Most Popular This Week
- Not to Worry, Rape Victims Who Want An Abortion: We Won't Charge You With Felony Tampering With Evidence, Just Your Doctor
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Obama Administration Compromise Would Implement No-Cost Birth Control
- The Right of the People, Even At the Airport
- To End Extreme Poverty, Let’s Try Ending Extreme Wealth
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Don’t Put a Fork in It: On the Perils of Genetically Engineered Salmon
- Five Possibilities for the Next Great Progressive Push
- An Economic Alternative to Exploitative Free Market Capitalism
- As Hurricane Victims Freeze, Billionaire Mayor Gives Away $1 Billion to Wealthy Med School
Popular content
Today's Top News
My Advice to the Occupy Wall Street Protesters: Hit Bankers Where It Hurts
I've been down to "Occupy Wall Street" twice now, and I love it. The protests building at Liberty Square and spreading over Lower Manhattan are a great thing, the logical answer to the Tea Party and a long-overdue middle finger to the financial elite. The protesters picked the right target and, through their refusal to disband after just one day, the right tactic, showing the public at large that the movement against Wall Street has stamina, resolve and growing popular appeal.
Protesters with the 'Occupy Wall Street' movement demonstrate in New York.
(Spencer Platt/Getty Images) But... there's a but. And for me this is a deeply personal thing, because this issue of how to combat Wall Street corruption has consumed my life for years now, and it's hard for me not to see where Occupy Wall Street could be better and more dangerous. I'm guessing, for instance, that the banks were secretly thrilled in the early going of the protests, sure they'd won round one of the messaging war.
Why? Because after a decade of unparalleled thievery and corruption, with tens of millions entering the ranks of the hungry thanks to artificially inflated commodity prices, and millions more displaced from their homes by corruption in the mortgage markets, the headline from the first week of protests against the financial-services sector was an old cop macing a quartet of college girls.
That, to me, speaks volumes about the primary challenge of opposing the 50-headed hydra of Wall Street corruption, which is that it's extremely difficult to explain the crimes of the modern financial elite in a simple visual. The essence of this particular sort of oligarchic power is its complexity and day-to-day invisibility: Its worst crimes, from bribery and insider trading and market manipulation, to backroom dominance of government and the usurping of the regulatory structure from within, simply can't be seen by the public or put on TV. There just isn't going to be an iconic "Running Girl" photo with Goldman Sachs, Citigroup or Bank of America – just 62 million Americans with zero or negative net worth, scratching their heads and wondering where the hell all their money went and why their votes seem to count less and less each and every year.
No matter what, I'll be supporting Occupy Wall Street. And I think the movement's basic strategy – to build numbers and stay in the fight, rather than tying itself to any particular set of principles – makes a lot of sense early on. But the time is rapidly approaching when the movement is going to have to offer concrete solutions to the problems posed by Wall Street. To do that, it will need a short but powerful list of demands. There are thousands one could make, but I'd suggest focusing on five:
1. Break up the monopolies. The so-called "Too Big to Fail" financial companies – now sometimes called by the more accurate term "Systemically Dangerous Institutions" – are a direct threat to national security. They are above the law and above market consequence, making them more dangerous and unaccountable than a thousand mafias combined. There are about 20 such firms in America, and they need to be dismantled; a good start would be to repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and mandate the separation of insurance companies, investment banks and commercial banks.
2. Pay for your own bailouts. A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts, and still have plenty left over to fight the deficits the banks claim to be so worried about. It would also deter the endless chase for instant profits through computerized insider-trading schemes like High Frequency Trading, and force Wall Street to go back to the job it's supposed to be doing, i.e., making sober investments in job-creating businesses and watching them grow.
3. No public money for private lobbying. A company that receives a public bailout should not be allowed to use the taxpayer's own money to lobby against him. You can either suck on the public teat or influence the next presidential race, but you can't do both. Butt out for once and let the people choose the next president and Congress.
4. Tax hedge-fund gamblers. For starters, we need an immediate repeal of the preposterous and indefensible carried-interest tax break, which allows hedge-fund titans like Stevie Cohen and John Paulson to pay taxes of only 15 percent on their billions in gambling income, while ordinary Americans pay twice that for teaching kids and putting out fires. I defy any politician to stand up and defend that loophole during an election year.
