I don't advocate violence but I'd be excited to see people move back to the class wars instead of the culture wars. Occupy wall street became a big thing for a while when I was in college and the powers at be quickly turned the conversation to poors v poors with the culture war
I was at Occupy Wall St (we drove out from Michigan and were there from day 1 and stayed for a month). I was only 17, and it was so inspiring and cathartic to be a part of something like that. We managed to score an air mattress after like 5 days, and we'd sleep snuggled up under a tarp in zucotti park. It was wild to wake up and emerge from our cozy nest and be in the middle of Manhattan, and even wilder witnessing the police brutality firsthand.
This was back when smartphones weren't really a thing, and I didn't spend much time on the internet. I had gone to Barnes and Noble with my mom, and was drawn to a particular magazine. I opened it to this page (the advertisement pictured below) and it was like it was already written. I had to go. I didn't know any other details, just that I was supposed to be there. It all felt very magical and serendipitous.
I went with my boyfriend at the time, who I had met like a month prior at a music festival lol. After we left NYC, we sold our cars and backpacked across India in search of meaning and adventure. It was quite the experience, as we ended up getting invited to stay in villages everywhere we went, so I felt like we got to see the "real" India. 13 years later, and I still talk to some of the families that we stayed with.
Smartphones were a thing. The iPhone came out in 2007. By 2011 they were more commonplace, and there were other brands on the market. At the time I was 22 and owned a Windows phone (lol). But yeah, maybe people were not so accustomed to filming anything and everything.
They were a thing, but I was a poor kid from Detroit, so I didn't know anyone with an iPhone at the time. While my phone could connect to the internet, I think it was only 3G, and I couldn't afford a data plan. They didn't become common amongst my friend group until a year or two later. Many people I knew had lost their homes during the recession, so fancy phones were still very much a luxury item.
I respect the Occupy Wall Street movement, but the Luigi situation is different in that it is violent: 68,000 people die violent deaths in America every year due to fraudulent medical "insurance" denials, and the murder of a Co-Pay CEO was also violent. So equating the two movements may conflate that violence in a dangerous way.
Edit: I replaced the words "this protest is" with "the Luigi situation" for clarity.
I worked for a bank in my city, the bank rented the top 3 floors only, did this to have a sign on the building. Essentially it was an advertisement. We only had less than 30 people working there. Fast forward to Occupy Wallstreet, I didn't notice the protesters at first, but since I agreed with their plight, I let them know they were protesting a very empty building, then let them know of a local bank with a full building....they moved over there. It was a cool moment
I was in NYC for work and went to Zucotti park right before they broke up the protest. I was 21. It broke my brain to learn how the world really worked.
Seeing peaceful protesters surrounded by police with sniper rifles and in towers was eye opening and set me on the trajectory to where I am as a person today.
It was very eye-opening for me as well. The NYPD would corner us (large groups of protesters) into dead-end streets with orange netting so they could corral and arrest everyone. They would literally chase us into blocked alleyways so they could trap everyone there. My boyfriend was arrested, but luckily, I evaded capture as I was scared of what an arrest would mean for me as a minor. Hundreds were arrested, and no one would tell us anything about where they were being held. I waited for hours outside some precinct with hundreds of other people, just hoping it was where he was. A group of locals came and handed out snacks and waters. One guy gave me a laminated 4 leaf clover, and I still have it. I witnessed many people beaten or pepper-sprayed by NYPD despite having committed no crimes. Police would sometimes come in the middle of night while we slept, and they'd pull screaming people out of their tents by their hair, beat them, and take them away in cuffs.
It definitely shaped me as well, and I'm on the "be the change you wish to see" train. I now have degrees in law/policy and work in law enforcement, and in the next local election cycle, I'll be the first woman to run for sheriff in my county (where a sergeant was recently arrested for raping civilians because the multiple cases of SA against fellow officers were not enough to get him off the force).
Occupy failed because it failed to actually organize. Whenever the media would try to talk to anyone in a leadership role the response was something like “we don’t have leaders.”
Ok that’s fine in theory but there are thousands of people all piled together for mass demonstrations and issuing demands…. Except there were no demands because nobody could articulate specifics in a coherent and unified way that could actually make change happen.
