#Occupywallstreet >

[AllNightDayDream]

SOPA was hated from the start, but today's protest decisively ended it for at least a couple years. Clear cut political campaign with decentralized grass-roots organization that focused on building allies, not alienating people, culminating in an effective form of protest (see: not sitting in parks).

All the while, obama appoints a former citigroup official who received post-bailout bonuses as his chief of staff, and not a whimper from the occupy movement because they're too busy trying to claim park space.

I recently bumped into my local occupy chapter at a meeting, and it's just... indescribable the priorities they have, and how they keep shooting themselves in the foot. The same shit they say is the same shit I hear about in the large rallies. Why is it that the constant public festival is the number one priority?

[kay]

I think it's quite different to end something before it has started, than to end something that's already deeply entrenched. Prevention is better than cure, and all that.

Perhaps if Google pulled the plug in protest of banking payouts and economic imbalance it might have an effect. But I can't see Google doing that, they probably have as much to lose as any large corporation.

[AllNightDayDream]

protest of banking payouts and economic imbalance

Probably the largest problem, in my eyes, is that the occupy camp has no idea how to extrapolate specifically what these problems actually are, how to go about solving them, and what priority it is. Whenever an individual does, there's zero consensus on the issue. The only thing they seem to have consensus about is that they are "above politics", which seeing as how their many grievances fall into a broader philosophy (giving them a lot of credit there), leaves no outlet to accomplish anything.

[wilson]

protest of banking payouts and economic imbalance

Probably the largest problem, in my eyes, is that the occupy camp has no idea how to extrapolate specifically what these problems actually are, how to go about solving them, and what priority it is. Whenever an individual does, there's zero consensus on the issue. The only thing they seem to have consensus about is that they are "above politics", which seeing as how their many grievances fall into a broader philosophy (giving them a lot of credit there), leaves no outlet to accomplish anything.

Occupy is more about raising awareness rather than offering solutions, non?

[tyger]

what is stopping politicians from noticing the issues that Occupy have raised awareness of, and proposing solutions to them?

not Occupy.

[wilson]

Yup, the silence is deafening.

[AllNightDayDream]

Dodd frank and the stimulus bill are more than appropriate responses to their concerns, if I understand their concerns rightly. Raising awareness is a good thing, definitely. But I think a great opportunity is being missed here. I think the anti wall street activists could give the left leaning a huge jolt of energy the same way the tea party has been doing the past few years for the right. Those efforts have gone a long way in terms of neutering large changes this administration has wanted. If this movement coalesced itself into a real political entity, as opposed to the disheveled awareness campaign it has become, a lot of good could come from it.

[magma]

Occupy is more about raising awareness rather than offering solutions, non?

This. It's not there to provide the answers, though it might be forced to try if nobody more qualified steps in. The main point is that there is essentially nobody in the corridors of power that is offering anything but the accepted conservative economic policy that has been in place since the late 70s/early 80s.

Opposition used to be ideologically different. There was a choice up until the 70s. Now we have two shades of the same grey - "left" leaning parties are offering exactly the same ideology as thr "right" leaning parties, just a very slightly lighter shade.

A fundamental shift is needed in political conversation - the only way to do that is to keep the conversation going and try to move the Overton Window to a more useful position. The movement is there to encourage those with ideas to engage, it's not about preaching a solution, it's spreading the message of the problem so people can agree we need a new solution that doesn't only focussing on credit scores and slashing budget deficits.

[magma]

Dodd frank and the stimulus bill are more than appropriate responses to their concerns

The stimulus bill in the US was a small step in the right direction, but because of the ideological power of the IMF its effect has been largely negated by slashing other areas of public expenditure... America are bucking the global trend by trying to do something, unfortunately they're also having to do all the wrong things as well to keep the IMF and the incredibly loud, more rabid conservatives at bay... Obama has been under fire for this whole process, his reactions have been decidedly scattergun - perhaps a President with bigger balls (and control of Senate majority, of course) may have been able to make more difference. America/Obama is doing a satisfactory job of treading water in seas where everyone else is slowly drowning... but you could've been getting close to swimming by now.

We have no such positive movement in our democracy. Both sides are behind slashing spending, concentrating on the deficit and in the last resort going for Quantitative Easing. They seem to think this will magically create jobs (unlike the US Stimulus package which actually did create jobs)... but all it's doing is making people more miserable, as the banks amass more capital yet still refuse to give it out as credit.

[test_recordings]

It doesn't help when Ed Milliband declares his agreement for the Tory-led spending cuts and thus making himself indistinguishable...

Also, quite odd how there's lots of spending cuts on vital services yet there's been a massive surge of PFI project contracts signed and an overly expensive, not-very-high-speed train line being planned (it will save 15 minutes ffs)...

[magma]

It doesn't help when Ed Milliband declares his agreement for the Tory-led spending cuts and thus making himself indistinguishable...

The entire Westminster wing of the Labour party is completely fucked... they bought into conservative economics in the mid 90s and haven't got the courage to admit they were wrong. They all know the answers to this problem deep down (they wouldn't have joined Labour in the 80s if they didn't), but they're too afraid to say them. Morons.

Also, quite odd how there's lots of spending cuts on vital services yet there's been a massive surge of PFI project contracts signed and an overly expensive, not-very-high-speed train line being planned (it will save 15 minutes ffs)...

It's a big clusterfuck. I'm actually quite in favour of the rail link as it'll create jobs (or at least extend the ones currently being created by Crossrail) and hopefully encourage a few more people off the roads.. our rail network is a bit of an embarassment.