5. Change the way bankers get paid. We need new laws preventing Wall Street executives from getting bonuses upfront for deals that might blow up in all of our faces later. It should be: You make a deal today, you get company stock you can redeem two or three years from now. That forces everyone to be invested in his own company's long-term health – no more Joe Cassanos pocketing multimillion-dollar bonuses for destroying the AIGs of the world.
To quote the immortal political philosopher Matt Damon from Rounders, "The key to No Limit poker is to put a man to a decision for all his chips." The only reason the Lloyd Blankfeins and Jamie Dimons of the world survive is that they're never forced, by the media or anyone else, to put all their cards on the table. If Occupy Wall Street can do that – if it can speak to the millions of people the banks have driven into foreclosure and joblessness – it has a chance to build a massive grassroots movement. All it has to do is light a match in the right place, and the overwhelming public support for real reform – not later, but right now – will be there in an instant.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
104 Comments so far
Show AllThis is excellent. I hope it will be read and implemented wherever and however possible, as widely as possible. And take your money out of the big banks!
I agree with Matt on the need to a concrete set of ideas. The problem you face is that all the players are owned by Wall Street. The way to change run a slate of candidates for Congress that are financed by the American people through millions of small donations. We can have all the right ideas, but we must have people in office who can make them reality.
History has proven that as long one penny of private campaign contributions are allowed you will not get populist candidates.
Public financing of campaigns and restoring all of FDR's New Deal financial industry regulations are the first two things that need to happen if any of the other suggested progressive changes have any hope of succeeding.
FDR recognized that unless structural changes were made first, the program would fail.
I totally agree, but these bought-off shills aren't going to vote to end Wall Street's reign because people are outside shouting. I've worked on Congressional campaigns. These folks could care less about protests. It's only when they face the threat of being voted out that they get concerned. The bowing to Tea Party is clear proof of that fact.
Run Main Street candidates against Wall Street candidates and make that the issue and you have the mechanism to end the corruption.
Ending Wall Street corruption and restoring democracy seem to me two over-arching, easily understood, and widely agreed upon goals. I have enormous respect for Matt Taibbi's understanding and suggestions for specific steps.
Personally, I do not know what to make of Matt's list. But I, too, think the goals of Occupy Wall Street are easily understood: Protesters are demanding ACCOUNTABILITY from Wall Street and the restoration of FAIRNESS to the American economy.
My suggested sign for the day (from the song of this title): "NO BANKER LEFT BEHIND!"
I'm about half way through the book Right is Might. It is a bit uncomfortable to read since it brings up one's own failures, but from there it is possible to see our world's/ country's/ business's systemic failures.
Before the numerical list of five that is given, maybe, make this work capital "A".
Terran
http://www.alphapub.com/rightismight.html
NATIONALIZE THE BANKS.
North Dakota is the only state with a public bank. They're unemployment rate is 3%.
Taibbi sez: "The only reason the Lloyd Blankfeins and Jamie Dimons of the world survive is that they're never forced ... to put all their cards on the table."
***
They're also never forced to put their own chips on the table. It's strictly house money. They collect the winnings, The People pick up the losses.
Goebbels,
The Blankfeins and Dimons of the world are the ones that Thomas Jefferson referred to as the "Artificial Aristocracy", founded on wealth and birth and lacking virtue and talent.
Jefferson strongly believed that provisions should be made to put a halt to their ascendancy.
"Hit Bankers Where it Hurts"? Gosh Mr. Tabbi, that seems so fierce. Oh, I see what you mean: "A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives"--Ouch! That really stings, Mr. Tabbi. A little softer, and more toward the cheek, please.
Where does Mr. Tabbi come up with his bold ideas? Warren Buffet?
You have not concept of how many transactions are done around the world everyday. This small 0.1 percent can generate trillions of dollars to help this country and its people.
That is true. A valid tax on many of the 'High Frequency Traitors' would be a very small percentage. That's where they're making their millions... off these very small percentage differences. Perhaps an even deeper reform would be to make it illegal to put recently borrowed money into short-term speculation. So much of the derivative and other hedge betting comes from access to very low-interest short-term loans, so when a bet goes south, then come the bailouts. Would a moratorium on all loans for short-term investments be feasible?