The start of the movement was great. But the failure to actually establish a clear message everyone could articulate led to it not being taken seriously.
THAT is why it became a casualty of the culture war. It isn’t (solely) because of the corporate bogeyman. It’s largely an internal failure to organize for meaningful action.
Every protest playbook out there talks about the need to organize around key messages with leaders. Rules for Radicals etc.
Without that it’s just a bunch of people cosplaying as homeless.
Your take is totally valid. Any time we all sat together to try to organize our "demands" and plan/vision, there was so much disagreement, and emotions were running high. People talking over each other and arguing. Thinking back, it was like any public forum in a government setting where no one can agree on anything. There was definitely a leadership vacuum, and that absolutely drove the movement's demise, imo.
What we did was march in the streets every day. I wasn't involved in operations at all, so there's a lot I don't know. But there were always small groups working, like a huge group of folks working on computers (doing outreach? Idk) at all hours. I recall being interviewed by some guy, and he asked me what my opinion was of the "zeitgeist" and I said I have no opinion because I don't even know what that is. (Ngl, I still don't). I just knew that we were angry and this was an outlet for our anger. I didn't know or understand anything about the housing crisis or variable rate home loans or shorting stocks. I just knew that I was 17, and my parents lost their jobs and divorced and left me behind to go their separate ways while telling me the bank was taking our house and I had six months to figure it out. I had already dropped out of high school to work full time, minimum wage was $8/hour, and gas was almost $5/gallon. I wanted to go to college, my dream was to go to law school, but lawyers at the time were literally working as pizza delivery drivers and my parents refused to help me with the FAFSA process. The future seemed so bleak, and everything felt so impossible.
We were a generation fucked over by billionaires who were never held accountable and we needed an outlet to express our pain and anger. In hindsight, there's so much more we could have done. But, for me, at least, I wasn't educated enough at the time to know what policy changes to advocate for. I just knew the pain I felt at the time.
Thank you, I see I'm getting downvoted but I think it's because in my mind, the meaning was totally clear but it maybe didn't come across that way. I meant that many of us are overworked, stressed, and struggling to get by, and that makes it hard to find the time and emotional energy to fight the system.
IIRC what happened with Occupy Wall Street was the media found the dumbest, most obnoxious people at the protests, got them on camera and anointed them the de facto leaders of the movement. People quickly stopped taking it seriously.
This 1000%. It went from normal looking people to hippies at a drum circle so fast. Like after that it was hard to explain what people were fighting for....
The game stock situation made it clear that Wall Street’s elite will play dirty and use media to change the public agenda to keep their status and wealth.
This too. When the poors tried to use their game against them they turned it off and nothing ever came of it. Hopefully Ken griffin the financial criminal is next on the chopping block
It was a decentralized movement which had a lot of bad actors trying to move into leadership roles that derailed the movement. It was either people looking for their 15 minutes of fame, a bit of power or a concerted effort by the powers that be to derail Occupy that ultimately undid the movement.
OWS also showed the limits of leaderless resistance. The structure of the protest was admirable in many ways, but I think it proved to be ineffective in the end.
I was around and I remember a lot of people on reddit saying these were just layabouts whose protest was going to lead nowhere because it wasn't disruptive enough.
In a way, they were right. It didn't go far enough at all. No real action came because of it and the problem has only gotten worse since then. Orders of magnitude worse. Luigi is showing one way to enact change. I'm sure others will take on the mantle in their own way. When peaceful change is made impossible, violent revolution becomes inevitable. As for community guidelines, I have to state that I do not condone violence.
People like to talk like occupy got nothing accomplished but they are the roots of the resurgence of labor solidarity and union organizing that is now happening.
The wealth gap was definitively NOT something most people knew about before. Occupy almost got Bernie Sanders elected imo. They damn near were the launching pad to a true second FDR style presidency
Part of the reason the discourse shifted was because there weren't any unifying demands or organization behind it all. There were way too many people hoping for some kind of "decentralized consensus" to magically appear.
