OCCUPY WALLSTREET!

[vaylorie]

Hasbinbad,
Don't be foolish. Nowhere have I said that all laws that were ever written are to be considered valid. What I will say is that no society can be viable in the long term without the creation and enforcement of laws. This is a universal truth.

I agree that not all laws are just which is why there are mechanisms in place to change and adapt laws as thoughts, cultures and morality experiences changes over time.

Where I part ways from the OWS folks is in the methodology that you implement to effect change in the existing laws. Should everyone be free to follow only the laws that they personally view are just? If I find it morally acceptable to stab you, should the law no longer be enforced? Or, if I find it morally acceptable to drive 100mph in a school zone is it an outrage when I get ticketed?

Is the correct method to enact change to just not abide by laws? I'm a fairly deep rooted conservative and I personally agree with many of the issues that OWS raises (apart from the obvious liberal / redistribution ones) and I believe that OWS could receive mainstream support across Republican and Democrats alike if the approach utilized was inside of the existing processes and a concise message was able to be delivered.

If you actually represent the '99%' (read: mainstream America) and want the movement to be able to actually enact change, then you would change tactics. (slightly) You have had marginal success so far but more and more people can no longer relate based on the methods used. Organize, deliver a clear message, form a 99% party even if that's what it takes, but violence & shanty towns & constant police presence & different viewpoints from each protester is killing your cause.

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Obviously advertising is powerful, but the consumer does have the ability to 'choose' which product most appealed to them through advertising.

This is completely untrue. As long as companies are allowed to lie on their advertising, as long as companies can legally price-fix, there is no real choice in consumption. There has to be regulation.

It's this stance that likens Libertarians to Republicans. They're all for personal rights until you try to limit rights of corporations, and then they go ape shit.

Originally Posted by vaylorie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is the correct method to enact change to just not abide by laws?

How exactly do you propose we start the process to limit the amount of laws that our congressmen are allowed to break? Did you know that they're immune to insider trading laws? Should I contact my congressman and tell him that I know and that I think he should change his ways? No, it's legal, and the only way to fix peacefully this is going to be through mass demonstrations. When that fails, violence will ensue. Congress has their chance to step down and stop being piggypiggypiggypiggypiggy greedy. Presently, they're passing on the opportunity, and the sheep such as yourself are just feeding into it deeper.

When the coup comes, the people on the fence will fall on the side of those rising up. Those like you will die like the 1%.

[Kraftwerk]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How exactly do you propose we start the process to limit the amount of laws that our congressmen are allowed to break? Did you know that they're immune to insider trading laws? Should I contact my congressman and tell him that I know and that I think he should change his ways? No, it's legal, and the only way to fix peacefully this is going to be through mass demonstrations. When that fails, violence will ensue. Congress has their chance to step down and stop being piggypiggypiggypiggypiggy greedy. Presently, they're passing on the opportunity, and the sheep such as yourself are just feeding into it deeper.

When the coup comes, the people on the fence will fall on the side of those rising up. Those like you will die like the 1%.

That insider trading legality for congressmen made a bit sick. Don't forget the laws that are broken daily by a lack of enforced regulation in our financial markets. The SEC and our government has created some pretty stringent rules, just nothing gets regulated or enforced.

So to sum up Vaylore, when OWS breaks the law it's bad. When banksters and career politicians do, it's okay. Like I said earlier, that guy is not worth anyone's time. He is still talking in terms of Republican/Democrat as if those political parties even matter. I wouldn't want the support of a Republican or Democrat for my cause of changing the way our country works, so why would OWS alter their methods to gain the support of corrupt and inept political parties?

[vaylorie]

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

so why would OWS alter their methods to gain the support of corrupt and inept political parties?

Maybe because they claim to be a populist movement and about 70% of Americans associate themselves with one of the two parties. Just a thought.

If the goal is to be a pack of retards out protesting for a couple months and then fizzling out with no real change, then mission accomplished. If they want to enact actual change to the system.. just some advice.

[Kraftwerk]

Originally Posted by vaylorie [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Maybe because they claim to be a populist movement and about 70% of Americans associate themselves with one of the two parties. Just a thought.

If the goal is to be a pack of retards out protesting for a couple months and then fizzling out with no real change, then mission accomplished. If they want to enact actual change to the system.. just some advice.

You made this easy and bulletpointed the most important parts of OWS -

Problem #1 - 70% of Americans associate themselves with one of two parties. Hopefully escalating protests will bring this number down so we can get rid of the political parties in their current embodiment and start fresh.

Problem #2 - If they want to enact actual change to the system. Hopefully we don't just enact some superficial changes, I'd much rather see a complete overhaul.

So you're stating OWS should stop doing what they're doing so that the complete and necessary overhaul of the political system, financial systems and methods with which our government operates can be avoided and TPTB can maintain their status quo and go un-altered. I'm glad you're against OWS rather than in support of it.

[vaylorie]

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So to sum up Vaylore, when OWS breaks the law it's bad. When banksters and career politicians do, it's okay.

Good misrepresentation Kraftwerk. I definitely remember the post in which I said it is okay for politicians to break the law!

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by Kraftwerk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So to sum up Vaylore, when OWS breaks the law it's bad. When banksters and career politicians do, it's okay.

They're not actually breaking the law, though. The system is rigged to favour those in power. They're reaping the rewards. They get away with it because some people are willing to blindly follow since they have a taste of happiness. The reality is, they're addicted to servitude. McDonald's, religion, professional sports, Facebook, they're all examples of what's truly oppressive in this society. You might think that you enjoy participating in the partaking of it, but the reality is, they're all just mechanisms of brainwashing.