Oh, I do have an idea of the nature of the pathetic shortcomings of these 'reforms'--Instead of spreading the movement, such reforms, their proposal by DP policy wanks and acceptance by the governing establishment, are appeasements that ultimately would allow business-as-usual accompanied by the sound of clinking champagne glasses. Do you want more money going to the US government? Tabbi needs to explain how half of any such tax would go to the ever-expanding military-industrial complex. Go ahead, follow Tabbi's advice and do your ugly business of begging for crumbs from the ruling elite and the beltway, but spare us the hollow tones of the machinations of economists. Some of us want radical, systemic change that has NOTHING to do with these pitiful reforms. Tabbi can take this crap to the DLC and see if he can get a consulting job. I, for one, am tired of his pretenses to be a journalist.
+ 1
Indeed. I believe the .01 percent on all derivative trades is the same number one Ralph Nader has proposed and did propose in his 2008 presidential campaign.
Where I live, and for the past six days, fighter jets have be going over head from one base to another. It is non-stop process, and sometimes deafening. There now has to have been well over a hundred or more sorties. What is going on? Ewwww....maybe it is that nasty old Iran.
Hey! We can get a twofer out of this.
1) The Military Industrial Complex get richer.
2) It will keep Americans distracted and away from the Wall Street protests, in the name of patriotism, and get them ready to let their taxes pay for another war.
Thus making the Military Industrial Complex and Wall Street bunch richer. And as usual, this has become a no fail policy. How dumb can ya all get?
That was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw the story about assassins from Iran. Trump up a little war to get the patriotic blood flowing. Oh, and lower the gas prices to get the sheeple to think, gee what's all the hubbub about. AND...I see today Chase has suddenly declared big losses ("see, we're not greedy bastards, we're losing money just like you"). Really makes you wonder.
Iran does oil trades in other currencies beyond the U.S. $. If that continues, it could destroy the $ as the world reserve currency and put the privately-owned Federal Reserve out of business.
Be prepared when the rest of the world decides to cash in their US Treasuries.
Lying about Iraq worked so well, they're now lying about Iran.
---"A tax of 0.1 percent on all trades of stocks and bonds and a 0.01 percent tax on all trades of derivatives would generate enough revenue to pay us back for the bailouts"---
The bailouts have already been paid back. The troubled assets bought by the Treasury Dept. under the TARP program have since been sold, in most cases at a higher value than when they were bought.
We need to use fact-based arguments - even if it means that we sound like "socialists". The puropse of a stock transaction tax and new taxes on the wealthy are for the proven benefits of wealth redistribution and vital public services - revitalized infrastructure, cities, and public transit, education, healthcare for all.
Well... the banks kind of paid back TARP. The audit of the fed revealed that 16 trillion in secret low-interest loans to US banks, foreign banks, corporations, etc... You are correct that TARP was paid back, but we mustn't forget the second component... TARP was essentially paid back with our money. If I could get close to 0% interest rates from the Fed with no strings attached, I could pay my student loans back REAL fast!
tarheel77,
Excellent points. Most importantly, we wouldn't have known about the $16 TRILLION SECRET bailout by the Fed if some people in congress didn't insist on the "partial" audit. Furthermore, if both the Fed and U.S. Treasury conspired to do this without telling the taxpayers, why in hell would any one believe anything they tell us?
Sounds like the kind of "facts" that were on CNN the other day.
So if someone holds a gun to your head and extorts 16 trillon dollars from you ... then magnanimously loans your own money back to you at high rates of interest ... and in doing so creates a huge profit ... which it then uses to "pay back" a small portion of the money it extorted from you ... that's ok with you? That constitutes "paying back the bailouts"? Really?
How is that at all a legtimate business practice? I guess all is fair in love and war .... and capitalism too.
The money from TARP may have been paid back-but that's not the problem. The problem is that Obama & crew did not get anyhing in exchange for bailing out the banks. He had an historic opportunity to play hard ball with the banks, and he blew it-because he doesn't play hardball. Instead, he signed up Larry Summers and Geitner. He was signalling that everything on Wall Street was going to be okay, and that the banksters could go back to business as usual, and that there would be no meaningful regulation at all. The banksters won without a battle.As for the addional 'secret' 1.2 trillion bucks loaned to the banks in addition to the TARP money-has that been paid back?? I doubt it.
re: "But... there's a but."
"the time is rapidly approaching when the movement is going to have to offer concrete solutions to the problems posed by Wall Street. To do that, it will need a short but powerful list of demands.
Really? I thought that what was one of the most powerful aspects of OWS was that it was not putting forward demands, which can then be slowly and disappointingly dismantled and denied over time. The lack of a specific demand IS the strategy, which apparently Taibbi doesn't agree with.
