• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

73 arrested at Occupy protest

I sort of agree, although I'd change the word "progressive" to "anti-capitalist".

That would be true in every way except factually.
 
That would be true in every way except factually.

To change the word would be inaccurate. To add it would not be, necessarily. There are definitely elements within OWS that are anti-capitalist, and would have like to see Obama also be anti-capitalist. On the other hand, I'm mostly talking about people within the leftist anarchist movement, who would never vote for a Democrat to begin with.
 
To change the word would be inaccurate. To add it would not be, necessarily. There are definitely elements within OWS that are anti-capitalist, and would have like to see Obama also be anti-capitalist. On the other hand, I'm mostly talking about people within the leftist anarchist movement, who would never vote for a Democrat to begin with.

Go back and look at the flow of the conversation. "him" = Obama. "he is not nearly as progressive", "change progressive to anti-capitalist".
 
OWS leaders are largely anti-capitalists, Redress.

Who are those leaders, and why did you all of a sudden switch from talking about Obama to thse nebulous unnamed leaders?
 
Go back and look at the flow of the conversation. "him" = Obama. "he is not nearly as progressive", "change progressive to anti-capitalist".

The question was whether or not OWS protestors dislike him because he's not progressive or because he's not anti-capitalist. Both are true to some extent.
 
The question was whether or not OWS protestors dislike him because he's not progressive or because he's not anti-capitalist. Both are true to some extent.

Depends on the individual. It's alot like the tea party, there is a really broad spectrum of beliefs contained within OWS. When you oversimplify you are inevitably going to get it wrong.
 
Depends on the individual. It's alot like the tea party, there is a really broad spectrum of beliefs contained within OWS. When you oversimplify you are inevitably going to get it wrong.

I agree that it depends on the individual. That's why I specifically brought up the left-anarchist wing of OWS. I know a couple of those people. They're rabidly anti-capitalist, and it's one of the primary reasons they don't like Obama.
 
I agree that it depends on the individual. That's why I specifically brought up the left-anarchist wing of OWS. I know a couple of those people. They're rabidly anti-capitalist, and it's one of the primary reasons they don't like Obama.

As is usually the case, I don't think the far end of the spectrum makes up a significant number of them though.
 
As is usually the case, I don't think the far end of the spectrum makes up a significant number of them though.

Also true. And the anarchist wing has been around a lot longer than OWS itself. They're their own entity.
 
they think Obama is a sell-out and a House-slave.
And they are still going to vote for him...just like they did last time. For all their impotent rage and rhetoric...they elected and will reelect the single largest recipient of all that corporate, banker, and broker cash. Sell out? WHo the **** did they THINK they were electing?
 
When are the police really going to start crackingdown on these left wing whackos instead of just slapping them on the wrist? They are Hussein Obama's foot soliders and are costing this country millions of dollars.


73 arrested at Occupy protest - Associated Press - POLITICO.com


By ASSOCIATED PRESS | 3/18/12 12:53 PM EDT

NEW YORK - Police say more than 70 people were taken into custody following a rally at the park where the Occupy movement was born.
Hundreds of protesters had returned to Zuccotti Park near Wall Street on Saturday to mark the six months that have passed since the movement began. They locked arms and sat down after police announced on a bullhorn at around 11:30 p.m. that the park was closed.




Read more: 73 arrested at Occupy protest - Associated Press - POLITICO.com






I don't Know if you are aware of this or not, but:

"73 arrested at Occupy protest"
 
They vandalize private property pee and **** all over the streets, rape women........They have cost the cities they protest in millions of dollars....your OK with that huh?

I seem to remember reading about some radicals back in 1773, who donned costumes to break and enter and throw private property into the water, don't you?
 
Last edited:
What are these people's names? How do they control the OWS? Do you have anything other than an idiotic editorial?


It's a video of them and their names are posted on cards right in front of them, Redress. The topic of the session was "The Abolition of Capitalism".
 
Last edited:
The people organizing the protests, the Occupy newspapers, etc.

Here's a video of the Occupy Strategy Session at NYU. These people are the leaders of the movement: Video Reveals ‘Occupy’ Strategy to ‘Abolish Capitalism’ (With SEIU Help!) | Video | TheBlaze.com

There aren't really any leaders of OWS, generally. There are different individuals who play more or less significant roles in guiding individual OWS events in the many, many cities around the world in which this is happening (i.e. there are guiding councils for each of the OWS cities), but it's really not that centralized at all, and there's a staggering, almost comical degree of divisiveness even within most of those circles (at least the ones I know about or have read about).
 
There aren't really any leaders of OWS, generally. There are different individuals who play more or less significant roles in guiding individual OWS events in the many, many cities around the world in which this is happening (i.e. there are guiding councils for each of the OWS cities), but it's really not that centralized at all, and there's a staggering, almost comical degree of divisiveness even within most of those circles (at least the ones I know about or have read about).

I would consider people invited to an event called "Occupy Strategy Session" to be leaders of the movement. They aren't just letting Joe Schmo on the street come in to address these questions.
 
It's a video of them and their names are posted on cards right in front of them, Redress. The topic of the session was "The Abolition of Capitalism".

Just because the Blaze and Breitbart says something is true does not make it true. In fact, it makes it highly questionable. In other words, do you have a non far right wing source for your claims?
 
I would consider people invited to an event called "Occupy Strategy Session" to be leaders of the movement. They aren't just letting Joe Schmo on the street come in to address these questions.

So if I ran an event called "hanging blacks with the Tea Party" I would be a Tea Party leader and would prove that the Tea Party really is racist?
 
Just because the Blaze and Breitbart says something is true does not make it true. In fact, it makes it highly questionable. In other words, do you have a non far right wing source for your claims?

If you're not going to watch the video of these people in their own words then we have nothing else to say to each other.
 
I would consider people invited to an event called "Occupy Strategy Session" to be leaders of the movement. They aren't just letting Joe Schmo on the street come in to address these questions.

Of course they're not, but the point that I'm making is that the people involved in the Occupy Strategy Session really have very little control over the many, many individual OWS movements throughout both the country and the globe. The other point that I'm making is that they disagree internally to a farcical degree.
 
If you're not going to watch the video of these people in their own words then we have nothing else to say to each other.

If you are not going to try and have a rational discussion using reasonable sources, then no, we don't have much to discuss. "Because Beck told me so" is not a good debate argument.
 
If you are not going to try and have a rational discussion using reasonable sources, then no, we don't have much to discuss. "Because Beck told me so" is not a good debate argument.

That's really dumb, Redress. It's a video of these people speaking about wanting to abolish capitalism. Because you dislike the messengers, you refuse to believe these people actually spoke the words coming out of their mouths. :shock:
 
They don't rape women and most of them don't vandalize anything (although criminal elements within certain cities have used them to shield criminal activity). They aren't Mongols. They're American citizens.

There have been rapes in Oakland California.. There were 73 arrests today....... Boy do you drink the left wing koolaid.............I thought you were smarter then that.....why do you think the left has stopped supporting them now?
 
Back
Top Bottom