good:

In an OWS Era, Americans Are Much More Aware of Class Tension 
It looks like Occupy Wall Street’s message has resonated even after Zuccotti Park cleared out. A new Pew Research Center survey reveals that two-thirds of the public believes there are “very strong” or “strong” conflicts between America’s rich and poor—a number that’s up 19 percentage points since 2009. According to the survey, income inequality now trumps tensions arising from race or immigration—popular answers only a few years before. 
Read more on GOOD→

good:

In an OWS Era, Americans Are Much More Aware of Class Tension 

It looks like Occupy Wall Street’s message has resonated even after Zuccotti Park cleared out. A new Pew Research Center survey reveals that two-thirds of the public believes there are “very strong” or “strong” conflicts between America’s rich and poor—a number that’s up 19 percentage points since 2009. According to the survey, income inequality now trumps tensions arising from race or immigration—popular answers only a few years before. 

Read more on GOOD→

reallyronreally:

I’m not ok with this.

wait what letter is this 

reallyronreally:

I’m not ok with this.

wait what letter is this 

THANK YOU RON PAUL FOR DOING WHAT YOU BEST!

reallyronreally:

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

GREAT JOB TAKING NOT TAKING A STAND AGAINST NDAA.

YOU KNOW HOW MUCH A VOTE MATTERS. LOOK AT HOW YOU WHORE YOURSELF FOR CAMPAIGN MONEY!

PIG.

THIS WAS ACTUALLY HIS BEST CHANCE TO GET SUPPORT 

AND HE FUCKED IT UP 

HE FUCKED UP HIS ONE CHANCE TO IMPRESS ME 

ericasavestheday:

Wealth Disparity Hits Families the Hardest: Even though America has gotten exponentially wealthier, children’s quality of life hasn’t improved in the past 35 years, and families are doing even worse than they were 35 years ago.

ronpaulsucks:

When some in a crowd of anti-war activists meeting at Democrat National Committee HQ in June, 2005 suggested Israel was behind the 9-11 attacks, DNC Chair Howard Dean was quick to get behind the microphones and denounce them saying: “such statements are nothing but vile, anti-Semitic…

HOLY FUCK THIS POST IS LONG 

BUT SO GOOD 

If you only sign one thing this year, sign this

omghayate:

I don’t even like being the one to bring up anything political, but I came online to post this. The amendment is poorly named (misleading), so look at it regardless of how you feel about Occupy Wall Street.

The Outlawing Corporate Cash Undermining the Public Interest in our Elections and Democracy (OCCUPIED) Amendment will end corporate influence in our elections by:

  • Overturning Citizens United and outright banning the ability of corporations to use their profits to influence our elections.
  • Making clear that corporations, as well as entities formed to represent corporations — are not real, living people with rights protected by our Constitution. They are entities established under our laws and thus subject to our laws.
  • Reasserting the authority of Congress and the States to crack down on anonymous third party groups flooding our elections with malicious attack ads and to limit campaign contributions and expenditures by individuals, candidates, and all types of private entities.

Good petition. Sign. 

My Day Off by ~RizzleG on DeviantART 

My Day Off by ~RizzleG on DeviantART 

Occupy Wall Street

Dear floraboraa

May I address many of the points you make here? Thank you. 

If half the people who actually do occupy Wall Street were in fact homeless, then I would be more sympathetic with their cause. But they’re not.

They are, actually. If you go down to where they’re occupying, you can expect at least a few roaming handtrucks piled with bags. In fact, people are saying the exact opposite of what you’re saying is the issue: that it’s all shameless homeless people. 

If you actually watch protesting videos or see pictures, each person has something made by the corporations they so detest:Canon cameras, iPhones, Droids, Panasonic video cameras, etc. I dont get it. You guys look like hypocrites honestly. Most of you guys are just pissed that you have no money for things (probably made by the corporations you’re protesting against) so you feel like protesting is your only option.

There’s a difference between fair capitalism and the corruption that OWS is protesting against. Apple good, Citibank bad. Panasonic good, WalMart (for many reasons that I can barely begin to touch upon without taking up too much space) bad. 

How about actually using that time to stop occupying wall street and go try to occupy a job. Sometimes its not the governments problems, its just your own. You just need to work for it, and not try, fail and then never try again.

That’s the logic they’ve been using since the crash. If they could get a job, they wouldn’t be whining about how there’s not enough jobs. I know plenty of people who work their poor asses off and still can’t find a job. Besides, for every four unemployed people in America, it’s been estimated that there’s only one job opening. 

If you guys were a legit 99% you wouldn’t be able to see what I’m writing, because you would have no internet or laptop. You wouldn’t be able to afford it. So go snuggle up in the Northfaces I had seen a couple of protesters wear, blog about how greedy corps are.

Erm, no. I can easily bet you’re the 99%. I’m the 99%. We make less than the 1%. That’s the point of the protests. You don’t have to be dirt broke to be the 99%. You just have to fall in that statistic. That’s what point they’re trying to break. 

Your main tools for getting people to rally are two the biggest corporations in social networking: Twitter and Facebook. I thought you were protesting big corps? 

Again. Good corp/bad corp. They’ve been staying away from Facebook for the most part due to a lot of their ethical concerns, but Twitter has been very good about their presence, since they get so much traffic from things like these. 

If the whole movement was to protest for people who can’t afford, I would withdraw my stance. But you guys are playing it out to be like you all are poor and cant afford.

Can’t afford what? A house? College? To feed your kids when you were perfectly capable of doing so five years ago? My parents didn’t think I’d have to worry about financial aid five years ago because we were so well off before the crash, but now that’s the main factor in my current college hunt. So personally, I can’t afford college. People can’t afford rent. They can’t afford to lose their voice with so many people losing their jobs.  

But lets face it, half of the people you know that are occupying Wall Street never had to deal with any of that. 

Two words: Debt slavery. The average college student debt is $25,000 after college. Some have tens of thousands more, some have less. But with the lack of good jobs out there, it’s getting harder and harder to pay off. 

And the people occupying Wall Street don’t have to be poor. I don’t have to be black to support the Civil Rights Movement. I don’t have to be a female to support feminism (though it helps). And I certainly don’t have to be gay to support the LGBT movement. They have to have an issue with corruption in corporations and the government. 

That’s my opinion, and I just wanted to share it. I can’t wait for some of you guys to write me back from your laptops and try to tell me off.

Wish granted. Thanks for providing every media cliche objection to OWS. I’m ashamed of you for falling for it. Have fun in your little mental bubble there. 

"Mr. President, we HOPE You’re on our side." 
Shepard Fairey, the artist behind the original Obama “Hope” poster from the 2008 campaign, created this version of the poster in support of the Occupy Wall Street movement.  
[click through for the official page for this work]

"Mr. President, we HOPE You’re on our side." 

Shepard Fairey, the artist behind the original Obama “Hope” poster from the 2008 campaign, created this version of the poster in support of the Occupy Wall Street movement.  

[click through for the official page for this work]

OWS Protesters: Why the camping?

thehappysmokers:

riningear:

hipsterlibertarian:

I wrote this at the bottom of a question I was answering earlier, but it hasn’t gotten any responses, so I’ll give it its own post because I am legitimately curious:

Can someone explain why the camping is seen as necessary?  Why would it be a problem for people to just be there all day, every day, but not set up housekeeping?  I get that it’s probably partly a money thing, but surely there’s a strong enough network in place at this point that those who actually live in NYC/whatever city could offer their couches/floors/guest rooms (ha! — guest rooms in NYC apartments) for out-of-towners to crash.  It seems to me this would actually make more sense because it would eliminate much of the bad blood with local businesses.

So can someone more intimately involved in the movement than I weigh in by replying to this post or messaging me?  I’m not asking to make an argument for or against camping for protests, I just want to know the reasoning behind it.

I actually remember when the protests were originally being discussed in some chats during the summer, so I think I have a bit of a better idea than a lot of protesters, actually.

This was one of the points brought up; why sleep? A few people thought it was ridiculous. Still, the original intentions of OWS were, in fact, to capture the attention of people who actually worked on Wall Street and stay there as long as possible to get people talking.

The original people with the idea, most likely peaceful Anarchists (which seems like an oxymoron but it really isn’t), felt that this would be the most effective way to get the point across. Obviously, there are very few alternatives other than Anonymous’s regular DDoSing methods. They obviously did their research, because it is, in fact, legal to sleep on public property as a form of protest. And, well, it’s working to get attention, no? Isn’t that a protest needs to do? 

Right now, they’re in Zuccotti Park because they closed down Wall Street itself in anticipation of the protesters, as some press releases from the NYPD long before the protests revealed. However, had they opened Wall Street, it would probably be a much different protest than you see now. I took a visit there one morning, and they do their best to keep clean. They have trash bins everywhere, they have some cleaning supplies laying around, and everyone keeps within their tents for the most part. 

In terms of “dealing with bad blood,” it’s not like every business has issues. Some have learned to cope, others have helped, and yet others are whining. I’m sure that local eateries are swimming in money from the tourists’ money, with OWS on top of the 9/11 memorial down the street. There are some business complaining about the drums/music, but other issues can be solved by adding an extra 30 seconds of walking time and going around the park itself. 

Plus, there still isn’t much trust in our country, much less NYC, in terms of housing strangers, and even if people were willing to give housing, there wouldn’t be enough people to house all the protesters. At any given time, perhaps 50-200 people occupy the area, and the people there are always changing. I know personally that I wouldn’t want someone from [insert faraway state here] sleeping in my room for an undetermined amount of time. 

Symbolically, the Occupy movement’s camping tactic means different things to different people. Personally, I see it as a symbol that corruption affects us 24/7, and sleeping where it apparently stems from would be an “ironic” move, but it can be interpreted in any way you wish. 

Hope I answered your question. 

You probably heard they had a midnight raid and the cops went down and cleaned out Zuccotti park… so if you’re keeping score, here it is: Protesters arrested, 70; Wall Street executives arrested: 0. The mayor said the reason protesters were thrown out of Zuccotti was because the conditions were hazardous, dangerous, and unsanitary and I’m saying, if that’s a reason to throw people out of the park, we’d ALL have to leave New York City.

—David Letterman

Reblogging for the quote. 

OWS Protesters: Why the camping?

hipsterlibertarian:

I wrote this at the bottom of a question I was answering earlier, but it hasn’t gotten any responses, so I’ll give it its own post because I am legitimately curious:

Can someone explain why the camping is seen as necessary?  Why would it be a problem for people to just be there all day, every day, but not set up housekeeping?  I get that it’s probably partly a money thing, but surely there’s a strong enough network in place at this point that those who actually live in NYC/whatever city could offer their couches/floors/guest rooms (ha! — guest rooms in NYC apartments) for out-of-towners to crash.  It seems to me this would actually make more sense because it would eliminate much of the bad blood with local businesses.

So can someone more intimately involved in the movement than I weigh in by replying to this post or messaging me?  I’m not asking to make an argument for or against camping for protests, I just want to know the reasoning behind it.

I actually remember when the protests were originally being discussed in some chats during the summer, so I think I have a bit of a better idea than a lot of protesters, actually.

This was one of the points brought up; why sleep? A few people thought it was ridiculous. Still, the original intentions of OWS were, in fact, to capture the attention of people who actually worked on Wall Street and stay there as long as possible to get people talking.

The original people with the idea, most likely peaceful Anarchists (which seems like an oxymoron but it really isn’t), felt that this would be the most effective way to get the point across. Obviously, there are very few alternatives other than Anonymous’s regular DDoSing methods. They obviously did their research, because it is, in fact, legal to sleep on public property as a form of protest. And, well, it’s working to get attention, no? Isn’t that a protest needs to do? 

Right now, they’re in Zuccotti Park because they closed down Wall Street itself in anticipation of the protesters, as some press releases from the NYPD long before the protests revealed. However, had they opened Wall Street, it would probably be a much different protest than you see now. I took a visit there one morning, and they do their best to keep clean. They have trash bins everywhere, they have some cleaning supplies laying around, and everyone keeps within their tents for the most part. 

In terms of “dealing with bad blood,” it’s not like every business has issues. Some have learned to cope, others have helped, and yet others are whining. I’m sure that local eateries are swimming in money from the tourists’ money, with OWS on top of the 9/11 memorial down the street. There are some business complaining about the drums/music, but other issues can be solved by adding an extra 30 seconds of walking time and going around the park itself. 

Plus, there still isn’t much trust in our country, much less NYC, in terms of housing strangers, and even if people were willing to give housing, there wouldn’t be enough people to house all the protesters. At any given time, perhaps 50-200 people occupy the area, and the people there are always changing. I know personally that I wouldn’t want someone from [insert faraway state here] sleeping in my room for an undetermined amount of time. 

Symbolically, the Occupy movement’s camping tactic means different things to different people. Personally, I see it as a symbol that corruption affects us 24/7, and sleeping where it apparently stems from would be an “ironic” move, but it can be interpreted in any way you wish. 

Hope I answered your question.