It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Dreine
reply to post by petrus4
One thing I've never really grasped is how environmentalism is claimed to be a 'liberal' issue when, in my 'fiscally conservative/socially liberal' view the environment is a human issue. We only have one planet to live on, and unless we seriously start to reassess our impact on the Earth our ancestors are going to be stuck on a world much worse and less wonderful than the one we currently enjoy.
I agree on corporate greed, to a degree. If the person is question is doing their weath accumulation in an unethical or illegal way, they should be arrested and their assets seized. However, I also believe in an honest days pay for an honest days work... if that person is seen as being worth $500000 a year or more in the eyes of the board, and if that person has done their job in an honest and estemable manner then I say 'good for them.'
Thanks for answering my question. If only the rest of the Occupy people could put their thoughts and feelings as coherently as you I think the movement could accomplish far more than it has.
Anyway... my whole point is, if you want the discussion to move beyond "yes they are/no we're not" perhaps you should stop trying to place labels, stop trying to catch us "red" handed...
A person being a Communist is not a crime nor anything to be ashamed of, it isn't something you admit... it is something you state.
And that is your pattern, I see right through you. You play up one side trying to fit in then something happens and you flip and start playing up the other.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Kali74
And that is your pattern, I see right through you. You play up one side trying to fit in then something happens and you flip and start playing up the other.
I don’t often agree with you these days but you’re certainly right about this. Petrus loves to play both sides and appears to instigate conflict between people of two opposing views.
I smell a bit of hypocrisy here, Kali. You blasted Petrus for labeling people then you throw up a picture FULL OF LABELS and explain where people fit in.
It should be a crime…it certainly borders on treasonous behavior IMO because it’s a violation of trust and allegiance to the sovereignty of our nation.
David Rockefeller once admitted that communism was created by the elites as a tool of despotism. Therefore anyone who promotes it is clearly in favor of autocratic government. That’s certainly not the American way. Any American who espouses communism in this country should rightfully be shunned. Occupy should distance itself from these fools if they ever want to be taken seriously.
Occupy should distance itself from these fools if they ever want to be taken seriously.
Coming from you, this is somewhat rich. Nobody can accuse you of playing both sides; but trolling, on the other hand?
I also don't believe that I do instigate conflict. The two sides already present here, do that perfectly adequately by themselves. You don't need my help.
Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by DavidWillts
Do you ever have anything original to say?
This is practically copy/pasted from September 2011.
Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by seabag
And yet again your ignorance shows. There is value in what they say. It is said that there is nothing new under the sun and I believe that to be true for the most part. Ideologies are born out of human personality traits that we all fall under. A mistake you Reactionaries constantly make is to not take what is valuable from failed ideologies and working them in new ways. Nor do you ever learn the lessons that brought those ideologies to revolutionary proportions. Already your ilk are on the path to armed revolution, when all peaceful options haven't been exhausted yet.
No I did not. I explained that here's a whole lot to the Left besides Communism and the difference between despotic communism and anarcho-communism. Then I explained my position.
No it should not be. The biggest threat to any Sovereignty is Reactionism which is something you participate in quite indulgently.
And yet again your ignorance shows.
There is value in what they say. It is said that there is nothing new under the sun and I believe that to be true for the most part. Ideologies are born out of human personality traits that we all fall under. A mistake you Reactionaries constantly make is to not take what is valuable from failed ideologies and working them in new ways. Nor do you ever learn the lessons that brought those ideologies to revolutionary proportions. Already your ilk are on the path to armed revolution, when all peaceful options haven't been exhausted yet.
The only fools I see are...
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by petrus4
Coming from you, this is somewhat rich. Nobody can accuse you of playing both sides; but trolling, on the other hand?
I have chosen sides and labeled myself a conservative. I don’t play the middle or work the room to stir debate, I stand on my principles and I’m unwavering. You might call that “trolling” but I call it “consistency”.
It was just my opinion, bud. I do enjoy your threads and posts though. You often force me rethink my position but usually it just reinforces the beliefs I already had!
S&F Sir!
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Kali74
I, Seabag, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
If only more people took that oath as seriously. I applaud this, seabag; and your motivations where Occupy are concerned, now do make a lot more sense to me.
Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by petrus4
If only more people took that oath as seriously. I applaud this, seabag; and your motivations where Occupy are concerned, now do make a lot more sense to me.
Uhmmm….thanks?
I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop!
I do take my oath seriously and I, too, wish more people took the same oath. Maybe we wouldn’t have communists and socialists taking over our once great country while the rest of America sleeps. Occupy will never be taken seriously by the vast majority of our country until they drop the radicals and get real.
It’s not reactionary to want to rid the country of people who violate allegiance to the principles of our democratic republic; it’s necessary. I took an oath...
That’s not civil discourse, Kali….calm down!
Why emulate a failed system?
And with regard to revolution, the only people on the streets sparking revolutionary action (many in the name of communism) is the occupy crowd.
Originally posted by beezzer
Originally posted by jacktherer
As for ows being capable of positive ends I would assert that the movement has already done several postive things such as bring communities together for various things like foreclosure defense, sustainable farming/agriculture, and fighting institutionalized racism and classism and a ishton of other isms. And I doubt that this will stop no matter how much we're clubbed or sprayed
Forclosure defense, okay, I get that. Sustainable farming/ag? Okay, I like that.
Fighting institutionalised racism? Groovy.
Fighting classism? What the frack?
How can you fight classism when you initiate it by defining yourself as the 99% vs the 1%?
Thats actually a point that myself and many occupiers ive spoken with agree on. The 'we are the 99%' thing does its job well as far as slogans go ya know summarizing the main problem very briefly but most of us agree that its very dangerous because it encourages division among mankind I.e the 100%. Many upper class folks, though far from '1%ers' associate themselves as the 1% and therefore as occupys enemy when in reality we dont hate everyone whos doing well for themselves at all we need them. Our enemy is not the wealthy but those 'supper wealthy' that dont give a fcuk about the cost to society and the environment of obtaining/creating that wealth I.e the military industrial complex, the federal reserve and other large private banking institutionse, the oil industry, the food industry (monsanto etc) the prison industrial complex, etc
Seems to me that you're enhancing the divide.