Anyway, this list is short, but not all that powerful I'm afraid, as one of the things it's very short on are details about how any of this is supposed to ever be implemented. It's actually pretty short on a lot of fronts, and doesn't seem to offer that concise, or that powerful of a message for the layperson.
So, as a counterpoint and to demonstrate what I think a more empowering list might look like, I offer my own unsolicited suggestions for 'long-term goals':
1. REVOKE CORPORATE PERSONHOOD.
2. NATIONALIZE THE FED.
3. REPEAL OF THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT, and REINSTATE THE GLASS-STEAGALL ACT.
4. INSTITUTE A CAPITAL GAINS TAX, AND APPROPRIATE DIVIDEND, DERIVATIVE, AND TARIFF TAXES. CLOSE TAX LOOPHOLES AND OUTLAW OFFSHORE TAX HAVENS.
5. BREAK UP MEDIA CONSOLIDATION, MULTINATIONAL TRUSTS AND CORPORATE MONOPOLIES.
6. ELECTION REFORM: ALL VOTES MUST HAVE A PAPER TRAIL
Use these for a bit more punch when you speak up at your local occupation.
* * * * * * *
Privatization is THEFT!
Deregulation is CORRUPTION!
Corporate Personhood is A WEAPON AGAINST WE THE PEOPLE!
"Unhappy events abroad have retaught us two simple truths about the liberty of a democratic people. The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any other controlling private power. The second truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if its business system does not provide employment and produce and distribute goods in such a way as to sustain an acceptable standard of living. Both lessons hit home. Among us today a concentration of private power without equal in history is growing."
"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson. The country is going through a repetition of Jackson's fight with the Bank of the United States — only on a far bigger and broader basis.
— FDR
SS, I'll go with your list over Taibbi's.
Hands down. No contest.
3 very important things I forgot to mention.... that is if we REALLY want to hit the banksters where it hurts (and which I don't think I read Taibbi mention):
QUIT YOUR BANK, JOIN A LOCAL CREDIT UNION!
RECYCLE YOUR TELEVISION! STOP KILLING YOUR MIND!
BUY LOCAL. BUY NON-CORPORATE. SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY AND BOYCOTT ALL BIG NAME BRANDS. Their products usually suck anyway.
Cheers GollyGee, and Long Live the Occupation of the USA!
I happen to agree with all those things, but I think we should allow them to arise organically out of the consensus process, and not present them as static demands.
Lists of static demands have gotten the left nowhere for two generations now. :( If we are are to be seen as serious thinkers we need to be seen as facilitators of processes to resolve conflicts ie a positive that involves ALL people, and not just a list of negatives from a particular faction.
Well said, and completely reflects my sentiment. My list is only for moral and intellectual support — after all, who am I to be presenting any concrete demands? In the end, I hope to positively effect the OWS movement, but am not fooling myself into thinking I'll be critical to it's ends. I'm just one little voice among the millions and millions of the 99%.
Here is the way I am looking at it, the U.S. Constitution had a 200 + year run because it was not a static list of laws or demands, but a meta level framework of a process for drafting laws, which is good as far it goes. BUT it's out date bring written in era when when white males land owners were trying to protect their privilege, in an age of inclusiveness, class awareness including rights for the homeless and renters, and networked intelligence we will want something IMO closer to direct democracy with possibly something like a bill of rights to protect minority opinions, and minority people. It is my hope OWS will help us think about what a new meta framework Constitution like document is going to look in an age of gay rights, near ubiquitous computer access, co-ops, etc.
Yes, a "meta level framework"...exactly.
I embrace, if done in good-faith, a re-writing/re-interpretation of the Constitution, maintaining all the original liberties and protections, while eliminating obsolescence, unfortunate obscurities and outgrown moral assumptions. A constitutional update to restore the spirit of the original, while reinforcing and integrating newly assimilated realities regarding modern ecological and cultural sophistication.
re: "It is my hope OWS will help us think about what a new meta framework Constitution like document is going to look"
I hope so too. Our nation was founded on contradiction, no doubt, but I think its founding spirit and its original documents are far more in line with the aspirations of the OWS protest than with the entrenched interests of the oligarchs. In my mind, our struggle is the self-same struggle taken up by our antecedents. Let's hope we have a fraction of their success, and if and when we do, we correct some of their shortsightedness, and get it right as they had intended.
My understanding is that Jefferson intended the constitution be re-worked every 20 years or so. That' might not be the best idea, but how about at least once every 200 years?
I would like the meta level framework to be less centralized and more localized and direct than the current Constitution and somehow perhaps in a preamble to assert the virtue education, and of cooperation and communal spaces for political, and artistic expression, and to protect ecology.
You get it when you say:
"Really? I thought that what was one of the most powerful aspects of OWS was that it was not putting forward demands, which can then be slowly and disappointingly dismantled and denied over time. The lack of a specific demand IS the strategy, which apparently Taibbi doesn't agree with."
And then you put forth exactly that a static and reformist list of demands that the anarchists who are prime movers behind OWS for example will correctly want nothing to do with. Did you read the Kropotkin you ordered? He can explain it better than I can.
Hi guitarist,
These are 'my' demands, not the rest of the 99%. I agree it's important the OWS movement stick to their amorphous demand for comprehensive bottom-up change... There MUST be no firm demands at this point which can be diluted or 'taken over' by 'reasonable' and 'responsible' parties.
But I also think that we must arm ourselves, and strengthen our arguments with what *might* be a powerful list of simple demands. My purpose was only to clarify that if OWS had real demands, they would have to be very strong, and very systemic, beyond what I think Taibbi is recommending.
The answer can, and must I think be approached from both sides of the equation.
I am reading Kropotkin, and greatly appreciate the referral. I am also reading Homage to Catalonia, also from your referral. Both are giving me a great deal of inspiration and substance to consider, and I find myself more and more drawn to the ideals presented, though I still believe that real world solutions will come from a simultaneous pursuit of both near-impossible-to-attain ideals (anarcho-syndicalism), and necessary-to-obtain practical reform (democratic socialism). I don't see a contradiction in this approach.
"I agree it's important the OWS movement stick to their amorphous demand for comprehensive bottom-up change... There MUST be no firm demands at this point which can be diluted or 'taken over' by 'reasonable' and 'responsible' parties."
I wonder whether it might be good to follow a two-track approach in which the OWS movement sticks to their amorphous demand while people who aren't actively in the movement demand some concrete changes. Might give the protesters some moral support, as you mentioined earlier.
Maybe occupy the courts with instance after instance of We The People vs. the Banksters...? The evidence of wrongdoing on so many fronts is profuse, yet justice is nowhere to be found. An independent, transparent, and democratically overseen congressional investigation is needed!
We The People are long overdue on getting some of the corruption exposed, and PURGED.
BTW, SSJJ, it's always best from my point of view to follow a two-track approach. That is just an expression of the Tao; To be able to see the antipodes, and not get caught by choosing one side over another. Always there is a proper balance where the most fruitful truth resides, one which encompasses and integrates two apparently opposed ideas which ultimately depend on one another for their long-term survival and success.
Cheers SSJJ
I am glad you are enjoying Homage, and Kroptkin I know I may seem like a grumpy porcupine kind of person, but know both of those books can make me cry with the beauty of the society they envision.
______________________________________
Would just like to offer a few basic points about "demands".
______________________________________
-- "Public" demands are completely useless, and can even be detrimental if one does not currently possess the means to ensure compliance.
______________________________________
-- Formulating useful demands requires one to have clear goals and objectives that are agreed to by consensus.
______________________________________
-- Useful demands fit congruently with ones goals and objectives, and are achievable via a set of strategies and tactics that one is capable of effectively executing.
______________________________________
-- Short of a complete overthrow of the existing government, making specific demands ultimately becomes necessary to achieve a significant percentage of ones goals.
______________________________________
Thus, OWS at some point will have to make specific demands, but we are a long way from that becoming necessary. They will also likely need to collaborate with other groups to have a shot at achieving a major reconstruction of our economic and political system.
______________________________________
P.S. Taibbi's "demands" are merely "reforms" to an irreparable political and economic system. "Fixing" these systems will not create a fundamentally just economic/political system, nor will it lead to ecological sustainability over the long term. For example, no mention of ending the Fed and authorizing the people themselves to create debt-free money. Absolutely necessary, in my view. No mention of a cap and dividend bill to control carbon. Critical. No mention of stopping the burning of coal, closing the empire of military bases, or ending the wars. No mention of ending corporate personhood, or requiring 100% public financing of elections. No mention of transforming the energy infrastructure (public transportation, localized agriculture, renewables, etc.) before the effects of peak oil really hit home. All of these are far more fundamentally critical to transforming our society to meet the challenges of the present and the future as compared to Taibbi's list.
