Call me a heartless soulless fascist sheep and slave of the man, but the OWS was incredibly disorganized and aimless. It was bound to fail because it had zero foresight or direction. Other than stomping the pavement and getting attention, what was their GOAL?
"Down with the 1%."
But what does that mean?
"They have too much wealth."
Okay, but what are you going to do about it?
"We're going to protest against it."
How will that help?
"It will get people to notice what's going on and join the cause and join the protests."
But in the end, EVERYONE had their own views of what they were fighting for, and they had no plan of ACTION for getting those goals met. It was all just a noisy protest for getting attention to their "cause", without the slightest sense of direction or tangible solution.
Honestly, go to the protests. Ask the people what they're going to do besides protest on the streets or wreck public property. They're all just aimlessly waiting for someone to fix the problem for them. That, or they think wishing hard enough will make their vague dreams come true.
Our system of government is flawed, sure, but I write to my congresspeople, I vote, and I try to wrestle the system into doing what I expect it to do. And it may not accomplish much, but I at least know when I'm making real effort to make a change, and when I'm just making noise and bolstering my ego to look at myself as a new-age revolutionary with paper-thin ideals and vague ideas of what the problem is.
Protest, when backed with tangible solutions for the problem, is good. OWS was terrible because it was a bunch of angry yuppies, hipsters and hippies angry at bankers and corporate elites (who I admit are corrupt), but do nothing more than ask for handouts and make chants.
It was motion without direction, voice without words, in lesser terms, it was chaos. And now it has settled.
Also, bitches don't know about my Gold Standard. (hint; getting rid of that is the root of the economic batshit-insanity we deal with today. So maybe we should go after the Chamber of Commerse! But that's just some kid talkin'.)
"Down with the 1%."
But what does that mean?
"They have too much wealth."
Okay, but what are you going to do about it?
"We're going to protest against it."
How will that help?
"It will get people to notice what's going on and join the cause and join the protests."
But in the end, EVERYONE had their own views of what they were fighting for, and they had no plan of ACTION for getting those goals met. It was all just a noisy protest for getting attention to their "cause", without the slightest sense of direction or tangible solution.
Honestly, go to the protests. Ask the people what they're going to do besides protest on the streets or wreck public property. They're all just aimlessly waiting for someone to fix the problem for them. That, or they think wishing hard enough will make their vague dreams come true.
Our system of government is flawed, sure, but I write to my congresspeople, I vote, and I try to wrestle the system into doing what I expect it to do. And it may not accomplish much, but I at least know when I'm making real effort to make a change, and when I'm just making noise and bolstering my ego to look at myself as a new-age revolutionary with paper-thin ideals and vague ideas of what the problem is.
Protest, when backed with tangible solutions for the problem, is good. OWS was terrible because it was a bunch of angry yuppies, hipsters and hippies angry at bankers and corporate elites (who I admit are corrupt), but do nothing more than ask for handouts and make chants.
It was motion without direction, voice without words, in lesser terms, it was chaos. And now it has settled.
Also, bitches don't know about my Gold Standard. (hint; getting rid of that is the root of the economic batshit-insanity we deal with today. So maybe we should go after the Chamber of Commerse! But that's just some kid talkin'.)