Yesterday afternoon, Kanye West FINALLY took a trip down to the Occupy Wall Street protest. Haha, wait, what? I’m sure you could just feel the energy coursing through the crowds. “This is it, guys,” people would whisper to each other. “This is what it’s all about!” Nothing suggests that your protest movement is impotent and ineffectual like a celebrity casually wandering through it after a champagne lunch at the St. Regis, or whatever. (The lobster salad is delicious!) Kanye West would have made it down sooner, but he was in his shoes apartment (a luxury penthouse apartment that he maintains simply to store his many shoes) trying to decide which shoes to wear. This story was reported on many blogs yesterday afternoon as it was happening (also known as liveblogging) and I am sure I am not the first person to ask “what?” and also “why?” but I’ve yet to see a compelling answer. Even “because he was bored” would be relatively satisfying and VERY believable, but so far there are no reports on whether or not Kanye West was bored. The closest we have come to an explanation, actually, was given by Russell Simmons, who went down to Occupy Wall Street with Kanye and acted as his impromptu spokesman. Needless to say, I think these dudes are a little confused about what’s up:

Uhhhhh. So Kanye West is a Federalist Papers-carrying member of the Tea Party? I am pretty sure that Occupy Wall Street isn’t about “taking the money out of government and giving it back to the people and letting them govern themselves.” Is it?! Wait, IS that what Occupy Wall Street is about? Because I was under the impression that Occupy Wall Street was about holding multi-national corporations and the financial services industry accountable for the grossly lopsided profits they enjoy off the fruits of other people’s labor, requiring them to both contribute more to the overall maintenance of our society as well as to take responsibility for their (often amoral) business practices, which have resulted in the near economic collapse of the modern world and countless other problems. That’s kind of what I was picking up from the whole Occupy Wall Street thing, but maybe I’m the one who is confused and Kanye West (via Russell Simmons) has it right and we are just trying to TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY. If that is the case, might I suggest we move this protest to Washington DC? And give Michele Bachmann and/or Grover Norquist the bullhorn? They would love to use it. (Video via GotchaMedia.)

Comments (106)
  1. Does anyone else think we maybe all just woke up in a Monty Python sketch? That is my explanation, and I am sticking to it.

  2. “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” – Kanye West, 2005

    “Russell Simmons doesn’t care about facts, people.” – Kanye West, 2011

  3. I saw a picture of Kanye at the rally and that dude was definitely wearing gold fronts. That mmmmaybe might’ve been why he wasn’t speaking so much

  4. well, even if you can’t tell Kanye nothin’, it’s still good he’s there.

  5. Rick Perry is coming to Pittsburgh on Friday. I’ll take Kanye West and Russell Simmons over that.

  6. I was going to occupy Wall Street, but I was too busy occupying employment.

  7. I really don’t know why Kanye was there. I KNOW he’s not saying that the large corporations are gold diggers.

  8. Yikes, someone should speak on behalf of Simmons speaking on behalf of Kanye.

  9. I am not totally sure that is what he means. Is it? Because what he actually says is not what Gabe quotes above, but that Kanye supports “getting the money out of government and letting the people govern.” Which could just mean what people mean when they talk about getting the money out of politics – i.e., reducing the influence of rich donors in politics. He doesn’t say anything about giving the money back to the people, at least in this clip. Did anyone else hear it this way?

    • That’s exactly how I took it as well. (And may God help us if we’re wrong.) Unfortunately, I’m afraid that message is getting lost in the midst of portrayal by a media that has a vested interested in serving that same corporate greed that our elected representatives are owned by. And sadly, this Kanye clip, so easily miscontrued, isn’t going to help clear things up.

  10. The explanation for Kanye being at the Occupy Wall Street protest is pretty simple… there were cameras there.

    • Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see

      • I have some advice which you can take or leave – I think if you italicize, you get your intended emphasis across better: “You’re pretty simple”

        • Well maybe some of us can never remember how to do italics on here, you ever think of that, DJ Freshie? And maybe some of us are really sensitive about that particular handicap, so maybe you should just lay off!

