Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×

:iconatheosemanon: More from AtheosEmanon





Details

Submitted on
November 25, 2011
Image Size
53.5 KB
Resolution
139×62
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
921
Favourites
23 (who?)
Comments
109
Downloads
21

License

Creative Commons License
Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
×
I judge your protests by the arrests by AtheosEmanon I judge your protests by the arrests by AtheosEmanon
A friend and I were speaking about social movements in this nation’s history and how in general social movements were usually met with mass arrests for those doing the protesting, and in some cases deaths as well. My friend who, full disclosure, is a conservative republican who then countered my argument saying how a group he supports the tea party has had no known arrests and that shows how justified their cause and how unlike the occupy wall street people they know how to conduct themselves… I shall touch back on this towards the end..

It should be stated that when I say arrests I am speaking of not only the number of people arrested which below I will show a long history of such but also show of the naïve people who expected help from those whose main job it was to enforce the laws on the books. It should also be stated that I am not marginalizing protests where people were not arrested merely showing that arrests does not mean that a protest is not justified nor predicated on liberty and justice which was what got me writing this.

Note: I did not go too in depth in any one subject usually just writing a few paragraphs, I am sure a quick google search will support everything I have said as the truth, as well as tell you a whole lot more information on the few subjects below as well as some other movements that I did not cover… it would be impossible to cover the hundreds of social movements that have occurred in American history by city, by state, and even by country…


A. M.-We can look at the abolitionist movements where men and women who were fighting for the abolition of slavery were arrested many times. At times these movements did turn violent as those who were opponents of the peaceful rallies of some of the abolitionist movements would come with sticks and guns to beat up on the protestors.

I could not pass this part without mentioning people like John Brown who led a revolt against the laws by action, where he and several of the men he led attacked slave settlements where their goal was to actively end slavery by what they thought were attacking those that actively stood in the way of liberty, those who owned slaves. Brown was later arrested and killed for his actions. I say this only to show that where peaceful resistance were shown to not work a man decided to take another route, one that caused his death yet dying for a cause of liberty for millions is something I must stand behind.

With also looking at the abolitionist movement what did we also see? Were the police simply bystanders? Sorry to tell you this; but for the most part the police are there to maintain the law, the police are there to keep order and maintain the status quo. It would be very naïve to expect help from a group whose main job is to maintain order and work with the laws on the books when you are by definition protesting the very laws on the books for a sense of justice that you believe is not there or from a law that is there yet that you believe to not being practiced.



[link]
W. S. The next movement I would look at is the women’s suffrage movement when American women were fighting for their equal rights under the law. Particularly the right for women to vote and hold political office the same as their male counterparts could. During this movement important women to the movement were arrested, such as a group of women led by Susan B. Anthony who were all arrested for voting when of course it was illegal for a woman to vote.

In 1913 on the day before the inauguration of President Wilson, Thousands of women were protesting for the rights of women, hundreds of them were attacked and injured by those opposing the rights for women. There was never any arrest made.

In 1917, hundreds of women were arrested for their attempt to bring rights to women across the country. Nearly 200 of them served jail time and some claimed to have been brutalized by their jailers, the very people who were supposed to guarantee their safety while incarcerated.

As with the previous movement, I shall say yet again it would be naïve of you to expect help from the police, it would be naïve to challenge a law and expect help from a group of people whose main job is to enforce the law on the books. Now, I wish to be certain to not smear all police as being this way, yet I would say all social movement that have shown themselves to be of importance started with defying a law… it has been this way since the founding of this country. The founders defied the laws stating the supremacy of Britain… You cannot have a true social movement that will get recognized without going against the unjustified laws that may be on the books.



L.M. The labor movement has a long history of not only arrests but killings as well. I will start with The Battle of Blair Mountain where hundreds of miners fought private companies for their right to unionize, for safe working conditions and a livable wage. During this gun battle, which is called one of the largest civil battles in American history since the civil war, which took place in West Virginia 15,000 coal miners fought against the sheriff’s department, the State Police, The US Army and a private detective agency. All of which actively fought against the workers gaining worker rights. Any stepping outside of the law was met with charges of treason by police officers, some convicted many others not.

In this battle you had Sheriff Don Chafin who received hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to fight against the workers unionizing, of which he ordered his men to arrest and imprison any coal miner who wished to organize and unionize usually with trumped up charges.

