailouts for other banks, motor companies, etc, and it funds the wars and numerous subsidies in this countries. Being on Wall Street, the place that is laying off workers left and right, with an incoherent message is trying to accomplish a goal of chaos, with no idea of a solution. Some of those banks have even repaid TARP. You guys are doing the average New Yorker a disservice by diluting the police force that's needed to prevent and enforce crime.
|
Not sure why, but my post is not showing up on their site.
|
United States43971 Posts
On September 27 2011 05:31 Spicy Pepper wrote:
You realize that the NYPD is filled with guys who've had their brothers and sisters die in 9/11, an attack on the US financial base.
I know that you live in a culture where 9/11 is a go to excuse whenever you want to get away with something, whether it be invading places, limiting personal freedoms or, in this case, police brutality but I think we're pushing the limits of it here. No group has ever had their memory so abused, manipulated and polluted as the victims of 9/11. You should be ashamed.
|
On September 27 2011 05:40 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 05:31 Spicy Pepper wrote:
You realize that the NYPD is filled with guys who've had their brothers and sisters die in 9/11, an attack on the US financial base. I know that you live in a culture where 9/11 is a go to excuse whenever you want to get away with something, whether it be invading places, limiting personal freedoms or, in this case, police brutality but I think we're pushing the limits of it here. No group has ever had their memory so abused, manipulated and polluted as the victims of 9/11. You should all be ashamed.
Beat to the punch. What a load of shit.
|
On September 27 2011 05:40 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 05:31 Spicy Pepper wrote:
You realize that the NYPD is filled with guys who've had their brothers and sisters die in 9/11, an attack on the US financial base. I know that you live in a culture where 9/11 is a go to excuse whenever you want to get away with something, whether it be invading places, limiting personal freedoms or, in this case, police brutality but I think we're pushing the limits of it here. No group has ever had their memory so abused, manipulated and polluted as the victims of 9/11. You should be ashamed.
I know people personally who died, and so do many of my friends. I'm well aware of their memories and what the victims think.
I remember sitting around with friends, as we were waiting to get phone calls through to see who was safe, and who was missing. Also, waiting around as they searched the rubble. Please, just go fuck yourself.
|
Sanya12364 Posts
I'm going to back up Kwark on that one. Juxtaposing and equating a non-violent protest with a violent destruction of a building is out of order regardless of your personal connection with any possible 9/11/2001 victims. Looks a lot like grandstanding.
|
United States43971 Posts
Would you like to demonstrate any kind of logical connection between 9/11 and the protests today which might justify police attacking peaceful American citizens or would you just like to keep working the "great national tragedy" angle? I mean I can see why you would because I'm sure over there it works. If people don't immediately fall silent when you say "....cause 9/11" in a solemn voice then you can accuse them of hating America. But it's not quite the same thing as a good case and I can assure you that logic is the one thing the victims of 9/11 would want right now.
Also my dog died and it was very sad so forgive me when I call you retarded. It was over ten years ago but whatever.
|
On September 27 2011 05:45 Spicy Pepper wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2011 05:40 KwarK wrote:On September 27 2011 05:31 Spicy Pepper wrote:
You realize that the NYPD is filled with guys who've had their brothers and sisters die in 9/11, an attack on the US financial base. I know that you live in a culture where 9/11 is a go to excuse whenever you want to get away with something, whether it be invading places, limiting personal freedoms or, in this case, police brutality but I think we're pushing the limits of it here. No group has ever had their memory so abused, manipulated and polluted as the victims of 9/11. You should be ashamed. I know people personally who died, and so do many of my friends. I'm well aware of their memories and what the victims think. I remember sitting around with friends, as we were waiting to get phone calls through to see who was safe, and who was missing. Also, waiting around as they searched the rubble. Please, just go fuck yourself.
Overwhelming arrogance. Justify assault by invoking WTC victims? Then insult the person who called you out on it? Disgusting behavior.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
