frank miller

[Ian Livingston]

Mike, I see you cite Joseph Campbell as support for your argument that
banks get unfair treatment from the OWS. I find that remarkable. Do
banks really share a subjective egoic mythos that helps them
personally progress toward individuation? Do we who oppose corporate
greed truly disenfranchise the banks in their struggle for life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? I must reassess my
understanding of capitalism, I see--and my understanding of
mythography and of Jungian psychology, as well as my notion of what
constitutes "life."

And, given my understanding of how the gov't works, I cannot too
readily give credit to reports of the misbehavior of fringe elements
attached to the OWS without considering whether those actions might be
the work of agents provocateurs.

I will not call the banks and corporations evil. I think, however,
that their structures encourage thought and behavior disregardful of
the general good of the citizens of the nations in which those
entities prosper so pornographically. I do think the banks ought to
forgive the excessive interest charged on illegal and deceptive loans,
as I also believe they should reduce their interest rates across the
board to reflect a friendlier relationship with their customers,
rather than insisting they cannot function in a capitalist society
without seizing every cent they can get by whatever means they can get
it.

I sensed frustration even from the banker and teller who helped me
close my account at Wells Fargo because they initiated a new policy
charging us unemployed citizens additional monthly charges because we
cannot find work to pay enough to keep our balances high enough to
serve their employers' desires. The banker, in response to my
statement that I really wished I did not have to close my account,
said something to the effect of well, we may not even be here when all
this is over. I dismissed his statement at the time as an attempt at
amelioration, but now I think he was really looking at the exodus from
the big banks as symptomatic of more than just a protest movement
favoring reform.

Having lived much of my adult life off the grid and being in
possession of less than a full-size pickup load of physical
property--primarily tools and books--I think I can speak as someone
who has committed to a lifestyle mostly scornful of the trappings of
wealth in our society. I do not think everyone should live as I do. I
think cities are important and help keep people from trampling the
landscape unnecessarily. I do think cities, as municipal organizations
of individuals seeking to find ways of cooperation in limited spaces,
should look for the most efficient, rather than the most profitable
means of encouraging that cooperation. Partial divestment from big
capital would only help local businesses. International trade is
enormously profitable and helpful to the nation as a whole, but is
focused on economic profit rather than effectiveness. Those two cannot
be equated. People need to thrive, and the exclusivity of contemporary
capitalism reduces individual human needs to their most primitive
basics rather than raising those needs to higher potentials. Reform is
necessary. People know it now, largely thanks to the recent emergence
of the voices of discontent. Tea Party or OWS, the people are speaking
out, and that is a good thing, even if a few windows get broken and
someone pees in the alley. Such minor infractions seem vastly
preferable to full-scale violent revolt, which is not out of the
question if the established power elite continues to disregard and
demean its critics.

On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Michael F <mff8785 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been quick to check out the various media outlets before I jump
> to quick to a conclusion on the character of the OWS folks.  Right
> wing media outlets, especially the NYPost are reporting the protestors
> staying in $700 a night hotels and eating meals at posh restaruantss.
> Many of the Left wing media outlets are portraying them as prophets in
> some lights.  I think both portrayals are pretty foolish.  However, in
> my backyard there has been vandalism of pubic property and direct
> threats to smaller business owners from OWS folks.  This has me angry.
>
> As for blaming the banks, like us, they are economic free-agents,
> willing to do what they like with their money.  In a democracy should
> a gov't regulate their behavior?  We get mad when they regulate our
> behavior.  Banks can do what they want, I just get angry when the
> gov't plays ball with them, favoring them rather than with "us".
> There should be a balance and this is lacking.  When I say "playing
> ball" with us, I don't mean the gov't forcing the banks to lower our
> mortagages or write of our debt.
>
> I understand Frank Miller's commentary.  What we are saying is:
>
>  "we can do what we want if you live in our democracy, unless you are
> a corporation or a bank. The gov't has to listen to us, not them.  The
> banks and corporations are evil."
>
> This ethos runs contradictory to democracy.  European Enlightenment
> and Post-Enlightenment thinkers warned us against this.  We need to
> change ourselves instead of looking outward.  Excuse me, maybe I've
> just read too much Joseph Campbell in my earlier years.
>
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net> wrote:
>> On 11/20/2011 11:42 AM, kelber at mindspring.com wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm also confused by the statement: "just people crying and wallowing, and
>>> making the lives of many hardworking lower and middle class Americans that
>>> much more difficult."
>>>
>>> I've seen site-fuls of construction workers stand up and cheer and
>>> fist-pump as OWS marchers went by.  I've seen kitchen-workers come out and
>>> applaud, and retail clerks and cab drivers and truck drivers.  Unions
>>> representing service employees and pilots and teachers and nurses have been
>>> out in full force, marching and lending meeting spaces to the movement.
>>>  Obviously, no has benefitted more from the Occupy movement than the police,
>>> who are getting hefty overtime checks - because of decisions made by Mayors,
>>> not marchers.  The officer who arrested me whispered that he supported what
>>> we were doing.  He said he was struggling to make his mortgage payments and
>>> had lots of unemployed people in his family.  Even the sadistic security
>>> guards at the jail said they agreed with what we were doing.
>>>
>>> Lots of people have drawn comparisons between OWS and the Tea Party
>>> movement.  Their members have no love for each other, but they are, in fact,
>>> two wings of the same movement.  It's the movement that was born when first
>>> Bush, then Obama and a majority of Congress supported bailing out the banks
>>> even though the polls said that the majority of Americans were opposed to
>>> this.  The Tea Party blames the government, OWS blames the banks, but
>>> they're united in their outrage.
>>
>> But Laura, wasn't it good that all necessary steps were taken to keep the
>> financial system from collapsing?
>>
>> In a complex society you can't cripple one of its component parts without
>> causing great harm to just about everybody.
>>
>> Innocent and guilty alike.
>>
>> P
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>
>>>> From: Joseph Tracy<brook7 at sover.net>
>>>> I appreciate you telling something about yourself and I agree with some
>>>> of what you are saying. We do need to adjust our daily lifestyles to
>>>> collectively bring down fossil fuel use, to grow food locally, to be more
>>>> creatively self reliant, to create more friendly peaceable communities.  But
>>>> all of that will make little difference if there is not serious political
>>>> change in the direction  and structure of national and global politics and
>>>> economics . The power and will of fossil fuel, Medical, mining, financial
>>>> industries and war industries has shown no regard for human justice or the
>>>> health of the biosphere. They own the political process in the US. You can
>>>> see their tracks in the Iraq war, the gulf oil spill, the financial fraud,
>>>> and unchecked global warming and a long history environmental desecration
>>>> and bloody coups and wars. There is no meaningful opposition to their
>>>> control of both parties. Occupy wall street is an attempt to set an example
>>>> of public resistance to this situation. It is part of a long history of
>>>> public demonstration and non-violent resistance which has over many years
>>>> been a key part of creating and maintaing the post colonial, post WW2
>>>> democratic middle class societies in much of the world and of the inclusion
>>>> of women and minorities as full citizens. Such demonstrations are continuing
>>>> to move things in that direction now in Islamic nations.
>>>>
>>>> Personal " attacks".  Nobody in this discussion has literally attacked
>>>> anyone else. The attack word is overblown..What we are talking about  would
>>>> more accurately be called  personal criricism. From my POV it starts with
>>>> your characterizing a movement of thousands of people with blanket phrases
>>>> like" just people crying and wallowing, and making the lives of many
>>>> hardworking lower and middle class Americans that much more difficult.",
>>>> "the OWS folks, like little kiddies, are drawing attention to their selves
>>>> and not an "issue", "their plan is not even half-baked, its foolish and
>>>> silly.", "Occupy folks are just looking to get media attention, which is
>>>> what there true goal is... attention." And all of this in defense of Frank
>>>> Miller's hateful statement on OWS.
>>>>
>>>> Well I happen to know several occupiers and your description is a set of
>>>> loaded personal criticisms that pretends to see others motives and is
>>>> offensive and wrong.  I questioned your motives and your qualification to
>>>> make these judgements, letting you know how it feels to be the object of
>>>> such personally pointed tactics.  Not so pleasant. Neither do I like phrases
>>>> like "they are the product of a lack of conceptual thinking and speak more
>>>> about the spitter rather than the target" no "ad Hominem" there? How about
>>>> your description of Naomi Klein as not a real thinker? Not a personal
>>>> insult? Have you read The Shock Doctrine?  Are you really sure this
>>>> constitutes  reason, not a"personal attack". People get defensive for
>>>> different reasons; personal  and political connections to OWS for me,
>>>> perhaps your admiration for Frank MIller and your offense at the ideas of
>>>> people like Moore or Klein. Its part of the baggage that often comes with a
>>>> passion for ideas.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we could both agree to try for greater civility and to focus on
>>>> ideas and arguments, and avoid personal criticism.
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 19, 2011, at 8:56 PM, Michael F wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ian,
>>>>>
>>>>> Not resignation, just changing targets; politiicians and us as a
>>>>> collective whole.  Politicians make the laws, and our lifestyle have
>>>>> grown so materially indulgent that we don't know up from down, forward
>>>>> from backward.  If we don't readjust or daily livestyles it doesn't
>>>>> matter who we march on or sit-in on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe,
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe, my reasoning is "weak" in your estimation, but at least it is
>>>>> reason, unlike your personal attacks.  A defense of Frank Miller and
>>>>> others who question these OWS folks is necessary.  It seems to me as
>>>>> if you are questioning nothing and only subscribing to what a weakly
>>>>> fashioned, supposedly radical group is selling.  Unfortunately, your
>>>>> desire to attack "me" and not my account of the situation has
>>>>> prevented us from having any good disucussion.  I'll assume that as a
>>>>> listserv you guys know each other.  Here's my intro.  I am a
>>>>> registered democrat, 34 year old white male middle school ELA teacher
>>>>> in the East Bay with a girlfriend who teaches Spec. Ed.(no kids).  I
>>>>> also coach football and basketball, when not doing that I tutor
>>>>> intervention reading level students at my middle school.  I sit in on
>>>>> my upper level Lit and Philosophy courses at UC Berk and have
>>>>> published some pieces from time-to-time.  Why my background effects my
>>>>> "reason" or "contribution" to discussion, I have no idea.  But, for
>>>>> some reason attacking each other is what is done around here.  I only
>>>>> jumped in on this dialogue to defend Frank Miller with reason, rather
>>>>> than ideology.  By the way, I am not a Struassian, but I have read and
>>>>> confronted him, unlike most of media pundints who attempt to demonize
>>>>> him.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for my disrespectful tone, the OWS folks have caused property
>>>>> damage and are hurting the regions that need the most help.  I've been
>>>>> seeing with my own eyes for the past few weeks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
"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