Then you have the battle of Matewan, which once again was a fight between labor groups, people who wanted to unionize and the private companies who hired thugs to kill those trying to organize. The private company known as Baldwin–Felts Detective Agency was hired to stop the people from unionizing by evicting them from their homes.. which had hoped would make them move and do away with the attempt to unionize. They attacked the town of Matewan where seven of the private detective agencies were killed, and four townspeople were killed, including the mayor of the town.

The police Chief Sid Hatfield and about two dozen other people was arrested for the death of one of the Private Detectives… but they were all acquitted,. When going to another trial at a later date Hatfield was shot and killed by the brother and an associate of one of the private detectives that had died in the battle of Matewan

As with the previous incidents, for the most part the law was against the miners and their right to unionize, as previous stated not all of the law were like this evidence of such men like Sid Hatfield who fought against the abuses happening to people who attempted to unionize, who was arrested and eventually killed in his fight to help the workers and stop the abuses.



L.M.-C-L: When speaking of the labor movement it cannot be covered without mentioning the child labor movement. Children were often used in mines because of their small frames they could squeeze in and place charges in the rock where a grown person could not fit into, this throughout the time caused the death of many children.

Yet when speaking of this it is not just dangerous at time but it is also unjust in that the children generally did the same job as their adult counterparts yet were not paid nearly as much. While there are many of those who advocated for the abolishment of child labor laws, one of the most well-known people was Mary Harris “Mother” Jones [more commonly known simply as Mother Jones. Jones was arrested several times in her fight to get equal pay for the young workers as well as the abolition of child labor laws as a whole.

In 1908 during her work trying to get coal miners in Paint Creek, West Virginia to unionize. During this strike armed men hired by the Coal mine owners to kill the strikers opened fire with machine guns on the crowd.. in this a guard was killed and as such Jones was arrested on conspiracy to commit murder and other charges..

she was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison, though she got very sick while in prison and just a few months after this her sentence was overturned by the senate in which she was found to be innocent of the charges.

In 1913 she was involved in yet another strike and was found guilty and spent nine weeks in prison… she was deported and then found her way back … where she was arrested yet again.

Like previous incidents the police in most case did nothing to help those being picked on. Ironically after the labor movement you now have many police unions and the majority of cops in America belonging to some type of union. Yet like previous movements only a naïve person would expect the help of the police whose job in a general sense is to keep order and maintain and fight on behalf of the laws that are on the books… so to expect help from a people who by definition are to uphold the law while you are fighting to change it is not smart at all.



G.R.M. – I will also discuss briefly the gay rights movement. I do not think any person can speak to the gay rights movement in America without speaking of the Stonewall Riots which was a series of at times violent clashes between gay rights opponents and police after years of police and government persecution of the gay community.

There were very few clubs, diners, and other businesses that allowed openly gay people to come to their places. Because of this many homosexuals started opening their own establishments, generally clubs where gays, lesbians, trans people could go, be welcomed and so on… yet this of course cause a problem. Police would raid these establishments since homosexual sex was still illegal during the 60s

[link]

It was not until 2003 when the last of the sodomy laws were repealed, sodomy laws of course made any sex between people of the same gender illegal though the main focus of this law were generally gay men.

When speaking of gay rights it would be hard not to bring up several men.

One mentioned below is Bayard Rustin, an openly gay civil rights icon, the chief advisor to Martin Luther King, who also in his later life advocated and was a proponent for gay rights in America and who testified in 1986 in front of the New York state Senate in which he said
“Today, blacks are no longer the litmus paper or the barometer of social change. Blacks are in every segment of society and there are laws that help to protect them from racial discrimination. The new "niggers" are gays. . . . It is in this sense that gay people are the new barometer for social change. . . . The question of social change should be framed with the most vulnerable group in mind: gay people.”

Which challenged the notion that social change was predicated solely on racial and gender injustices. Challenging the social mantra of somewhat conservative thinking of their view of family of only man and women and any who dared to step out of this could expect to be demonized.

When also speaking of gay rights mentioning Harvey Milk who was a huge proponent of the gay rights movement and was the first openly gay person to be elected to public office in California. Milk got into politics after seeing hundreds of people what he believed to be illegally arrested and being generally picked on for being homosexuals



C.R.M. you cannot speak of social movements in America without speaking of the civil rights movement. I decided to connect this with the labor union movement since a key figure in both movements was Martin Luther King Jr. A man who fought for the rights of black workers to unionize and at the time of his death he was in town to protests with the sanitation workers so that they may unionize.

