• 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!

Does the Occupy Wall Street movement represent the 99%?

Does the Occupy Wall Street movement represent the 99%?

  • Yes, they very much represent their complaints & agenda.

    Votes: 11 14.5%

  • They represent some of their complaints & agenda, but also have their own unique/radical ideas.

    Votes: 20 26.3%

  • Not really, their ideas are more represent the complaints & goals of the poor and radicals.

    Votes: 17 22.4%

  • Not at all! They only speak for a radical fringe!!

    Votes: 28 36.8%
  • Total voters
    76
  • Poll closed .
digsbe said:
No, they don't represent the 99%. They claim to but they don't. I'm not sure they even have majority support.
Click to expand...

last poll I saw was 20% support, 31% don't, and the rest don't care.
 
cpwill said:
last poll I saw was 20% support, 31% don't, and the rest don't care.
Click to expand...
in other words, 69% have expressed no opposition to OWS
 
The results of this poll are interesting. Thank you for starting this thread, Catawba. :)
 
Freedom From al said:
I am not worried about success I am concerned about intent.
Click to expand...

That kind of irrational fear of intent-without-threat is what led us to invade and occupy one of the most defenseless countries on the planet.
 
cpwill said:
let me get this straight. attempts to launch campaigns of violence (potentially you could call this terrorism) aren't important unless you are actually successful at achieving your goals.


their failure does not excuse them. hopefully these idiots wind up in prison for actual serious sentences.
Click to expand...

You do not understand the purpose of either the OWS protesters, or the Vietnam war protesters. When earlier, we blocked the main entrance to Wright Patterson AFB, it wasn't because we thought we could shut down the base, it was to draw attention to the injustice and unnecessary harm being caused by US policy. In that, we were successful and our demonstration was reported on by Time magazine with much public debate that would not have happened without the protests.

I haven't heard of any violent actions proposed by OWS.
 
cpwill said:
:shrug: if you're nonviolent and willing to go to jail - fine. unfortunately, that does not describe OWS.
Click to expand...

You haven't read the news???? Thousands of the OWS protesters have been willing to be arrested so far for non-violent civil disobedience.


yes. if you will recall, hostage taking in the pursuit of political goals is terrorism. if OWS starts taking hostages, then they deserve snipers.
Click to expand...

OWS has not taken any hostages. Calm down.

yes. that is why this plan is abysmally stupid. not only does it harm the people that OWS claims to be speaking for the most, it pisses off the vast majority of Americans who do not approve of such tactics and do not wish to have their pay reduced or lose their jobs so that OWS can throw a temper tantrum.
Click to expand...

The great majority of the tens of thousands of OWS protesters have harmed no one and have an approval rating 3 times higher than the Republican Congress.
 
Josie said:
The results of this poll are interesting. Thank you for starting this thread, Catawba. :)
Click to expand...

Taking nothing away from your powers of observation, I didn't start this thread.
 
The OWs protests may not be a big hit with america but it will have an impact on the election...if not anything else many of the protesters who may have sat home will vote.
One poll I read said that america isnt for the protests as they are being conducted...but they agree with the protesters that wall street is out of control and a major contributor to the mess were in....now thats an interesting take...
 
OWS represents a very deep felt issue with the banking and financial industry and their unbridled greed. Not only did bankers cause the financial mess that we are in now, they also profited from it since they got bonuses for failure. And it is especially the last one that pisses so many people off world wide. Why should the tax payer not only backstop banks who ****ed up the economy, who are not lending to average people and companies, and then at the same time pay out billions in bonuses to their employees and executives?
 
Catawba said:
That kind of irrational fear of intent-without-threat is what led us to invade and occupy one of the most defenseless countries on the planet.
Click to expand...

Not the same concept at all. Occupy Oakland clearly expresses their intent, while Bush straight up lied. We know before hand since Occupy Oakland has told us, that they are going to commit a crime on December 12th. And to remind Occupy Oakland admittedly asserted that they were going to engage in Economic terrorism on US soil. "Occupy Oakland calls for the blockade and disruption of the economic apparatus of the 1% with a coordinated shutdown of ports on the entire West Coast on December 12th."

Occupy Oakland intends as its main purpose of the event to make a blockade that may economicly disrupt the entire west coast ports. Considering the condition of our economy I think that any disruptions will not go over well with the public. The last time that the occupiers shut down the port of Oakland the Black blocs took advantage of the situation. The police will be very aware of the possibility of that happening again. This time around the cities involved will be prepared which means that the occupiers will want to extend their shutdown of the ports which will most likely cause a many arrests. perhaps even some violence then people in authority will be looking to lay blame and they will turn to the written words of Occupy Oakland as evidence of intent.

Hence why I am concerned about the occupiers intent. The last time around many supporters showed up, they will probably be expecting the same thing that happened last time to happen again. But things have changed since then. And the General Assembly in Oakland knows that. But they designed a scenario where innocent supporters will be taking on law enforcement that has already proven that they are willing to use chemicals and rubber bullets. If there is any blood spilled by protesters on 12/12 it will be on the General Assemblies hands because they know what they are doing and what risks they are sending innocent peaceful protesters into.
 
Catawba said:
You haven't read the news???? Thousands of the OWS protesters have been willing to be arrested so far for non-violent civil disobedience.
Click to expand...

yeah. somehow, i tend to suspect that hurling bottles, rocks, molotov cocktails, smashing storefronts, and charging police lines falls under the definition of both "violence" and "resisting arrest".

OWS has not taken any hostages.
Click to expand...

no, the longshoremen did.

The great majority of the tens of thousands of OWS protesters have harmed no one and have an approval rating 3 times higher than the Republican Congress.
Click to expand...

:lol: the Republican Congress? Republicans own the house, and they have owned it for all of ten months of this administration.
 
Catawba said:
The great majority of the tens of thousands of OWS protesters have harmed no one and have an approval rating 3 times higher than the Republican Congress.
Click to expand...

Well, so does Kim Kardashian. That's not saying much.
 
Catawba said:
Taking nothing away from your powers of observation, I didn't start this thread.
Click to expand...

Ahhh...you're right. My bad.

Thanks, Thunder!
 
I'm not a fan of our President. I think a lot of what he does is pretty awful. However, I found this to be a truly disgusting show. I don't know if it's already been posted (I glanced through and didn't see it), but I thought it should be shared that they interrupted the President of the United States giving a speech. Now a governor in a town hall meeting or presidential candidate addressing a small crowd is one thing, but this is the POTUS. I'm not a fan of the occasional a-hole in the crowd shouting dissent, but this is much larger scale.

So many actions out there being done in the name of OWS are childish, dangerous, or embarrassing that it gets harder and harder to tolerate them. If you claim they don't represent the movement as a whole, when does the majority come out to admonish them or take action to curtail them?
 
Thunder said:
I know there are many individual OWS movements around the country, but in general, do you believe that the OWS movement represents the grievances, complaints, & desires of the 99% of the USA?

Keep in mind, the 99% means those folks in the USA who make less than $379,000 a year.
Click to expand...

If you are in the 99% it is speaking about you whether you like it or not. From here you can find that in 1913 the top 1% in the US owned 17.6% of the wealth and the top 10% owned 40.29%. By 1970 the top 1% owned it's lowest percentage ever - only 7.74% but by 2007 it was owning 18.29% of the wealth with the top 10% owning 45.51%.


As you say you can be in the top 1% with only a paltry income of $379,000 - for the real movers and dealers look to the top 0.1%.

The UK's top 1% was 19.24% in 1918 down to 5.72% in 1978 and back up to 14.5% in 2005. So yes, it is us. We are the 99% and the inequality is growing and getting worse. According to this report, unless we take action, we will have the same kind of inequality within 5-10 years as we had in Victorian times. The occupy movement seems to not want this. Do you?
BBC News - UK High Pay Commission: 'Victorian inequality' warning
 
alexa said:
If you are in the 99% it is speaking about you whether you like it or not. From here you can find that in 1913 the top 1% in the US owned 17.6% of the wealth and the top 10% owned 40.29%. By 1970 the top 1% owned it's lowest percentage ever - only 7.74% but by 2007 it was owning 18.29% of the wealth with the top 10% owning 45.51%.


As you say you can be in the top 1% with only a paltry income of $379,000 - for the real movers and dealers look to the top 0.1%.

The UK's top 1% was 19.24% in 1918 down to 5.72% in 1978 and back up to 14.5% in 2005. So yes, it is us. We are the 99% and the inequality is growing and getting worse. According to this report, unless we take action, we will have the same kind of inequality within 5-10 years as we had in Victorian times. The occupy movement seems to not want this. Do you?
BBC News - UK High Pay Commission: 'Victorian inequality' warning
Click to expand...

Dividing the population by income is a false flag. It is an attempt to manipulate people to join a movement that has a specific ideology.

The 99% ploy is called "Bandwagon appeal"

Bandwagon Appeal – the belief that something should be done because the majority of people do it (or wish to do it).


Ad populum is the original Latin term, meaning “to the people,” suggesting that a person yields his opinion to the will of the public majority rather than to logic. Bandwagon appeals are arguments that urge people to follow the same paths that others do. In old-time political campaigns, politicians used to travel literally on horse-drawn bandwagons, urging citizens to “jump on the bandwagon” — or join the crowd — to vote for them.

People can be like sheep, and most of us can be attracted to strong, charismatic leaders who make us feel wanted or important. Although Americans like to think of themselves as “rugged individuals,” we are often easily seduced by ideas endorsed by popular culture and the mass media that prey upon our desires to belong to a herd.

-- Peer pressure is a type of bandwagon appeal – you may do something that others are doing simply because others are doing it. “Because everyone else does it” is a favorite reason cited by young teens who are looking for reasons to do something more grown up. Bandwagon Appeal
Click to expand...

The 'occupy movement' is asking us to jump off a bridge just because they are. By trying to make the majority of the 'common folk' hostile towards the 'rich folk'. Meanwhile the Occupiers purposely makes the appearance of having no real agenda. But there are some facts about the Occupy movement: The movement is entirely from the Left. Is factional. There is not any agreement among those factions. There is a large amount of far leftists among the General Assemblies. The General Assembly mechanism makes all of the decisions for the Occupy movement. Any action by the Occupy movement must be by consensus. You can only get that consensus through the General assemblies.

The general assembly is a small percentage of the Occupy movement. So the reality is that the General assembly is dictating to the majority of the followers of the Occupy movement.
 
lpast said:
The OWs protests may not be a big hit with america but it will have an impact on the election...if not anything else many of the protesters who may have sat home will vote.
One poll I read said that america isnt for the protests as they are being conducted...but they agree with the protesters that wall street is out of control and a major contributor to the mess were in....now thats an interesting take...
Click to expand...

The way I see it, the biggest benefit to the country of the OWS protests is that they are taking the place of having a progressive candidates primary against Obama. The OWS is providing the public focus on progressive issues that would just never be brought up for discussion by Obama, and certainly not by those on the right that oppose him.
 
Freedom From al said:
Not the same concept at all. Occupy Oakland clearly expresses their intent, while Bush straight up lied.
Click to expand...

The Bush lie could only have been pulled off if some people, mostly conservative, had not been so fearful of intent without threat.

We know before hand since Occupy Oakland has told us, that they are going to commit a crime on December 12th.
Click to expand...

We communicated before hand that we were going to block the main entrance to Wright Patterson AFB during the Vietnam war protest. What's your point? They are calling for non-violent civil disobedience, of which there is a rich history of in the US. Get a grip
 
cpwill said:
yeah. somehow, i tend to suspect that hurling bottles, rocks, molotov cocktails, smashing storefronts, and charging police lines falls under the definition of both "violence" and "resisting arrest".
Click to expand...

A handful at most out of tens of thousands? Look at the soldiers actions at Abu Ghraib and in Afghanistan. Would you condemn all soldiers because of the actions of a few?


no, the longshoremen did.
Click to expand...

That's what I said, it was not the OWS protesters.


:lol: the Republican Congress? Republicans own the house, and they have owned it for all of ten months of this administration.
Click to expand...

And since the Republicans began blocking progress in 2010, Congress approval rating has dropped from 25% to 9%.
 
According to TIME:

the 1% = Average Yearly Income $1, 530, 773.
the 99% = Average Yearly Income $54, 792.

In light of this, I would think the OWS do represent the 99%.
 
Wake said:
According to TIME:

the 1% = Average Yearly Income $1, 530, 773.
the 99% = Average Yearly Income $54, 792.

In light of this, I would think the OWS do represent the 99%.
Click to expand...

My income falls below the 1% and they sure don't represent my views.
 
Keridan said:
My income falls below the 1% and they sure don't represent my views.
Click to expand...

According to TIME that makes you apart of the 99%, in terms of income. You aren't required to agree with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom