frank miller

[Ian Livingston]

Well, Mike, I may not agree with you either about OWS motivations or
effects, but you're sure entitled to your opinion.


On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Michael B.,
>
> Nice Post. You make great points.
>
> Ian,
>
> Everyone knows how these Fortune 500 CEO's are living, how
> smaller/medium-sized corporations are not held accountable for falsification
> of quarterly reports, and how our politicians(both dem and repub) are
> playing the game: ais not needed. I think the OWS folks, like little
> kiddies, are drawing attention to their selves and not an "issue". From the
> start if the OWS wanted to make positive change, they'd be occupying the
> streets in front of the local, state, and federal level politicians(both
> repub and dem). Mad at Wall Street? Who is giving them the money? Who is
> allowing it to go on? The politicians. Are they trying to make the Gordon
> Gecko's of the world feel guilty? If so, their plan is not even half-baked.
>
> The Occupy-thing is not making change, its just people crying and wallowing,
> and making the lives of many hardworking lower and middle class Americans
> that much more difficult.
>
> Mike
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>> My conclusion: if they get some media attention, spark some
>>> discussion, and avoid both getting slaughtered (always a sad event)
>>> and undercutting meliorist factions (to the great gain of intransigent
>>> reactionaries) by making the perfect the enemy of the good...that
>>> would seem to be a reachable success that I could applaud...
>>>
>>
>> Dang! Where's the "Like" button?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Michael Bailey
>> <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hmm.  What does affect these evildoers?
>>> Mass civil disobedience in bringing their operations to a halt would
>>> be something to see
>>> but who will bell that cat?
>>>
>>> so many problems -
>>>
>>> a) a charismatic leader is vulnerable to assassination or cooptation,
>>> but without articulate spokespeople the message is muddled
>>>
>>> b) a mass movement is vulnerable to agents provocateur and the human
>>> frailties of its participants
>>>
>>> c) the supply lines for simply keeping body and soul together in the
>>> act of challenging established evildoers are problematic too (I always
>>> wonder how somebody sustains a long protest - who's feeding their cat,
>>> paying their electric bill, watching their kids?)
>>>
>>> d) predicating action on an adversarial relationship tilts the playing
>>> field in favor of those who continually practice adversarial
>>> techniques (nightmarish big guys swinging lead pipes, eg) - when you
>>> look back at the 60s, those who scoffed at people "working within the
>>> system" don't seem to have achieved as much, in retrospect, as those
>>> at whom they scoffed...
>>>
>>> My conclusion: if they get some media attention, spark some
>>> discussion, and avoid both getting slaughtered (always a sad event)
>>> and undercutting meliorist factions (to the great gain of intransigent
>>> reactionaries) by making the perfect the enemy of the good...that
>>> would seem to be a reachable success that I could applaud...
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Ian Livingston <igrlivingston at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Right. If no pays attention to the problem, the problem is permitted
>>>> unfettered growth. The problem is not OWS, they draw attention to the
>>>> problem.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> What truly shows how half-baked alot of these Occcupy movements are:
>>>>> the money corporations are in Danville and San Ramon and
>>>>> Dublin/Pleasanton(20-30 minutes outside of Oakland).  And these guys
>>>>> are messing with one Fortune 500 hundred company, which will leave
>>>>> sooner than later, and other smaller businesses that are giving tax
>>>>> revenues to a broken Oakland?  Rather than using strategy to succeed,
>>>>> these Occupy folks are just looking to get media attention, which is
>>>>> what there true goal is... attention.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:45 PM, glenn <glennfuller at sbcglobal.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> There is an Occupy San Francisco  movement in the SF financial
>>>>>> district
>>>>>> which has been going on as long as Occupy Oakland, as well as an
>>>>>> Occupy
>>>>>> Berkeley, Occupy UC, (which is located on UC Berkeley Campus),  Occupy
>>>>>> San
>>>>>> Jose, Occupy San Raphael, hell even an Occupy Walnut Creek, (though
>>>>>> occupy
>>>>>> WC doesn't have any encampments).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/14/2011 02:27 PM, Humberto Torofuerte wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Never met any Oakland cops (sounds like I am better off for it) so
>>>>>>> I'll reserve judgement...but why not take the train across the bay
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> occupy San Francisco's financial district...where all the banks and
>>>>>>> hedge funds are?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Ian
>>>>>>> Livingston<igrlivingston at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yeah well somebody has to keep those Raiders fans in line.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yeah, well, it probably won't be the cops who do that. The cops are
>>>>>>>> all Raiders fans and would rather be bashing activist heads.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Humberto Torofuerte
>>>>>>>> <strongbool at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:19 PM, David Morris<fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And Oakland's cops really are pigs.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 2:19 PM, David Morris<fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Not everyone can make it to Wall Street.  I see it as a
>>>>>>>>>>> solidarity
>>>>>>>>>>> statement.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Humberto Torofuerte
>>>>>>>>>>> <strongbool at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>  I don't think cities like Portland or Oakland are where the
>>>>>>>>>>>> financial engineering of destruction was happening.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> "Less than any man have I  excuse for prejudice; and I feel for all
>>>>>>>> creeds the warm sympathy of one who has come to learn that even the
>>>>>>>> trust in reason is a precarious faith, and that we are all fragments
>>>>>>>> of darkness groping for the sun. I know no more about the ultimates
>>>>>>>> than the simplest urchin in the streets." -- Will Durant
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> "Less than any man have I  excuse for prejudice; and I feel for all
>>>> creeds the warm sympathy of one who has come to learn that even the
>>>> trust in reason is a precarious faith, and that we are all fragments
>>>> of darkness groping for the sun. I know no more about the ultimates
>>>> than the simplest urchin in the streets." -- Will Durant
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> "Less than any man have I  excuse for prejudice; and I feel for all
>> creeds the warm sympathy of one who has come to learn that even the
>> trust in reason is a precarious faith, and that we are all fragments
>> of darkness groping for the sun. I know no more about the ultimates
>> than the simplest urchin in the streets." -- Will Durant
>>
>



-- 
"Less than any man have I  excuse for prejudice; and I feel for all
creeds the warm sympathy of one who has come to learn that even the
trust in reason is a precarious faith, and that we are all fragments
of darkness groping for the sun. I know no more about the ultimates
than the simplest urchin in the streets." -- Will Durant