Is anyone else plain tired of the feeble attempts of Trade Unions, politicians, corporations and political parties to co-opt a movement which defiantly stands against everything these money-driven, corrupt entities represent? Show me your spirit fingers, occupiers! Chris Hedges phrased it perfectly in his Truthdig column on October 17th: “The faux liberal reformers, whose abject failure to stand up for the rights of the poor and the working class, have signed on to this movement because they fear becoming irrelevant.” Occupy LA, in solidarity with all Occupy movements, refuses to align itself with political parties nor existing political and social organizations. We do not seek political office, nor endorse our own candidate, never mind that of anyone else’s party. We are not a brand, a commodity, a soundbite, a marketing slogan. For this reason, the Occupy Movement is greater in number than both the Republican and Democratic parties combined. A recent poll showed it had 57% support of the American public, with 72% of those same people believing the rich should be taxed more. By the time this article comes to press, those numbers will have increased enormously. It is a global movement of people resisting existing corrupt corporate systems of power through peaceful, non-violent civil disobedience.
The Occupy Movement is a politician and corporation’s wet dream.
From Ron Paul’s attempts to hijack the movement, to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s recent email urging supporters to sign a petition backing the wave of Occupy Wall Street protests, we are witnessing not an articulation of support for the movement, but the demise in the need and relevance of existing political and corporate structures, and their desperate attempts to piggyback onto something which might revive their own drooping stems. Why else would MoveOn send out an email which invites its member to support Occupy Wall St, not by joining an Occupy movement, but by attending one of their events?! “How is this connected to Occupy Wall Street?” the email asks, without ever responding to its own question. If MoveOn wanted to be in solidarity with the movement, they’d be sending people to the Occupy movement, not co-opting its supporters for their own separate events, nor soliciting campaign donations for their own organization by shamelessly using Occupy Wall St in emails such as this, sent out to its members on October 18th:
“In addition to providing all the support we can to #OccupyWallStreet, at MoveOn we're scrambling to launch a huge campaign to make Wall Street pay. We're organizing mass meetings in hundreds of cities. We've hired filmmakers to tell the stories that the mainstream media are ignoring. We're turning up the heat on the banks by helping people move their money. And we're helping organize two major national days of protest in November.Together, we can make sure this momentum keeps building. But this all takes money—for materials, coordination, tech, and supporting thousands of volunteers. This is the moment. Can you chip in $5?”
How about suggesting individuals spend five dollars on purchasing organic vegetables from a local farmer, turn it into a stew, and feed it to cold, hungry protestors, under police attack in Zucotti Park? That might actually be “helping” the movement. I fail to see how my five dollars, sent to your bureaucratic faux-liberal bullshit non-profit, will help anyone but those in your pay collecting a salary every month. Hearing rumors that MoveOn owned the domain name OccupyTogether.org, I emailed Occupy Together to verify the truth of this. They vehemently denied this was the case, and explained that “The only place we've even mentioned MoveOn was in an update about why we were choosing to go with MeetUp. We quickly realized that even though we were only trying to illustrate how much attention occupytogether.org received, we shouldn't have pointed out specific organizations or public figures that had mentioned us. We've tried our best to stay as neutral as possible as an information resource.” Unfortunately, Occupy Together’s attempts to stay neutral did not prevent them from aligning themselves with Meetup, whom they describe as “good souls”, shortly before expounding upon the brilliance of their online tools and technical support, which they have integrated into their site. If Meetup were truly “good souls”, Occupy Together, they would have provided you with the resources to implement your own tools. Instead they created a reliance upon their online resources, successfully piggybacking onto the movement and gaining themselves extra press. “Good souls” give without expecting anything in return, certainly not a massive plug nor free advertising space.
But the most shameless act of piggy-backing so far has come from Act Blue, a political committee which enables online Democratic Party candidate fundraising. They have released ‘Occupy Wall Street’ bumper stickers, t-shirts and yard signs on their website. They are supposedly “free” - though Act Blue, of course, asks for a donation, with the insidiously worded message that: “your contribution today will help offset the costs and support our continued involvement, spreading the message, and supporting the Occupy Wall Street movement.”
Act Blue's efforts to make money from the movement is rank hypocrisy, greed and opportunism. The Occupy Movement is independent of existing corrupt political parties and the financial structures they operate within. We do not engage in corporate activity of any kind, nor condone organizations which use the name of any Occupy Movement for economic or political advantage.
But it seems like no one out there seems to quite get it. If you know of any other piggybackers out there the public should avoid, please leave them in the comments section of this blog.
On a side note, on Tuesday 25th October at 7.30 pm, we will have a special General Assembly to discuss an important proposal regarding Occupy LA’s position re: political parties. I urge you all to attend. If anyone has the precise wording of the proposal, might be an idea to send it to the web team so they can post it online prior to the GA, or leave it here in the comments section.

125 Comments
Correction - defamation of character
Submitted by raywzup on
I agree with Ruth of the feeble attempts of Trade Unions, politicians, corporations and political parties to co-opt a movement. But when has Congressman Ron Paul ever attempted to hijack the movement? Your link to an article by the DailyPaul about Alex Jones could hardly be used as evidence. Just because Alex Jones support Ron Paul? That's Alex Jones' business, and his personal decision. Ron Paul has nothing to do with it.
Ruth's claim is as ridiculous as (for example) pointing out an article in the DailyBruin about UC Regents and concluding that Obama is co-opting the movement. Simply based on the idea that the UC Regents support Obama.