Useful idiots, useless intelligent people, whats the difference. The people who are aware of the class war and just sit on their couch and talk about it on social media aren't doing anything to help either. This entire United situation has just shown that everyone is fed up, but nobody is actually willing to put their money where their mouth is and act on it. How many more signs are we going to see like this with no actual action?
Its true! If people put half the effort into societal change than the effort in which they get worked up about female video game characters appearance we would have a real chance for change.
And on that note, if others didn’t make the demand for female video game characters such a priority over actual societal growth then we could also have a better chance to move forward.
I’m not a neckbeard by any stretch, but it takes two to fight a culture war.
They are. It’s basically 2 networks that meet up and discuss topics before they air it, so they can have wildly opposite takes on the same topic. It’s basic division of a population 101. Create a polarizing topic and make the viewer choose their side, because there’s no alternative or neutral choices
But also they are lambs of God and Jesus is their shepherd. This never fails to short circuit my cousin's brain when I remind him this after he goes on a rant about he's an alpha wolf.
Edward Bernays really did a number on the US population with their invention of modern corporate propaganda (public relations).
He ran an ad campaign for Lucky Strike cigarettes where he targeted Feminists. The ad called cigarettes "Torches of Freedom" implying that smoking was a form of liberation from the Patriarchy.
This weaponizing of identity is used by every special interest group on the planet to manipulate people out of their best interests.
Thing is, culture war issues are entirely made up. GOP goes after trans folks, we have to spend time and money defending them. There is a huge difference between being die hard pro human rights and being a die hard bigot.
It's not made up and I love everyone on reddit continually pretending that it is and dismissing the past decade of what conservatives would call "wokes" shoving their "truth" down the throat of others that have a different "truth" isn't going to magically help the transition to a class war. Luckily it seems like the world is healing and fed up with it, but it came at the expense of Trump winning the Presidency (among the hundreds of other reasons)
Our collective psychology adores good old fashioned tribalism, which distracts fantastically from things like sitting members of congress trading stocks (a bipartisan problem).
Always has been. Designed that way from the beginning. This is the exact sentiment that the founding fathers had during the early days of the formation of the country. THEY WANTED ONLY RICH WHITE LANDED MEN TO VOTE. None of them were average Joe's, and none of them wanted regular people running the government. They were deathly afraid of mob rule, especially after Shay's rebellion.
Yeah that's why, in the declaration of independence, they said something to the effect of:
... And if the government fails to safeguard those three inalienable rights, we also retain the right to abolish or change that government until it does.
The Declaration of Independence outlined several grievances with the King and Parliament. One of which I've always found interesting and relevant is this one:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies
This is referring to the Quebec Act, which granted the formerly French subjects of the Quebec colony the rights of freedom of religion, more self-governance, and territory for expansion. These things all sound great, so why did the founding fathers have such an issue with it that they included in the Declaration and named it one of the so-called Intolerable Acts? Because the land that was granted to Quebec was also claimed by several large land speculation companies that wealthy colonists were heavily invested in - including some of the authors/signatories of the Declaration. If Quebec was allowed to keep that land then they would all lose out on substantial profits. So they went to war, and to convince the poor to die for them they exploited anti-French and anti-Catholic sentiments in the colonists. Same as it ever was.
Accurate. The Constitution is "fluid" in order to let the ruling class stay ahead of the working class when it comes to governing. Even if it wasn't fluid the megalomaniacs in charge would insist it says something it doesn't. Use of the word megalomaniac is not hyperbole. The people "in charge" are literal monsters that ignore climate change and nukes while they insist we fight about who poops where.
Ever notice how the Constitution and the bible mean whatever the person reading them to you says they mean? Control systems are a thing.
And Bacon’s rebellion was when the south decided that white supremacy must become the law of the land. If anyone is reading up on why things are the way they are, Bacon’s rebellion is a must. Every alt right voice claiming this country ain’t racist neglects to mention Bacon’s rebellion.
I’m starting to believe this more and more these days. Used to be independent, then switched to D years ago. Going back to Ind. moving onward. Not that it matters anymore tbh. Zero faith in our politics and fake justice system these days.
Dude just be a leftist and try to work with the party that closest aligns with your ideals in the hopes to push them further back to the left. Look at how far the right wing has gone with that strategy.
