Fliers Drop on Occupy Chicago Protesters

Originally posted by ANOK

Imagine if we all stopped working, how would your GDP help you then?

Lot's of people have already stopped working Citizen.

It is because of the amazing productivity that the nation is now producing that work is no longer required.

Originally posted by Fractured.Facade

Originally posted by SLAYER69
"Fliers Drop on Occupy Chicago Protesters"


Were there any injuries?
This brutality is getting out of hand.

It's propaganda plain and simple. Sure it was from the 1%....

Stupid people are everywhere including drones that work on Wall Street.

What are your thoughts on the fliers found at occupy Phoenix?

Here is the text in these fliers:

content.clearchannel.com... (pdf file)

I don't believe anyone in the occupy movement wrote that, so... who did and why?

What happens when someone or some group starts to take this stuff seriously?

maybe the end of tyranny

on topic

these flyers could well be the modern re-run of "let them eat cake"
or rather the more modern: "eat SHT and die"

apparently somebody has nothing better to do than provoke people to violence.

thanks for the great link, has been my philosophy re authoritarians for decades

here's some relevant and thoughtful reading for anyone whose been drinking koolaid lately

The authoritarian-corporatist-militarist system victimizes untold millions of individual human beings, as well as many other forms of life as we see again today, both here and abroad. That would be a momentous evil in itself, but this particular evil is unsatisfied with only this first form of destruction.

Thus, the victims are targeted a second time, and they are forced to become collaborators in their own destruction. It is crucial to understand that these two forms of destruction are not separate manifestations of separate evils. They are the consequences of the same evil, and the two forms of lingering torture and death (psychologically at a minimum, and frequently existentially as well) are part of one overall design. I've discussed certain cultural-psychological manifestations of this dynamic in a number of essays. For an introduction to this analytic approach, I would recommend one article in particular: "Let the Victims Speak." As I stated at the outset of that essay, the nature and operation of this dynamic are very complex; it took me a few decades to appreciate its character. If the subject interests you, I therefore suggest a reading of the earlier article in its entirety.

These passages will provide a sense of the dynamic that concerns me, one that is so commonplace that most people don't even notice it:

Focus on the critical sentence: "Yet, when a victim explodes or acts out in unacceptable ways, these same officials are shocked and indignant."

What exactly are these "unacceptable ways" of exploding or acting out? Who decided they were "unacceptable"? Why is it that "reluctant school officials" will not "take definitive action" against the bullies -- thus tacitly conceding that the bullying itself is not all that "unacceptable" -- while the same officials are "shocked and indignant" when the victim protests too strongly?

This pattern, and certain of its origins, will be found throughout history, in every culture around the world. The pattern is a simple and deadly one: the oppressor -- that is, those who are in the superior position, whether they are parents, school officials, or the government, or in a superior position merely by virtue of physical strength -- may inflict bodily harm and/or grievous, lifelong emotional and psychological injury, but the victim may only protest within the limits set by the oppressor himself. The oppressor will determine those forms of protest by the victim that are "acceptable."

Think about this very carefully for a moment. The oppressor may inflict unimaginable cruelties on innocent victims -- but the victims may only protest in ways which the oppressor deems "acceptable." The profound injustice is obvious, but not in itself remarkable or unexpected: this is how oppression operates. But ask yourself about the deeper reason for the prohibition. This is of the greatest importance: the victims may only protest within a constricted range of "permissible" behavior because, when they exceed the prescribed limits, they make the oppressors too uncomfortable. They force the oppressors to confront the nature of what they, the oppressors, have done in ways that the oppressors do not choose to face.

SOURCE: Memo to the Victims: You Yourselves Will Pay for the Crimes of the Ruling Class

Originally posted by Rockpuck
A friend of mine E-mailed this to me, apparently from one of the office buildings in Chicago someone threw these down on the protesters. While it is kind of a funny rant from a trader, I think it actually highlights a very concerning trend of class warfare. It's one thing to target the ultra wealthy and the corrupt politicians .. it's another to demonize anyone and everyone with money. The point of this country is to have the right to achieve limitless success without hindrance from tyrannical governments and personal restrictions.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

edit on 10/29/2011 by Rockpuck because: (no reason given)

What is the problem here?
Sounds like fair warning to me.
What are people expecting, for them to just roll over and take another?

For the most part, the letter is true.
Stock traders and such do work those hours and conditions.

So it is ok for OWS to warn and protest upwards, but how dare those people fight back.

Originally posted by InformationAccount
Lot's of people have already stopped working Citizen.

It is because of the amazing productivity that the nation is now producing that work is no longer required.

Are you really that naive lol, or are you joking? I can't tell.

However, manufacturing as a share of the economy has been plummeting. In 1965, manufacturing accounted for 53 percent of the economy. By 1988 it only accounted for 39 percent, and in 2004, it accounted for just 9 percent.

www.thetrumpet.com...

Who suffers? The working class. Who benefits? The capitalist class.

This is why the rich-poor divide is getting ever wider.

If instead of having to rely on 'private owners' to supply 'jobs', we had access to the means to produce we would not have these problems caused by bad management of our economy by people who only care about themselves, and sell out the communities they live in.

Private ownership, capitalism, has always been the problem...

Technological capacity to produce enough to satisfy everyone's needs already exists globally and has done so for many decades. Yet needs continue to remain unmet on a massive scale. Why? Quite simply because scarcity is a functional requirement of capitalism itself.

Production today is not primarily geared to satisfy human needs but "effective demand"--when "consumers" are able to buy goods at a price which will enable enterprises producing them to realise a profit. If what people can afford falls short of what they need, increasing output to satisfy the latter would cause prices to fall--to the detriment of profit. So the need for profit conflicts with the satisfaction of human needs.

www.worldsocialism.org...

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (pronounced [ˈpruːd ɒn] in BrE, [pʁu dɔ̃] in French) (15 January, 1809 – 19 January, 1865) was a French economist and socialist philosopher who was the first individual to call himself an "anarchist" and is considered among the first anarchist thinkers. Proudhon is most famous for his assertion of "Property is theft!", in his missive What is Property? Or, an Inquiry into the Principle of Right of Government with the original title: Qu'est-ce que la propriété? Recherche sur le principe du droit et du gouvernement, which was his first major work, published in 1840...

...In his earliest works, Proudhon analyzed the nature and problems of the capitalist economy. While deeply critical of capitalism, he also objected to contemporary socialists who idolized association. In series of commentaries, from What is Property? (1840) through the posthumously-published Théorie de la propriété (Theory of Property, 1863-64), he declared that "property is theft", "property is impossible", "property is despotism" and "property is freedom". The apparent contradiction is resolved when it is realized that, in "property is theft", he was using the word to mean the type of property which created exploitative conditions. Specifically, he was referring to the means of production which labourers did not own themselves, and the system of wage labour...

...On the other hand, in asserting that property is essential for liberty, he was referring not only to the product of an individual's labor, but to the peasant or artisans home and tools of his trade. For Proudhon, the only legitimate source of property is labor. What one produces is his property and anything beyond that is not. He can be considered a libertarian socialist, since he advocated worker self-management and argued against capitalist ownership of the means of production.

eng.anarchopedia.org...

reply to post by InformationAccount


the wealth of nations is in the productivity/creativity of it's people

not in elaborate "numerological schemes"

the merchant/trader class is the one that LEAST contributes to society,
it produces/creates nothing, all it does is shuffle around that which is produced by others.

reply to post by Rockpuck


the problem is not capitalism its debt taxation thats just another form of concealed slavery. it used to be called feudalism..

reply to post by sheepslayer247


Seem those good little protesters can't live without their iphones and gadgets,clothes and many other things that is their "logistical support".

They aren't catching their food etc.

Man can't exist without people today or those evil people making everything they use on a daily basis.

Feel free to go all caveman tho but soon you will be screaming for things.

reply to post by Rockpuck


"It is our job to make money"

I never heard a truer word spoken in this kleptocracy

As if making money superseeds all other human values

Makes me sick

DEFINITION OF KLEPTOCRACY

reply to post by dreamseeker


Well excuse me for having an opinion. I don't really care about your personal situation, your issues, your destitute poverty. You think it's the rich that pay your entitlements but it's not. No, it's hard working middle class people who work their asses off and still live paycheck to paycheck. After our retirement accounts were slaughtered, our houses underwater, the value of our wages collapsing, the costs of necessities killing us.. and now we have OWS protesters wanting MORE. More free this, more free that, they want healthcare and free education, pensions and entitlement and who pays for it? You can't target the rich to give to the poor because it's fundamentally wrong to reward someone simply on the basis that they didn't achieve anything themselves. It's fundamentally wrong to the middle class as well, taking from one group and giving to another while we get nothing in return. The only ones to profit from such policies is the poor. and quite frankly I don't care how bad your life sucks, no one deserves a free ride over another person especially on someone elses dime.

Originally posted by InformationAccount

Originally posted by sonnny1

Theres a lot of Anger at the Government for keeping poor people poor.

Imagine a government,where you dont pay Taxes?

Where there is NO Fed Reserve?

That's been done before Comrade.

It's called Communism or Totalitarianism

"The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism by Goldstein - (How You Are Controlled)"
www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 29-10-2011 by InformationAccount because: (no reason given)

Actually we had no Federal Reserve,or IRS, following our Independence.Our founding fathers would be rolling in their graves.

Comrade.

If I had written that in third grade composition class, I would have been awarded a big fat "D" (extremely poor). They won't get any teacher's jobs, that's for sure.

As for landscaping, you can bet they would plant money trees and be shocked in a few year's time that the money tree isn't a tree and doesn't grow money at all.

I think a lone trouble-maker dropped those. It certainly doesn't reflect what I would expect Wall Street to say in a propagnada leaflet.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by InformationAccount

Citizen this is an untruth.

It has produced something.

Making money from money has led to an increase in the lastest GDP numbers.

I can't eat your money.

Maybe you should try

US GDP increased by 1.3% in the 2nd quarter of 2011

Q3 2011 GDP increased 2.5%

The US economy has produced tremendous growth over the last 2 quarters

I expect that 4th Quarter GDP numbers will be higher still than 3rd Quarter numbers

Let them eat money

That is the dumbest most ill conceived taunt/rant I have seen today. The reality is that what they call work is mostly sitting on your butt in front of a computer screen or talking on the phone for hours. That is not going to prepare them for middle class level of work. They tanked the market and our 401k so they are already feeding on us. What they are not going to like is when we who overwhelmingly outnumber the Wall Street bunch work for real every day are not harmed at all if they did not exist. We make things. We build things and we are the ones that create things.

Wall Street creates nothing, it builds nothing. It invents clever ways to extract more value from the productive classes. That type of invention we do not need more of we need less so if they were gone tomorrow I would just say good riddance now we are one giant parasitic organism down with one more to go.

reply to post by Rockpuck


Lol
"What's going to happen when we can't find jobs on the Street anymore?"

He says we'll take yours! LOLOLOL. No, when it crashes and they lose their money these guys prefer to jump out of windows than be poor or work "our" jobs!




Also.. he missed the point.

Originally posted by AzureSky
Talking about the 1% = talking to anyone who makes multi-millions, or billions a year.
BIG BUSINESS
MONEY IN POLITICS.

Its more like the top 0.001% that control trillions of 'digital' money. And can collapse what they want, when they want. Theres lots of money in it. Lots of money to be robbed from the planet.

No, statistically the 1% is anyone making more than $350k a year. Like that mom-and-pop Chinese restaurant down the street. Or that local hobby shop. Or that privately owned dry cleaner that doesn't put too much starch in your pants. You know, small business owners that are the backbone of the U.S. economy. The small business owners that employ 60% of the Americans holding a job today.

Down with the 1%, indeed.

/TOA

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by dreamseeker

 

Well excuse me for having an opinion. I don't really care about your personal situation, your issues, your destitute poverty. You think it's the rich that pay your entitlements but it's not. No, it's hard working middle class people who work their asses off and still live paycheck to paycheck. After our retirement accounts were slaughtered, our houses underwater, the value of our wages collapsing, the costs of necessities killing us.. and now we have OWS protesters wanting MORE. More free this, more free that, they want healthcare and free education, pensions and entitlement and who pays for it? You can't target the rich to give to the poor because it's fundamentally wrong to reward someone simply on the basis that they didn't achieve anything themselves. It's fundamentally wrong to the middle class as well, taking from one group and giving to another while we get nothing in return. The only ones to profit from such policies is the poor. and quite frankly I don't care how bad your life sucks, no one deserves a free ride over another person especially on someone elses dime.

Dude, you have some serious issues. Who do you think the resources that the rich steal belong to? The People, all of the people. How did they get rich? They bought the resources from Government OR they got rid of the people who owned the land where the resources are located and I mean got rid of them legally, or not. Either way they consolidated resources among themselves and that is how they got rich at the expense of everyone else. They have a great racket going. They own the resources that belong to everyone then they pay us (wages) to process and manufacture those resources then they take up to half back (if not more) through taxes.

If that isn't bad enough, we spend the rest of the money we earn on the very products we helped process and manufacture which in turn gives back whatever money we had left back to rich so that we may partake in the resource scam. At the end of the day, they have it all....the resources, the system, the land, water and air plus the measly few bucks we have left and if that isn't bad enough woe to whoever doesn't belong to this criminal enterprise because they will use every evil trick in the book to steal whatever is left that isn't theirs.

I don't know about you but I'd rather own and keep what I worked for so very hard and long instead of letting entitled minded rich people (who think they are entitled to everyone and everything) steal whatever I have. If that means taking back what has been stolen from us then so be it!

So when we drive the 1% out of business they will enact their terrible revenge on us by taking the jobs of all of us 99% by their sheer godlike productivity and drive us into job and homelessness? Well, must be pretty heroic people then if each of them can take the workload of nearly one hundred nine-to-five jobs every day.

reply to post by Rockpuck


You have to keep in mind that the rich people did not generate their wealth out of themselves but by being part of the society they got rich in. So for me demanding some of their wealth back and use it to stabilize this society is everything but far fetched.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


When the markets crashed and the big banks laid off thousands of people a lot of high level bankers and traders found themselves out of a job. I was actually kicked out of the industry I was in because of layoffs at the bank I worked for and every job thereafter I tried to interview for I had to compete with those once executives, traders, etc. Needless to say I don't have a masters or phd, and the job I did never required more than a 4 year degree. A lot of people like me found our selves continuously unemployed because of people on the top coming down to our level. Yes.. it is entirely possible, I know, I've had my job taken.

reply to post by roswell1987


Explain to me how "society gave them their money"