We do need some big public spending projects, but you're right... doing them at the same time as slashing vital services and closing libraries is utterly fucking futile. We're governed by Economic bulimics.

Last time we had a massive structural deficit (after WW2) we got ourselves out by building the Welfare State, the NHS, our motorway network and countless other infrastructure and military projects... this time around we're arguing about [privatised anyway] railways and royal yachts. It's not good enough David.

[test_recordings]

If you analyse the cases for building:

1) A high-speed railway link, or
2) Improving current rail services with more carriages, trains and relayed track...

...you'll find that improving current services wins out in overall efficiency, both in cost AND service!

I read somewhere that this is actually a cover for an EU directive that mandates highspeed railway links across Europe.. what the Tory's have done is declare it their own idea yet it's complete submission to the European Commission

Will look in to it more...

[magma]

If you analyse the cases for building:

1) A high-speed railway link, or
2) Improving current rail services with more carriages, trains and relayed track...

...you'll find that improving current services wins out in overall efficiency, both in cost AND service!

I read somewhere that this is actually a cover for an EU directive that mandates highspeed railway links across Europe.. what the Tory's have done is declare it their own idea yet it's complete submission to the European Commission

Will look in to it more...

Would be interested to see where you read that, have you got a link?

Although our current network can certainly be patched up, I can't see it being a long term thing. If you use the railways in most of Europe (especially Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium etc) the difference in standard of train and service is amazing... almost embarrassing. Most of our railways are up to date about as far as the early 70s... some of them older and very few of them newer (the new track laid for fast Eurostars for example)... I'd be pretty surprised if we could produce anything rivalling continental networks without putting some entirely new lines in... and if we're putting new lines in, we might as well make them so that the latest trains can use them... that's common sense, isn't it?

We've seen the effect of private operators putting "more trains" on their tracks - they have more frequent services stopping at LESS places, putting added pressure on the roads as people have to drive or cycle to their nearest useful station. If we can get the major stops covered by HS2, the older trains will be able to stop at local stations during commuter hours again.

I'm lucky in that I can walk to work or get the Tube, but most people I work with have to stand for up to an hour and a half each way in order to get the train to work - and they're paying thousands of pounds a year for this "service"... we definitely need to do something to take the pressure off those areas of the network. I'm not sure what it is, I'm not really a railways expert, but I tend to like solutions that last for decades rather than patchups that last for years.

Privatisation has been a disaster for our trains.

[tyger]

The entire Westminster wing of the Labour party is completely fucked... they bought into conservative economics in the mid 90s and haven't got the courage to admit they were wrong. They all know the answers to this problem deep down (they wouldn't have joined Labour in the 80s if they didn't), but they're too afraid to say them. Morons.

blair destroyed the labour party (actually, kinnock/mandelson started the process) by turning it into a top-down, soundbite-obsessed organization. i don't think it has the capacity to renew itself now.

brown always gave me the impression that he had once had some principles, but kept on postponing acting on them because he thought dreadful things would happen if we didn't first give the bankers exactly what they wanted. most the current front bench seem to have no more than the atavistic memory of some principles.

any political party is likely to attract unprincipled seekers after power, but when they come to dominate a party, you see ... well, how much more scared they are of the 1% than of the 99%. unfortunately, i don't think they are miscalculating on that point ... at least, not yet.

[kay]

I wonder whether I'd be able to run for an election on the platform of not having any elected ministers. My only role upon winning the election would be to identify and appoint actual experts to take on ministerial posts. As opposed to fuckwit egotripping attentionwhores who barely even scrapped together passes in their GCSEs.

[tyger]

there no experts on ethics or politics (which is why it makes sense to let everybody vote!). and most economists are fake experts (very little is really known in economics). there are only proper experts in the hard sciences.

yes, sometimes governments make bad policy by flying in the face of scientific evidence. but science by itself doesn't get you to actual policies. anybody claiming to be neutral is not only biased, but dishonestly concealing their biases.

when greece and italy are given "experts" as prime ministers, they get bankers. er............

[kay]

yes but then at least you know you're getting fucked up by experts, now some lowlife scumbag that just likes the sound of their voice.

[tyger]

if i wanted to be fucked by an expert, i'd hire a prostitute.

politicians are just puppets. it can be healthy to direct some anger at them, but don't direct all your anger at them. the puppet masters will be happy to give us new puppets, with policies indistinguishable from the old puppets.

it's up to us to demand specific policies, even if none of politicians are advocating them, and to keep demanding those policies until we get politicians who will deliver them.

[kay]

So you'd rather be fucked by a puppet? Do you have a muppet fetish? Oh wait, just noticed your avatar.

[AllNightDayDream]

@magma: but he still has done much that people don't credit him for for the progressive movement, not just economically. I suppose people can complain because he didn't do everything he promised on the campaign, but the reality is no candidate could ever achieve everything. The reason Americans want deficit reduction, myself included, is because bush since his first year in first kept growing it to finance his wars. There is a lot of waste that doesn't need to be there.

At the same time I disagree that you can't have a scientific approach to policy. The problem in large part is there is no way to test the counter factual, that is "what if it was done differently". But a combination of historical insight, and indeed scientific measurement, can give you effective policy. The problem is getting past the politics, sometimes even the morals of the people. Welfare for example is proven to reduce poverty in the long run and increase access to the middle class, but people oppose it largely on moral grounds. Stem cell research is another blatant example, even gun control has hard evidence that can be taken into account.