          • Case in point: I had fake html coding in that comment to demonstrate my lack of knowledge on this subject, and the system, being smarter than I, removed them prior to posting. Double whammy.

          • I read it with Italics anyways, and I present to you now, my reading of your comment:

            Well maybe some of us can never remember how to do italics on here, you ever think of that, DJ Freshie? And maybe some of us are really sensitive about that particular handicap, so maybe you should just lay off!

        • “Seriously dj freshie, you’re making me the self-proclaimed mayor of boner-city over here” Italics Fetish Guy

      • Really. That’s your response (That’s your response!). Awesome. Cool. Please allow me to retort: NO YOU ARE!!! Uggh… just shut up.

        No Kanye does not have a hard time getting media coverage. Thanks to our ubiquitous mediasphere, we’re all aware anytime a celebrity farts before the air even clears, whether we want to be or not. That doesn’t change the fact that his number one talent is being a flaming narcissistic douchebag media whore (which only slightly edges out his talent for making millions by stealing from more innovative and esoteric yet lesser-known artists, watering-down their artistic concepts, and re-selling them to the braindead pop-culture consuming masses.)

        Forgive me if I find his “spiritual” support (gag) for the OWS movement slightly disingenuous, as he shows up wearing his gold chains, gold teeth, diamond jesus necklace and $400 shirt, after writing his 47th song containing a grocery list of luxury brand names.

  11. I went down to Occupy Wall Street after work yesterday, a luxury I have now that I’ve been cut back to part time. I tried to talk to some people, but every time I did, Russell Simmons would run up and speak on my behalf, always saying things I wouldn’t. What can you do though? That’s Reverend Run’s brother.

  12. I was going to throw some Occupy Wall Street stuff into some Kanye lyrics, but then I realized I have been COMPLETELY ignoring Occupy Wall Street. So I’m just going to listen to Watch the Throne instead.

    ” : ( ” – My Parents

    • dude, hate to tell you this, but I have never heard the tea party make a coherent statement about the problem of corporations having too much power to influence politics. there might have been a little lip service at the start about being against TARP, but everything else they stand for includes corporations being able to run amuck.

    • Here’s another infographic

      Who voted in the last election:

      Tea Party: Yes
      Occupy Wall Street protesters: No

      iSad that the #occupywallstreeters (hashtagswag) do not have a unified message and I keep running into videos like this that make me go, “huh?”. I am sympathetic to some of the message of the movement, but it’s hard for me to get around what seems like another opportunity for people to engage in slacktivism.

      • I actually did go down there yesterday, and I’m with you Fondue. I’m totally behind the ideal of this protest, but when I got down there and saw my first “Capitalism is a Crime” poster, I knew it was not going to be my scene. This is a movement that needs to be co-opted by some smarter people who understand economics, and quickly, or the good momentum will die.

        • Well said. Just curious, any other insights from the ground? i.e. do you think it is becoming more unified in message?

          • I definitely know how to do italics

          • I was there this weekend and despite a bunch of “End the Fed” signs, it seemed like an okay bunch. But … apparently they’re also hosting an anti-war march soon to advocate, among other things, an end to all aid to Israel, and that’s where I start backing away slowly and refusing to make eye contact with any of the OWSers. Not my scene.

          • There’s no real direction to it. There’s a lot of justified anger, but it spreads too far beyond Wall Street. I wanted it to be good, but I think the reality is that everyone is projecting their version of what it means on to the protest. It’s a Rorschach test.

          • you know, Gabe didn’t have any problem summing things right about up, in a way that was pretty beautifully a “fuck you” to the people repeating the lazy-ass republican talking point that this protest is full of dumb, slacker, unfocused people. Here it was for you guys, again. You didn’t have any problem with it above:

            “…I was under the impression that Occupy Wall Street was about holding multi-national corporations and the financial services industry accountable for the grossly lopsided profits they enjoy off the fruits of other people’s labor, requiring them to both contribute more to the overall maintenance of our society as well as to take responsibility for their (often amoral) business practices, which have resulted in the near economic collapse of the modern world and countless other problems. That’s kind of what I was picking up from the whole Occupy Wall Street thing…”

            why don’t you guys from now on, instead of repeating republican talking points, just repeat THAT, with the tone of impatience for the people that say they don’t get it. it’s a lot cooler than being the people that don’t get it.

