Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

IP is the place for boisterous political discussion, but please remember, the Rules still apply, especially with regards to Personal Attacks. These and other inappropriate posts will be removed without notification.

Moderators: Mick, TheGingerMan

Forum rules
IP is the place for boisterous political discussion, but please remember, the Rules still apply, especially with regards to Personal Attacks. These and other inappropriate posts will be removed without notification.

Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby BigJohn » 18 Oct 2011, 02:42

Now that the movement is really going global, I'm just curious to see what some Forumosans might have to say on the subject.
Forumosan avatar
BigJohn
National Security Advisor (guójiā ānquán gùwèn)
National Security Advisor (guójiā ānquán gùwèn)
 
Posts: 4560
ORIGINAL POSTER
Joined: 25 Jun 2005, 01:45
Location: Lost in time, lost in space...and meaning
97 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby BigJohn » 13 Dec 2011, 00:41

Hi, this is the continuation from the previous thread, "Occupy Wall Street: What do you think?"

Please note that one reason the old thread was locked was that it was increasingly following a cycle of dueling on side issues by certain posters who, IMO, were not debating in a fair spirit. This thread is not about liberalism or nihilism as philosophical topics; it is about the OWS movement in general as a political and social force. If you wish to start a thread about the decline of values in the West then by all means do so. But do not insist on this as the major theme in this thread, which has a broader topic.

This relates back to the issue of dueling: it tends to distort the thread by focusing on only one or a few points, and people, and often leads to rancor and ad hominem attacks. Please respect the fact that this thread does not belong to any one person, and that posters who try to persistently dominate the thread to the detriment of others will have their posts temped.

Oh,yes, and sorry but we lost the poll function when we split the thread, but the last result was about 60% either strongly or mildly in favor of OWS.
Forumosan avatar
BigJohn
National Security Advisor (guójiā ānquán gùwèn)
National Security Advisor (guójiā ānquán gùwèn)
 
Posts: 4560
ORIGINAL POSTER
Joined: 25 Jun 2005, 01:45
Location: Lost in time, lost in space...and meaning
97 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby fred smith » 13 Dec 2011, 20:07

I still believe that this is 100% relevant as it goes to the coherence and motivation of the Occupy Wall Street Movement. I also stress that it is ironic that this movement was started by a Canadian ADVERTISING Agency and so no conflict of interest there folks... nothing to see about an ADVERTISING agency making a name for itself by engaging in a huge publicity stunt. The two issues are completely UNRELATED, and there is no moral issue here in an ADVERTISING agency starting up such a POLITICAL (supposedly) movement.

Anyway, I have stated that the protest is all over the place. The Huffington Post agrees. The organizers of the protest are a Canadian advertising firm of all things... cannot imagine any conflict of interest there! Right! An ADVERTISING firm sets up one of the biggest publicity stunts in the world and there is no issue there. Nothing to see folks. Keep moving?

So, apparently, with 233 people interviewed, the Huffington Post finds nine major subcategories of responses with 10-15 responses per category. Few if any are related to the claimed issue: getting the 1% to pay more or even the Glass Steagal Act. The latter was barely mentioned and a KEY group within the movement wants to focus on local issues which would PRECLUDE national and international issues like the Glass Steagall Act and financial sector reform. So?

And if this really is as the ORGANIZERS say about financial sector reform, the Glass Steagall Act AND stopping Washington from bailing out the Wall Street firms, why are they not protesting in Washington DC?

I, being the cynic that I am, think that this ADVERTISING AGENCY from CANADA has a lot more going on behind the scenes that disinterested political advocacy OR it would seem incredibly incoherent in its policy reform stance.

And if the organizers have stated aims for why they are there, clearly few if any of the followers or protesters of this movement have a clue as to what those are or even worse the protesters are there for entirely different reasons. So shall we still discuss coherence intellectual, moral or other?
Forumosan avatar
fred smith
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 16508
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 17:14
54 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby Satellite TV » 13 Dec 2011, 20:45

BigJohn wrote:Now that the movement is really going global, I'm just curious to see what some Forumosans might have to say on the subject.


I think its a waste of time and most of those protesting do not undertsand what they are protesting about anyways. They just want a free bowl of soup and a chicken sandwdich to go along with their liberal arts education. These people are wasting our time. Let them go out and start a business and employ others and create something good for the economy.
It's such a pleasure living in a world where everyone is in such a hurry to be outraged over someone else’s trivial comments
Forumosan avatar
Satellite TV
Entering Second Childhood (èrdù tóngnián qī)
Entering Second Childhood (èrdù tóngnián qī)
 
Posts: 7073
Joined: 18 Jun 2004, 11:10

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby Gao Bohan » 14 Dec 2011, 23:50

I was at Zucotti Park three days ago. There were maybe a dozen protestors, and several police officers. One of the guys had a sign reading, and I quote, "Need $ For Happy Endings". Another guy was clearly mentally disturbed, and was barking at people to keep moving. One lady had a sign which said, "Hey 1%, Suck It!!!"

That's the Occupy Wall Street Movement now.
"We're not going to be disrespected," Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.) told The Washington Examiner. "We have to get something out of this. And I don't know what that even is."
Forumosan avatar
Gao Bohan
Thinking of Staging a Coup (xiǎng yào gǎo zhèng biàn)
Thinking of Staging a Coup (xiǎng yào gǎo zhèng biàn)
 
Posts: 6082
Joined: 28 Jun 2004, 03:20
Location: The Glorious American Empire
103 Recommends(s)
200 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby fred smith » 15 Dec 2011, 00:09

That's the Occupy Wall Street Movement now.


I disagree with the ¨now.¨ I think (haha) that this movement has always been characterized by the same. Given its incoherence, in what appreciable respects does it differ from sort of looting-crazed mob? or some rock concert?

I think that it is interesting that in the discussion of the aims of this organization (the one that exists at any rate) that the fact that the organizers are a Canadian advertising agency never comes up in the press. Why is that? To me that is shockingly glaringly bad reporting. I believe that any publicity stunt and its connection to a company that lives and profits from creating said publicity stunts must be open to moral, ethical, legal challenges. Why focus on social justice when we are dealing with a very slippery slope if not a broken elevator plummeting 100 stories of traditional ethics?

Again, I said all along these protesters were incoherent. I proved that. I think that they still are. They will be around for the next major gathering. Clearly, that is not going to be global warming or climate change but as always the next ïssue¨will be one that draws them like vermin to fly paper. It is always the same. If I were not so moral, I would search for a way like Al Gore or this advertising agency to tap into the sheer stupidity and gullibility of these people to make $$$$ lots of them.. Worked for Al Gore, why not others?
Forumosan avatar
fred smith
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 16508
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 17:14
54 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby Border Security » 15 Dec 2011, 00:15

fred smith wrote: that the fact that the organizers are a Canadian advertising agency never comes up in the press.


Anti-advertising agency, actually. Called Adbusters. Damned Canadians; always creating a fuss. Maybe the States ought to sell them over-priced fighter jets and-- just for good measure-- make 'em wait real long for them. Oh, wait. Already done. :lol:
Can I see your identification, please?
Forumosan avatar
Border Security
Càiniǎo
Càiniǎo
 
Posts: 26
Joined: 07 Dec 2011, 23:48
Location: Clearing out the riff-raff
3 Recommends(s)
2 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby fred smith » 15 Dec 2011, 00:24

Anti-advertising agency, actually. Called Adbusters. Damned Canadians; always creating a fuss. Maybe the States ought to sell them over-priced fighter jets and-- just for good measure-- make 'em wait real long for them. Oh, wait. Already done.


