NEW YORK (Frameshop) – One of the more vexing issues for people looking at Occupy Wall Street (OWS) from the outside has been the movement’s reluctance to adhere to the norms of established politics–in particular, the refusal to elect spokespeople who communicate a set list of demands. If we ask why this is the case, the answer brings us to the idea of “direct action,” a concept which should be examined a much greater length than it has been by the media thus far.
NEW YORK (Frameshop) – One of the most common reactions to the Occupy Wall Street movement (OWS) has been for media and politicians to ask “What is it about?” Former Republican Gov. Gary Johnson is the latest visitor to Zuccotti Park to take this approach. Curiously, though, there is another version of this “What is it about?” meme emerging in the form of questions that ask “What is the difference between the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street?”
As it happens, what is going on in OWS and how to distinguish the Tea Party from OWS are both possible with a fair degree of certainty. The key is to introduce two basic terms to set the stage for discussion.
NEW YORK (Frameshop) – Every time I force myself to watch the 2012 GOP field try to out whine one another in yet another televised “debate,” I cannot understand why Ron Paul is still on that stage. The other candidates may be unprepared and insincere, but Ron Paul spews nonsense–nonsense often laced with seemingly humane calls to end wars that he undercuts with promises to abandon the sick, poor, and elderly. Huge tracts of American government for the last 150 years are against the law? A monetary system not based on gold deprives people of liberty? Good lord this stuff is puerile hokum.
But then it occurred to me why people listen to him: because the media never takes the time to explain what will happen to this country if Ron Paul’s policies were enacted.
NEW YORK (Frameshop) – Barney Frank has added his voice to the chorus of Democrats trying to close their eyes and ignore Occupy Wall Street by (OWS) with the false argument that real change only happens when people vote. Speaking to Rachel Maddow, Frank offered this nugget which passes for Washington wisdom, these days:
NEW YORK (Frameshop) – In recent comments that seemed to support the Occupy Wall Street movement (OWS), GE’s Jeff Immelt said that he empathized with people protesting, he believed that obscenely high CEO pay was a symptom of the issue more than a factor to be addressed immediately.
When reading these kinds of remarks from people who are enjoy astronomically high salaries and unrivaled influence in our system of government, many people are left with a feeling similar to that experienced after eating 30 rotten oysters in fast succession.
