@bl0ggcat I guess you haven't heard about the foreclosures that many Occupys have prevented. Occupy 477 wouldn't have won heat in their building this winter. I pity armchair revolutionaries like you who are the first to disown a movement because it doesn't conform to their expectations but when asked what action they are taking have nothing to say.
@bl0ggcat Something that benefits people of color does not mean they don't care about what happens to working class whites, sorry. The pure "class revolution" without flaws and problems you speak of will never come. Complaining about OWS in a comments section on YouTube does nothing to help the 99%. You should take a hint from Occupy and do something instead of just complaining about the efforts of others.
I'm really glad to see your enthusiasm. This movement is amazing. It's the only thing I've been apart in my life time that I feel has the real potential to transform society, finally, into something positive. Greetings as a member of occupy University of Michigan.
@bl0ggcat Obviously? No. You are assuming. I've had a lot of discussions with Malik and its simply not the case that he/they "do not care about poor white males." You are missing the point. If you want to represent poor white males, then do so. OTH isn't stopping you.
Disowning OWS because of progressive stack is ridiculous.
@bl0ggcat I don't subscribe to privilege theory and have made a lot of enemies arguing against it. Don't underestimate the support that progressive stack has among people who organize with Occupy the Hood and other non-elite/middle class forces either.
@bl0ggcat Again, how would you determine someone's class in a meeting? Similarly, progressive stack can't take into account sexual orientation. I asked you for a solution to a problem you are raising. You have yet to provide one. I'm not the one being lazy here. Also, in places where affirmative action programs have been overturned, the racist status quo of the bygone 40s and 50s days has returned if you look at the numbers. It's an imperfect solution but the alternative is worse.
@bl0ggcat How do you add class to progressive stack? Ask people to fill out W2s and check their listed occupation? Again, women are included in affirmative action programs and the like because of sexism, not middle class feminism.
@bl0ggcat You would have to ask them. I'm very aware of the class dynamics at OWS. The way we organize privileges people who have money and can afford to protest/organize 24/7. Women are often lumped together with these other groups not because of middle-class feminists but because of sexism (men interrupting women speakings before their time is up), not to mention the sexual assaults at OWS that were never properly handled until Oct./Nov.
No need to feel bad about it, trolls are trolls they do that to amuse themselves. Let them continously disrupt your meeeting with no contributions is being stupid, that is the kind of thing they take advantage of.
@bl0ggcat How do you figure I'm "intellectually honest"? I asked because the way you framed your objection was puzzling to me.
I think it depends on the situation. I've been in meetings that were 50-50 men and women but all the speakers were men. Progressive stack is an imperfect way to rectify some of that.
@bl0ggcat I understand what the word judgement means. What I do not understand is how calling on a woman, person of color, or differently-abled person prior to a white person and/or a man constitutes a judgement. I'm hoping you can explain.
@acromagnonman I've done a seven video series on democracy that I would encourage you to check out; mob rule is simply a pejorative term for Democracy used by elites to scare the crap out of us and mislead us into thinking Democracy is a bad thing. I can tell you that OWS is very concerned with the rights of minorities and the story I mention actually addresses this in real terms.
@Invinciblenumanist: I think that's what we are seeing develop right now. Resources are being shared among occupy communities. We just sent OO $25,000; this stuff is happening now.
@Bl0ggcat: Progressive stack isn't necessarily a given and tends to depend on who facilitates. I have no problem with it; but it's not written into stone by any means.
Crazycheesemagee: You're definitely right in that regard. Our votes do matter more at the local level where there is far less participation. But it's still a pale substitute for real democracy IMO
I think we have more of a chance with local and state elections. We're doing much better at the state level then the federal level, with Citizens United overturned in Montana and Ohio's anti-union bill turned down and not made into law.
@eboyd32 I understand the word. I understand what people think it is on both sides of the argument. I do not want it nor do I care for the idea of it and the practice of it. I am a capitalist and I like it like that.
I can accept capitalism with a splash of socialism. A small splash at that.
@TheRagingFoxhound so you, for all intensive purposes, oppose the idea of workers' (who are the people literally creating the wealth) controlling the means of production and prefer the idea of centralizing the means of production within the hands of a few people who own property? i understand the concept that worker cooperatives can come about in capitalism, but it's rare and most capitalists prefer a hierarchical business structure and give little justification for it.
@eboyd32 Look, in theory it works. What you mention is not capitalism though. It is corporatism. Corporatism is not at all capitalism. I believe in private ownership. There are pros and cons with both. Neither will ever be perfect. I can see Capitalistic Socialism or Socialistic Capitalism But never could I accept just socialism. I can not accept redistribution of wealth. The thing is, I grew up poor. I am poor now. I am to young to have built for myself as I am doing now.
@TheRagingFoxhound How about anarchism, or what is called Libertarian Socialism? Capitalism and socialism are a rough mix, we have it now. Capitalism is quite an ill, or corporatism as you state it. We've never had real capitalism because it would collapse instantly, When we were closer to it we had robber barons and a third world country. That's why it is regulated. And it needs to be regulated, just not regulated in favor of corporations.
@NocheezRecords We also had what we called captain of industries back then to. Yes, we need regulation. I do not think we need regulation to the point of pure socialism though. In the end, all these systems are flawed. There are pros and cons to both. Like I said, socialism that leans more to capitalism is not so bad. I believe in private ownership without being punished for it. Not monopoly though.
@TheRagingFoxhound We don't need captains of industry in my opinion. As far as socialism, I am for anarchism which is Libertarian socialism based on horizontal democracy. I don't think representative democracy works well at all, in fact we see that quite clearly now. No one should lose their liberties when they enter the work place, or anywhere for that matter. Corporations are unaccountable tyrannies. we don't need them to do business.
@TheRagingFoxhound By the way anarchism has existed, worked well in Catalonia until the fascists backed by the west smashed it in fear of real democracy spreading. That's what powerful states and institutions hate, democracy.
@TheRagingFoxhound socialism is not redistribution of wealth. you are probably thinking of communism, which is a form of socialism that includes wealth distribution according to need. i am not a communist, but i am a socialist. socialism is, simply put, any system that advocates WORKERS' CONTROL OVER THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. nothing more nothing less. it doesn't necessarily oppose private ownership. sure, in theory capitalism and socialism don't contradict each other, but...
...in all practicality the basis of ownership inherent in capitalism, even supposed "anarcho"-capitalism, prevents any form of socialism coming about in sufficient numbers. in other words the Labor Theory of Property as it is proposed by capitalists such as Murray Rothbard prevents collectivized businesses from being erected in sufficient numbers in society. this leads to unjust wealth disparities maybe not as wide as today but still similar to what we see in society currently
Acromagnonman: not really. My point is that I think when people experience real democracy the elections will just seem kinda silly. We're all smart, capable people. Why would we possibly need someone to make decisions for us?
That is the big crucial difference between the status-quo apathetics and the protesters: the no-protest, no-question majority believe in top-down organizations that "do it all for you." The Occupiers do it for themselves, and that's the way they want it.
@bl0ggcat I guess you haven't heard about the foreclosures that many Occupys have prevented. Occupy 477 wouldn't have won heat in their building this winter. I pity armchair revolutionaries like you who are the first to disown a movement because it doesn't conform to their expectations but when asked what action they are taking have nothing to say.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Dialectics, a philosophical method, is a form of action? LOL
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Again, you're all complaints + no action. No one cares what you think until you stop talking and start acting, including me. Good bye.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Something that benefits people of color does not mean they don't care about what happens to working class whites, sorry. The pure "class revolution" without flaws and problems you speak of will never come. Complaining about OWS in a comments section on YouTube does nothing to help the 99%. You should take a hint from Occupy and do something instead of just complaining about the efforts of others.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
I'm really glad to see your enthusiasm. This movement is amazing. It's the only thing I've been apart in my life time that I feel has the real potential to transform society, finally, into something positive. Greetings as a member of occupy University of Michigan.
Simbelmyne13 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Obviously? No. You are assuming. I've had a lot of discussions with Malik and its simply not the case that he/they "do not care about poor white males." You are missing the point. If you want to represent poor white males, then do so. OTH isn't stopping you.
Disowning OWS because of progressive stack is ridiculous.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Something like you do, being a troll! talking shit. reply to yourself?
blade9z 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat "they do not care about poor white males." Not true. Unless you can prove it.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat I don't subscribe to privilege theory and have made a lot of enemies arguing against it. Don't underestimate the support that progressive stack has among people who organize with Occupy the Hood and other non-elite/middle class forces either.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Again, how would you determine someone's class in a meeting? Similarly, progressive stack can't take into account sexual orientation. I asked you for a solution to a problem you are raising. You have yet to provide one. I'm not the one being lazy here. Also, in places where affirmative action programs have been overturned, the racist status quo of the bygone 40s and 50s days has returned if you look at the numbers. It's an imperfect solution but the alternative is worse.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat How do you add class to progressive stack? Ask people to fill out W2s and check their listed occupation? Again, women are included in affirmative action programs and the like because of sexism, not middle class feminism.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat You would have to ask them. I'm very aware of the class dynamics at OWS. The way we organize privileges people who have money and can afford to protest/organize 24/7. Women are often lumped together with these other groups not because of middle-class feminists but because of sexism (men interrupting women speakings before their time is up), not to mention the sexual assaults at OWS that were never properly handled until Oct./Nov.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
No need to feel bad about it, trolls are trolls they do that to amuse themselves. Let them continously disrupt your meeeting with no contributions is being stupid, that is the kind of thing they take advantage of.
blade9z 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat Not sure.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat How do you figure I'm "intellectually honest"? I asked because the way you framed your objection was puzzling to me.
I think it depends on the situation. I've been in meetings that were 50-50 men and women but all the speakers were men. Progressive stack is an imperfect way to rectify some of that.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat I understand what the word judgement means. What I do not understand is how calling on a woman, person of color, or differently-abled person prior to a white person and/or a man constitutes a judgement. I'm hoping you can explain.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat I don't understand what you mean by "judged"?
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
@acromagnonman I've done a seven video series on democracy that I would encourage you to check out; mob rule is simply a pejorative term for Democracy used by elites to scare the crap out of us and mislead us into thinking Democracy is a bad thing. I can tell you that OWS is very concerned with the rights of minorities and the story I mention actually addresses this in real terms.
buddhagem 1 month ago
@bl0ggcat What is wrong with progressive stack?
binhthanhvo 1 month ago in playlist Liked videos
@Invinciblenumanist: I think that's what we are seeing develop right now. Resources are being shared among occupy communities. We just sent OO $25,000; this stuff is happening now.
buddhagem 1 month ago
@Bl0ggcat: Progressive stack isn't necessarily a given and tends to depend on who facilitates. I have no problem with it; but it's not written into stone by any means.
buddhagem 1 month ago
Crazycheesemagee: You're definitely right in that regard. Our votes do matter more at the local level where there is far less participation. But it's still a pale substitute for real democracy IMO
buddhagem 1 month ago
I think we have more of a chance with local and state elections. We're doing much better at the state level then the federal level, with Citizens United overturned in Montana and Ohio's anti-union bill turned down and not made into law.
CrazyCheeseMagee 1 month ago
Any chance of these movements evolving into the reestablishment of mutual aid societies?
InvincibleNumanist 1 month ago
My biggest concern with this movement is the demand of Socialism from some folks.
It is a rather pointless movement outside of this social connection he speaks of..
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound what's wrong with socialism? do you even understand what that word means?
eboyd32 1 month ago
@eboyd32 I understand the word. I understand what people think it is on both sides of the argument. I do not want it nor do I care for the idea of it and the practice of it. I am a capitalist and I like it like that.
I can accept capitalism with a splash of socialism. A small splash at that.
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound so you, for all intensive purposes, oppose the idea of workers' (who are the people literally creating the wealth) controlling the means of production and prefer the idea of centralizing the means of production within the hands of a few people who own property? i understand the concept that worker cooperatives can come about in capitalism, but it's rare and most capitalists prefer a hierarchical business structure and give little justification for it.
eboyd32 1 month ago
@eboyd32 Look, in theory it works. What you mention is not capitalism though. It is corporatism. Corporatism is not at all capitalism. I believe in private ownership. There are pros and cons with both. Neither will ever be perfect. I can see Capitalistic Socialism or Socialistic Capitalism But never could I accept just socialism. I can not accept redistribution of wealth. The thing is, I grew up poor. I am poor now. I am to young to have built for myself as I am doing now.
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound How about anarchism, or what is called Libertarian Socialism? Capitalism and socialism are a rough mix, we have it now. Capitalism is quite an ill, or corporatism as you state it. We've never had real capitalism because it would collapse instantly, When we were closer to it we had robber barons and a third world country. That's why it is regulated. And it needs to be regulated, just not regulated in favor of corporations.
NocheezRecords 1 month ago
@NocheezRecords We also had what we called captain of industries back then to. Yes, we need regulation. I do not think we need regulation to the point of pure socialism though. In the end, all these systems are flawed. There are pros and cons to both. Like I said, socialism that leans more to capitalism is not so bad. I believe in private ownership without being punished for it. Not monopoly though.
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound We don't need captains of industry in my opinion. As far as socialism, I am for anarchism which is Libertarian socialism based on horizontal democracy. I don't think representative democracy works well at all, in fact we see that quite clearly now. No one should lose their liberties when they enter the work place, or anywhere for that matter. Corporations are unaccountable tyrannies. we don't need them to do business.
NocheezRecords 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound By the way anarchism has existed, worked well in Catalonia until the fascists backed by the west smashed it in fear of real democracy spreading. That's what powerful states and institutions hate, democracy.
NocheezRecords 1 month ago
@NocheezRecords I am not exactly sure what you are suggesting in this one.
TheRagingFoxhound 1 month ago
@TheRagingFoxhound socialism is not redistribution of wealth. you are probably thinking of communism, which is a form of socialism that includes wealth distribution according to need. i am not a communist, but i am a socialist. socialism is, simply put, any system that advocates WORKERS' CONTROL OVER THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION. nothing more nothing less. it doesn't necessarily oppose private ownership. sure, in theory capitalism and socialism don't contradict each other, but...
eboyd32 1 month ago
...in all practicality the basis of ownership inherent in capitalism, even supposed "anarcho"-capitalism, prevents any form of socialism coming about in sufficient numbers. in other words the Labor Theory of Property as it is proposed by capitalists such as Murray Rothbard prevents collectivized businesses from being erected in sufficient numbers in society. this leads to unjust wealth disparities maybe not as wide as today but still similar to what we see in society currently
eboyd32 1 month ago
Acromagnonman: not really. My point is that I think when people experience real democracy the elections will just seem kinda silly. We're all smart, capable people. Why would we possibly need someone to make decisions for us?
buddhagem 1 month ago
I assume you're referring to Nan.
binhthanhvo 1 month ago
That is the big crucial difference between the status-quo apathetics and the protesters: the no-protest, no-question majority believe in top-down organizations that "do it all for you." The Occupiers do it for themselves, and that's the way they want it.
not2tees 1 month ago