          • I’m not sure how I’m repeating Republican talking points (insofar as I’m speaking my opinion and I’m not a Republican). I don’t think it’s a far stretch to say that the protest lacks focus. I think a lot of anger directed at Wall Street is misdirected and should instead be focused on a government who stressed deregulation and provides wall street with incentives to not be “sharing” in the burden of fixing our economic crisis.

            My point was that, most of the occupy wall streeters are young people. Only 20% of 18-29 year olds voted in the 2010 election. If they would have voted in the elextion, or, alternatively, focus their energy on pressuring their representatives now, we probably would be fixing a lot of the problems that exists (and are being potentiated right now by a very disruptive wing of congress.)

          • Most of the world already understands what the complaint is about wall street. There has been plenty of very exact focus on what went wrong there, for years. That’s obviously what this is about. The reason you think it’s not a far stretch to say that the protest lacks focus is cause you heard someone else say that.

            You called them slacktivists. You agreed that the people there are not smart enough and need to be co-opted by someone smarter.

            These people are sacrificing a lot to get in the fight. Your shit-talking is not helping.

          • Well, I don’t want to get into an internet argument™, so I won’t get all hot and bothered about you calling me uninformed concerning repeating talking points, but you are also misrepresenting what I said.

            I didn’t call the people out on the streets slacktivists. I said the movement is allowing people to engage in slacktivism. Similar to the #FreeTroyDavis movement, people feel like they can post links, #occupywallstreet hashtag, etc. and think they’ve done their part. And I think that this type of activity, while beneficial in some respects (by drawing attention to the movement) hurts more often than not. As I mentioned before, most young people did not vote in last election.

            And I disagree with you saying “most of the world already understands what the complaint is about wall street.” Many people do not understand the reason for the economic collapse which may have been prevented with appropriate regulation and more fed activity concerning interest rates. Sure Wall Street is certainly to blame for some of the problem, and I definitely support the aspect of the movement that is for taking big money out of politics, but i think the “capitalism is a crime”-sign people are slightly off base as I believe, with appropriate regualtion, it is not a crime.

          • I’m not a republican, I agree to Gabe’s point about Wall Street, and if I’d seen anything that reflected that sentiment at the actual protest, I’d be more on board with the protest itself. But just because Gabe nailed the general feeling in the country regarding our financial institutions does not mean that A) The protestors did, or B) That by diminishing the message of the protestors I am, or anyone is, becoming the voice piece for the Republican agenda.

            It’s a lot cooler to try having reasonable arguments that you thought out yourself, instead of telling me that I should be repeating anybody else’s words as my own.

          • So you’re claiming that you never said that the people that are giving up their regular lives, donating 24/7 to living outdoors to fight this are “slacktivists.” no, not what you said, but for the sake of argument, let’s move on. But then you still have some problem that they are “allowing people to engage in slacktivism.” Nothing about that complaint makes any sense. Nothing.

            “Inside Job” was 2 hours of information. There were multiple hours of “This American Life” about what happened. “Too Big to Fail,” and “The Big Short,” and hundreds of other multiple-hundred paged books were written about what happened. Every day for the last 3 years there have been other versions of what happened in every newspaper and blog, in entirety.

            Yes, most of the world gets some version of the idea that the investment banks in Wall Street did some very immoral and illegal things.

            And you’re complaining that thousands of people, many of whom have been following different parts of that information, for years, and are now fighting together in 100s of cities, with no leader, are not SO focused about it that they agree with your simple version of it – that it all may have “been prevented with appropriate regulation and more fed activity concerning interest rates.”

            You are the one that is misrepresenting what is going on with OWS, and what you said about it. You’re adding to the chorus that this is a bunch of misinformed people, and it is influencing other people that hear you. Stop doing that.

