And now we're terrorists..

[Daldolma]

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

Adopting the goals stated by the Occupy London Movement might not be a bad idea, for starters:

• The current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives; this is where we work towards them.
• We are of all ethnicities, backgrounds, genders, generations, sexualities dis/abilities and faiths. We stand together with occupations all over the world.
• We refuse to pay for the banks’ crisis.
• We do not accept the cuts as either necessary or inevitable. We demand an end to global tax injustice and our democracy representing corporations instead of the people.
• We want regulators to be genuinely independent of the industries they regulate.
• We support...actions to defend our health services, welfare, education and employment, and to stop wars and arms dealing.
• We want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich.
• The present economic system pollutes land, sea and air, is causing massive loss of natural species and environments, and is accelerating humanity towards irreversible climate change. We call for a positive, sustainable economic system that benefits present and future generations.
• We stand in solidarity with the global oppressed and we call for an end to the actions of our government and others in causing this oppression.

This is a perfect example of the problem with the OWS movement.

First of all, it's absurdly vague.

Global tax injustice? How so? What is unjust about current tax rates? How could those rates be fixed? If you ask conservatives about tax rates, they say they're unjustly harsh for the rich.

Actions to defend? That's unbelievably vague. You're never going to see a politician say he is attacking your health services. They all are "defending" your health services, welfare, education, and employment. The point is: how?

That group of statements touches on government bail-outs, taxes, corporate regulation, health care, welfare, education, employment, military spending, military action, foreign aid, environmental conservation, economic reform, and foreign policy. It doesn't cite or promote a single piece of legislation or any particular reform. It's unbelievably broad and vague.

You might as well draft a policy goal of making the world a better place.