And about myself, yes I like Ron Paul, so what? Are you saying that people who likes a certain someone is not allowed a voice in the Occupy movement? I have never tried to "sell" Ron Paul to anyone. But I have been sharing with others about my point of view in abolishing the Federal Reserve. I feel I have as much right as others who have been sharing the view of taxing the rich. Those are issues we are sharing with each other. But just because we are calling for End the Fed, you simply dismiss people like me as Ron Paul supporters trying to hijack the movement? That's ridiculous. That'll be like me calling for the dismissal of anyone that advocates taxing the rich to be from the Democratic Party - a ridiculous notion.
So Ms. Ruth Fowler, if you want to voice out your opinion about the feeble attempts of certain unions, corporations, and special interests that tried to co-opt the movement, I whole-heartedly agree. But to point out RON PAUL when he has nothing but sincere things to say show either your ignorance or a deliberat attempt to defame his character.
OH, BALONEY!
Submitted by Corporal Thing A. on
I saw the Paulina's come and set up a table In FRONT of the Occupy sign in table and start aggressively pushing their dvd's towards passers-by. I had to tell them that they HAD there own space over at the farmers market . How would they like it if we just moved in and invaded ? Of course, they got all huffy and spouting platitudes of free speech at the time. Just trouble-makers and drama queens.
Corporal Thing A. 'Civilizationalist'
"How would they like it if we
Submitted by JtotheEtotheFtotheF on
"How would they like it if we just moved in and invaded ?"
Isn't that what the Occupy movement did? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. We should at least have dialog with the movements kin.
"Of course, they got all huffy and spouting platitudes of free speech at the time. Just trouble-makers and drama queens."
I am sure many a Right-Winger has assigned those same words to the 99%
Just sayin Yo
Paulina
Submitted by raywzup on
Again this is the type of stupid argument I was retorting to. There were a whole bunch of other people trying to push their preferred candidates, I saw a whole union group wearing Obama buttons when they were marching. But to conclude that RON PAUL himself orchestrated this is as ridiculous as someone who accuse Obama for putting the buttons on the union protesters. What individuals do has nothing to do with the candidates. Stop the accusation via guilt-by-association!
Another deceitful game played by a Pauler here ...hmmmm
Submitted by maryjanie on
Resorting to clever word games with new incorporations [incorporating here yes ] a word or concept not used before...see this written by pauler above:
'But to conclude that RON PAUL himself orchestrated this"
WHEN did anyone say that RP HIMSELF did anything here at OLA or sent his forces by his own direction conducing his orchestra to invade Los Angeles ?
no one. of course.
a way of being defensive, misleading and changing the statements made to have others LOOK RIDICULOUS when the writer is playing mean deceitful games. No fair .
Ah ffs
Submitted by Fex on
Look. There's a difference of discrediting Ron Paul supporters and their ideas, and discrediting an asshole. For instance, about the incident mentioned with the Ron Paul supporter with a bullhorn who wasn't authorised, etc- that's an asshole. There's a difference.
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, but hell yes I encourage them to come to Occupy. I encourage Obama supporters too (ugh, I don't support Obama either). Assuming every Ron Paul supporter is going to be yelling and/or trying to hijack the movement for Ron Paul *is* being biased and discriminatory. There's tons of Ron Paul supporters who are not like that, they go unnoticed because they're not advertising constantly and definitely aren't being assholes. The assholes are the ones that get noticed.
This is true for a supporter of any type.
An Obama supporter with an unauthorized bullhorn trying to either convert people in the Occupy movement or speak for all of us would also be, yup, an asshole.
I've known asshole loudmouths that are dems, reps, green partiers, anarchists, socialists, free market capitalists, independents, what have you.
It doesn't invalidate everything they stand for, it simply makes that one individual's personality not likeable.
"Word following word- I wrought words. Deed following deed, I wrought deeds." - The Havamal
Yes, I actually heard unauthorized bullhorn PAULing loudly 2x
Submitted by maryjanie on
so easy to deny having not heard or refusing to admit what infiltration occurs...
two separate times I heard a male on loud bullhorn near fountain area loudly and continually promoting Ron PAUL and his ideas....and he could not be shut up by many around who tried, as he was UNAUTHORIZED to use mic w/bullhorn to promote separatist and individual political candidates, PR for his cause, or interrupt what else was happening in that square.
so to claim it aint so is not true and may be deliberately defensively misleading.
Occupy Together
Submitted by OccupyNews.net on
When I was creating OccupyNews.net, I noticed that many of the Occupy Together sites did not have RSS feeds. RSS feeds are a useful tool for keeping tabs on what Occupy sites are doing all over the country and the world as anytime an Occupy Blog site with an RSS feed posts a new topic, it appears within minutes on Occupy News at the top of the page.
One reason that Occupy Together blog sites may not have many RSS feeds is because when one signs up for Word Press, Word Press does not allow for more than one or two RSS feeds per signee.
So the dozens upon dozens of Occupy together sites that do not have RSS feeds could mean they are being created by a select few people who may not even reside in the cities in which they are posting Occupy Together sites.
As I put together OccupyNews I decided to leave out the Occupy Together sites since most of those sites did not have an RSS Feed which meant it could be just a select few people posting up dozens of Occupy sites.
I consider the putting up of multiple Occupy websites by one person or entity a form of fraud since that would mean people are putting up Occupy sites who don't even live near where they are putting up the Occupy sites.