          • I think part of this problem is that all of our financial issues are interrelated — the wars, the bank bailouts, tort reform, the HMOs and major corporations dictating health care, the myth that clean air and water kills jobs, the government not holding corporations accountable for their actions because major candidates are now directly funded by corporations… and yes, not legalizing marijuana for functional or recreational purposes (which is always made fun of but hemp for paper and alternative energy functions would prevent a lot of over-foresting issues and lessen the insanity of the Mexican drug cartels). And all whole bunch of other stuff that I’m sure I’m forgetting. That insane Supreme Court ruling Citizens United v. FEC is a huge part. (So, essentially, what Gabe said.)

            So my point is this — there’s no way that a large group of people can protest about everything that is wrong and does tie back to Wall Street, even at a symbolic level, without messages getting muddled. And yes the idiots are going to get more coverage because they give better sound bites but the idiots aren’t the only people there.

            Things are bad. I’m glad people are speaking up.

          • We’re on the same team here, but I am going to stop after this because you are putting words into my mouth that I didn’t say; please reread my comments, and in case you are still unclear of what I’m saying let me try to restate in more clear words:

            I sympathize with much of the movement. Wall Street immorality is, generally speaking, a symptom of poor previous government regulation and current disruption by one wing of Congress, not the root disease. Therefore, I wish all of the energy being put into OWS protests was instead focused on protesting the people in charge of setting the rules (politicians). While some of OWS IS clearly foucsed on this, much of what I’ve seen is not. And to my point about slacktivism, there is lots of psychological research (look up moral credentials) saying that this type of activity is counterproductive, and I find it especially counterproductive in a population (young people; of which I am a member) that largely did not vote during the last election.


          • if we’re done, we’re done. but if you ask me, you are not on the team that you think you are on. Saying “but I’m not a republican” does not reverse the damage you do by publicly, anonymously, characterizing an entire movement as “slackers” and “not smart.” Fucking INCREDIBLE that you’re willing to give some psychological study about how “this type of activity” (you mean, fighting for a cause?) is counterproductive to the cause, yet repeating the conventional wisdom about it which is obviously being spread by the other side as far and wide as they can, is NOT counterproductive to it.

          • Backwaxer: you say “Most of the world already understands what the complaint is about wall street. ”

            I take your point seriously and I promise I’m not just poking at you. What do you think the complaint against Wall Street is? I haven’t really seen you articulate why Wall Street is to blame for the shitty economy.

            As for writing off Tea Partiers, they do have a coherent philosophically based agenda that has policy recommendations to go with it. That is why they have been so successful at pushing the GOP to change course and start talking about cutting spending. Also, there is plenty of anger at Wall Street from Tea Partiers. Corporatism (government – corporate partnership) necessarily leads to corruption and market disruptions. Fanny and Freddie interfering in mortgage markets skewed it all out of natural proportions by removing the moral hazard and we get the housing bubble, etc.

            The basic idea is that the more government is involved in business/industry, the more corporations will seek to influence government with money (Unions do this as well) creating a vicious cycle of gov’t with their hands in corp. pockets and vice versa. The solution is to separate gov’t and business/industry as much as possible by ending subsidies and corporate wellfare. If you go to Tea Party organizations you’ll see that they want to end subsidies. Being pro business and free market is NOT the same thing as being pro- big corporations. Think of it as being a champion of Main Street not Wall Street.

            The difference with OWS is that first off, they can’t seem to agree on a policy agenda. In fact it seems to be a central tenant in the ‘movement’ that there can be no hierarchy to decide what the values are much less the goals. I am willing to believe the OWS majority would do away with corp subsidies/wellfare but with all the student loan debt forgiveness and abolish credit rating agencies talk it does seem a bit like part of it is young people wanting a bailout so they can stay pure by avoiding the “machine” of the corporate world.

  13. Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see

  14. I know this isn’t Canadagum, but I just want to point out that #Occupywallstreet is organizing themselves here in Toronto. On Saturday.

    This is idiotic. First of all, there is no “Wall Street” in Canada. We have banks, sure, and they are shitty like American banks, sure! But our economy did not suffer after the subprime mortgage crisis like the American economy did, and especially in Toronto, there are a million other things to be protesting. Like our corrupt municipal government, for one.