What is an anti-advertising agency and did creating the Occupy Wall Street movement earn it stripes or street cred for its success in marshalling so many people and how will that success be used? to advance the goals of the organization in some way? and will any of these advances (no doubt for the best of intentions) lead like the global warming er climate change movement to research (cough cough) grants flowing into its coffers and-or will the notoriety it has gained lead to support (financial of course cough cough) from foundations and NGOs interested in advancing, er, (cough cough) social justice? starting with themselves first? Hey, that could be a new slogan with re-engineered wording... social justice begins at home... how´s that?
Forumosan avatar
fred smith
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 16508
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 17:14
54 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby fred smith » 15 Dec 2011, 01:01

Let´s take a closer look at Adbusters... The site is filled with eye-opening details but I thought that the consumerism of anti-consumerism was amusing and so am only posting that segment...

I can certainly see how this organization would ad-tract (haha) the muddled mindless minions of the left... to an Occupy Wall Street protest, the latest and greatest of its many ¨non-profit¨ ventures... read on and weep!

Selling Anti-Consumerism

Adbusters may try to discourage buying, but obviously not when it comes to its own wares. Lasn has claimed that the magazine “is trying to sell ideas rather than products.” A look at its order form tells another story.

The slick glossy has a cover price of $7.95 -- more than twice the price of People, Vogue, or GQ. The Adbusters website features a plethora of products for sale, including videos, posters, calendars, postcards, books, and even a 3x5-foot “corporate” flag -- the American flag with the stars replaced by corporate logos. In 2002, Adbusters suggested substituting its version for the real Stars and Stripes on July 4 in front of stores, schools, and embassies.

Adbusters can’t seem to help biting even the hip, corporate hands that feed it. One issue featured a fashion layout, for which the magazine thanked such retailers as Banana Republic for providing clothes. Another issue, however, mocked The Gap, Banana Republic’s sister corporation, on its the back cover.

Even supporters of the magazine have noticed its incongruities. Early issues contained angry letters from readers who wanted to know why the magazine was not published on recycled paper.

Lasn plans to publish another book. Design Anarchy will be a large, graphic tome that should be out in time for Christmas 2005. “I want to sell as many copies of this as possible,” he gushed to DiSCORDER magazine. “It may also cost a lot of money. We may actually sell it for $100.”

Adbusters is even getting into the shoe business. It will start flogging the Black Spot sneaker next year. The retro black canvas shoe’s logo is, as the name suggests, a black spot. The marketing for the shoe is well under way, even though Adbusters has no prototype, manufacturer, distributor, business plan, designer or suggested price. The first shoe will be manufactured after 5,000 orders have been received. The group plans to spend $250,000 on the campaign.

Lasn himself is a tangle of contradictions. His book is filled with references to and metaphors of the popular culture he decries. He mines what he claims is a “soulless” culture to express his most important thoughts and feelings.

He has called the automobile “arguably the most destructive product we humans have ever produced.” Yet he cheerfully drives a Toyota, as he writes in Culture Jam: “The love of convenience, the time I save, the speed and the power, and the lack of viable alternatives trump my hate more often than not.” In typically elitist fashion, what is “convenience” for Lasn is brainwashing for the masses.

A reporter from the Sydney Sun Herald asked Lasn whether he ever eats at McDonald’s. He admitted he did and explained, “People ask me this all the time -- it’s very embarrassing -- but I’m just a walking, talking contradiction. I'm not pure, and I don't feel like I want to be all that pure.” Why Americans must be purer than Kalle Lasn is something he has refused to explain.


http://activistcash.com/organization_ov ... -adbusters
Forumosan avatar
fred smith
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 16508
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 17:14
54 Recognized(s)

6000

Re: Occupy Wall Street: What do you think? (Part 2) POLL

Postby fred smith » 15 Dec 2011, 01:13

This had me in tears... It kinda sorta sounds like a few of our regular posters have bought into this whole thing and that is funny... well, sad but funny in a sad way in that it is so sadly funny. Well, now I get the whole effort behind the Occupy Wall Street movement and its equally incoherent ramblings and posturings... Read all about it here... from the organizers... Adbusters!!!!!!

Adbusters: Landfill Of The Mental Environment
Last Friday Buy Nothing Day went largely unobserved in the United States despite being heavily promoted by the magazine Adbusters. That’s mostly because, like Adbusters, Buy Nothing Day is bullshit. Adbusters was founded in 1989 by Canadians Bill Schmalz and Kalle Lasn, apparently after the latter had an incredibly boring realization while clashing with a supermarket shopping cart. The organization picked up Buy Nothing Day as one of its campaigns following the holiday’s invention by a fellow Canuck activist in 1992. It makes sense, considering both the event and its chief promoter suffer from a glut of vanity and lack of substance that would make Paris Hilton cringe.

Though Adbusters credits itself with being an anti-consumerist clarion call of responsible social and political activism in a world gorged on sitcoms, designer sneakers and lattes, it’s actually a deluded rag that takes advantage of the same marketing techniques it denounces. Simply put, Adbusters isn’t worth the high gloss pages it’s printed on.

ADBUSTERS IS OUT OF TOUCH

Whether the folks at Adbusters are completely insulated in anarchist book fairs or vegan baking classes, I don’t know — but they sure as hell don’t understand where the rest of society is coming from. This quote about Buy Nothing Day from an interview with Kalle shows just how out of touch the people behind the magazine are:

“It is quite a powerful personal experience if you try to suppress the impulse to buy for a whole day — it is very difficult to do, and you really learn something.”

What kind of Valley Girl considers it hard to keep from purchasing something for 24 hours? I don’t know if Kalle realizes it, but a lot of people spend most of the year not buying anything. That’s partially why they do go out shopping on days like Black Friday: They’re preparing for a special occasion during which they buy things to give to the people they love. They spend every other day of their lives not buying shit, having Buy Nothing Days in practice because they either: a) don’t have any money; b) don’t have any time; c) aren’t pathological shoppers as Kalle appears to be.

Are hoards of Americans lining up at 4 A.M. outside of Best Buy or fighting for the last copy of Halo 7 in GameStop on Black Friday clues that our society is too preoccupied with material things? Yeah. But it’s still a lot better than a bunch of yuppies giving themselves congratulatory handjobs because they postponed their Christmas shopping.

The only person I’ve ever known to have a subscription to Adbusters is my friend’s dad, a wealthy Frenchmen who owned a marketing company and lived just off Wall Street. A quick survey of people promoting Buy Nothing Day also shows how committed these revolutionaries are to The Cause: This self-described Hollywood socialite pushed responsible consumerism between plugging artisan chocolate and Costco granola. Of course Adbusters doesn’t acknowledge their moneyed audience driven by white guilt, the $1,000 armchair activists or the junior ad execs, but even their choice of readers to recognize is revealing.

This poster and the instructions accompanying it — “Slap this poster up all over your school’s economics department” — are typical of Adbusters egging undergrads to “rock the boat,” “stick it to the man” and do other dumb shit that’s more annoying than enlightening.

What’s interesting about Adbusters targeting these kids is that they also belong to a relatively privileged class. Without generally needing to worry about rent, food or drinking money, undergrad students have the spare $9 in allowance to fork over for each bi-monthly issue of Adbusters, which is a must if you want to stay on the cutting edge of the revolution because, for some reason, new issues of Adbusters are not available for free online. The New York Times and even The Economist, that bible of globalist capitalist pigs, make their latest issues available to all for no charge — yet Adbusters seeking to “change the way information flows” doesn’t.

While spending about the equivalent of a six-pack on a magazine isn’t going to break the bank for Adbusters readers, it’s gotta be noted that it is definitely out of reach for third world revolutionaries, a population the magazine repeatedly expresses solidarity with and even denounces the rest of society for ignoring. But what does it say about a magazine that champions the dispossessed when the people it claims to side with can’t even afford an issue?

ADBUSTERS IS CONSUMERIST

Besides the inherent hypocrisy of hawking a magazine that calls for an end to hawking, Adbusters also engages in the very same practices it condemns the media and corporations of using to encourage useless, destructive consumption. On a very basic level, Adbusters leverages the same economies of scale by selling a single issue for around $9, a yearly subscription for $38, a two-year subscription for only $58, etc. They even sweeten the deal by throwing in a free Adbusters calendar for multi-year subscriptions — just like banks giving away shitty toasters back in the day!

But that can be defended by common sense, as it’s the only way to run a self-sustaining business. Less defensible by Adbusters own standards is the magazine’s commodification of rebellion. Just like the companies it criticizes for packaging “authentic” youth culture and selling it back to young people, Adbusters gift-wraps activism, revolution, Che Guevara shirts and anything else that fits into a black bandanna, and attempts to pass it off to the next young rebel or ad exec.

Besides filling its magazine and plastering its site with riot police, black-clad protesters and other hackneyed anarchist imagery in a poor attempt to offer readers a revolutionary experience, Adbusters also actively peddles what it calls “tools for activists.” Whether it’s the $75 Converse ripoffs, the hideous $99 boots (above), the $27.50 corporate American flag or co-founder Kalle Lasn’s memoir, the question remains: How do any of these things amplify social activism? Obviously, they don’t. They all simply amount to Adbusters doing what all its corporate counterparts are doing: Grabbing something that makes money and running with it. The fact that Adbusters does it with more ecological or humanitarian consideration would be worth mentioning if the entire endeavour didn’t create such a gaping blind spot in its smug politics.

ADBUSTERS IS A RAG

Aside from maybe that anti-Semitic piece, the only article most people have even heard of from Adbusters is “Hipsters: The Dead End of Western Civilization.” Considering that this was the cover story, it’s only natural to believe it was one that Adbusters was totally behind and felt good about. And how sad that is.

In case you haven’t read it, I’ll summarize: Author goes to party, hates on music, hates on other guests, goes to another party, hates on guests, etc., plus an interview with Gavin thrown in. How a DJ “making a mix that sounds like he took hatchet to a collection of yesteryear billboard hits” or a girl “wearing big dangling earrings, an American Apparel V-neck tee, non-prescription eyeglasses and an inappropriately warm wool coat” are the ultimate insurmountable boulders in the progress of almost 3,000 years of Western culture is beyond me, even after re-reading the article.

But that’s just it: There is nothing else. Almost all Adbusters’ content is made up of posturing and masturbatory prose, like this taken from that same article about hipsters:

“The half-built condos tower above us like foreboding monoliths of our yuppie futures. I take a look at one of the girls wearing a bright pink keffiyah and carrying a Polaroid camera and think, ‘If only we carried rocks instead of cameras, we’d look like revolutionaries.”

It’s all such nonsense. The burden of proof in making claims, no matter how outrageous, is usually never even weighed in an Adbusters article.

ADBUSTERS IS IRRELEVANT

Since Adbusters simply peddles a charade of revolution to the same yuppies it claims are the problem, it’s no surprise that the magazine fails to accomplish much. For example: Despite heavy promotion leading up to Buy Nothing Day, people spent almost $4 billion dollars more during this year’s Black Friday than last year’s.

You know who’s better at furthering responsible consumption than Adbusters? Anyone not frantically waving an anarcho-syndicalist flag with one hand and jacking off to the thought of how cool they look with the other, simply because those people have a free hand to actually do something with. A collection of nerds like The Pirate Bay do a lot more to foster anti-consumerism than Adbusters and they rarely even mention politics. And although I doubt Kalle would ever admit it, American Apparel has done more to promote to sweatshop-free manufacturing than the poorly selling Blackspot campaign ever has — and Dov Charney doesn’t even consider himself in the ranks of “the Left.”

Ultimately, I guess it’s a good thing that Adbusters doesn’t have any real impact. We don’t need anymore twats spray painting their ads around town.


http://readplatform.com/adbusters-landf ... vironment/
Forumosan avatar
fred smith
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 16508
Joined: 11 Oct 2002, 17:14
54 Recognized(s)

6000

Next




 
 
 x

Return to International Politics



Who is online

Forumosans browsing this forum: No Forumosans and 1 visitor

We are always getting ready to live but never living -- RALPH WALDO EMERSON