I emailed my concern to the Occupy Together site that did not have RSS feeds and never heard back. It is a collossial waste of time to have to keep clicking on links to see if there is any new information, that is why RSS feeds are important for any blog site interested in having others know about their situation on an as it happens basis.
The one downside however regarding RSS feeds is that it makes easier for the government to keep tabs on the movement, however, I think it is more important that Occupy blogs be able to track each other so they can learn from each other and what each Occupy location is experiencing on a day to day basis.
www.occupynews.net, www.swarmthebanks.com, www.wallstreetchange.com, www.bankprotests.com, www.dailyprotest.com, www.parallelforeclosure.com, www.credit-protector.blogspot.com, www.myalexlogic.com, www.bloggersagainstchasebank.com,
Amazing SITE im sharing it with everyone.
Submitted by Justice4all on
We have to fight against the mainstream media and be the source o four own news becasue the mainstream media is controlled by the 1% and im sick o fnot seeing more coverage of the occupations going on all over the country.
"IF you think in terms of a year, plant a seed, if in terms of ten years, plant trees, if in terms of 100 years, teach the people" -Confucius
WE MUST TEACH THE PEOPLE!
Thanks for the nice comment, Justice4all.
Submitted by OccupyNews.net on
Eventually, people who view Occupy News may decide to respond to an Occupy blog from another part of the country just to say hello and to start a dialogue between different occupy blog sites.
I see this as positive Piggybacking since the Occupy News site allows viewers to be able to instantly read short excerpts (with link) from over 100 Occupy sites and what their biggest concerns are at any given moment.
www.occupynews.net, www.swarmthebanks.com, www.wallstreetchange.com, www.bankprotests.com, www.dailyprotest.com, www.parallelforeclosure.com, www.credit-protector.blogspot.com, www.myalexlogic.com, www.bloggersagainstchasebank.com,
"For this reason, the Occupy
Submitted by Mahayana on
"For this reason, the Occupy Movement is greater in number than both the Republican and Democratic parties combined. A recent poll showed it had 57% support of the American public"
Ruth, I have heard percentages similar to what you've stated regarding public support for the movement, but "support" is very different from being 100% behind the movement. I think you have for example Democrats who say "Yeah, I support the OWS movement because I think they are addressing important issues" yet these people are still democrats. Although dissapointed perhaps in Obama, they are still voting for him in the next election. I think the OWS message might be a little too radical for most to be 100% behind it.
In this clip which was aired on NPR the 21st of oct, one commentator gives 2-3% as the number for total support for the movement. (Not just some dude that makes 100k+/yr who says "yeah, those guys have a right to be mad", but has a cushy job so doesn't really give a crap what happens.)
Discussion begins at 5:20.
http://www.npr.org/2011/10/21/141597304/week-in-politics-troop-withdrawal-gop-debate-jobs
I was going to bring up the Ron Paul thing but another poster addressed that I see. Yeah, co-opting anything is not really Ron Pauls style. I take it from the post that you are not an "End the Fed" supporter. I feel that the fed is synonymous with big banks. I would love to hear your take on it one of these days.
Thanks Ruth, I always enjoy reading your posts.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves - in their separate, and individual capacities. -Abe
End the Fed? YES!
Submitted by Ruth Fowler on
No, I'm totally an End the Fed supporter. Hate the Fed. I just find it so hypocritical that people are using the occupy movement for their own political traction. If they left the electioneering behind, rolled up their sleeves, and stuck in and got dirty like the rest of us, minus their own slogans and campaigns, I'd be way happy. And that includes Ron Paul.
well Ruth.. you're not running for President, or are you?
Submitted by helper on
I mean, give good reasons NOT to vote for Ron Paul, or vote for no one?
Ron Paul and the MIC
Submitted by ctizzie on
Ron Paul received the vast majority of his funding in the 2008 Presidential Campaign from the Military Industrial Complex. The top contributors to his campaign were international weapons manufacturers like Raytheon, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, etc... For a candidate who supposedly espouses a non-interventionist foreign policy, there are a lot of weapons manufacturers among his greatest contributors. I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer by any supporter as to why this is true...
See for yourself: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00005906
Straight up LIES
Submitted by raywzup on
That's the biggest bs I ever read. First of all, if you look at his top 3 contributors, it's the active military personnels - that means the brave men & women fighting in the military, obviously that means they support Ron Paul's idea to BRING ALL THE TROOPS HOME NOW!
But your link pointing out the companies is ridiculous. Do you even know how contributions are reported? Other candidates received their donations from the CEO, Directors, Presidents, VP, etc. Ron Paul are getting the donations from the WORKERS that are normal regular wage employees of the companies who are sick of seeing the very company they are employed for contributing to the weapons of wars. I know because I'm an Aerospace Engineer!
I pointed out facts. You
Submitted by ctizzie on
I pointed out facts. You reacted with nothing but conjecture, personal bias, and hostility. I'll let anyone who wants to read the facts decide for themself. I don't think your hostility furthers your cause - or adds the clarity you may have sought.
CALLING LIES FACTS is your version of Truth?