    Anyways, forget all of that…SATURDAY? Jeez people. Nobody cares that you are protesting “Wall Street” on a Saturday. At least Kanye showed up on a weekday.

    • Are you ready for your mind to be blown?

      The Occupy Wall Street movement was starting by a group of Canadians.

        • +25 internet points for using a super-Canadian GIF!

          In other news, I’ve just written my councillor to express dismay at the new plan to reduce library service and staff, even though this is kind of like preaching to the choir ’cause my ward is repped by a big old leftie. The Ford Brothers were cc-ed, though.

          Aaand now I have the theme song to Seeing Things stuck in my head, so thanks for that.

      • the face taco blog commentating “was starting” by a guy who can’t write english good

    • But isn’t it just in solidarity? To say that Canadians support people in the United States standing up for what our (my) country is doing wrong? At the very least you could make a clever sign saying you’re sick of Americans coming to Canada for your cheap amazing Viagra and other drugs.

  15. Look, not trying to make this into a big thing, But this is why Videogum should stop with the politics. And Downvote all you want but hear me out:

    Everytime we discuss something like this, we end up with comments that veer far, far away from actual discourse, and they end up taking the place of the discussion. This leaves ACTUAL ISSUES ignored.

    How About we just say this – Kanye West was curious about a new political movement that appears to be gaining momentum and attention. He is a human being and an artist. In his curiosity towards his fellow humans and their current movement, he wanted to take a look and get a feel for what this was all about. As opposed to running his mouth, or making dumb blog posts, or making stupid fucking comments on a dumb blog post, or ASSUMING he knows PRECISELY what OWS stands for because of the BS he read on the blogs and newspaper websites, No – Kanye Did none of that; He went to go fucking see it.

    Maybe you should go see what is going on.

    • Well I might, now that I know there’s a chance of running into celebrities!

    • I agree. It’s the whole limousine liberal argument that drives me nuts. You want rich people like Kanye checking this out and maybe donating to the cause or helping out in some way. It will give the movement momentum. Susan Sarandon was down there two weeks ago and had to leave early to jet off to Europe. Why didn’t she get similar flack? Sure she’s not as “flashy” as Kanye but she’s still an excessively wealthy celeb. These people can help.

      • Because Susan Sarandon protests everything all the time, not just for what appears to be a photo op — especially in New York City. She’s brought a LOT of attention to a LOT of causes — environment and social — that would otherwise go unnoticed or get significantly less press, public attention or money. I’ve also heard her talk about how she considers herself an activist first and an actress second. She was there when the media was ignoring it because (I assume) she believes in the messages people are espousing.

        I’m surprised Daryl Hannah isn’t there, actually, for the very same reasons. (Unless she is and totally blends in with the crowd.) She does great stuff for environmental causes and public welfare in the Los Angeles area. She lived in a tree in South Central so that developers couldn’t bulldoze a community garden to make room for an incinerator. Here is a link to that story:,8599,1205063,00.html

        My point is that some celebrities use their celebrity to promote causes they believe in, long before they are fashionable. Others show up at the height of media oversaturation wearing gold teeth and don’t talk ABOUT ANYTHING. Actually I can only think of one that has done that so far. So please lay off Susan Sarandon.

        • LOL. I’m not attacking her. I like her. But she’s also been around a lot longer than Kanye. What she’s doing is great. But why hate on Kanye for going down there. He’s bringing attention to it. Even if he’s JUST doing it because it’s fashionable, what’s the harm in that? I don’t see what the big deal is. What are you such a big super duper Sarandon fan that you can’t even fathom someone saying about her at all? Is she paying your rent or your school loans or something?

          That said, Gabe IS pointing out how funny and egocentric Kanye is as That One points out and I agree. That is funny. I was just saying – this time his egocentricity might not be that bad – but still funny.

