Topic: Who occupies the occupiers? (Read 1462 times)

Could this be a reaction to Tea Party politics? One thing I learned from the tea party is that you do not have to be reasonable or sensible to get power in politics. Perhaps that is why everyone is saying "No compromise!"

Wow, I can't even imagine how that is possible.

That sounds very compatible with libertarian views, but not concrete enough.

The newest one I've heard is

"Separation of Corporation and State"

They need a clear message and request soon.
I would prefer "No bail outs, bankers to the courts" over "people over profits, direct democracy".
I mean I'm not against direct democracy, but I can't take seriously a movement that just proposes "people over profits", because that sounds really abstract and will get nowhere.
It would be great if the message also included "end monopoly money" but I think that's not likely to happen.

Have been keeping tabs on it since the first weekend it started: the main messages have been annoyance at the bail outs for the banks, but no bail outs of sorts for the general public; that the people that caused the economic down turn are walking free and with bonuses;  overturn the Citizens United ruling. Though I can understand why people haven't heard it as, as mentioned, other groups have been joining in unrelated to it and the lazy reporting surrounding it. CNN had someone mention the human mic thing was because no one had the cash for a mega-phone. If they had actually asked anyone about it, they would have found out it was because they couldn't use one due to noise ordinances.

What I meant was that it smells like they'll be co-opted just like the Tea party was. I'm sure there is still significant small government sentiment in the Tea party but unless you are already liberty minded, the perception is Tea party = Sarah Palin/Michele Bachmann. I mean, remember Ron Paul got booed at a "Tea Party sponsored" debate for saying the US shouldn't wage war against Iran.

I cannot contradict this observation.  In my own experience, half of the tea parties people are libs and half are neo-con fodder.  Kinda like a dead split between Ron Paul and Sarah Palin.  I have no direct experience with the OWS crowd, so I can't comment on that.  However, if they really are the liberal far left's version of the 'Tea Party' they are their own worst enemy.  The tea party types that showed up for Glenn Beck's 9/12 rally last year left the grounds at least as clean as it was when they arrived, and that was property of the very government that they want downsized.  The OWS crowd are camped out on private property that is managed by a trust that does not have the authority from the donator to evict peaceful patrons, and they are defiling the grounds.

I realize that there is a wide variety of people involved in the Occupy movement.  I cannot fly down to New York to go check it out myself, so I have to rely on secondary sources such as videos, interviews and the comments on the occupywallst.org forum.  What my observations from these secondary sources have told me is that there are a lot of socialists and progressives involved who want more government regulation and intervention to protect them from the corporations.  They want free college education, an increase in the minimum wage and free health care.  There was a very small Occupy protest on my campus and I know some of the people involved.  Again, more progressives and leftists.  That doesn't mean that everyone in the OWS movement is leftist or socialist, but I see it getting coopted in the same way that the Tea Party has.

I know a lot of Tea Partiers, and most of them do indeed want freedom from government and lower taxes and they'll vote in any Republican who promises them said things regardless of voting record or historical stances on the issues.  Also, most of them are pro-war and want us to invade Iran.  I'm sure there are a lot of libertarian leaning Tea Party members as well, but the vibe I've gotten from the ones I've interacted with is that of neo-conservatism, which I detest.   

It's pretty obvious that neither one of you have ever actually attended a Tea Party rally to find out for yourself what they are about.  I have, and at least in my area of the country, freedom from government (and oppressive taxation) is pretty much the major undercurrent.  There are many libertarian leaning groups there, both young and old.  I shouldn't have to say this, but don't depend upon the observations of others for your opinions, particularly not people that listen to the media much.  I think that both of you would likely find that you have much in common with both the Tea Party people and the Wall Street occupiers if you took either event first hand.

It's the left's version of the tea party movement.  So now freedom can be trampled from both the left and the right--by the Occupy Movement and the Tea Party movement.

I agree. The fact that there isn't a singular message means that the media can pick and choose any sub-entity of the movement and paint the whole as that. And anyone who disagrees with that sub-group will be turned off by the whole thing. It's kinda working on me with all this socialist non-sense. The way things are going I don't see this achieving anything, even Obama is using them as a reason to pass his "jobs" bill.

I think they should concentrate in what they have in common. Nobody wants more bail outs either on the "left" or on the "right".
It would be great if people could also agree on "no more public deficit".
Here in spain, the constitution has been recently changed (without referendum) to include, in summary, "public debt must be controlled but is the first thing to pay". I hope that Greece defaults and also Spain when the interest section of public expenditures becomes too high.
Protestors should concentrate in a few points if they want to achieve something.
For me the most important point would be a free monetary market, but I fear that all this will end up just being more financial regulation, just what Christine Lagarde wants.

I hope so, because it smells like the Tea Party thing all over again.

mainstream news chooses to air the stuff that makes them look bad even if there's way better groups to follow. I got to bitch out some family members kuz they were talking: 'oh they don't even know what they're protesting, they just want to protest- idiots....' so I asked them who told them what to think and they start talking about their U.S. news stations.... more like propaganda stations than news stations....

From what I can find on the internet, it looks to me that the media is focusing on particular groups within the protests, intentionally or otherwise.  It doesn't look like there is any single group, but some groups make more news than others.

Hasn't it already been co-opted? All I see on TV are banners saying "Tax the rich" "More welfare" etc. And right wingers seem to be cheering on the kops as they bash the protesters. Or is the corporate media doing a great job obfuscating what's going on?

I wonder if the unions and fellow travelers who are trying to co-opt the Occupy Wall Street realize that they already are in the midst of the Tea Party?

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/2011/10/05/oath-keepers-and-the-wayseers-to-occupy-the-occupation/