Submitted by raywzup on
I will simply point out the lies from your own paragraph. Let readers do their own research:
RP received the vast majority of his funding in the 2008 Presidential Campaign from the Military Industrial Complex (LIE - Military Industrial Complex?? TRUTH - they are from individual active military personnel, meaning the actual soldiers, navy officers, air force officers, etc.). The top contributors to his campaign were international weapons manufacturers like Raytheon, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman (LIE - from Weapons Manufacturers? TRUTH - your sentence insinuates special interests involvements when they are actually donations from wage-working individuals averageing ~$50 per donation) For a candidate who supposedly espouses a non-interventionist foreign policy, there are a lot of weapons manufacturers among his greatest contributors (LIE - straw man argument; TRUTH - there are many engineers who worked for companies like these who's sick of seeing more weapons being built for wars)
I have yet to receive a satisfactory answer by any supporter as to why this is true... (LIE - false claim; TRUTH - You just did, but you ignore the facts by skipping details in your investigation)
Candidate Donations
Submitted by Mahayana on
Hey ctizzie, the "Military Industrial Complex" did not neccessarily contribute to Ron Paul. I am unclear really about what constitutes as a "US Army contribution". The website says this:
The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.
So if I was enlisted in the Army & personally donated, would that fall into the "US Army" donation category? Ron Paul is VERY anti-war unless absolutely necessarry so I can't imagine that the Military and contractors profiting in the billions would support a man, who once hired would likely make them lose money.
It is intersting to note that the number one contributor for Obama in this same election exceeds that of Ron Paul's entire contribution list!
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves - in their separate, and individual capacities. -Abe
You still don't get the point!
Submitted by raywzup on
Again this is the type of stupid argument I was retorting to. There were a whole bunch of other people trying to push their preferred candidates, I saw a whole union group wearing Obama buttons when they were marching. But to conclude that RON PAUL himself orchestrated this is as ridiculous as someone who accuse Obama for putting the buttons on the union protesters. What individuals do has nothing to do with the candidates. Stop the accusation via guilt-by-association!
This movement brought to you by Pepsi
Submitted by Mahayana on
Since the occupy movement began, I have been wondering where its roots began. Where did the money come from to pay for the webhosting, website, legal advice etc....?
Does anybody know if there are any ties with OWS to the "Alliance of Youth Movements"? There are some interesting people & corporate sponsors involved.
http://www.movements.org/pages/the-summit#2010
http://allyoumov.3cdn.net/b237e3ae9bd04eaf6d_4lm6bj8n6.pdf
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves - in their separate, and individual capacities. -Abe
AdBusters sent out a call in July
Submitted by MAry Rose on
But OWS is much bigger than its origins, fortunately.
http://www.adbusters.org/blogs/adbusters-blog/occupywallstreet.html
It's all donation. Our
Submitted by Ruth Fowler on
It's all donation. Our personal web hosting is provided by a guy onsite who had his own. Legal advice is free. We don't solicit money, we solicit solid help and advice. Money has been given, but we don't accept money from political parties, corporations, organized groups or politicians.
Ruth,
Submitted by ctizzie on
Ruth,
I love your misty-eyed idealism - but the reality is - much of what we are (at least in Los Angeles) is a direct result of the tireless efforts of ORGANIZERS who have outside affiliations. If you don't embrace that, you are perpetuating a clear myth that there has not been the involvement of Labor since the beginning. I should know. I was there in the beginning.
That is not to say that Labor itself has "co-opted" the movement, but the simple reality is that the only people with the organizational know-how in today's society to make an ongoing event like this possible are trained organizers, and those people typically hail from Labor. We should be open about this, embrace their help and support, diminish their careerist objectives where possible, and utilize their unique skill sets to accomplish our 'goal' of economic justice for all. In the end, that's what matters.
I'm an unaffiliated former-grassroots organizer. My only commitment is to the Occupy Movement. However, even saying that, I have been stonewalled by the culture of OccupyLA at almost every turn whenever I try to help. The Committees, some more than others, are insular. The 'leadership' is not open, and yes - perhaps these individuals do sometimes let their personal agendas supplant the greater good of the Occupy Movement. Yet I still hear how 'overworked' everyone is.
On that score - I'm calling bullshit. Stagger committee meetings (as passed the GA with consensus a FULL TWO WEEKS AGO, be more inclusive (including the Media, which sometimes seems to have its own agenda), and utilize the skills of the trained organizers (while being forthright about who they are, until such time as others can be trained to do what they do) and we will have a much better chance of success than this meandering, stumbling collective of political neophites ever could.
We need to confront the efforts of others to co-opt the momentum we clearly have at every opportunity. It is a very real thing. Howard Dean's Democracy For America is even giving away 'We Are the 99" bumper stickers.
I am not a careerist. I don't want a job in the Los Angeles City Hall, or at any other of these entrenched, political organizations. I am not 'the professional left.' If you want my help, let me help.
Thank You
Submitted by Gmcg on
Thank you ctizzie for so eloquently stating what I and others have felt about this issue. I personally have attempted several times to volunteer, work, do something and have been stonewalled or dealt with individuals who are non-responsive. Occupy LA repeatedly states they need help..stop complaining and come down here. Well I am there and I do not go to have a party and hang out with friends, I want to really be involved. And am quite passionate about it. I am not so sure about getting Labor too involved in the movement..but I know for certainty that there are quite a few people who want to get involved but are receiving no response or as you saw are stonewalled. If they continue to alienate people who want to really participate then it will be their own downfall and have wasted a perfect opportunity. Like my comrade above said, "if you want my help, let me help."
Thanks.
Submitted by ctizzie on
Thanks.
It maddens me to no end to see people walking away, every single day, shaking their heads in frustration. There are so many talented people I met in week 1 who I no longer see. Ever.
Disenfranchising the already disenfranchised because some undefined, inner-circle won't adapt their clearly imperfect system to be more inclusive is what is stifling this movement in Los Angeles (as well as a clearly, careerist-driven, cozy relationship with City Hall). It's frustrating to watch because - as a student of history and someone who listens avidly to what those who have organized social movements in the past have to share with us - we are making a lot of mistakes that can easily be resolved.
If we wonder why LA seems a lot like an extension of Burning Man instead of an active movement like those at Zuccotti Park, it has a lot to do with how those who want to get involved have been stifled from participation and how there is a dearth of defined opposition in this city.
If you still have an interest in getting involved, please get in touch with me. My Twitter account is the same as this handle, ("ctizzie"). I'm going to be on site, 24/7 Wed. and Thurs. to try to get more involved in the process, and I'd love to get in touch with others who have had a similar experience as I have had.
Correction - defamation of character
Submitted by raywzup on
I agree with Ruth of the feeble attempts of Trade Unions, politicians, corporations and political parties to co-opt a movement. But when has Congressman Ron Paul ever attempted to hijack the movement? Your link to an article by the DailyPaul about Alex Jones could hardly be used as evidence. Just because Alex Jones support Ron Paul? That's Alex Jones' business, and his personal decision. Ron Paul has nothing to do with it.
Ruth's claim is as ridiculous as (for example) pointing out an article in the DailyBruin about UC Regents and concluding that Obama is co-opting the movement. Simply based on the idea that the UC Regents support Obama.
And about myself, yes I like Ron Paul, so what? Are you saying that people who likes a certain someone is not allowed a voice in the Occupy movement? I have never tried to "sell" Ron Paul to anyone. But I have been sharing with others about my point of view in abolishing the Federal Reserve. I feel I have as much right as others who have been sharing the view of taxing the rich. Those are issues we are sharing with each other. But just because we are calling for End the Fed, you simply dismiss people like me as Ron Paul supporters trying to hijack the movement? That's ridiculous. That'll be like me calling for the dismissal of anyone that advocates taxing the rich to be from the Democratic Party - a ridiculous notion.
So Ms. Ruth Fowler, if you want to voice out your opinion about the feeble attempts of certain unions, corporations, and special interests that tried to co-opt the movement, I whole-heartedly agree. But to point out RON PAUL when he has nothing but sincere things to say show either your ignorance or a deliberat attempt to defame his character.
Solidarity
Submitted by MAry Rose on
Ruth, I understand your concern that some folks and organizations who are in fact tools of the 1% will try to cash in on the Occupy movement, but I don't understand why you would advocate making the movement exclusive to those who are able to occupy 24/7. This movement will actually bring about changes necessary to make ours a more just society when a vast majority of the people who actually vote but aren't actively occupying are persuaded that the movement's demands are sound and achievable. Why would you want to snub like-minded organizations that have been working for decades on these same issues when they call for solidarity with OWS?
Are you aware that unions have been staging creative protests at banks across the country, fighting foreclosures, demanding that the financial elite pay back what they've stolen since long before OWS took off? Like any other human institution, OWS included, unions are flawed. But they have historically been THE voice for workers and are responsible for abolishing child labor in this country, for securing a minimum wage, weekends off, paid vacations — in short, for creating the now-dwindling middle class.
It's important to distinguish who's an enemy and who's a friend. If OWS and/or Occupy LA get bogged down in the notion that this is a unique movement with no historical precedent and that, therefore, it defies the law of nature that tells us there is strength in numbers, it risks being ultimately ineffectual. There are tons of kindred spirits out there who have been working for the cause for ages and are already well-organized. Be smart and use them well. But, please, don't tell us to get screwed.
I DO NOT ADVOCATE FULL-TIME, OCCUPIER-ONLY INVOLVEMENT!!
Submitted by Ruth Fowler on
I'm absolutely not advocating the movement only be for people who occupy 24/7, and if that is anywhere in the article, point it out to me and I will remove it, as it's a mistake. I don't occupy 24/7. I've slept over once, and usually leave about 4am and drive home. I have a full time job and since the occupation started, have had no sleep, no social life, and no time because I'm trying to do both. It's been exhausting and glorious, and I can only do both as I have a flexible full time job. Most people don't have this luxury, and we understand this, hence we hold GA's every night at 7.30. We want the 99% to be involved in all and any way possible. We do not want corporate nor political backing, nor do we wish to be hijacked by an existing organization for their own purposes - particularly so that they can raise money using the Occupy name. This is against everything we believe in. We are for small business, against branding, against corporation,
No where does Ruth say such a
Submitted by Furley on
No where does Ruth say such a thing in her article.. "Roll up your sleeves" Yeah, that means do what you are able to do within the realm of your life's responsibilities. And most importatnly don't fucking sit on your computer all day and critisize, which is most Americans seem to be doing.
My Occupy Wall Street Videos & Interviews from NYC
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2B8CD45D7CE2E38B&feature=viewall
solidarity
Submitted by seniorcit on
I agree with MAry Rose. The strength of the movement is the 99%. If those who wish to be supportive and contribute in many ways are discouraged from doing so for fear of "co-opting", then the 99% will begin to shrink to a smaller number. Some of us in the general public are not in a position to make a 100% commitment (and there are millions of us), but strongly desire to participate/contribute in some way to help OWS reach its goals. Some guidance would be appreciated as to how that can be done without having it appear that we have ulterior motives.