          • I take huge offense to the limousine liberal term when it is applied to situations like this. (Not by you, but in general. I hear it a lot.) It’s a flawed concept and phrase at any level and one that is thrown out whenever someone on the right wants to marginalize any good done on behalf of people or the environment at the expense of big business by someone who happens to not be absolutely destitute. (Which is even more ironic since many of these protestors are angry that they are, in fact, destitute or will be soon.)

            And the harm in Kanye going down to see what the protests are about is that it adds to the marginalization of the people who are actually trying to enact change through social disobedience by drawing attention to himself in a way that someone who is only half paying attention will think it’s some slacker concert festival… AND allows Page Six to start undermining the movement instead of just the overt Murdoch-run news groups, which in turn further draws attention away from why people are even there.

            It would be one thing if he tried to go incognito, but as it is his way, Kanye had to make a protest about corrupt government issues that tie into Wall Street about him. Even by not speaking when asked why he was there he drew further attention to himself. It is the very opposite of showing up two weeks ago… which is why she didn’t get the negative attention.

            And why do I like her? I like her politics. I’ve seen her at rallies and protests that I’ve been to and unless she’s explicitly using her celebrity to draw attention to the cause, she keeps a very low profile. Or she did when I lived in NYC.

            Look at what Penn Badgley and Zoe Kravitz did last week… they managed to be a part of the protest, show their support and didn’t derail the conversations about why the protests exist into a conversation about gold teeth. (Though I absolutely understand why gold teeth on Kanye West at a protest should be a discussion on Videogum.)

          • I saw Jesse Ventura at the first day of OccupyMN. He suplexed some lippy conservative into a fountain. I couldn’t tell if he did it for attention or for the love of suplexes.

    • DS3M, this isn’t really a political post at all. It’s a post about Kanye West, who Gabe (among others) sees as maniacally egocentric and out of touch. A post about someone like that appearing at a function which is ostensibly about middle-class disenfranchisement is well within Videogum’s wheelhouse.

      And isn’t it Gabe’s job to run his mouth and make dumb blog posts?

      • I guess my whole point was we should treat celebrities like everyone. The Media is going to make of the situation what they will. Maybe Kanye Was GENUINELY Curious. Maybe it has NOTHING to do with Media Attention or drawing attention to himself or his gold fronts. Idk, maybe Kanye is LITERALLY an Attention Whore. Either way, I don’t care, let’s see some trampoline accidents up in this bitch.

    • Actually, I think Videogum commenters have done a pretty decent job at not reducing discussion to flame war nightmares, especially when compared to the rest of the haternet. I’m a conservative and I’ve never been made to feel stupid or personally insulted when people have disagreed with me, and that’s all I really ask of anyone. I mean, the caveat is, I’m a conservative who is pretty disgusted with the state of the republican party. I’m also a Christian and the digs at other Christians have been more or less fair, even if sometimes it stings just a tad too much. SMILES

      • (I know that’s not really what your point was, but it’s nice to have SOME kind of discussion about important things with decent people, even if it’s not always kept on track)

    • this DSxj39M commentator is mad because if anyone pauses long enough to make a joke about kanye then the important issues of the day will be “ignored” and then what? the world will end, probablies. You mad!

    • Also, obligatory “mogul got emotional.”

  16. Not really excited about defending these two–plenty of other reasons to mock Kanye, and Russel Simmons certainly seems to be pretty down with big corporations, making his participation certainly odd, possibly hypocritical.

    That said, if you give Simmons the benefit of the doubt, couldn’t the money in government he mentions be the money that goes into lobbying politicians and influencing policy thereby removing power from the people and wouldn’t that criticism be pretty in line with Occupy Wall Street.

    Again, plenty of reasons to harsh the guys, maybe even on this issue. And maybe he really is talking the Tea Party talk. But also maybe not. Reset button?

  17. This is only going to hurt Occupy Wall Street’s reputation as being a bunch of College Dropouts.

  18. Clearly the military-industrial complex is connected to elite that run our economy, in fact they are one and the same. Sigh. It’s tough being a Marxist in the US, when people shrink away from the implications of the problems that are staring them in the face. We spend close to a trillion dollars a year on the military, more than the next 25-30 countries combined. Much of it goes to upkeeping our overseas empire of military bases. That money could be used to fund a lot of social programs instead of occupations, but it’s not because big corporations like the money going in to their wallets. Oh, and add to that we give a number of countries (Israel being only one of many) billions of dollars to buy war materials which they then use to mostly oppress their own population. We do it in Egypt as well as Israel, and both of them like to rain rockets and mortar fire down on the “stubborn” parts of their population. So yea, we should end all military aid to these nations. Isn’t that logical?

    And oh btw, if you are astonished my by (quasi) coherence, I am a local Green Party head and a professor of political science… but I digress. The movement needs to be more coherent, but it isn’t a bad start.

    • I think the last 100 years have plenty of instances showing that Marxists have had a hard time in Marxist countries as well. Zing? Sorry, kidding.

      I guess you illustrate my basic problem with current marxist/socialist complaints: You want to take money from one thing to pay for a different thing. In other words, you’re only reforming HOW to pay for things instead of reforming the things themselves. This was why the health care bill pissed me off so much: It does nothing to address why things cost what they do, it just shuffles the money from one place of incompetence to another. I’m a capitalist who doesn’t really trust the private or public sector: human nature is human nature, so I’d rather be left alone to try and carve out my own way. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand social obligation or participation in taxes or welfare programs, all of those are necessary, and thus I’m not a Rand fan or anything like that.

      But what I don’t understand is the idea that we can have our cake and eat it too: Making health care cheaper WILL erode technological progress in that field, for example. If that’s what it takes, than maybe that’s the way to go, but we all have to be prepared for the consequences. The military industrial complex is just one of the other industrial complexes that are plaguing this country, from the financial industry, health care, higher education, and if you want to separate it, the real estate industry: To all of these things, if we have any hope for change, we have to ask 3 questions:

      “Why do these things cost so much?”
      “How can the public interact with these markets to control prices better?”
      “What can we as the public live without?”

      Those are all questions that no politician can ask without getting gutted on the spot: This is where the Occupy movement could be useful, but until they start acting like people who are willing to put in the actual WORK to get this stuff done instead of playing camp-out, then to me it just looks like a bunch of frustrated kids who also like the adrenaline of facing cops in riot gear.

  19. I agree with most of you who have said that the movement needs a clear voice and message other than outrage to really achieve great things.

    However, this is why I believe this will not happen: so much of our hope and belief has been co-opted by the media, advertisers and politicians that we simply do not trust anyone who takes on a position of leadership. They seem to corrupt almost instantaneously. The same for really believing in that you may achieve some clear policy goals. It feels almost naive to issue a list of demands in a system that is maligned so deeply.

    BUT that being said, the movement does hold some power. I do not believe that the tea party really had a clear agenda either. But their protests realigned the republican party and changed the way that reps presented policy and what they believed their constituents wanted. If the OWS people can continue to make their voices heard without giving up, then they may well do the same.

    Okay, end of my rant.

    • why end your rant now when you could make it so much longer than it already is JUST KIDDING!!!

    • That’s really reasonable and well thought out. I think maybe you give too much credit to the OWS people though. No fault of yours if you are trying to be fair, which I think you are.

      But, OWS would have to have some policy goals and it seems to be a core tenant of the “movement” that there is no list of demands nor can there be a comprehensive list. The “movement” claims to have no leaders, which is believable but with everyone refusing to have a set of defined policy goals OWS will never be able to push Democratic pols to frame debate to their liking. Also, OWS seems to reject the idea that any politicians can lead to reform at all because by definition they are part of the problem.

      My personal opinion is that what OWS is really angry about is that the WRONG people are being bailed out (Banks, Industry, etc) when it should be them (99%) that gets a bail out. (Student loan forgiveness, abolishing credit ratings, etc)

  20. So Russell Simmons is basically the kid in Valhalla Rising?

    Spokesperson for Top-Teeth.

  21. man this whole thread is tl;dr

  22. Cokeparty  |   Posted on Oct 12th, 2011 +1

    It’s like a war between the jocks and the burners and Kayne is def on the side of the burners but not too close but maybe girls will be there.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.