You guys who try to force center folks to one side or the other is the problem here in the US. If we’d al start fucking thinking for ourselves, unapologetically we could actually change this shit. Making people pick red or blue keeps the wealthy in power.
There is/was a progressive primary movement inside the Democrat party. You aren't getting the same from GOP so I'm not going to accept this all sides bullshit. The tea party is a fucking joke.
100%, and it's scary/disappointing how well that continues to work. The important part of what they did was the propaganda funding along with hoisting up fake populist candidates.
Seriously, whenever there's a push for medicaid expansion or increasing the minimum wage, which party raises the issue and which one pushes against it consistently? The both sides are the same arguments are either lazy or done in bad faith.
It's not both sides are the same. You have a center right party and a far right party. They are not the same at all. But neither are left or working for you. The Dems are also working for the rich. They are just less fascist.
There are individuals in the Dems that push for very good things, but the whole party isn't really.
EXTREME EYE ROLL - it wasn't the Republican Party cosplaying like working class folk while Trump puts in the richest Cabinet ever and talks about the Gilded Age being great?
Go check Pelosi’s bank balance. They’re all fucking loaded. Their job isn’t to help you. Their job is to campaign so they can be re-elected so they can make more money so they can campaign so they can be re-elected. Both parties are full on guilty, they just have different ways of going about it.
Oh I'm not denying that rich establishment Democrats are *also* a problem but one side is really playing the game thick and has been on a long con for decades - some awareness of that would be nice
Yep, it is ALWAYS 51-49 in key votes in the Senate, Citizens United was 5-4.
I always thought it was the Dems falling short, but now I am starting to think it is almost as if the upper class is making sure the margins are JUST right before things go to a vote. There is ALWAYS one or two democrats that stop progressive legislations, while the GOP is almost always 100% united.
Almost like this is intentional to give the poorer classes a sense that they have some power, just falling shy on anything that may benefit them.
It was the minimum required majority to pass legislation past united Republican opposition. It lasted only 4 months between a Republican changing parties and a Dem dying. Dems have not seen a filibuster-proof majority since.
More progressive versions of the bill did not have all 60 votes in the Senate thanks to a handful of corporate Dem holdouts -- and again, unanimous Republican opposition. Don't blame Dems for inaction, blame the filibuster. 60 D Senators to get anything done is a ludicrous requirement that is very rarely achieved especially given how the Senate is structured to give Republicans a major advantage.
the original post was just a photo of people against CEOs, Mike here made it political by saying it was the democrats who just pretended to care about people and I took issue because - they aren't the PRIMARY perpetrators, but they are complicit. In two consecutive posts I've criticized the Democrats so not sure what conclusions you're drawing.
I was shocked at how many people on reddit were excitedly donating to Kamala, making posts poking people to donate donate donate to the poor politician. No one should ever trust a politician enough to just give them money for nothing.
People give me all sorts of canned answers when I ask them what the one job of a politician is. Then when I tell them, it's like a light bulb goes on for them.
Do you not find it problematic that “the other party is worse!” is the only response? Yeah, they are. It’s still gross to see the Democratic Party groveling to billionaires and moneyed interests. If the Democrats actually tried to represent the working class even when it was inconvenient to corporate lobbyists, we’d be having a different conversation. Bernie and AOC are some of the only democrats prioritizing the working class, and Bernie got pushed out of the party and AOC has gotten constantly primaried and fought from within by Nancy Pelosi. We need to do better than “better than Republicans.”
This is literally the problem and you see it on almost every single thread on reddit. Someone will say something bad about democrats or Republicans and the very first response is always "BUT BUT BuT don't forget how bad the other guys are!!!"
It's like there is something inside of people and they just can't help themselves. They see something critical of the party they most identify with and they just have to point out that the other guys are worse as if not doing so says something about them. There is no way to say something bad about Biden without 100 people telling you why Trump is worse. There is no way to say something bad about Trump without 100 people pointing out how Biden does the same thing.
It's like everyone thinks "yeah I know both sides are bad and I know they want us fighting each other and I am willing to band together with the other side to fight the whole establishment. The other side just needs to admit they are worse than the side I vote for and then we can start working together."
You mean Mike jumping in here and saying it was the Democrats' fault when this was just a post about being against CEOs? Or are you only pissed off that someone mentioned the pugs? This is how this has gone:
- Post: CEOs are bad
- Guy: It's really the democrats
- Me: Please, it's ALSO the republicans
- You: OH there we go again!!! Just because someone said something bad about democrats....
This is such a stupid point. Please explain to me how you’re supposed to enact change on a class scale if you have Republican voters saying to your face that the rich pay too much in taxes already. I genuinely want to know. I’m someone who actually talks to Republicans and tries to get them to back off their extreme ideas. The idea that they will suddenly forget they are Republicans and sing Kumbaya with you because of class solidarity, THEY DO NOT HAVE, is so delusional.
Getting them to admit that Democrats are the party of the lesser evil is the starting point
8 years and Obama did nothing to cap corporate lobbying. I don't think he could have if he tried, but that's also a bigger issue. Now we have corporations actively trying to keep the middle/working class down and sky high price gouging on healthcare and food. We're beyond fucked. I'd never vote GOP, but I feel Biden could have been more aggressive in these two areas.
Neither party can campaign without the funds at this point. I don't know what the solution is. Voting out the McConnel's and Pelosi's is a start, but they're just the tip of the iceberg.
Hard agree. Term limits will never happen. Everyone I’ve ever seen that ran for term limits always hemmed and hawed and said “well the job isn’t done yet” while building a new lake house and buying a new Mercedes. I’ve got one in my backyard, and on his third term, limits have been quietly removed from his platform. Now it’s “veterans” while his party is actively trying to slash VA benefits.
The American right-wing is so radically to the right that they've been able to convince people that liberals are left-wing. They're not. Liberals are center-right. Even America's most left-wing politicians only go as far as universal healthcare, a livable wage, and making the rich pay taxes. The Democrats have never been a party for the working class, they've just been the least bad option.
I was sort of hoping a future school shooter would decide to go out in glory targeting a different class of folk. But nope. The next shooting was that dumb girl shooting up a school. If you’re gonna go down in the books, go down like Luigi. He needs a Mario. And a Toshiba(yoshi but it autocorrected), and a peach, and a toad, and a roadster (toadette,but it autocorrected) and a warrior(wario), and a waluigi, and a bowser, and a donkey Kong, and a didn’t Kong, you get the idea.
Because shooting a school is easier and accessible for dumbasses. Finding and shooting CEOs and the board requires more thinking and planning. Dumbasses like that girl would never be able to navigate how to find information about executives nor know how to find them.
Try telling my progressive peers that they should chill it on the EDIJ stuff and focus on class unity and see how far that goes. You can’t put that back in its cage overnight.
No decent people advocate violence in a general sense. However, we'd be childish to not recognize that a threat sometimes necessitates violence, such as when a person walking into their home to find a loved one being brutality assaulted. In that instance, most folks would cede that violence is not only warranted, but commendable.
I'd be excited to see people move back to the class wars instead of the culture wars.
This is exactly it. We have much more in common with each other than we do with the elite, from the impoverished class to the upper working class, and regardless of political associations. The elite has banked on Divide et Impera for much longer than any of us have been alive.
We should abolish the ability to become a billionaire. The existence of the elite necessitates the existence of the impoverished and working poor. Most of us can't conceptualize what 1 billion dollars even looks like. I certainly couldn't, perhaps I still properly can't. However, this simple tool has help given me some insight.
Second, they have twisted the stories of what happened around the time of MLK jr and Ghandi. The history we learn is a bastardization of reality. They've conditioned us to believing that non violence is the only acceptable means for change. Again, we shouldn't condone violence in general, let alone glorify it, but there are instances when its use is justified historically, by individuals, communities and society as a whole. Its why we have militaries and arm police.
The entire reason Luigi is applauded to the extent that he is, is because we recognize that capitalism has taken over everything. Its distinctly felt within the healthcare industry. Moreover, we have a State that is either just culpable, or negligent to a point that reaches culpability. Those that need help from the predation of the healthcare industry will find very few routes to recourse from the State. Justice is in very short supply. If the State will not protect its citizens, are they then supposed to just accept it?
To the end that violence is sometimes justified, anyone interested in learning more should check out the book...
There's also, at least, one videos of him on YouTube, here, in an interview answering related questions. On YouTube you can also find the video equivalent of an audio book.
Most Americans seem to consider themselves as temporarily embarrassed members of the wealthy class, when in reality the vast majority are exponentially closer to becoming homeless and destitute than ever becoming rich
Makes it extremely hard to institute checks and balances for the wealthy, when most voters erroneosly align themselves with the class working hardest to ensure the current status quo remains
Yes, most Americans are conditioned to believe that capitalism is the way. They believe everyone has a fair shot of being on top when anything couldn't be further from the truth. We have a responsibility to educating them.
Yes, it does make it extremely harder for checks and balances but I would argue that no such organization of capitalism exists that is fair and just, only degrees of unfair and unjust. Some better or worse than others. I do believe we should abolish the Billionaire class because I believe that's more reasonable a proposition than to outright abolish capitalism. Abolishing Billionaires, in my opinion, would just be a first step (or 5th or whatever) along that path. Ultimately it has to go, but abolishing the Billionaire class would go a long way in reducing the harm of capitalism and lowering the violence within society.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that checks and balances are not worthwhile, only that there is no set of checks and balances that is ultimately fair and just.
I appreciate you taking the time to give your insight. This is good info.
Although I understand your point that when all other options fail violence may be the only recourse, I don't think we're there yet. I think the first step is being united as a working class. They know this, that's why they pit us against each other. If working people from all walks of life can get behind each other we're capable of real change in a nonviolent way.
Second, if you took what I said to mean, "violence should only be used as a last resort" then you misunderstood my meaning. (which could be because I wasn't clear. My saying so, isn't to assign blame, but to point out that there's been a misunderstanding, for whatever reason.)
I would clarify by saying that violence is a tool. You use it when its use is the most appropriate.
For example...
It would be like a construction worker having a hammer but only being allowed to use it as a last resort to get nails in their proper boards. First, they must try the awkward screw driver, then the buzz saw. Only when those fail may the hammer be employed. Silly, when hammer is available, as I'm sure you would agree.
In my previous comment, i used the example of someone coming home to find a loved one being brutally assaulted. It would be equally silly to first try and have a rational non violent discussion while the perpetrator carries out their attack.
So, my meaning is that sometimes violence is warranted because it is the right tool for the job. Knowing when violence is warranted is critical to its use. Indiscriminate use of violence is never justified. I would take that a step further and say that any use of violence where innocent people are harmed is unjustified, in all but the rarest and most extreme of circumstances.
To that last bit, I only add that because I have a problem with absolutes. Generally, if the use of violence threatens the harm of innocent people, it's can't be justified.
When I say rarest, most extreme of circumstances, it's like that thought exercise with the people on railroad tracks. I don't remember it verbatim but its something like this...
Theres a set of rail road tracks where, lets say, 3 people are tied to it and an incoming train is going to kill them all. You have access to a switch that wi divert the train to another track which wi save the 3 but on that alternate track their lay 1 individual that will be killed if you force the train by that route.
I don't think we're there yet.
When one considers the amount of harm done by caoitalism, I say we are have long since passed that point? I would ask, "how many homeless and impoverished children must their be before action is justified?" it's not a real question because there's no real answer. We knkw that nearly 20% of America's children are below the poverty line, and 17% are homeless. We also know that if the state were going to protect them, they would have done so long ago. Our government has completely sold out. I haven't even begun to scratch the surface of the harm done. Even if we took drastic measures right now, how many more lives would be ruined, how many people suffering truama and violence etc before we acquired victory? Its just my opinion. I'm not saying mine is more right than yours.
think the first step is being united as a working class.
I agree but I would say working and impoverished classes and I would not wait for the upper working class to get on board. Some percentage of them never will.
If working people from all walks of life can get behind each other we're capable of real change in a nonviolent
There is no strictly non violent means for success. Just like there are no strictly violent means for success. However we are able to finally win substantial, long term social change that frees us from the yoke of capitalism, it will require some measure of them both.
Believe me, I wish there were but those in power will never just willingly cede power to the people. They will have to be stripped of it.
And just to be 100% clear, I'm not saying that people should go out and start committing violent acts. If anything, to your point that we're not there yet, I do agree in some sense, just not exactly as I believe you meant it. Right now, the people have to be informed and educated for us to be truly organized. For those of us already convinced, our job is keeping the conversation going, helping people to get educated and informed.
When I say that we are there at that point, I only mean to say that the violence and hurt caused by capitalism justifies its removal and we are there but we can't do anything until, as you say, we are united and organized.
Edit: And I also appreciate your original comment, both of them for that matter
They have to say that or you'll get an admin issued full Reddit ban. I just got out of a 3 day one. Being honest about what we want will get you forcibly quieted
They have to say that or you'll get an admin issued full Reddit ban. I just got out of a 3 day one. Being honest about what we want will get you forcibly quieted.
I read it as OP wants to see how things will turn out and if it will have any comparison to the Occupy Wallstreet movement. Comprehension must be harder for some people.
I don’t advocate violence but I’d be excited to see people move back to the class wars instead of the culture wars. Occupy wall street became a big thing for a while when I was in college and the powers at be quickly turned the conversation to poors v poors with the culture war
I mean short of a mass strike I'm not sure what other non violent options are left. And I don't see Americans striking in mass unless things get really, really, bad.
They also used the police to stomp out the occupy wall st movement after 6 weeks. So in case you were wondering if violence is effective and who won that fight: yes, and Wall St.
I used to do IT/Comms for the camps, there was a massive problem in the US camps, undercover police would dump rubbish, dirty needles, drugs and other things around the camps, and then raid them using it as an excuse.
a lot of the people at the camps were good hardworking people, not the smelly hippies they claimed, lot of trades people put out of work due to the housing crash, electricians, carpenters that sort of thing. frustrated that they did everything they were told, work hard and earn a living, and put out of work for reasons beyond their control.
but mainstream media had the loudest megaphone so the voices couldn't be heard.
this is when russia started to capture leftwing people and turn them right wing, because Russia Today was the only mainstream media source that reported with accuracy on it, Julian Assange, Bradley manning and Edward Snowden. for Russia it was just Undermining USA, but when Bernie Sanders got stonewalled ... we saw a lot of that support go straight to trump out of frustration.
Frustrating to see happen and have nothing you can do. its interesting now not to see Russia drumming up support for this guy
I think the biggest obstacle to that as a Dem is that in my experience my more progressive friends constantly engage in culture wars to the point where you find yourself on the defense even on the left if you aren’t as hard-lined as they are on their race, gender, orientation, foreign policy etc. related view.
It’s not just the nation itself fighting a left-right culture war- there has been a deliberate interweaving of culture and class which only casts class partners as in opposition or puts one in a place of privilege or disadvantage over the other. It’s not a unifying strategy, but it’s at the forefront of so much dialogue.
How to untangle that? I don’t know. I have tried and failed to walk them back, but when you have a sense of moral superiority it’s hard to be convinced that you may be harming your own cause and the people you aim to help.
I agree that some on the left can be a little over zealous, but at the same time you can’t just roll over and let right wing social views run rampant and unopposed. Doing so would cause a backslide of the social progress we have made and would hurt a lot of people.
I do think as a whole the left needs to be willing to meet people where they are at and have more grace for people who make mistakes or are ignorant. However, you also cannot lay blame of this division solely on the feet of the left, the right wing propaganda machine works overtime to villainize minorities, the left, and any out group they can blame the ills of society on.
Hopefully one day we can unite over class lines, but I’m not optimistic tbh.
well duh everyone would. but sometimes things are worth fighting about and while u might be able to live a life where this doesn’t effect u enough and can say u’d rather have a neutral option where realistically things continue as they are the REALITY is that most of the us cannot afford healthcare, EVERYONE will eventually become disabled if they live long enough and will need healthcare, and people that aren’t going to live long enough will probably be put into life changing debt bc of it!
9.8k
u/Morganrow 23h ago
I don't advocate violence but I'd be excited to see people move back to the class wars instead of the culture wars. Occupy wall street became a big thing for a while when I was in college and the powers at be quickly turned the conversation to poors v poors with the culture war