We very much stand in agreement with OWS and just want to help.
JOIN US NOW!
Submitted by Ruth Fowler on
My suggestion would be you attend GA's, and learn how to set one up in your own neighborhood. What are your particular skills? Do you wish to do something at home, or drop in once a week, or give materially? We can't 'order' people to do something at home, without you taking enough personal responsibility to come in, and talk to us about what you can do, and when. Start that dialogue now. Do it here, on this thread. I'll respond immediately and direct you somewhere. I don't do many marches or protests, as I'm involved in Facilitation and Outreach, and also writing for media, PR and web. There are SO MANY things you can do, from rocking up with a pot of vegan soup, standing on the corner, and spending 20 minutes feeding people, to writing a blog, to researching a GA and learning all about consensus and direct democracy, to handing out flyers and telling your friends, to participating in an action, to coming to a workshop at our free university.... we cannot ORDER you to do something. You have to talk to us, and start that dialogue. We're here for you guys. I'm one of you - I have a job, I don't live onsite fulltime at all (though my boyfriend does) and I'm having a hellish time trying to juggle it all. Don't be shy! And don't listen to Mary Beth - she doesn't know her arse from a hole in the ground. I WOULD CATEGORICALLY NEVER SUGGEST THIS MOVEMENT IS ONLY FOR THOSE WHO CAN TENT ONSITE FULLTIME! She's obviously either someone who can't read an article properly, or is a provocateur trying to cause trouble. Shame on you, MB.
Join Us Now
Submitted by seniorcit on
Thank you so much for all you are doing, Ruth. I was actively involved in organizing protest marches as a student in the '70s, so I have a general idea of what you are personally facing at the moment. Your efforts are not going unappreciated.
At this point in my life, I am in a situation where I must remain on the DL. However, I have visited OLA on weekends and made anonymous cash donations. I also spend much of my time forwarding info and explaining things to those of my friends who are skeptical or just not sure what to make of this movement.
They are beginning to see that OWS is not only fighting for them, but also their children and grandchildren's future. And it is the right thing to do.
Thank you for your leadership and for taking time to respond. Stay strong and focused and please know that we are and will be with you in a supportive role.
What about fighting for the parents and grandparents?
Submitted by OccupyNews.net on
The Occupy movement seems to be a bit skewed to the wants and desires of those 35 and under. The problem I have with this is that there are 5,000 to 10,000 home foreclosures going on each and every day in the United States, and the Occupy Movement does not seem to care that much about that.
I would estimate that a majority of the 5,000 to 10,000 daily foreclosures are occuring to those who are over the age of 35.
Definitely there are dozens of equally important issues facing the Occupy Movement besides home foreclosures, but home foreclosures are happening at such a hight rate that to not show much concern for this issue makes me question if the dynamics fueling Occupy are more to do with revenge against wall street criminals, anger at the system, desire to walk away from debts, (even valid ones), and less to do with protecting those who need protecting right now.
In choosing the Occupy battles, is it really better to let 5,000 to 10,000 people twist in the wind each and every day because we want to bring to justice a few schmucks on wall street?
I feel there is a great age divide in the occupy movement that trivializes the gains being lost by those over the age of 35 on a daily basis versus those under the age of 35 who are talking about more government entitlements, taxation, and debt forgiveness for themselves.
I believe that the economy heals when the banks stop stealing the wealth and assets of those over the age of 35, yet the Occupy Movement does not seem interested in stopping this ongoing theft.
Simply changing one banking law from Debt restructuring first requires a default, to, Debt Restructuring DOES NOT first require a default could be the single biggest remedy that would allow main street to effectively fight the banks when it comes to theft of their remaining assets. Saving main street would allow our economy to heal from within while also keeping the banks away from main street's remaining wealth.
www.occupynews.net, www.swarmthebanks.com, www.wallstreetchange.com, www.bankprotests.com, www.dailyprotest.com, www.parallelforeclosure.com, www.credit-protector.blogspot.com, www.myalexlogic.com, www.bloggersagainstchasebank.com,
Response to your suggestion
Submitted by Gmcg on
Ruth,
I work full-time as well but have Mondays off. I have been down onsite multiple times during which I have attempted to volunteer, work, DO SOMETHING! But I always end up with someone that doesn't have a response, or I am completely brushed off. I am very passionate about this cause, am an extremely hard worker, dedicated, and believe I can really contribute something. So when I read your above comment, it really frustrated me because this is just not the case. I repeatedly hear "you can't complain if you don't get active and go onsite." or "We need your help." Well I am down there, donated supplies, and offered to do anything but alas I am here writing to you about the groups non-responsiveness instead of doing something productive.
Piggybackers?
Submitted by Dogbarx on
Are we the elitists now?
I think anyone that wants and/or agrees with us is in by definition. Or is this the 99% except for these types and maybe some of those people over there?
Just my opinion but I thought this was an open movement.
WTF?
Submitted by Ruth Fowler on
Are you fucking stupid? I'm warning the public not to give to organizations that use the occupy movement name to raise money and awareness for their own political campaigns, in a political system where MONEY BUYS YOU POWER! MONEY BUYS YOU GOVERNMENT! MONEY BUYS YOU LOBBYISTS! How ON EARTH is that elitist? To warn people not to give their money to a campaign which represents the 1% we are against? I can only assume you haven't read the article nor understood it, or else need a crash course in the two party political system and how our government currently functions. If you want to help occupy, come down, bring material donations, talk to people, learn how to set up a GA in your own neiborhood, learn about participatory democracy and collective decision making and consensus. Don't feed into a broken system, that is so broken, it apparently doesn't get our message and is trying to use the name "occupy" to garner money to sustain their own flagging irrelevance.
