• 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!

Occupy Wall Street movement has hit a wall

Most of these OWS loons have no CLUE as to what they want to accomplish other than income redistribution in some "fuzzy" sense. Some want a "living wage", some want "free college" but most simply "want". I have seen NONE offer a coherent message or support any particular candidate or platform.
 
Yeah, but they are bogging down the GOP. They won't last long under the Republican tent. Populism and all of it's awful consequences always flourish right after an economic downturn, and it usually fades after some time and recovery. I didn't mean that both would vanish by next month, but both examples of extreme idiocy have had their 15 minutes, accomplished nothing and will soon be gone.
Winning 63 House seats in the 2010 election constitutes "bogging down" the GOP, which appears on-target to win control of the Senate this year?
 
Could you please post a link that works.

And how is this news?

The title is editorial.
 
Third, it still lacks a clearly articulated, significant, and realistic agenda of change. Nebulous rhetoric and "catch-all" complaints do not constitute concrete and attainable policy goals and recommendations.

Most of these OWS loons have no CLUE as to what they want to accomplish other than income redistribution in some "fuzzy" sense. Some want a "living wage", some want "free college" but most simply "want". I have seen NONE offer a coherent message or support any particular candidate or platform.

Both of those statements are untrue. OWS had a very coherent message and a real agenda. That you and others think they didn't is why I blame the media for distorting the movement. Remember all this nonsense?

They-don't-know-why-they're-protesting.jpg

That's what happened with OWS. No one listened to their message. Read the signs in the cartoon. They're pretty accurate to why OWS wanted. Do you really mean to tell me that you don't see the coherent agenda in them? If you haven't heard their message, it's because you were purposefully not listening, and because the media was purposefully unwilling to let them be heard.
 
OWS had a very coherent message and a real agenda.

I'm not disputing that OWS has a message and agenda. I'm stating that its agenda was not clearly articulated or realistic, because there was no focus on concrete and attainable policy goals and recommendations.

To expand on my point, I'll reference some of the "principles of solidarity" cited on OWS's website.

One such principle is "Empowering one another against all forms of oppression." How does the group define "oppression?" What concrete policy ideas does the group propose to combat "oppression." What substantive efforts does the group intend to make to increase prospects for enactment of those policy solutions? What other methods does the group seek to pursue to "empower" itself? Details are not available. No list of policy solutions is proposed.

Another principle is "Redefining how labor is valued." This is a direct challenge to the prevailing mixed market approach that leverages supply and demand for labor and regulations such as the minimum wage, working conditions protections, etc. How does OWS seek to "redefine" the valuation of labor? If it rejects market factors such as supply and demand, what does it propose as an alternative? How would that alternative work? What evidence does it have that such an alternative would be feasible? How would the alternative be implemented? Again one is dealing with little more than rhetoric. The substance is lacking.

In the end, a set of slogans is not a substitute for missing concreteness. The movement lacks the substance necessary to play a meaningful role in the public discourse. Its complaints have been heard, but it has nothing--at least to date--to offer beyond those complaints.
 
There's a very big difference between a group whining that it has to pay a few taxes and a group that is upset by the massive concentration of wealth and power in private corporate hands.

Obama has spent 5 trillion in 4 years and you're claiming that all the wealth is concentrated in "Corporate hands"?
 
There's a very big difference between a group whining that it has to pay a few taxes and a group that is upset by the massive concentration of wealth and power in private corporate hands.

But yeah, I'm sad to say that OWS didn't make a whole lot of difference. For once, I actually do think the media is to blame. They made the conversation about trying to prove that OWS didn't have a message, when they clearly did. And so that message didn't get out. OWS had a lot of good things to say, but no one listened. And as a result, there's still plenty of profiteering and warmongering, still plenty of jobs being shipped overseas, still the legal ability by corporations to bribe elected leaders with campaign contributions, still massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper class, and still a shrinking middle class and a growing lower class. But no, it's very important that the old white people who wear teabags on their hats stop paying taxes so the next generation can't go to school.



Yes, it's much easier to be a selfish prick and already be comfortable than it is to have almost nothing, and work to actually make this a better country.

Yes. OWS did have a message. However most of the OWS supporters expected other people to follow their message but they refused to follow it themselves. When a group with the same message comes up and is not filled with a bunch of hypocrites then they may be able to make a difference.
 
You mean a bunch of ten-time losers quit on something?

Shocked, I tell you.
 
Union funding is not unlimited....their ass handing in Wisconsin wasn't free, either.
 
Back
Top Bottom