Originally posted by The Highroller
That is exactly what happened, and O'Leary got his.
So is he off the show now or what? I can't watch it from here.
LightsOut
quote:
Originally posted by jon jon
ok so you do get why the protests are a good thing afterall?
We'll see what the outcome is. I think the lack of cohesion is hurting them, but some legitimate concerns have been raised.
GGM
quote:
Originally posted by Stilez
For me, my issue with Toronto's version of OccupyETC... is that Toronto has become obsessed with the idea of following everything that everyone else in the world does. We've lost our way somewhere. Where we once used to be a leader in environmental, social, governance issues,....we now only jump on the band wagon of whatever the 'Issue of the day' is when someone else brings it up or stands up against it. That's just my personal opinion of course.
Might not be the best cause out there, but it was Toronto born... :haha:
Elendil
quote:
Originally posted by StereoPrincess
but why can't they have an electronic device. the idea is that everyone should have the opportunity to get whatever they want and live a good life. if they want an iphone, they should get an iphone. i wouldn't want one of those but to each their own. if they want an adidas tank top, they should be able to get it.
Honestly, corporations must be chomping at the bit at quotes like this. I'm not making a personal attack here, I'm simply taking issue with the fundamental process behind this way of thinking.
Everyone should have the opportunity to get whatever they want and live a good life? I can't see how everyone being entitled to material wealth - iphones, cars, etc - sits in line with any natural process. Some people win. Some people lose. Some animals are eaten, some animals eat. Rain, drought. Creation. Destruction. There is no perfection state in which we can exist. We are not gods, or demi-gods. We are mankind, intrinsically bound in the natural processes that surround us. At best, we as a species seek to find the closest thing to - hence where we find ourselves today.
The fundamental problems throughout all of these ordeals are limited resources & the control and manipulation of them by entities into objects of power. These objects of power are then used to compel individuals to sacrifice some of their own personal power (which in our case happens to be money and time), in order to obtain them. Some sacrifice more than others in the bargaining. Hence, some people obtain wealth - it has ever been so.
To imagine that there is some balance to be found, where everyone will live in peace and harmony is to imagine that we are outside of nature. We are still driven by primitive features (such as archetypal forces who truly run the show in our psyche) that will - until we evolve on a physical level (perhaps a further brain development) - will mar our best intentions.
Not everyone can have what they want. Not everyone will succeed, no matter what base you provide for them. Every organism that is created is not intrinsically worthy of propagation. There is no escape from this.
Ultimately, in any of these discussions, there is always a great deal of blame being placed. Rarely is it placed squarely on the self. This is projection, and it masquerades as truth. It's always a "super elite" here, a "crooked government" there - always something just out of reach which is the source of our woes.
Yet, every day I see people walking around under mountains of debt that have not been forced upon them. I see men driving sleek cars that they can't afford, and women walking around in 700 dollar high heels purchased on credit. I see families choosing to go out for dinner, rather than making it at home. I see walking reasons for an increasing wealth disparity.
Rich people know how to acquire money. They understand the game, and they play it. Tigers are excellent hunters. They understand the habits of the Gazelle, and they kill it. Companies exist to meet our demands. They profit off of it handsomely, or they die. We feed their power by providing them with our own, of free will. If we redirected our power, they would have none. Alas, while we're all eager to complain, so few of us are willing to make real personal sacrifice in order to change.
Rest assured, the only way out of any of this mess is by each and every one of us making deep sacrifice in our way of life. At best, this will gain us a measure of time, but it may be time well acquired. If you are unwilling to do that, you have no right to blame anyone - be they rich, poor, or anything in between.
Of course, I may be way out to lunch here - but that's simply the way I see it.
The Highroller
quote:
Originally posted by LightsOut
We'll see what the outcome is. I think the lack of cohesion is hurting them, but some legitimate concerns have been raised.
About their lack of cohesion and clear demands, we must remember that these protests are in their early stages. Just because they lack a clear set of demands, doesn't mean that the protests have any less legitimacy nor does it mean that they will have less potential for impact.
People are being too quick to dismiss these protests for this reason.
LightsOut
^^^
I agree. I'm guilty of essentially dismissing them myself. Not because I don't agree with the issues, but because nothing new is being tabled in regards to these issues. Hopefully that changes.
jon jon
quote:
Originally posted by LightsOut
We'll see what the outcome is. I think the lack of cohesion is hurting them, but some legitimate concerns have been raised.
i'm trying to say that even if the protests made you learn 1 new thing, or made you think about something else differently, surely it's a positive?!!!??
GGM
quote:
Originally posted by LightsOut
We'll see what the outcome is. I think the lack of cohesion is hurting them, but some legitimate concerns have been raised.
The more I look at this the more I think it might actually be helping them more than hurting them. By not having core groups/people in charge of everything, no specific immediate goals to accomplish and no single enemy they also make it very very hard for people to argue against or discredit them. It's taking the whole "anonymous" movement stuff to a new and lateral level.
For example it's quite easy to kill a Martin Luther King Jr or a John F Kennedy. It's also easy to come up with arguments against things with a clear goal like an anti-war protest. It's even easier to discredit a person like Julian Assange (rape accusations) when you have the media on your side. But, consider that no matter how these Occupy protesters went about their business they would have had critics like every other movement. The best opposition these critics have got so far is "you have no clear goals/solutions/enemies" and "you're wasting your time" is pretty astounding in itself.
In short, perhaps when you're trying to take on the most powerful and dangerous people out there (the rich, governments and corporations) it might be better not to give them easy targets that they can use to stop your movement?
The Highroller
quote:
Originally posted by LightsOut
^^^
I agree. I'm guilty of essentially dismissing them myself. Not because I don't agree with the issues, but because nothing new is being tabled in regards to these issues. Hopefully that changes.
The protestors have not offered much in the way of a solution, I agree. However, as this movement grows, the positive impact it should have is to pressure policy makers into fixing this significant and worsening problem.
Elendil
quote:
Originally posted by GGM
The more I look at this the more I think it might actually be helping them more than hurting them. By not having core groups/people in charge of everything, no specific immediate goals to accomplish and no single enemy they also make it very very hard for people to argue against or discredit them. It's taking the whole "anonymous" movement stuff to a new and lateral level.
For example it's quite easy to kill a Martin Luther King Jr or a John F Kennedy. It's also easy to come up with arguments against things with a clear goal like an anti-war protest. It's even easier to discredit a person like Julian Assange (rape accusations) when you have the media on your side. But, consider that no matter how these Occupy protesters went about their business they would have had critics like every other movement. The best opposition these critics have got so far is "you have no clear goals/solutions/enemies" and "you're wasting your time" is pretty astounding in itself.
In short, perhaps when you're trying to take on the most powerful and dangerous people out there (the rich, governments and corporations) it might be better not to give them easy targets that they can use to stop your movement?
But at some point, one man (or woman) - I speak figuratively here, of course - must raise the flag, proclaim a direction and take the helm, no? I mean, until then, of course there will be nothing for critics to hit directly - they aren't doing much. Is there really anything all that astounding about that?
I mean, if you're taking on anyone, it is by action - one way or another. Until then, these people need clothes, food, and general goods and services - so, in reality, none of the most dangerous people are in any real predicament.
Guest
Holy mother of god this topic blew up from like 5 hours ago... I want to read all the pages I missed but I have an essay to finish :(
