• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    riverdaughter on “Why should you go to jail for…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on “Why should you go to jail for…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on “Why should you go to jail for…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on “Why should you go to jail for…
    campskunk on Ping me when there’s news
    William on D-Day -1
    William on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    jmac on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    William on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on D-Day -1
    thewizardofroz on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    William on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    thewizardofroz on Steve Garvey Running for U.S.…
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Shiny Happy People
  • Categories

  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    October 2011
    S M T W T F S
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

  • Top Posts

OccupyWallStreet: Why it has to be

I’ve noticed a certain deranged Klown has a provocative and baseless post up on his blog (see myiq?  We are sending you traffic) that suggests that OccupyWallStreet and other Occupy events are part of some broader astroturf campaign.  I’m not sure how he came to that conclusion.  I mean, they aren’t infiltrating blogs, promoting candidates like Sarah Palin or her Tea Party organization.  I’ve got nothing against Sarah as a person and I don’t think she’s as dumb as the left would have you believe but I do judge her by the people she hangs out with, like Glenn Beck.  So, there’s that.

But OccupyWallStreet is not about politics.  Oh, indirectly, it is, but what it’s really about is something we at The Confluence have been challenging since 2008.  We are talking about “consensus reality”.  In this particular case, we are talking about the consensus reality that says that the bailing the financial institutions out was the most important thing that needed to be done after the crash in 2008 to the exclusion of everything else.  And the media message that exemplifies this attitude the best is this interview from 2009 between Adam Davidson of Planet Money and Elizabeth Warren, candidate for Senator in MA and Harvard professor of law specializing in bankruptcy and consumer finance protection.  Here’s a partial transcript with the money quotes:

ADAM DAVIDSON: What it feels to me is what you are missing is that — I think we put aside your pet issues. We put them aside. We put them aside until this crisis is over.

ELIZABETH WARREN: The cr– What you’re saying makes no sense. Now come on. [interpolate Davidson sputtering and attempting to interrupt throughout.] It makes no sense. On an emergency basis, on one day, one week, one month, there’s no doubt in my mind we’ve got to step in, we’ve got to make sure we have a functioning banking system. I think I’ve said that like nine times now. Of course we’ve got to have a functioning banking system.

DAVIDSON: Wait a minute. I want to make you go farther. I want to make you madder before I —

ELIZABETH WARREN: No no no. [Davidson snickers] We’re now at what — we’re now seven, eight months into this. And it’s the second part of what you said. We can’t do anything about the American family until this crisis is over? This crisis will not be over until the American family begins to recover. [More Davidson sputtering.] This crisis does not exist independently —

DAVIDSON: That’s your crisis.

ELIZABETH WARREN: No it is not my crisis! That is America’s crisis! If people cannnot pay their credit card bills [Davidson tries to interrupt] if they cannot pay their mortgages —

DAVIDSON: But you are not in the mainstream of views on this issue. You are not —

ELIZABETH WARREN: What, if they can’t pay their credit card bills the banks are gonna do fine? Who are you looking at?

DAVIDSON: The [sputters]–

ELIZABETH WARREN: Who says a bank a bank is going to survive — Who is not worried about the fact that the Bank of America’s default rate has now bumped over 10%? That’s at least the latest data I saw. So the idea that we’re going to somehow fix the banks and then next year or next decade we’re going to start worrying about the American family just doesn’t [Davidson talking over] make any sense.

DAVIDSON: The American families are not — These issues of crucial, the essential need for credit intermediation are as close to accepted principles among every serious thinker on this topic. The view that the American family, that you hold very powerfully, is fully under assault and that there is — and we can get into that — that is not accepted broad wisdom. I talk to a lot a lot a lot of left, right, center, neutral economists [and] you are the only person I’ve talked to in a year of covering this crisis who has a view that we have two equally acute crises: a financial crisis and a household debt crisis that is equally acute in the same kind of way. I literally don’t know who else I can talk to support that view. I literally don’t know anyone other than you who has that view, and you are the person [snicker] who went to Congress to oversee it and you are presenting averyvery narrow view to the American people.

