‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street

CrystalLettuce

Godge wrote: »

Hitler did not win the election in 1932.


What happened in Germany in the late 1920s and early 1930s is very chilling in its parallels. Hitler built up a protest movement in the 1920s around the idea that the little man got screwed while the elite got away with everything with a little bit of anti-immigration built in. With his mob sitting outside the Central Bank Reichstag in 1932, he claimed victory even though he did not have a majority. To the great delight of the unwashed mob that brought him to power, he then eliminated the elite, thus removing all opposition (echoes of the nobody in politics can be trusted rhetoric of the neo-fascists outside the Central Bank today). That allowed him to insert his own security force (giving power back to the people, where did I hear that recently) and policies descending Germany into the Dark Ages.

Thankfully, the mob at the Central Bank does not appear to be as organised as the Hitler mobs but some of their demands such as let us default on our debts (Versailles payments) and take back our oil (give Germany back to the Germans) are eerily and chillingly similar to the early demands of Hitler's party.

The problem with this is that any sort of movement against corporate greed and political corruption taking much the same for, would look like this regardless. And is automatically the new Nazis. So who are the good guys exactly? What's the right thing to do? The "Little bit of immigration fear" isn't there. If you talked to any of the people at these camps you would see they're clearly not fascists of any kind. They're nearly all social liberals which makes the comparison completely redundant, since the issue with fascism and Hitler's national socialism was that it was a kind of extreme social conservatism.

Please go over these ideas before you embarrass yourself by posting them.

CrystalLettuce

Scofflaw wrote: »

...a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

What saddens me here is that the time to protest about the folly of the system was during the Celtic Tiger, but the only protests during the Tiger years were by people looking to get yet more money. Standing at the graveside roaring and shouting about how it died and how we don't want to pay the death duties is largely meaningless.

cordially,
Scofflaw

That in no way invalidates the protests that are going on now. It would be far worse is that even AFTER all that, people STILL didn't protest. It'd be very "Irish". And even the protests we do have are small.

There were plenty of people against deregulation, who are probably largely the kind of people you'll see at these amps. The issue is that the corruption has gotten to a grander scale than before and is seriously affecting the quality of people's lives.

You can't expect everyone to be politically/economically savvy enough to know things would turn out like this.

CrystalLettuce

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And what about people that can't? It's not a case of "everyone" here. People on the bottom rungs have no choice but to demand more. People on the top do not need as much. The equation is pretty simple.

CrystalLettuce

What I hate about threads like this is the nasty comments and general attitude towards protesters, and those on the left in general(though not all protesters are necessarily left). A lot of these people with snarkily complain that someone like me is somehow oppressing their opinion, when it's not so much about that as the inherent lack of respect and general underlying malice to most of their posting.

It's why I can't stand the right wingers on this board. It's one thing if I don't agree with them, conversation can be had. But some of the off-hand remarks do nothing but spur further hatred. They are just nasty people, and I think we need to stop writing off our social and moral character as something that's political and can therefore be excused.

Regardless of whether they're right or wrong - most of these protestors have a genuine will to help people, and at least when they're out doing their thing, don't fall back on the same lazy archetypes(or rather don't rely on them) as the right wingers do here. I'm sure someone will come up with a clever response to that though, and a bunch of obnoxious "Conservative Libertarians" will like it, and won't listen to my point elaborating on it, and that's part of the problem too.

The thing I hate the most about those moaning about the protesters, and again the right on this board is this idea that they're somehow more mature than the lefties, when all they're doing is throwing out childish insults and poor logic. If you dress a twat up in a suit, he's still a twat. Putting on the illusion of maturity does not mean you are mature.

Though their "opinion" is mostly formed on that, and their sense of privilege in the first place, so perhaps you can't distinct the two to that extent.

PeadarCo

CrystalLettuce wrote: »

What I hate about threads like this is the nasty comments and general attitude towards protesters, and those on the left in general(though not all protesters are necessarily left). A lot of these people with snarkily complain that someone like me is somehow oppressing their opinion, when it's not so much about that as the inherent lack of respect and general underlying malice to most of their posting.

It's why I can't stand the right wingers on this board. It's one thing if I don't agree with them, conversation can be had. But some of the off-hand remarks do nothing but spur further hatred. They are just nasty people, and I think we need to stop writing off our social and moral character as something that's political and can therefore be excused.

Regardless of whether they're right or wrong - most of these protestors have a genuine will to help people, and at least when they're out doing their thing, don't fall back on the same lazy archetypes(or rather don't rely on them) as the right wingers do here. I'm sure someone will come up with a clever response to that though, and a bunch of obnoxious "Conservative Libertarians" will like it, and won't listen to my point elaborating on it, and that's part of the problem too.

The thing I hate the most about those moaning about the protesters, and again the right on this board is this idea that they're somehow more mature than the lefties, when all they're doing is throwing out childish insults and poor logic. If you dress a twat up in a suit, he's still a twat. Putting on the illusion of maturity does not mean you are mature.

Though their "opinion" is mostly formed on that, and their sense of privilege in the first place, so perhaps you can't distinct the two to that extent.

The problem is even though the protesters have a genuine will to help people their solutions don't seem to me at least to be grounded in reality and would end up hurting the people who thay claim to support. They seem to be just angry and shouting impossible and contradictory statements. Also I don't think just because you are angry you have a right to do anything. An example being just because you are angry with a person not matter how justifibly you can't kill them. And secondly why didn't they stand for election in March and if they did they were rejected. So some of them a least seem to be ignoring or refusing to take part in the democratic proccess we have in this country. That process may not be perfect but at least under the system we have it is relativly easy for an independent to be elected. Also given that the majority of people seem to support the current democratic proccess I don't think it is suprising that they would take a dim view to people who are ignoring it especially given some of the demands the protesters are making.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

davoxx

hmmm wrote: »

If your doctor gives you a recommendation to address a sore toe, do you spend several years studying medicine to decide whether you agree with his recommendation or not?

i weigh it against my common knowledge and will consult a second opinion if i need to.
unfortunately for you, i have more medical knowledge than most gps, because they were so crap that i needed to educate meyself. there are A LOT of bad incompetent doctors ... that is a different rant though

but if a doctor said "mmh sore toe, drink 3l of horse piss and squeeze a lemon on your toe, 50 euro" would you go .. "sure i don't want to think about it myself and even read up about my own body ... because it would take time and i don't want to." and then after your toe rots off, would you be happy? you paid for his opinion so it can't be wrong is your argument.

hmmm wrote: »

Before you board a plane do you spend time pouring over schematics and flight manuals to decide whether you're happy with the pilots decisions?

i would, it is known that several airlines had flown dangerously just to make money ... insurance companies and regulation have helped put an end to that, but there are times when i've thought "they really should have known better"

so if you're boarding the plane and you can smell fuel and you see sparks from the engine, do you say, "gee whizz i don't know nothin about these here planes, but i lets the pilot fly so its okay, shucks" and not raise it immediately?

we all have to think for ourselves, even if we really are to lazy to ...

hmmm wrote: »

You're asking an entire populace to instead educate themselves to a level that would allow them understand and adequately decide on potentially complex legislation which is ridiculous.

why is it ridiculous, don't people live under them? they understand real world implications better than anyone else ... remember the 30km limit on the quays? that could have done with more input ...

hmmm wrote: »

We'll end up with another x-factor election, like most of our referendums have been recently where few understand the issue and people are making decisions based on who said what.

end up with? we already have x-factor elections ... there are stupid people, and yet they can still vote so your point is null and void here.
having to spend time and effort will remove the lazy, and having active debates will educate them.

hmmm wrote: »

The modern world is built on delegation, politics is no different.

it is always the modern world ... things change and we aim to change for the better.

davoxx

Suryavarman wrote: »

I hope you'll have the same attitude if someday people decide to vote away your rights.

we already have for a lot of things ...

and my attitude is irrelevant, if i don't want it i would participate in it, as opposed to now when it is just passed and i'm left wondering why.

Suryavarman wrote: »

When do we vote away other peoples rights when children are involved?

we did not vote them away, laws are passed and we loose them ... like having your children taken away from you ...

(though i think the referendum on children being born in the state was one example where we did)

Suryavarman wrote: »

If people are going to be running the country they are either going to have to give up their job or give up their free time. Politicians work full time for a reason.

that's not true. have you given up your job to reply on boards? have you given up some free time .. yes
if you don't want to 'waste'' your free time, why spend it on boards arguing against doing so?

Suryavarman wrote: »

Politicians work full time for a reason.

coz they can't do anything else? coz the kickbacks are fecking excellent? coz you get paid more that a qualified doctor?, coz it is a clique and they would fail in real life, where results are expected? then pension?

Godge

CrystalLettuce wrote: »

The problem with this is that any sort of movement against corporate greed and political corruption taking much the same for, would look like this regardless. And is automatically the new Nazis. So who are the good guys exactly? What's the right thing to do? The "Little bit of immigration fear" isn't there. If you talked to any of the people at these camps you would see they're clearly not fascists of any kind. They're nearly all social liberals which makes the comparison completely redundant, since the issue with fascism and Hitler's national socialism was that it was a kind of extreme social conservatism.

Please go over these ideas before you embarrass yourself by posting them.

Read my post. I never ever said that there was a little bit of anti-immigration mixed in the Central Bank protests, I said it was there in the very early stages of the rise of Hitler (that later developed into something much much worse). The anti-foreigner parallel with the Central Bank protests is the anti-EU/IMF rhetoric, the people who have come to our rescue, they are the bad foreigners now being villified as well as the accusation that we have given away our oil and gas resources. Like it or not, there is an anti-foreigner undertone to the Central Bank protests albeit to German and French bondholders as well as foreign oil companies.

The main parallel I was drawing was between the post-Versailles situation whereby Germany was paying vast reparations to the Allied powers that were holding back its own economy and Hitler's movement started with a demand for the reparations to stop. Today, the case being made by the protesters is that we are paying vast money back to foreign (German and French in particular) bondholders and have handed away our oil and gas with our economy suffering as a result of both. The demand now is that we should stop paying the foreign bondholders. If you cannot see the similarities.......

Hitler also eschewed the democratic process, using demonstrations and protests as a means to spread his views, all the while maintaining an anti-Government and anti-reparations rhetoric. His movement also failed to garner support in early democratic elections (parallels with the failure of ULA and SF to capitalise on anti-government sentiment in the last election) and resorted to street protests instead.

So, to sum up, I am saying there are parallels between the picture painted by Hitler's movement in the early 1920s (long before his rise to power in the 1930s) and the picture painted by the Central Bank protests. It is far too early to say if the Central Bank protests could develop in the same way - Hitler's own personality played a major role and the hyperinflation economic shocks of the time were greater than those we face today.

Many think we are repeating the economic mistakes of the post-Wall Street crash 1929, let us make sure that we do not make the same political mistakes. The way to do that is to stay within the legitimate democratic processes that work (the FF government was thrown out, remember) and stay away from mob rule through protest and demonstration.

Godge

CrystalLettuce wrote: »

What I hate about threads like this is the nasty comments and general attitude towards protesters, and those on the left in general(though not all protesters are necessarily left). A lot of these people with snarkily complain that someone like me is somehow oppressing their opinion, when it's not so much about that as the inherent lack of respect and general underlying malice to most of their posting.

It's why I can't stand the right wingers on this board. It's one thing if I don't agree with them, conversation can be had. But some of the off-hand remarks do nothing but spur further hatred. They are just nasty people, and I think we need to stop writing off our social and moral character as something that's political and can therefore be excused.

Regardless of whether they're right or wrong - most of these protestors have a genuine will to help people, and at least when they're out doing their thing, don't fall back on the same lazy archetypes(or rather don't rely on them) as the right wingers do here. I'm sure someone will come up with a clever response to that though, and a bunch of obnoxious "Conservative Libertarians" will like it, and won't listen to my point elaborating on it, and that's part of the problem too.

The thing I hate the most about those moaning about the protesters, and again the right on this board is this idea that they're somehow more mature than the lefties, when all they're doing is throwing out childish insults and poor logic. If you dress a twat up in a suit, he's still a twat. Putting on the illusion of maturity does not mean you are mature.

Though their "opinion" is mostly formed on that, and their sense of privilege in the first place, so perhaps you can't distinct the two to that extent.

Given your response to some of my posts, you are probably including me in your list of right-wingers.

I am surprised to be the subject of hatred, it is not a word I associate with political debate. I may dislike or reject an idea but I have respect for those who genuinely hold opinions. So while I may disagree with the likes of Joe Higgins and Richard Boyd-Barrett, I respect them because I accept that they genuinely believe what they stand for (in contrast I would have little respect for Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness, FF politicians and David Norris).

Using language such as hatred for people who hold certain views is a dangerous road to go down.

As for the protesters, most of them have a genuine anger but instead of respecting the democratic processes of the country, they are throwing the toys out of the pram and ignoring the democratic will of the people as expressed in the recent general election. They also appear to have been subverted by serial protesters as evidenced by the few demands they have made to date.

20Cent

When the extreme right start calling you Hitler you know your probably doing the right thing. Last desperate smears.

ed2hands

Godge wrote: »

Many think we are repeating the economic mistakes of the post-Wall Street crash 1929, let us make sure that we do not make the same political mistakes. The way to do that is to stay within the legitimate democratic processes that work (the FF government was thrown out, remember) and stay away from mob rule through protest and demonstration.

Equating the peaceful demonstations with Hilter and fascism really takes the biscuit for me.
"Eerily and chillingly similar" you said. That is so so laughable.
I think that has to be the most preposterous comparison i've ever heard in my life.
It seems there's no bounds to peoples imaginative ways to discredit the movement. You said we should stay away from "mob rule" through protest and demonstration". Now that sounds like fascism to me.

Surely you realise that that all the modern rights and priviliges you enjoy today were by-and-large achieved through having to protest for them.
Workers rights to fair pay and a 40 hour week. Civil rights. Womens rights and suffrage.

BluePlanet

ei.sdraob wrote: »

The the rhetoric we are hearing from this lot is confusing, non focused and in some cases contradicting.

They are comparing themselves to Arab Spring etc but all of those protesters have very clear aims and uniting goals, neither did any of them live in the oldest democracy of modern europe.

No they didn't. Arab Spring started as a protest against general police brutality and ill treatment. There were no clearly stated aims or goals, just gripes.

In Egypt they didn't all just randomly converge on a public square in a some ordinated effort to bring down the regime.
No, they were protesting general grievances, not articulating specific demands.
The protests changed as the situation changed.
Result:
People 1 - Elites 0

Hayte

Godge wrote: »

So, to sum up, I am saying there are parallels between the picture painted by Hitler's movement in the early 1920s (long before his rise to power in the 1930s) and the picture painted by the Central Bank protests.

So, Godwin basically?

As for opinions? Everyone has them so I don't respect people for having an opinion or for having the conviction to believe what they say. I expect it otherwise you are lying. I do respect people that can form an argument well so that it is logical, internally consistent, readable and educational with much kudos if its all of these and referenced too.

Online forums for debate and discussion should be places where there is free flow of information but in order for it to be useful for the exchange of ideas, there has to be strict rules of form, otherwise a forum becomes a node for the spread of misinformation.

I infrequently post in another debate forum where rule of form is strictly enforced, such that strawmen and other specious tactics will get you banned (whether they are employed in bad faith or ignorance). I note however that it is not enough to frighten people into behaving appropriately in a supposed place of knowledge because a type of "reverse baiting" is common there: discussion frequently degenerates into a game of point scoring until all opposing views have essentially been wiped out (as the users propagating those views have been banned). For some odd reason that seems to be enough to close a discussion out. I feel as if the point is to establish who is right, who is wrong and bugger learning anything in the process. Its a horrible place to discuss anything actually.

For any internet forum to be useful as a place of knowledge it relies on its contributors to post in good faith. Some people though are either case studies in Dunning Kruger or they are disingenuous shills. I don't know which is worse.

Godge

Hayte wrote: »

So, Godwin basically?

As for opinions? Everyone has them so I don't respect people for having an opinion or for having the conviction to believe what they say. I expect it otherwise you are lying. I do respect people that can form an argument well so that it is logical, internally consistent, readable and educational with much kudos if its all of these and referenced too.

Online forums for debate and discussion should be places where there is free flow of information but in order for it to be useful for the exchange of ideas, there has to be strict rules of form, otherwise a forum becomes a node for the spread of misinformation.

I infrequently post in another debate forum where rule of form is strictly enforced, such that strawmen and other specious tactics will get you banned (whether they are employed in bad faith or ignorance). I note however that it is not enough to frighten people into behaving appropriately in a supposed place of knowledge because a type of "reverse baiting" is common there: discussion frequently degenerates into a game of point scoring until all opposing views have essentially been wiped out (as the users propagating those views have been banned). For some odd reason that seems to be enough to close a discussion out. I feel as if the point is to establish who is right, who is wrong and bugger learning anything in the process. Its a horrible place to discuss anything actually.

For any internet forum to be useful as a place of knowledge it relies on its contributors to post in good faith. Some people though are either case studies in Dunning Kruger or they are disingenuous shills. I don't know which is worse.

Had to google godwin to find godwin's law, interesting, but you probably won't believe I knew of it when posting.

To be honest, I could have used other parallels for where angry protests with little coherence have gone in the past.

The many defenders of the IRA on this forim point to its orgins and legitimacy from the British reaction to the peaceful Civil Rights Movement. There are also other examples internationally such as the Red Army Faction. I chose the early 1920s because of the economic situation we find ourselves in and the perceived belief that the Irish people are bailing out German and French banks. But the others could have been used too.

I am not saying that those down at the Central Bank are Nazis - there was a long way from 1921 to 1942. I was pointing to the dangers of stepping outside the normal broadly accepted democratic processes and where that could lead. In the same way that we should not make the same economic mistakes as the 1920s and 1930s, neither should we make the same social and political mistakes. Respect for the law and for the democratic will of the people are paramount.

I will refrain from comment on this issue again in fear of falling foul of Godwin's Law.

hmmm

davoxx wrote: »

unfortunately for you, i have more medical knowledge than most gps, because they were so crap that i needed to educate meyself.

You have more medical knowledge than most GPs?

oooooooooook

I still haven't seen a single cogent explanation as to what the protesters are trying to achieve. I've heard lots of babble about "systems" and "elites" which largely means "anyone who disagrees with me".

BluePlanet

hmmm wrote: »

You have more medical knowledge than most GPs?

oooooooooook

I still haven't seen a single cogent explanation as to what the protesters are trying to achieve. I've heard lots of babble about "systems" and "elites" which largely means "anyone who disagrees with me".

Have you even attempted to educate yourself before posting?
It's right on the flippin home page of their website for christsakes. http://www.occupydamestreet.org/

- Reject the complete control of the ECB in dictating economic policy.
- Demand that the IMF stay out.
- Demand that private bank debt that has been socialised and put onto the people, be lifted.
- Demand that the oil and gas reserves off our coast that were given away to private corporation be returned to sovereign control.
- Demand for "real participatory democracy" where people's interests come first.
- Do not claim to have a list of solutions
- Believe the protest is part of a process of participation that will better democracy..

PeadarCo

BluePlanet wrote: »

Have you even attempted to educate yourself before posting?
It's right on the flippin home page of their website for christsakes. http://www.occupydamestreet.org/

You are aware parties that put forward these polices were by and large rejected in the last election.

hmmm

BluePlanet wrote: »

Have you even attempted to educate yourself before posting?
It's right on the flippin home page of their website for christsakes.

We've been over these vague demands for the past 1000 pages of this thread. It still doesn't make them any more coherent.

hmmm

PeadarCo wrote: »

You are aware parties that put forward these polices were by and large rejected in the last election.

They were rejected because of the actions of the elites manipulating the system. The whole system needs to come down.

In a real participative democracy, obviously those parties would have triumphed.

For an interim period after the collapse of democracy, it would be best if a small group of people were appointed to act on behalf of the people. Preferably us. Don't worry, we have your best interests at heart and will ensure the elites in society are sho...erhm removed.

BluePlanet

PeadarCo wrote: »

You are aware parties that put forward these polices were by and large rejected in the last election.

I am not an advocate of Occupy Dame Street demands.

In my post, i was performing a public service to someone that (apparently pretends?) to be ignorant of the protests demands.

If the poster was only feigning his ignorance, was he just trolling?

davoxx

hmmm wrote: »

I still haven't seen a single cogent explanation as to what the protesters are trying to achieve. I've heard lots of babble about "systems" and "elites" which largely means "anyone who disagrees with me".

oooooooooook

PeadarCo

BluePlanet wrote: »

I am not an advocate of Occupy Dame Street demands.

In my post, i was performing a public service to someone that (apparently pretends?) to be ignorant of the protests demands.

If the poster was only feigning his ignorance, was he just trolling?

Apologies for the insinuation.

hatrickpatrick

hmmm wrote: »

They were rejected because of the actions of the elites manipulating the system. The whole system needs to come down.

In a real participative democracy, obviously those parties would have triumphed.

For an interim period after the collapse of democracy, it would be best if a small group of people were appointed to act on behalf of the people. Preferably us. Don't worry, we have your best interests at heart and will ensure the elites in society are sho...erhm removed.

I'm no longer going to take you seriously after this post. I don't know if this is trolling or just willful ignorance of everything that's been said to contradict it over the course of the thread but in either case, it's too ridiculous to keep answering over and over again only to have the answers ignored.

Suryavarman

davoxx wrote: »

we did not vote them away, laws are passed and we loose them

How are laws passed if they aren't voted for?

... like having your children taken away from you ...

What does having your children taken away from you have to do with your rights been taken away from you?

(though i think the referendum on children being born in the state was one example where we did)

Ending birth tourism isn't really an example of voting away our rights.

that's not true. have you given up your job to reply on boards? have you given up some free time .. yes
if you don't want to 'waste'' your free time, why spend it on boards arguing against doing so?

Being a member of boards isn't really the same thing as having to understand new bills and vote on them every couple of days.

I spend my time on boards because I enjoy doing it, I wouldn't consider spending time on boards as a waste of time.

coz they can't do anything else? coz the kickbacks are fecking excellent? coz you get paid more that a qualified doctor?, coz it is a clique and they would fail in real life, where results are expected? then pension?

Those are reasons people become politicians. They are not reasons why being a politician is a full time job.

davoxx

Suryavarman wrote: »

How are laws passed if they aren't voted for?

voted for by who? everyone? just judges? ...

davoxx

Suryavarman wrote: »

What does having your children taken away from you have to do with your rights been taken away from you?

it stops me having my right to have my children stay with me and raise them how i see fit ...

davoxx

Suryavarman wrote: »

Ending birth tourism isn't really an example of voting away our rights.

not our rights, but the kids that were born in ireland ...

it's ironic when you consider how irish have left and had kids elsewhere only to return home and claim both nationalities ...

davoxx

Suryavarman wrote: »

Being a member of boards isn't really the same thing as having to understand new bills and vote on them every couple of days.

it is the same thing, just that with boards it's just a poll.
like i said before, the point is not forcing people to vote, but giving them the option ...

Suryavarman wrote: »

I spend my time on boards because I enjoy doing it, I wouldn't consider spending time on boards as a waste of time.

and there would be people who would like to do the same for our society ...

davoxx

Suryavarman wrote: »

Those are reasons people become politicians. They are not reasons why being a politician is a full time job.

no they are reasons why being a politician has become a full time job.

there is no reason what so ever why it could not be a part time job.