IndependntLogic
Senior Member
- Jul 14, 2011
- 2,997
- 399
- 48
To paraphrase the great American production "The Music Man"... There's trouble in Tent City. Ironically, it could be described as a growing feud between the "Haves & Have-Nots".
Those of you who have read my posts, know that I support the political agenda that has evolved from the OWS Movement.
I am grateful for those who started out in tents and banging drums. I truly am.
But the movement grew beyond the tents quickly. There was an article that showed dozens of arrested protesters live in luxury homes and neighborhoods. While those who are blinded by political ideology used the opportunity to claim the entire movement was "hypocrites", they also claim there are no Occupiers who live in homes at all - let alone luxury homes. Thus is the logic of the politically manipulated.
These are the people who are starting the rebellion. The "Home Occupiers."
During the last General Assembly, I talked about having a clear message, clearly defined goals, leaders and an action plan. Maybe a bit more than a third, perked up and were nodding enthusiastically. About half were crossing their arms, shaking their head no and several interrupted me. The rest were neutral.
So afterward, several people came up to me to express their thanks etc... Turned out we all had several things in common:
We have jobs or those I met who don't are obviously making an effort to get them.
We usually have families at home.
We have clearly identified several problems we feel have gotten out of hand.
We have identified several steps that could be taken to correct things.
We love capitalism! (But are not necessarily fans of building an economy that is supported almost exclusive by consumerism).
Those who consistently oppose this element of the movement known as "Home Occupiers"?
Few have jobs and seem less enthused about looking for them than Home Occupiers.
They are usually (but not always) younger - although many Home Occupiers are young.
They're usually single and almost never parents.
They know something has gone terribly wrong with our country but usually aren't able to intelligently articulate specifics.
Their ideas of how to address our problems are nebulous, at best and sometimes non-existent.
I haven't met anyone who actually wants to end capitalism but I'm not in New York and I'm sure there are people there who actually condone that idea - although they have no idea what they would replace it with.
Of course, any time the MSM interviews a Home Occupier, that segment is cut and replaced with the segment featuring a guy with dreadlocks lighting up a bong.
But the Tent Occupiers were the ones who started the movement, who made the wake up call, so they feel like they own it - and I have to admit, it is a legitimate sentiment. I can't fault them for it, even if they fault me and those like for for outgrowing the "drum-baning phase" of the movement.
What will happen? I've been talking with GA's (General Assemblies) and other occupiers around the country. There are a least three groups that are splintering off to start movements that are solely political. More will probably emerge and eventually combine to form something akin to the Tea Party but hopefully, more effective and not associated with candidates like Michele Bachmann, Christine O'Donnell or Sharon Angle. Seriously, we could do better than that if we ran a beagle dressed in a suit and tie - but not if we ran a guy with dreadlocks and a bong in his hand...
Those of you who have read my posts, know that I support the political agenda that has evolved from the OWS Movement.
I am grateful for those who started out in tents and banging drums. I truly am.
But the movement grew beyond the tents quickly. There was an article that showed dozens of arrested protesters live in luxury homes and neighborhoods. While those who are blinded by political ideology used the opportunity to claim the entire movement was "hypocrites", they also claim there are no Occupiers who live in homes at all - let alone luxury homes. Thus is the logic of the politically manipulated.
These are the people who are starting the rebellion. The "Home Occupiers."
During the last General Assembly, I talked about having a clear message, clearly defined goals, leaders and an action plan. Maybe a bit more than a third, perked up and were nodding enthusiastically. About half were crossing their arms, shaking their head no and several interrupted me. The rest were neutral.
So afterward, several people came up to me to express their thanks etc... Turned out we all had several things in common:
We have jobs or those I met who don't are obviously making an effort to get them.
We usually have families at home.
We have clearly identified several problems we feel have gotten out of hand.
We have identified several steps that could be taken to correct things.
We love capitalism! (But are not necessarily fans of building an economy that is supported almost exclusive by consumerism).
Those who consistently oppose this element of the movement known as "Home Occupiers"?
Few have jobs and seem less enthused about looking for them than Home Occupiers.
They are usually (but not always) younger - although many Home Occupiers are young.
They're usually single and almost never parents.
They know something has gone terribly wrong with our country but usually aren't able to intelligently articulate specifics.
Their ideas of how to address our problems are nebulous, at best and sometimes non-existent.
I haven't met anyone who actually wants to end capitalism but I'm not in New York and I'm sure there are people there who actually condone that idea - although they have no idea what they would replace it with.
Of course, any time the MSM interviews a Home Occupier, that segment is cut and replaced with the segment featuring a guy with dreadlocks lighting up a bong.
But the Tent Occupiers were the ones who started the movement, who made the wake up call, so they feel like they own it - and I have to admit, it is a legitimate sentiment. I can't fault them for it, even if they fault me and those like for for outgrowing the "drum-baning phase" of the movement.
What will happen? I've been talking with GA's (General Assemblies) and other occupiers around the country. There are a least three groups that are splintering off to start movements that are solely political. More will probably emerge and eventually combine to form something akin to the Tea Party but hopefully, more effective and not associated with candidates like Michele Bachmann, Christine O'Donnell or Sharon Angle. Seriously, we could do better than that if we ran a beagle dressed in a suit and tie - but not if we ran a guy with dreadlocks and a bong in his hand...