ELIZABETH WARREN: I’m sorry. That is not a narrow view. What you are saying is that it is the broad view to think only about trying to save the banks [Davidson sputters] and say Hey! the American economy will recover at some point and we’ll worry about the families [Davidson talking over]. I think that is the narrow view and I think I have the broad view. The broad view is that these two things are connected to each other. And the notion that you can save the banking system while the American economy goes down the tubes is just foolish.

Well, now we know that Elizabeth Warren was right and Adam Davidson and his serious people, what Paul Krugman calls the “VSPs”, were dead wrong.  And who’s point of view has Barack Obama subscribed to since 2008?  That’s right, the VSPs.  According to Ron Suskind’s book, Confidence Men, Christina Romer, his economic advisor, was unable to get Obama to commit to a paltry $100Bn for the creation of potentially 1,000,000 jobs in 2009.  It’s not like he thought he couldn’t get it, although that was one of the excuses he was making.  It’s that in the overall scheme of things, it just wasn’t all that important to him.  No, seriously.  If you’ve been out of work since 2009, you can partially thank Obama for not thinking your situation required all that much attention.  It was much more important to him to bail out the bankers.  He admitted as much today.

Q Thank you, Mr. President. As you travel the country, you also take credit for tightening regulations on Wall Street through the Dodd-Frank law, and about your efforts to combat income inequality. There’s this movement — Occupy Wall Street — which has spread from Wall Street to other cities. They clearly don’t think that you or Republicans have done enough, that you’re in fact part of the problem.

Are you following this movement, and what would you say to its — people that are attracted to it?

THE PRESIDENT: Obviously I’ve heard of it. I’ve seen it on television. I think it expresses the frustrations that the American people feel — that we had the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, huge collateral damage all throughout the country, all across Main Street, and yet you’re still seeing some of the same folks who acted irresponsibly trying to fight efforts to crack down on abusive practices that got us into this problem in the first place.

So, yes, I think people are frustrated, and the protestors are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works. Now, keep in mind I have said before and I will continue to repeat, we have to have a strong, effective financial sector in order for us to grow. And I used up a lot of political capital, and I’ve got the dings and bruises to prove it, in order to make sure that we prevented a financial meltdown, and that banks stayed afloat. And that was the right thing to do, because had we seen a financial collapse then the damage to the American economy would have been even worse.

And then he goes on to give some lip service to financial reform and Dodd-Frank, which was so watered down as to be less than a tap on the wrist with an anorexic feather, blah, blah, blah.  There was a reason why he concentrated all of his efforts on saving the financial institutions.  He relied on Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke who were spooked by the collapse of Lehman Brothers.  They were scared to death to rein in the banks for fear of triggering another catastrophe.  But instead of feeding the roots, the homeowners and working people who could have pumped up the banks from the bottom up, Obama lavished all of his attentions on the bankers, giving them all they wanted without considering whether it was good for them or us.

In the meantime, the Very Serious People decided that we should all share the sacrifice, even those of us who did everything right and still got hammered.  The Villagers have been on a tear about deficit reduction and austerity and entitlement reform for the past 3 years.  It’s disaster capitalism with a capital D.  And this relentless message to rip the working class to smithereens to make sure the financial sector comes to no harm has been the consensus reality that has dominated media coverage for the last three years.

The problem is that consensus reality isn’t meshing with real reality for the rest of us these days.  We’ve been told to have compassion for the bankers but somehow must blame ourselves for the mountains of student loan and housing debt we’ve been forced to shoulder because the productivity gains of the past 30 years got siphoned off as profits to the shareholders.  We’ve been told that bankers’ contracts for bonuses are sacred legal documents but union contracts for wages and pensions are not.  We are told that bankers are entitled to taxpayer largess to keep them functioning even if it adds trillions of dollars to the deficit but that we the taxpayers are not entitled to the social security insurance program that we paid for in advance and which adds nothing to the deficit.  We are told that it is unfair to tax rich people because they earned their yachts and second homes and private schools but it is perfectly ok to decimate public schools and foreclose on families when they are out of jobs and can’t pay their property taxes and mortgages.

What the f%^& kind of fools do they take us for??

OccupyWallStreet was destined to happen, even without astroturf.  A nation can’t exist in two realities forever.  One of them is going to start feeling a lot more real-er than the other.  That is what is happening.  Suddenly, all across the country, millions of people are starting to ask themselves, what kind of bullshit have they been feeding us for 3 years or 30 years?  It’s insane that the Very Serious People would expect that we perform a form of ritual suicide to spare them any sense of obligation to the unity of the United States as a national entity “conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”.

In that heated discussion above, Adam Davidson, his voice dripping with mocking contempt, told Elizabeth Warren that she wasn’t worth listening to and no one would take her seriously.

OccupyWallStreet is about to change all that.

Update:  I don’t know if the picture below is from The Occupation but it sounds right from someone who was there:

After the 2008 election, those of us who were heartsick with the way things turned out wanted very much to start a new movement but didn’t know how to begin.  I doubt it would have caught fire in the aftermath of the 2008 election, in spite of all that we saw that went wrong in 2008.  But how to do it?  Would it be organized?  Decentralized?  What kind of credo?  No one could agree, no leaders could be spared, some of us didn’t know the first thing about starting movements. At one point, I thought that the best example would be like the spread of Christianity in the first and second centuries.  Small groups of self lead believers, figuring it out as they went along, writing their own books, strewn like pearls along the Roman road.

The Occupation has that kind of feel to it.

60 Responses

  1. I just got the putrid e-mail for DKos telling me how they are now joining with SEIU to support OWS. Who the fuck cares?

    IMHO the clowns (not Klowns) who are going to jump on the bandwagon now that the wheels are in strong forward motion will only look like fools – for not having the good sense to know the anger that is out there – anger from EVERY group. There’s a picture somewhere of a woman with purple in her grey hair (it looks temporary – which I love) holding a sign that says, “I’m 87 and I’m mad as hell”.

    Well, I’m 65 and so am I. For the first time since 2007 I now have a place to vent that anger – and I will. Proudly.

    God forbid if someone wearing an Obama (Perry/Romney) button steps in my path,

    • Oh gosh, I got it too. I just responded to it telling them to fuck off.

    • Take their money and f*ck ’em if they can’t take a joke. So far as I can tell, the General Assemblies are autonomous. So the “creative class” can and will try to hijck the branding, but I doubt it will work.

    • I wouldn’t tell them to fuck off. I would simply say that I do not need to join with the SEIU to support OWS. That I can do it perfectly well on my own, thank you very much.
      We need everyone but we don’t have to have an intermediary.

      • It’s Chris Bowers’ chronically urgent, condescending tone that set me off. Next time I will tell him to please allow the people to conduct their own business in peace–the polite way of saying to fuck off 😀

    • Why has BO allowed 70% of “Wall street: trading (although its mostly not located there) to consist of high speed computer traders who have acess to information seconds before anyone else can get it, and who trade zillions of times per day , at a speed approaching the speed of light, using quantitative and statistical programs alone. Why not tax them a penny or two for each trade, since they have a huge advantage over the rest of us. Guess who has the bulk of the money you lost on any investments relating to wallstreet commodities? The high speed traders—Geinter’s friends. Look into it.

      • I think it’s Congress’ responsibility to make laws and the president to execute them. So, if Congress hasn’t written one regarding high speed trading…
        Maybe it was included in the Dodd-Frank bill and they haven’t written the regulation yet.
        I don’t have to look into it. The big money lost in 2008 was due to too much leverage, securitization of mortgages and credit defailt swaps on assets that the parties didn’t own.
        Not to say that high speed trading isn’t important but it’s not the speed that bothers me. It’s the exclusivity of one or two companies being able to see what trades another company or individuals are going to execute before they execute them. Sort of like playing cards with one of your opponents looking over your shoulder at your hand.

  2. Two excellent posts today!

  3. A certain Klown definitely doesn’t get it.

    To those of us who have been simmering in silence, OWS represents the first non-partisian outlet to release that pent up energy, rage and frustration. In fact, it seems to be the pressure cooker release of the rage that I have felt – in me and around me – for the past 3-4 years.

    I, too, got DKos’ putrid e-mail. To him and his kind – who the fuck cares? Stay out of my way and don’t anyone stick a Obama/Perry/Romney button in my face. I’m not sure I will be able to remain non-violent.

    • I think a certain Klown is appropriately skeptical. I read the facts I know differently than he does-I think that it’s a parade that the established D groups are trying to jump in front of, just as they did with the tea party (as far as I could see.) The reality is probably more complicated, as as OWS grows and more people join it will get more so.

  4. (I’m in moderator heaven with my two previous attempts to post…)

    Anyway, I didn’t see the update until after I vented in those posts.

    The poster to moveon is perfect – and expresses pretty much what I said in my posts. Now we just need one addressed to DKos.

  5. I HAVE IT.

    Seriously. I have a clear, specific goal — THE plan, THE demand — for the Occupy Wall Street movement. It’s not the final move, it’s not a checkmate — it’s just a first move. But as first moves go, this one is a doozy. It’s an easy win. I am convinced that one big initial real-world victory will make subsequent victories far more possible.


    • You’re skipping to the end of the book. Firing Geithner may happen but if it is deemed a pre-emptive strike to quell the masses and go home, it’s not going to work. This movement is all about people coming together to say they’re finished with the bullshit and they want to be heard because they’re sick of picking up the mess the wealthy and well connected are leaving behind.
      Don’t get me wrong. If Obama thought that firing Geithner would appease the crowd and keep a protective firewall between them and the bankers, he’d do it. But OccupyWallStreet seems very savvy to me. They’re not going to go away so easily.

      • You didn’t read my post, riverdaughter. I said nothing about “quelling” the movement. This is not the end of the book; I propose a socko first chapter.

        It’s an easy win. (He wants to go anyways, or so some say.) A big first victory makes a second victory easier. Then the third, then the fourth.

        I’ve already had to say it a zillion times and I’ll probably have to say it a zillion times more: What I propose is not an endgame but an opening move. But as first moves go, it’s a doozy.

        The crowd won’t suddenly become docile if they get that initial demand met. They’ll become emboldened. And the crowds will grow. People want a movement that will actually get concrete things DONE. We’re all sick of talk-talk-talkers.

        We need a win. A fast win. A big win. With one big win under the belt, everything else becomes possible.

        • Yes, I understand you perfectly. And I disagree with you about going for an easy win. I’m not sure that getting rid of Geithner is a win, especially if he is replaced with someone who thinks like he does and buys into the same consensus reality.
          For those of you looking for battles to be fought and won, I urge you to shift gears. This is a different kind of war. The best way to participate is to let go of all of the identities you are burdened with. We have always said, reflect on your values and what is most important to you. Turn off cable news. The only thing that matters is how you relate to one another as human beings and Americans. You are in charge of what happens in the Occupation.
          Hold hands, watch both ways and don’t let anyone divide you.

          • “For those of you looking for battles to be fought and won, I urge you to shift gears. This is a different kind of war. The best way to participate is to let go of all of the identities you are burdened with…”

            How many times have I heard variations of this same crappy argument since 1967? “The important thing is not stopping the war; the important thing is to change our consciousness…” For god’s sake, you think I haven’t seen this same damned mistake made over and over?

            Consensus decision-making is a proven loser — has been since the ’60s. (Arguably since the 1930s, if you want to count the Spanish experiment.) Lefties insist on it, despite its abysmal tack record, because they think it is virtuous, and it doesn’t require them to hold their pwecious widdle egos in check.

            I will NEVER support any movement which insists on consensus. Accept heirarchy. That’s how things get done. That’s how they got done in your lab, right?

            “We have always said, reflect on your values and what is most important to you. Turn off cable news. The only thing that matters is how you relate to one another as human beings and Americans…”

            What impractical nonsense. The only thing that matters is that you no longer have a job and will soon be forced out of your home.

            This is no time for hippie thinking. It’s a time for FDR thinking.

            Like a zillion other lefties I’ve seen since, like, forever, you’re simply afraid of accomplishing anything. The fact that a woman in your position could actually talk this way is disheartening.

            Face it, RD: You WANT to be unemployed. You’d rather suffer than wield actual power. Because only the exercise of power — not virtue: power — can keep you from living in the streets, which is where you and a lot of other people are headed..

          • I didn’t say anything about consensus decision making. In any assembly of people, leaders will have to emerge or nothing will get done. I’ve been to enough curriculum goals committee meetings to know that consensus decision making and, god help us, “wordsmithing”, is the surest way to kill an idea and any accompanying energy.
            That’s not what I am referring to at all. I am saying that if you go to one of these events, you have to start seeing yourself as part of a much bigger contingent. Stop identifying yourself as Democrat or Conservative, liberal or Tea Partier, Jew or evangelical. What the bad guys have been exceptionally good at is emphasizing our differences. What we need to do is accentuate our commonalities. It you start talking about who you support for president, it becomes distracting. Neither party’s candidates give a fuck about you. If you start dickering about social issues, it’s distracting. Yes, social issues are important but people have to eat first.
            The biggest problem we have to overcome is the fact that the wealthy and well-connected 1% have no respect for us. And the only way we will get them to respect us is if they look out of their glass walled corner offices and see that we are all united against them. That will make them very nervous. They will try to throw a bone, like getting rid of Tim Geithner. But if we are wise, we won’t take it. What we will do is keep this movement going to become a forceful voting bloc and eventually a third party. Because without representation in government, we can’t change anything. So, first we have to grow, then we have to stick together for as long as possible and then we have to organize an entity that the 1% and their puppets will respect.
            And then we win.
            But before we do that, we have to lose our tribal identities and take up a new one. A supertribe of people who have had enough.

          • BTW, hierarchy in the lab is not necessarily the best way to get things done. In fact, my last lab group of five was not very hierarchical at all. The person with the most laboratory expertise was technically the lowest person on the salary level totem pole. But we paid attention to her and did what she said because she knew more stuff than we did. If it had been a true hierarchy like *some* people I know like to run their groups, there would have been one grand poohbah who would delegate all of his authority to one right hand man who would in turn pick his own favorites leaving everyone else with the dregs. Then those favorites would pick over other people’s projects like vultures and go behind their colleagues’ backs to derail their work and undermine them.
            So, I object to imposed hierarchies based on some perceived officially recognized certificate. I prefer leaders to emerge naturally based on their attributes and how well they can direct other people. And those other people will work optimally if they can concentrate on the work and lose *some* of their ego.
            It’s not a pipedream. It can happen. I have seen it. You have to be committed to a certain outcome that you can envision and for which you are willing to work very hard.

          • RD, if you’re talking about identity politics, we are certainly agreed. I’ve despised identity politics since the 1970s. It was always just a way for provocateurs to keep the left impotent.

            But I AM in favor of winning battles.

            That’s how things get done. If you win one battle, you can go on to the next.

            You want a good feminist-friendly example? Consider the other French girl I love, Jeanne d’Arc.

            First Joan wins at Orleans, then she wins at Jargeau, then she wins at Patay, then she wins at Troyes — this time without a fight, because the enemy was starting to shit its pants at the very mention of her name. And then she gets her king crowned at Reims, her long-term goal.

            Without one big win at the beginning of her campaign, the rest of it would not have fallen into place. The big win at Orleans established her credibility — her clout, if you will.