WTF?
Submitted by followthemoney on
Please refrain from verbal abuse. Have some patience, we're all trying to work this out.
folllowthemoney
Thank you for this response,
Submitted by prayn4peace on
Thank you for this response, followthemoney. I was just thinking how nice it was to read a post from Ruth that didn't have "fuck" every other word and then somebody asks a question and she responds with "Are you fucking stupid?" That's reprensible. The person was making a comment, for goodness' sake! I don't talk to people that way and don't want to be around people who DO talk to people that way! This movement is for all of us, including everyone here making comments.
You have a bright mind, Ruth, but YOU are not OccupyLA and there isn't any call for hostility. Respect others and you will be treated with respect.
Cool your jets, Ruthie, and
Submitted by MAry Rose on
Cool your jets, Ruthie, and while you're at it, you might curb your tongue. Are you interested in gaining supporters or alienating them?
MoveOn.org and labor unions are not part of the one percent, for crying out loud. They're organized progressives who are good at what they do. You are creating divisions where you should be encouraging solidarity. The Occupy movement is not the only show in town, and you're missing the point if you don't welcome legitimate extensions of OSW/OLA throughout the city/state/country. A lot of these folks have been fighting the good fight since before you were born. A little humility and a less acerbic tongue might be in order.
Unions and collectivist 'parties'
Submitted by skullnboner on
Unions are inherently group-based and represent their own interests in the whole scheme of things. Rarely do 'oranised groups' look at things from the larger perspective--even outside the box--except in their group interest. This is why a lot of 'organised-groups', such as Unions, Political parties touting themselves as 'progressive' aren't really progressive. The fact that 'socialists' as collectivists permeate Union groups (among whom many individuals in those groups would be opposed to if they were paying attention), organised socialist-ideologues are able to transpose their ideological actions upon society-at-large with solutions that are of NO threat to the 1%. Again, that's because these elements were groomed in that thought-process which was initiated, financed and propogated by that very 1% in the racket-based Bankster-dominated system we are laboring under now (no pun intended).
You will find that most of these collectivist so-called 'progressives' are NOT interested in exposing the racket of the monetary-financial system and the syndicate of operaters running it. A few of them know better...meaning they know whom they have prostituted themselves to...the rest being gullibly indoctrinated foot-soldiers. People better get a grip on understanding the monetary system, who created and controls it, because it is the top-down instrument of collectivist control over all else, corrupting the political, judicial, etc. etc. NOT doing so will be a waste of time in trying to make the world a better place for the security and peace of all people around the globe.
MOVEON.ORG IS the 1%, ever
Submitted by Furley on
MOVEON.ORG IS the 1%, ever heard of an evil Rothchild agent named George Soros, who funds fake revolutions and the Chechen Rebels? amonst many other evil deeds, that is his website!
My Occupy Wall Street Videos & Interviews from NYC
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2B8CD45D7CE2E38B&feature=viewall
George Soros, Move on dot org, and Hillary Clinton.
Submitted by OccupyNews.net on
One of the things about Hillary Clinton that I admired during the 2008 democratic race is I think she told Soros to f'off and not try to control her. I think this is the reason that Soros and Move on turned against Hillary Clinton and for Barack Obama early on in the race. Obama basically promised anything to anyone in exchange for their support.
To get an idea of how much of a sociopath Soros is, Move on dot org was started as a response to the Bill Clinton witchhunt put on by the Republican 12 back in 1996 and 1997. Ironically the republican 12 had to keep dropping and then adding new members when it was found out that many of them had had their own affairs. So Soros founded Move on to protect democrats from future republican witch hunts.
It was sheer pathology to use Move on against the wife of the man that motivated the creation of Move on in the first place. Soros is a dangerous bird and he has very close ties with the Huffington Post along with Media Matters.
Sadly, Soros hate of the republican party is so great that Soros ended up destroying any fabric of integrity within the democratic party with his manipulations regarding the 2008 democratic nomination process.
www.occupynews.net, www.swarmthebanks.com, www.wallstreetchange.com, www.bankprotests.com, www.dailyprotest.com, www.parallelforeclosure.com, www.credit-protector.blogspot.com, www.myalexlogic.com, www.bloggersagainstchasebank.com,
It's pretty clear who's
Submitted by V-Mutt on
It's pretty clear who's cornered the market on stupidity (as well as counter-productivity) in this conversation.
Constructive progress is not won by all-too-frequent lapses into profanity nor the hurling of insults at those whose opinions don't concur with our own. It doesn't matter how entitled you believe yourself to be by virtue of the number of blog posts you've written on behalf of the Occupy movement, the number of GA meetings you've attended, nor any other metric you feel gives you license to behave like a petulant child. The belief that you represent the voice of the 99% is quite unfortunate and misguided. The qualities you've exhibited are precisely what the larger movement is fighting against and any valid points you may have made are simply lost in your cringe-inducing dialog.
The public nature and frankly embarassing charater of these remarks are a pretty sad display of the reasons OLA is challenged to be taken seriously by anything beyond a rather limited audience.
yes, imbecile egotists that think it is about 'them'
Submitted by Corporal Thing A. on
and not us . Hijackers of a movement. Frauds as crooked as the banksters we rail against.
Every revolution has it's originalists, and the sliders in that would try to be the new royal guard.
Satya
Corporal Thing A. 'Civilizationalist'
I don't agree with the
Submitted by prayn4peace on
I don't agree with the allegation that Ruth's character is at all reflective of the OLA in general, but I'm behind this reponse entirely otherwise.. I think the OLA is a wonderful thing and I've seen polite, respectful, peaceful and intelligent behavior every time I've been there. Ruth's language and attacks aren't representative of the movement.
Are we the elitists now?
Submitted by alhs06 on
Are we the elitists now?
Not me, I'm more Old School R&B, with emphasis on the B
I'm not really into Eminem or alot of the whole White Rap genre, it just doesn't feel natural, but some of the tunes are cool.
However, I do want to add a disclaimer for The Beasty Boys & Beck, they kinda got their roles as white dudes in a black dudes way of expression. However I think Native Americans & The Aztecs have a legitimate spot in the reason to rap world.
BTW, I am slightly off topic, I could be screwing with you and lets Lighten up a bit, aye.
Stay focused stay on task. SOLIDARITY please. The 99% vs. the 1%
Keeping it real, just a band...
Submitted by emwoccupyla on
Thou shalt not put musicians and recording artists on ridiculous pedestals no matter how great they are or were.
The Beatles... Were just a band.
Led Zepplin... Just a band.
The Beach Boys... Just a band.
The Sex Pistols... Just a band.
The Clash... Just a band.
Crass... Just a band.
Minor Threat... Just a band.
The Cure... Just a band.
The Smiths... Just a band.
Nirvana... Just a band.
The Pixies... Just a band.
Oasis... Just a band.
Radiohead... Just a band.
Bloc Party... Just a band.
The Arctic Monkeys... Just a band.
The Next Big Thing.. JUST A BAND.
- Dan le Sac vs Scroobius Pip
Is it Piggybacking to occupy the Rose Bowl Parade?
Submitted by OccupyNews.net on
I believe there is a call to piggyback on the Rose Bowl parade. Perhaps Ruth can explain if it's ok to condemn piggybackers who want in on the Occupy Movement while accepting that the Occupy Movement wants in on the Rose Bowl parade.
www.occupynews.net, www.swarmthebanks.com, www.wallstreetchange.com, www.bankprotests.com, www.dailyprotest.com, www.parallelforeclosure.com, www.credit-protector.blogspot.com, www.myalexlogic.com, www.bloggersagainstchasebank.com,
Great Article Ruth!
Submitted by Furley on
I totally agree.. The number one threat to the entire occupy movement is the democratic party and if they are successful, the movement will DIE. They are trying everything they can to act like they are with the people when their actions have proven over and over again that they work for the Bankers, the SAME bankers that the Republicans work for. In 3 weeks at Zuccotti Park I spotted one crazy guy who had a pro-Obama sign, and he got more shit than anybody form the protesters. Obama is nothing but a mouthpiece for Goldman Sachs (his biggest contributor) and the International Banking Cartels who are looting our treasury and getting us into War after War after War. For example, Ghaddafi's crime? Libya had ZERO debt, interest-free loans for it's citizens and was about to start a gold-based currency. These bankers insatious greed could not let than happen so Obama and Sarkozy followed their orders. They sent in Al Queda fighters from other countries and claimed they were "rebels" ran a massive propoganda campaign with Al Jazzera's help and now tens of thousands are dead, black Libyans are being beheaded on sight, their infrastructure is destroyed and just today the new "Gov't" announced Sharia Law, which means that women will no longer have equal rights. Just fucking SICKENING!
As for Ron Paul piggybacking, he has done nothing but voice words of support, That link is just an Alex Jones scam to prevent people from joining the occupy movement, he is another one, a false "profit" working for the very bankers he claims to be fighting against. If anyone is piggybacking anyone, the Occupy Movement is piggybacking on Ron Paul because he has been saying the same things that the Occupiers are saying for 30+ years! Luckly his warnings are finally being listened to and the people have risen up and he is on our side and we should be on his because he is the LAST hope for this country. If our movement accepts anything less than ending the Federal Reserve ponzi scheme it will be a dismal failure.
Taxing the rich is NOT the answer! In theory is sounds good but the reality is that NONE of the Federal Income Tax goes to the people, that's right 0%. 66% goes straight to the Miliatry-Industrial Complex and the NSA/TSA gustapo. The rest goes OFFSHORE to the bankers to pay off the debt from their Federal Reserve scam. We need to end the IRS as it is ILLEGAL! I highly suggest a documentary called "Freedom To Facism" to learn more.
Here is an occupier speaking on the subject: http://youtu.be/jOEJJvJC-so
And check my playlist of interviews from the first 3 weeks of OccupyWallStreet, these people are SMART! The Dylan Ratigan interview is ESSENTIAL!
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2B8CD45D7CE2E38B&feature=viewall
My Occupy Wall Street Videos & Interviews from NYC
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2B8CD45D7CE2E38B&feature=viewall
"If anyone is piggybacking
Submitted by Mahayana on
"If anyone is piggybacking anyone, the Occupy Movement is piggybacking on Ron Paul because he has been saying the same things that the Occupiers are saying for 30+ years!"
This is so true! I'm a little confused as to why there is so much opposition to Ron Paul in the occupy movement. Both seem to have the same goals and many of the same ideas. I just don't get it.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves - in their separate, and individual capacities. -Abe
Pages