Do not POLITICIZE the OWS movement. Why?
As a SOCIAL movement you will acquire many millions more participants. Each participant represents "intellectual talent,." The road to successful outcomes involves broad based applied intellectual talent. That is the KEY to successful change. DECENTRALIZED participation IS the model for change in the 21st Century. Ask any futurist.
How does a SOCIAL movement effect change?
IDENTIFY THE PROBLEMS AND SEEK NON POLITICAL SOLUTIONS.
Make a list of the problems and publicize them; then, seek solutions outside of government. Creativity is the currency of the 21st Century. Design creative actions to build a sustainable future for all Americans. One good example is to join the efforts of Anonymous and move accounts from banks to local credit unions. The problem was identified and a non-governmental solution was found.
I would strongly urge the OWS movement to remain SOCIAL despite short term promises of faster political change through direct engagement. The blueprint must not be compromised or failure will result. Let OTHERS who desire direct political confrontation start their own organization outside of OWS.
OWS must attract huge numbers of participants to create alternative futures to the current dystopia. By transcending the corrupt existing system through peaceful creative means the establishment of more sustainable lifeways will emerge without the loss of life. Governments cannot stand without the consent of the governed. Government will have to change as a by product of the independent establishment of the new living paradigm.
I agree accept I would say the social dialog among the 99% and "intellectual talent" IS political. Creatively modeling a new democracy is the shadow of the oligarchy is a courageous political act IMO.
_____________________________________
Completely disagree.
I think the theory is right decentralized dialog among a wide group of people, the poster just fails to realized that, that in itself is radically political.
_______________________________________
I don't agree with their leadership structure. I'm in favor of a basically decentralized approach, but their excessively decentralized process will ultimately prevent the group from accomplishing anything of great import if it continues indefinitely.
No t necessarily if they stay until the government and corporate control collapses then the councils themselves are a perfect model of the sorts of direct citizen democracy meetings we will need in all our communities to decide how to rebuild post peak oil, and post empire.
That's it Matt! You've come up with the solution:
Break up the monopolies, tax all financial transactions, no public money for lobbying, repeal the carried-interest tax break, change the way bankers get paid...
Easy enough, except you left out how we're going to get that legislative agenda passed when the banks own the govenment.
Does Rolling Stone actually pay you to write this stuff?
As I understand it, the only way our "Representatives" in Congress are going to do anything that will benefit the people is if we protest en-mass (all the 99%), in the streets and at their offices to DEMAND that they vote for specific legislation. This is the "power of the people" that the occupy movement is building. When (not if) this movement becomes large enough, then we can have non-violent mass actions to DEMAND specific legislation we need to reclaim our government and our democracy for all of the people.
From another thread on CD today: Posted by lnb Oct 13 2011 - 2:48pm
"Government is just a tool. A tool. TOOL. Like a hammer, it can be used to perform useful work, or wielded as a weapon for murder. The hammer, itself, is blameless. Our enemy wishes to extinguish this tool, because life willautomatically revert to a rough neo-feudalism, in the absence of this tool (where they will thrive as oligarchs, and we will wither & perish as their serfs). Mac calls attention to the fact that it only matters WHOSE hand is on that tool; the hand of bought "agents of global bankster empire"(who wield that tool as a weapon against the people), or the hand of reps for "WE the people". We are the tool user/makers of the animal kingdom. The tool of government is our GREATEST invention. It is the MOST effective tool at promoting the general welfare, establishing justice and providing for the common defense. With these goals accomplished, the good life is achieved, for ALL life everywhere. This CANNOT happen without the tool of government. Size and composition can be re-designed as needed. Its' existence CANNOT be questioned. I think this clarifies the real issue, does it not?"
The Elite 1% have almost complete control of how the tool of government is currently wielded. We the People MUST pry their hands off of the hammer, and place our collective hands together to wield that tool for the benefit of ALL the people!
(From another farmer) I like your plan, and I like Inb's thoughts about government. It is always to be watched and kept to openness. Something that ours has not displayed for most of my 70 years. That is partly why we have the diabolical mess we have. dh
One of the first things that has to happen is the son of Wall Street that the Supreme Court gave birth to must be eliminated. If not he will become the only citizen in America that is looked after and protected by the Constitution. The we of we the people will become a second-class citizen with no protection or voice.
Hoa binh