            A big win energizes a movement. History proves that. Victory does not mollify or disempower; it creates a feeling of exaltation and accomplishment. If you win, you intimidate the enemy — and your next battle may be like Troyes.

          • The idea that we can get anywhere by going after the top 1% is a mistake. They also pay like 90% of the taxes.Anyway, even taking more from this teeny group will not raise needed revenues; studies have shown this.Plus he’s planning to use this money, if it is passed, to hire that same group of teachers he hired during the stimulus—not improve the job situation in general, which he has never even investigated.

          • Hatshepsut, do yourself a favor and put a block on any cable news channel in your lineup and don’t listen to the radio for anything but music.
            The problem is that you are listening to people who are not being honest. All you need to do is observe the people around you. If they are suffering through no fault of their own and bankers and their friends are getting large bonuses in spite of their poor management, there is something very wrong.

  6. I agree, RD. And thanks for the eyewitness report from NYC yesterday. Enjoyed the pics and the reports!

    The critics, many TP supporters, whine that the movement is too late, just a bunch of stupid kids, has no concentrated theme or message [as if any nascent protest comes into being fully hatched], and of course, the astro-turf charge. I think the Tea Party people are aghast that their ‘thunder’ has been stolen.

    And so, we’re sure to hear accusations and labels–just a bunch of criminal slackers, a mob without a purpose, a bunch of Red diaper babies. It’s already in the wind and the Fox mouthpieces are trying hard to make any resistence look sinister.

    This is an awakening, a start. Can’t say where it’s going to go but it surely is the most promising movement we’ve seen in years. I give the people on the ground a lot of credit. They’ve suffered through bad weather, dismissive attitudes, police roughness and ridicule.

    But they’re still there!

  7. Been there again today – looking for signs of either reality. I saw an older black guy with a sign for Obama (an anagram of his name spelling some flattery or another). Also, on a sign about Bush deregulating Wall Street someone added in pencil “Clinton” next to Bush. That’s all. By the time I turned around to photograph the Obama sign, the guy disappeared.
    plenty of “NO MORE REPUBLICANS OR DEMOCRATS” signs and sentiment. Not sure how this came about. But as long as it stays out of politics, I’m there.

  8. We are told that bankers are entitled to taxpayer largess to keep them functioning even if it adds trillions of dollars to the deficit but that we the taxpayers are not entitled to the social security insurance program that we paid for in advance and which adds nothing to the deficit.


  9. The livefeed from OccupyWallStreet got a lot better today. I just listened to an address by Naomi Klein.

  10. “You are not cannon fodder for Washington policy wonks.”

    Naomi Klein, OccupyWallStreet, October, 6, 2011

  11. It’s a little like the “We’re all individuals!” thing because they aren’t allowed to use public address systems. So, the speaker says one sentence at a time, which is repeated in waves by successive rings around the speaker. It’s better than nothing but it does sometimes have a “Blessed are the cheesemakers” quality to it.

  12. You and Robert Scheer are on the same wavelength today. On TruthDig he said:

    How can anyone possessed of the faintest sense of social justice not thrill to the Occupy Wall Street movement now spreading throughout the country? One need not be religiously doctrinaire to recognize this as a “come to Jesus moment” when the money-changers stand exposed and the victims of their avarice are at long last offered succor.

    • Close. He’s talking about morality. I’m talking about the nature of social movements. Christianity was a very powerful social movement of the 1st and 2nd centuries. I’ve always wondered why that is. Part of it is the message. It wasn’t just eschatology. If those early christians wanted that, there were plenty of sects to choose from. It wasn’t just peace, love and understanding. I think the motivating force was the enfranchisement of each believer to believe he or she was not constrained by dogma to behave in a manner that was incompatable with what the individual thought was fair and just. Think of the good Samaritan, the woman who was to be stoned, the prodigal son. In each of these stories, society and religion had a predetermined script to follow and Christians said they preferred to behave compassionately and they freed themselves from the institutions that told them they couldn’t.
      Once that concept firmed itself up, it found a receptive audience. But they had to figure it out for themselves, they had to self organize and the Romans made it possible for the message to spread because they built and maintained the roads and made the empire safe for travellers.
      So, what do we have here? We have an oppressed population. We have ingrained institutions writing the scripts: if you’re a conservative, you believe in this; if you’re a Democrat, you believe in that if you’re a politician, you are expected to be insincere, if you’re union you act this way, if you’re a 501c, you can say blah. And OccupyWallStreet is cutting through all of that and saying, we don’t want that anymore. Sticking to the script is depriving people of justice and fairness. We want to listen to our moral compass and reassert our dignity and our voices.
      That’s what they are doing. And the more they stick around, the more attractive they will be to others.
      And they have the internet, which is the best Roman Road ever built. And they have self forming groups in cities all over the country.
      And in this era, it takes less time to start a movement than it did 2000 years ago.

  13. Question: Some media say that this is the answer to the Tea Party. Do you think that’s true?
    Answer: “I think this is the answer to the Democratic party”

    Naomi Klein, OccupyWallStreet, Oct 6, 2011

    That line got a lot of applause.

  14. Yeah, what I thought yesterday watching the livestream was “this is where religious ecstasy comes from.” Read J. Anderson Thomson’s wonderful little book, Why We Believe in God(s): A Concise Guide to the Science of Faith.

    • To be honest, I didn’t feel the same thrill at the march as I have at other events. But there was a feeling of something about to happen. And when that something finally gels, I want to be there.

  15. Excellent post again. I feel like the OWS’ers are PUMA’s. It is telling how many people on the left have said that the OWS’ers should do this or that and it is gonna fail because they did not have just one demand or they should have done this in 2008, etc. , meanwhile they sit at home and grip about people who are putting feet on the ground and in the fight. In my view there is more than one thing that needs changing so one demand is useless. I am so glad these people have taken to the streets. I again have hope for our future.

  16. Neither Wall Street or Congress is going to listen this week. What matters is six months from now when people start voting.

    • yep. I’m beginning to think the end point is a third party

      • Hillary should be drafted to run on the third party. There are many Republicans who will vote for her.

        • Before Hillary can run for a third party, she has to become one of them.

          • I believe that if Hillary wasn’t married to the last two term Democratic President, she might go the third party way.
            But she sweated blood and tears during Bill’s terms and is very protective of his legacy.
            Riverdaughter, you’re on fire! “Must see” blog viewing everyday.

  17. Awesome comment of Paul Krugman’s blog.
    4-3-2009 – POTUS to banks “I’m the only one between you and the pitchforks” 2011 – OWS to POTUS “Step aside Mr. President”

  18. OccupyAustin was a lovely thing today. Had as many as 1500 people at City Hall this evening. The demands, what demands?, are quite confused and amorphous but will come together. I’m very hopeful that a 3rd party, or a cultural rearrangement, will come from the occupiers if they can avoid being taken over by the malignant establishment.

  19. Great post, RD! And kudos to you for diving into the thick of it. Your on the street reporting is exciting and informative. Thanks for giving us the participant’s eye view.

  20. …a certain deranged Klown…
    Fight, fight, fight. {{gets out popcorn}} 🙂

    Great post.

  21. Question: Some media say that this is the answer to the Tea Party. Do you think that’s true?
    Answer: “I think this is the answer to the Democratic party”

    Naomi Klein, OccupyWallStreet, Oct 6, 2011

    Good. Let us have a primary challenge to Obama which should send him scurrying back to Hawaii and the one really smart person 😉 😉 can take over. But I hesitate to dump his clusterfuck on her.

  22. JWS: Shelby Fluffy has a few concerns about Obama and the election

    • Maybe I’m just tired but I didn’t find this that funny.
      Love the subway tiles.

  23. fyi, riverdaughter, if you havent known, Sarah Palin has already said she will not run for President on 2012 and has announced it last Oct. 6, in case you did not know.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: