Dubstepforum.com

There is many reasons why it was such a life changing experience for me. Firstly, the knowledge that I picked up, from all different people with so many different view points and ethnical and sociology backgrounds. Some of what i was told I agreed with highly, but some of it i didn't. If i didn't agree, i didn't have it force fed to me and rammed down my throat, they accepted it and then wanted to hear my views on the issue.

Secondly, how many things there are going on. Occupy LSX news paper, Tarrot Readings, Welfare tent with counsellors to talk to at any time. Loads of people playing every instrument under the sun, even a daily appearance from the 12 volt people's party, who run a small mobile rig off a car battery, playing all kinds of music. There is a free kitchen, tea tent, women and children's only tent so they can feel safe camping there without their partners, free library of donated books, a tent city university giving free lectures, which also turns into a cinema at night playing all kinds of things.

I really believe this whole movement is the begining. Its now in over 2000 cities in the world. Something gaining so much moment has to make even a little bit of change surely?

jameshk wrote:There is many reasons why it was such a life changing experience for me. Firstly, the knowledge that I picked up, from all different people with so many different view points and ethnical and sociology backgrounds. Some of what i was told I agreed with highly, but some of it i didn't. If i didn't agree, i didn't have it force fed to me and rammed down my throat, they accepted it and then wanted to hear my views on the issue.

Secondly, how many things there are going on. Occupy LSX news paper, Tarrot Readings, Welfare tent with counsellors to talk to at any time. Loads of people playing every instrument under the sun, even a daily appearance from the 12 volt people's party, who run a small mobile rig off a car battery, playing all kinds of music. There is a free kitchen, tea tent, women and children's only tent so they can feel safe camping there without their partners, free library of donated books, a tent city university giving free lectures, which also turns into a cinema at night playing all kinds of things.

I really believe this whole movement is the begining. Its now in over 2000 cities in the world. Something gaining so much moment has to make even a little bit of change surely?

no, you've already said why

jameshk wrote:the knowledge that I picked up, from all different people with so many different view points and ethnical and sociology backgrounds. Some of what i was told I agreed with highly, but some of it i didn't. If i didn't agree, i didn't have it force fed to me and rammed down my throat, they accepted it and then wanted to hear my views on the issue.

the 'anti-capitalists' at these sit ins just like getting together and chatting about feminism, spiritual atheism, lesbian rights etc etc

they love living in liberal capitalist democracies tbh. half of them probably don't even know what they believe they just read some Derrida and decided they can't trust authority any longer. actually I'm probably overestimating them, the catalyst was most likely a green day album.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:

jameshk wrote:There is many reasons why it was such a life changing experience for me. Firstly, the knowledge that I picked up, from all different people with so many different view points and ethnical and sociology backgrounds. Some of what i was told I agreed with highly, but some of it i didn't. If i didn't agree, i didn't have it force fed to me and rammed down my throat, they accepted it and then wanted to hear my views on the issue.

Secondly, how many things there are going on. Occupy LSX news paper, Tarrot Readings, Welfare tent with counsellors to talk to at any time. Loads of people playing every instrument under the sun, even a daily appearance from the 12 volt people's party, who run a small mobile rig off a car battery, playing all kinds of music. There is a free kitchen, tea tent, women and children's only tent so they can feel safe camping there without their partners, free library of donated books, a tent city university giving free lectures, which also turns into a cinema at night playing all kinds of things.

I really believe this whole movement is the begining. Its now in over 2000 cities in the world. Something gaining so much moment has to make even a little bit of change surely?

no, you've already said why

jameshk wrote:the knowledge that I picked up, from all different people with so many different view points and ethnical and sociology backgrounds. Some of what i was told I agreed with highly, but some of it i didn't. If i didn't agree, i didn't have it force fed to me and rammed down my throat, they accepted it and then wanted to hear my views on the issue.

the 'anti-capitalists' at these sit ins just like getting together and chatting about feminism, spiritual atheism, lesbian rights etc etc

they love living in liberal capitalist democracies tbh. half of them probably don't even know what they believe they just read some Derrida and decided they can't trust authority any longer. actually I'm probably overestimating them, the catalyst was most likely a green day album.

Too be honest with you, I wasn't even there for anti capitalism, it couldn't work. There needs to be some kind of capitalism to make the world go round, trade has to happen in some form of another.

So do you disagree with the movement?

they don't have any unified aims or purpose for me to disagree with. it's just a load of people in a place who haven't washed for a bit. no different to visiting the north of england.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:they don't have any unified aims or purpose for me to disagree with. it's just a load of people in a place who haven't washed for a bit. no different to visiting the north of england.

Hi, I support capitalism, shower, put on a suit every day to work for an Investment Bank and still manage to go to the General Assemblies most days and agree with most of what's said. You don't have to be a wishy washy hippy in hemp trousers to realise that our economy is incorrectly balanced and to comment that we're not being offered any realistic alternatives but to place all our faith into the quasi-religion of "the market".

You've rather clearly made up your mind without engaging in the slightest. Standard web fail...

mgma, im there thursday evening to sunday or monday. We need to hook up. Send me over your number mate.

magma wrote:

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:they don't have any unified aims or purpose for me to disagree with. it's just a load of people in a place who haven't washed for a bit. no different to visiting the north of england.

Hi, I support capitalism, shower, put on a suit every day to work for an Investment Bank and still manage to go to the General Assemblies most days and agree with most of what's said. You don't have to be a wishy washy hippy in hemp trousers to realise that our economy is incorrectly balanced and to comment that we're not being offered any realistic alternatives but to place all our faith into the quasi-religion of "the market".

You've rather clearly made up your mind without engaging in the slightest. Standard web fail...

everything you said is absolutely true, but it doesn't alter the fact that these movements will change nothing, because as you said you love the dual life that a liberal capitalist democracy allows you to lead.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:

magma wrote:

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:they don't have any unified aims or purpose for me to disagree with. it's just a load of people in a place who haven't washed for a bit. no different to visiting the north of england.

Hi, I support capitalism, shower, put on a suit every day to work for an Investment Bank and still manage to go to the General Assemblies most days and agree with most of what's said. You don't have to be a wishy washy hippy in hemp trousers to realise that our economy is incorrectly balanced and to comment that we're not being offered any realistic alternatives but to place all our faith into the quasi-religion of "the market".

You've rather clearly made up your mind without engaging in the slightest. Standard web fail...

everything you said is absolutely true, but it doesn't alter the fact that these movements will change nothing, because as you said you love the dual life that a liberal capitalist democracy allows you to lead.

In what way does it have to be a dual life? If corps were regulated to act correctly (for instance, sharing more profit through fair wages to workers rather than so much in dividends to investors) and pay their full taxes, we could have everything we currently have AND a fairer distribution of wealth. It's not really rocket science.

There is no contradiction between owning an iPhone, shopping in a supermarket or having a job and supporting the Occupy movement. Everyone will still need a job in whatever Brave New World (or Bravely Slightly Augmented World, anyway) is formed. That's how you pay for shit. Capitalism is a pretty decent system to provide people with relevant jobs, it's just that the balance needs shifting from investor to worker a little.

The very fact we're having this conversation shows that the existence of Occupy is having a positive effect on the West's debate. Long may it continue.

cos noone ever discussed the relative merits of capitalism before the occupy movement and george soros hasn't been actively writing and lecturing on this exact topic for years, his various organisations haven't been working towards the exact aims you just outlined...

it's not gonna go the way you think. capitalism is about competition, if you're not competitive you're not successful. we won't compete with china and india by liberalising our economy or society.

also corporations don't function by favouring their workers over their investors. do you really think if we make our corporations less profitable investments there will be nowhere else for the super rich to invest their money with better returns?

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:cos noone ever discussed the relative merits of capitalism before the occupy movement and george soros hasn't been actively writing and lecturing on this exact topic for years, his various organisations haven't been working towards the exact aims you just outlined...

it's not gonna go the way you think. capitalism is about competition, if you're not competitive you're not successful. we won't compete with china and india by liberalising our economy or society.

Why does virulent competition mean that profits have to be skewed so far towards investors rather than workers? Why would the two things even be connected? I'm not talking about sharing ALL profits with workers, just more than currently. The current situation is laughable... the average worker in a city like London can't afford to buy a house on a normal working wage - something's clearly wrong if that is true.

How can a company like John Lewis PLC continue to be one of the most competitive, reliable and profitable companies in our economy (as they have for over a century) yet also embue its workers with a sense of pride and ownership? Why do you think the economy would fail if other companies took this lead?

George Soros et al haven't ever managed to be rolling news making their point over and over for months on end. This is getting a lot of publicity and starting conversations all over (we've had four or five threads on this forum alone). It's forcing the topic into the public consciousness, which is where it needs to be - the more interested of us have of course been talking about the same things for decades, but it takes more than an unread book or an unheard rant to change the world. The People actually need to engage.

Your "it's no use" attitude does you great disservice... society's been getting better for millennia, reshaping our economies so that they work for the majority is the next battle we need to win.

Don't pussy out. It's incredibly easy to snipe at something you don't have the energy to engage with... I'd be quite surprised if you didn't agree with most of what was being promoted by these groups...

I'm not sure I really believe in democracy any longer, so I think that would be the biggest ideological disagreement between myself and the occupy movement

yes John Lewis pay their staff more fairly but they're able to do so because they're different. so investors who share some of their social values can choose to invest in that company. it wouldn't work with every company though, cos the vast majority of investors only care about the numbers.

I guess it's achieved something in the sense that there are a lot of ppl who simply accept capitalism (and more ridiculously the form we have now) as the way it's always been and the only workable system. but I don't think the fact that they've been on the news makes what they do or say any more valuable than guys like George Soros. especially considering he's used his wealth and influence to effect genuine tangible change, whether the media report on it or people know about it doesn't really matter imo.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:I'm not sure I really believe in democracy any longer, so I think that would be the biggest ideological disagreement between myself and the occupy movement

I agree. I do not believe in democracy any more either, yet i consider myself a part of the movement.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:I'm not sure I really believe in democracy any longer, so I think that would be the biggest ideological disagreement between myself and the occupy movement

yes John Lewis pay their staff more fairly but they're able to do so because they're different. so investors who share some of their social values can choose to invest in that company. it wouldn't work with every company though, cos the vast majority of investors only care about the numbers.

They're a publically traded company, though shares are in trust. They still have investors. The difference is that every employee is a Partner in the business, receives a % bonus based on profit and gets to vote on issues concerning corporate governance. Economically, it's not much different to most other PLCs, but practically it's a world apart.

I guess it's achieved something in the sense that there are a lot of ppl who simply accept capitalism (and more ridiculously the form we have now) as the way it's always been and the only workable system. but I don't think the fact that they've been on the news makes what they do or say any more valuable than guys like George Soros. especially considering he's used his wealth and influence to effect genuine tangible change, whether the media report on it or people know about it doesn't really matter imo.

George Soros has done great things (he also committed fraud and helped almost bankrupt the UK, but...) , as have Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Warren Buffet and Charles Saatchi. Philanthropy from the ultra-rich is what you're forced to rely on when the economy is set up in such an unfair way and we should be grateful to these people - the money doesn't naturally "trickle down", you just have to hope that once in a while someone with a conscience gets into a position where they can help.

In a properly balanced economy, the Bill Gates Foundation would be unneccesary. These people are providing a stopgap, they're not the solution. Soros's books are great, but they're no use if nobody's reading them... the Occupy movement might jut inspire people to read them.

lol I know I've got a couple of mates who work for waitrose and john lewis respectively. economically you might applaud what they do but I find the way they try to become so involved in their employees lives and distribute literature in an attempt to impose their company's supposed social values on their employees quite sinister.

the Open Society Foundations go way beyond philanthropy tbh. Soros has got a vision and he's implementing it, whether you agree or not. I much prefer that kind of decisiveness to the way the occupy movement functions.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:lol I know I've got a couple of mates who work for waitrose and john lewis respectively. economically you might applaud what they do but I find the way they try to become so involved in their employees lives and distribute literature in an attempt to impose their company's supposed social values on their employees quite sinister.

I contracted for them for about 18 months when I first moved to London. It's still the only place I've ever worked where the permanent employees were almost all happy with their situations.. good wages, great social structure... people that worked in the warehouses to the ivory towers were able to use the company holiday homes and yachts... training was going on all the time. Really positive place to work.

the Open Society Foundations go way beyond philanthropy tbh. Soros has got a vision and he's implementing it, whether you agree or not. I much prefer that kind of decisiveness to the way the occupy movement functions.

One man can only have so much influence, but doing something is better than nothing and a Progressive with his status, wealth and influence is an important voice to have in society. I'm just sceptical that the very high-minded theory he puts into his book is easy enough to grasp for enough people to force changes to occur. As a comparison, most people are now against the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts... but they didn't get there through reading Chomsky, they got there by watching the news on the hunt for WMDs and talking to their friends. Not enough people were convinced by the anti-war elite in time to stop it happening... you have to be able to put your argument into terms that the vast majority can easily digest.

Plenty of philosophers and moralists had shown State racism to be obscene decades before Martin Luther King and the Civil Right's Movement said it all in the People's voice and forced real change to happen in the States.

Equally, I can also understand why people looking to push for change for the perceived "99%" are sceptical of advice from a multi-billionaire businsess magnate like Soros (however clean his intentions).... but either way, he's confirmed his support for it (and has possibly even donated, but this is unclear), so arguing his way isn't "our" way or that he represents a different struggle is more than a little bit difficult.

Occupy are largely expressing exasperation at the current crop of choices... there aren't many policy suggestions yet. In the UK, influential "thinkers" like George Monbiot, Peter Tatchell and even a fair few traders/financiers have been involved in discussions on how things can be run more fairly for everyone - it's very much a forum, not a manifesto at this point.... people like Soros, Gates, Buffett and Ellison should be absolutely welcome to be involved. One of our country's greatest "champions of the working class" is Tony Benn, who's never been working class... we should be interested in broadening our support through these channels in order to effect intelligent changes rather than being afraid of the power they represent.

"We're all in this together"

Sorry, but I hear/see the name George Soros and I think of the financial reset button he pushed in the mid-to-late 90s in South East Asia. The affected nations have still not fully recovered thanks to him. I will never believe a word of his good intentions.

leftists always waste their time moaning about past grievances and debating whether supporting someone is ideologically acceptable.

O Tumma Tum Ladin wrote:leftists always waste their time moaning about past grievances and debating whether supporting someone is ideologically acceptable.

as opposed to conservatives who do... [exactly the same?]

this turned up....

<iframe src="/forum/video.php?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3akQVM9wgME&feature=channel_video_title" frameborder="0" style="overflow:hidden; height:auto; max-width:540px"></iframe>