Yet moving on the civil rights movement which is more than labor, which is more than children’s rights, which is more than woman’s rights and gay rights and so on…

King protested at many venues and was arrested quite a few times, in order to try to make the people lose favor king was smeared as a communist, anti-American… he had his phones tapped many times, was tailed by federal agents to try and get dirt on him and those he was around. During his life MLK was imprisoned nearly 30x for the fight for civil rights for people he believed were not being given them.

When speaking of the civil rights movement you cannot do so without discussing the mass demonstrations that took place on college campuses, marching onto public places, peaceful resistance which had thousands of people arrested, dozens of people killed, which had women raped and beaten by the opposing people

You had people like civil rights leader James farmer who led peaceful protests yet who reported how police beat up protesters, how many people were arrested, himself included for peacefully protesting on what was public ground.

You have men like Bayard Rustin, an openly gay man who was the chief adviser of Martin Luther king, who, himself was arrested for being a homosexual in his younger years which was considered illegal.

The civil rights section of this incorporates all of the movements previously mentioned. From the abolitionist movements, from the labor rights movements, from the women’s rights movement, from the gay rights movement, to the abolition of child labor laws and from many of the other civil rights and social movements that one has taken part in our history, where the people were usually met with mass arrests and mass injustices against the them usually by public officials as well as the police.


W.U. To wrap this up I will get back onto the premise that caused this where a friend was speaking of how the tea party movement is more justifiable because they have had no one arrested. To say that is to say all of the major civil movements in American history which granted rights to millions people were not justified because people were arrested. Currently in the Occupy Wall Street Movement thousands have been arrested, several hundred arrested just a day or so ago in the “day of action” when they were marching around New York City. To say this is not a justifiable movement because people are being arrested make no sense given the historically correlation between civil protests and mass arrests.

As with the other movements, it would be naive to expect help from police in general. Police are there to protect and abide by the very laws that you are now challenging. They are there not be sympathize but to enforce. I have seen very few social movements in this nation's history, if any, where the police in general sided with those challenging the very laws that they swore an oath to uphold. So it does not come at any surprise when I see police using pepper spray intended for bears, not people, at a minimum of 15 feet away... spraying it at point blank range in the eyes of people. It does not surprise me when I see police shooting rubber bullets at protesters, it does not surprise me when I hear the stories of police enclosing protesters in a small areas in order to arrest and pepper spray them more, it does not surprise me when I hear these things because history tells us that the law enforcers are there for just that, enforcing the very laws that you are now protesting, that you are now challenging.... no one ever said that change was easy and no one ever said that true change happens overnight... it is a long and hard fight for justice, for some resemblance of liberty... for some distant memory of the idea of liberty that is the ideal of us all...

To connect previous person to this you have the MLK Quote:
"You can't talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can't talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You're really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry.... Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong... with capitalism.... There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism".

The OWS group, usually called the 99% are people who are doing just that. Who believe that to address social progression you must also take the money out of politics. You must hold politicians accountable, yet make sure that money does not drown out the want of the people. They also want realistic regulation, they are not “anti-American”, nor do they want to see American destroyed. Quite the contrary they wish for America as a nation and its citizens to flourish … not just a few select people making record profits as the nation goes into record debts, as 1/6 of the country now lives below the poverty lines, as we do nothing to address the over 100K Americans that die each and every year from a lack of or no medical coverage, how we continuously cut education and wonder why America has went from being in the top 10 of all academic subjects worldwide to now being in the 20s-30s range in many of the academic subjects.

So, while I may not agree with the tea party to say they are more “justified” because they have not been arrested makes no sense in an historical; social movements in the nation’s history. If you wish to be a tea party person, great, have at it yet saying you are more justified and as such have a better message because no one is arrested should make you evaluate why that is.

In many social movements in our nation’s history those involved in social movements were challenging the establishment, were arrested, beaten, and in some cases killed. If you say this group is wrong because they are being arrested and beaten, even veterans who have taken to the streets have been beaten by officers. I believe history will be on the side of those from Occupy Wall Street, yet with respect to the Tea party, have you never wondered why the establishment for the most part are not against you? That those in power do not see you as a threat to their profits? … it is because you are nothing more than pawns being used as a chess piece by those in power.


As always, the views with respect to the opening and closing is all my opinion and myself as a liberal, progressive and democratic socialist will not lie and say that there is no bias based upon my views because I am sure there more than likely is. Yet it does not take away from the historical facts listed above of mass arrests of people who challenged the status quo and who would not sit by and do nothing.

As always comrades,
Let knowledge be that truth, which portrays humanity, condemns malevolence; that respects the differences in others while abandoning the hatred and misconceptions of the past.
-Emanon
Add a Comment:
 
:iconpeteseeger:
PeteSeeger Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Student Writer
In the words of Winston Churchill "You have enemies? Good! You believe in something enough to stand up for it!"
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
That is a great quote and something I agree with. Thank you for the comment and the fave of the piece
Reply
:iconpeteseeger:
PeteSeeger Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Student Writer
You're welcome. I'm conflicted in my beliefs about Churchill, but all in all he was a good man.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I completely agree, he has points for everyone to enjoy...for me it was his push for a national health service which has lasted today... While quite different, I see Thatcher as similar in that, the conservatives say SHE HATED SOCIALISM!!!.. while she expanded their national health service - - pass that her other economic policy goals left much to be desired, in my opinion.
Reply
:iconpeteseeger:
PeteSeeger Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Student Writer
Don't get me started on Thatcher.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Thatcher and Reagan, two people who could arguably be seen as great enemies to the middle class of their countries.. are conservative heroes..
Reply
:iconpeteseeger:
PeteSeeger Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Student Writer
I have a lot of conflicting views of them. More positive for Reagan than Thatcher.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I am no fan of Reagan, cutting education by 18.6%, revving up this so-called drug war, ... then there is the whole "Reaganomics" which even his own economic adviser Bruce Bartlett says is a failure but hey, Reagan, the great, 2nd coming said it was okay so many GOP still push the trickle down economic failing theory
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconeehills:
EEHills Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I think you're right - but I'd like to point out that this isn't just true in the USA, but in Canada too, my country. This is because it is true across continents and throughout history. Change that threatens those in power tends to produce an unpleasant response from those in charge, and from those in charge of upholding the laws of that time and place.

I think you may also be right about the Tea Party, although admittedly I don't like the Tea Party.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I know that this is not just true in the USA, but since I am in America, I know about the history of our civil rights movements than I would about the several movements in Canada, England, France etc.. I know of a few movements in each for rights that resulted in some arrests but I do not know enough about many in each country to write a piece such as this.

I agree with you on the tea party, they are not arrested because they are no threat to those in power... in fact, they seem to be the lap dogs for those in power.
Reply
:iconeehills:
EEHills Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Yeah, just thought I'd mention it because it strengthens your point. Also, I get slightly tired of the discussion(not yours in specific, internet in general) being so America-centric and thought I'd bring in a wider perspective.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jun 22, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
That is cool, you should do one about the movements in your country and I will be more than happy to link it in the artist comments on mine :thumbsup: But yes, since most of the users tend to be American on these sites that is why most of the news focuses on the issues with the given country of the user.
Reply
:iconspat500:
Spat500 Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012
You know your history, exactly. :D I almost thought this was anti-occupy bait trap lol at first.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Lmao, perhaps many people did and that is why this has lower faves than my other political pieces, they may have thought I Was saying that arrests made it a bad movement...

Thank you for the fave.
Reply
:iconspat500:
Spat500 Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012
Hahaha yeah thankfully I read before I made a foolish judgement. Usually when it comes to arrests they are for stupid things. A lot of injustice happening as well.

Well you're very welcome!
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
:thumbsup: I agree, which is why I named it that way, in order to change the theory that arrests automatically means justice has been served
Reply
:iconspat500:
Spat500 Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012
Yeah, what I hate the most is when one simply stands in the streets along with the other activists, they get swarmed violently and beat down on the ground one by one. Fine if you're going to arrest someone you don't need to be a fucking Nazi Fascist pig about it is what I say. You know none of the Occupy protesters pose even close to any kind of threat that would cause physical harm to the public or police.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Gandhi in his greatness spoke to this, "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

They tried to ignore OWS, then they tried to laugh at them as nothing more than a "counter protest" of the tea party, you are not at the fight you stage... and then you win, perhaps that will happen in November when the people throw out the tea party bums in congress, maybe it will come later on but I do know it will come sooner or later.
Reply
:iconspat500:
Spat500 Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012
Awesome statement. Except we're different from the tea party in a lot of ways. Although we may share similar things from what they wanted. ^^
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Jul 4, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
That is why it is called a "counter protest" the opposite of their conservative wants.

OWS could learn a few things from the tea party, the power is congress, which is why rather than protesting, the tea party spent most of their time getting people elected, as OWS has several people running for office now
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconnlmchaos12:
nlmchaos12 Featured By Owner May 12, 2012
Tea Party doesn't need 'No Rape Zones'
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner May 12, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I have been to many occupy movements, and saw no "no rape zones" that works under the premise that there are acceptable places to rape someone... is that all you truly have?
Reply
:iconnlmchaos12:
nlmchaos12 Featured By Owner May 14, 2012
Then why is OWS on the news for violence so often?
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner May 14, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
What is "often" ... if you look at the history of social movements, there is always a fringe who are violent. I would implore you to look at Gandhi, MLK, Debs, Rustin etc ... who spoke to the violent fringe. Yet to use a fringe, a small minority to try and smear groups 100x bigger does not meet the basic merits tests of generalizations and I would hope you would come up with something better than the use of a minority to generalize a much larger movement.
Reply
:iconivanturoc:
IvanTuroc Featured By Owner Mar 28, 2012
what does it take to get occupy from a movement to reality? What were the key elements that got the civil rights movement from protests to a form of reality?

Congressmen enjoy the freedom of "executive privilege" where they are not held accountable for their actions while in office. They merely have to imply their actions incurred national security and they can commit murder, steal, whatever they want to do really. As long as they hold that kind of power in office. Little is going to change I am afraid.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Mar 28, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Well from my perspective..all movements are in reality. If you mean what would it take for them to make an impact, I believe they have, you now have people on the conservative/republican sides speaking of economic inequality over the past 3-4 decades.

Which is why in several of my pieces I advocate for greater accountability to them and for their accounts to be made public records... why must you hide who are donating to your campaigns unless you have something to hide?...
Reply
:iconcapricornicis:
Capricornicis Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2012  Student Digital Artist
You use Dr.King a lot in here, but you seem to ignore when this man protested, the vast majority of his preaching were to be peaceful, being law biding citizens, and those who fallowed generally did this. They were arrested a simple grounds of racism. Actually your examples are mind numbing that you even compared to the Occupy. These are genuine peaceful movement and are targeted because of old prejudices.

Occupy has had a history of not being peaceful, members are known of commenting serious crimes, and just disrupting people lives. The police would go after them and generalize them.

Ten there is simple fact, there is no clear answer as to what Occupy stands for as whole all these other had a clear message.

As for the establishment not against the Tea Party...Ok I might have missed something there. Today is a new age in America. The establishment is the government, the media, and entertainment.

The media and entertainment both have verbally attacked the Tea Party. Members of the government has called them 'racists', mirroring those of the media and entertainment. The reason why the majority of America likes the Tea Party is the reason why they never got arrested over Occupy: they are not violent.

I am not sure what you are saying, but I agree with what the stamp states. I judge a protest on its arrests, too, but the context and actions should go first.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Mar 26, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
I disagree with your first premise of “ignore when this man protested” since the point of the piece was not Dr. King and unsure how you figured I mentioned him a lot, in 2 pages of writing he was only mentioned 5 times, 3 of those times was simply showing his connections to his advisers and so on so only two of the times was actually specifically speaking of things he had done.

If you studied many of the labor movements that I had mentioned overall they all were all peaceful.
I shall go through a short list right now.

Woman’s suffrage consisted of for the most part women holding signs protesting for their rights… and for this they were jailed, beaten and in some cases raped.

Abolitionist movement –were for the most civil disobedience where most of the movements were about citizens protesting and scholars challenging the laws on the books… yet I also did mention men like John Brown who early in his life was simply a protestor before taking a more direct line of action.

The labor movement, overall consisted of workers striking, workers blocking and slowing production down for the right to unionize, of which since you said I mention him too much … he was a big proponent of strikes, marches etc for union rights. Yet then you have things like the battle of Blair Mountain when you had a private company hire thugs who killed a police captain, who killed union leaders and who eventually fought against the union workers…

Gay Rights movement, which consisted of mostly protests and trying to elect more gay friendly senators. King’s wife was largely involved in the movement and I will take her word that if he had been alive, like Bayard Rustin one of his top advisers that King would be greatly involved in the Gay rights movement.

Civil rights movement which is where he was mentioned the most regarding him personally, was mostly protests, yet there were people who yes, tried to secure their own neighborhoods as you had police coming in and killing people for no other reason than their skin color ..

These are the only sections or rather broad right movements that were discussed in this piece and it was not really about this person or that person but to discuss how in all major civil rights movements of our time and in the past there have been mass arrests and thus saying that the tea party movement is more liberating because they have had no arrests makes no sense.

… and of the movements I spoke of, the vast majority of them were peaceful… I do not know about law-biding since at the time many of whom were arrested for just assembling peacefully … so I supposed that would depend on your reading of mid to late 1800s and the way the law was enforced to the mid-1900s and the way the law was enforced… so as stated, I greatly agree with you when you say I am ignoring his message since overall all of the movements I mentioned were peaceful movements on behalf of the protesters whether they were marching, striking, holding signs, refusing to work for unequal pay for equal work and things of that nature. As well as disagree with the “law biding citizens” since I am sure you know the law, particularly in the 1800s to women, and in many parts of the souths in the 1900s to blacks were not equal and as such if a group got arrested for protesting .. they may not be considered law biding by those standards but by my standards they would be.

I also disagree with your premise of “they were arrested on a simple grounds of racism” since most of the movements I mentioned were not about race, they were about gender equality, homosexuality, child labor, unions… pretty much only one movement I mentioned was specifically about race.

It is not “mind numbing’ since the point of the piece was the discussion of protests and arrests, I have been to several occupy wall street movements around the country and OVERALL, they were quite peaceful.. so I do not judge the lot by judging a few select pieces. But since you said it is mind numbing, might I share with you a MLK Quote?

In a speech to his staff in 1966 he said
“You can’t talk about solving the economic problem of the Negro without talking about billions of dollars. You can’t talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You’re really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry… Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong…with capitalism… There must be a better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a Democratic Socialism.”

That is what OWS is talking about, the economic problem in America, to quote Bernie Sanders, who both politifact and snopes has said his statement was true

“1970s. In the mid-1970s, the top 1 percent earned about 8 percent of all income. In the 1980s, that figure jumped to 14 percent. In the late 1990s, that 1 percent earned about 19 percent.. in the year 2007, the top 1 percent of all income earners in the United States made 23.5 percent of all income,”

So I see nothing “mind numbing” by discussing the ever-widening economic inequality gap of this country. Or discussing what the OWS people are discussing, that it is shameful in the richest country in the world to have 50 million Americans living below the poverty line, I do not think it is mind numbing to discuss that in the richest country in the world to have 150K Americans dying each year, which is 5% of our population increase, because of a lack of medical coverage. .. reminding you that in the early 90s a study was done to say that 45K Americans were dying because of a lack of medical coverage that is when the Republicans first proposed their single payer mandate.. and now as of 2007 you have 150K Americans dying and now that Obama is proposing a single payer health insurance …

So I must disagree with you that it is “mind numbing” to compare the movements, both were about discussing the woes and inequalities of a society of the average man.

I would disagree that “Occupy has had a history of not being peaceful” overall if you look at the hundreds of protests over the year in the many states they have been overall peaceful and I will not smear the whole OWS movement because a few groups got violent … that would even do a disserve if you studied the civil rights movement you would see that several smaller groups also got violent and would shoot at police and such.. am I to smear the entire civil rights movement because of this or look at it from an overall perspective?

Well disrupting people’s lives … could also be attributed to every movement I mentioned, striking disrupts people’s lives, marching disrupts people’s lives, … women being beaten and raped for trying to get their rights disrupts the lives of people.. if it is not disrupting the lives then it is failing. As the great reporter Finley Peter Dunne once said
“Comfort the afflicted, and afflict the comfortable.”

If you are not making the average person aware of the inequality of the nation enough that they wish to get involved then nothing will ever change.

I shall assume you meant “then” because “ten there is” I admit did not make much sense.

There has been an OWS manifesto for months, so unsure where you get the there is no clear answer as to what they stand for… I believe their manifesto which was co-written by several big OWS groups from around the country speaks rightly to what they stand for.

The government is the establishment.. well in that government half are more left leaning and half are more right leaning so in your mind only half of the establishment is against them? … Not agreeing with them does not mean there is a cohesive agenda to do away with them. This is not the McCarthy era where if you are a tea party person you will lose your job, your spouse will lose their jobs, your entire history will be combed over with a fine tooth comb and you will be surveyed as a terrorist for trying to bring down the country.

Which “media” media is not one big idea of everyone agreeing, you have more left leaning media outlets who may not agree with the tea party and speak of it, then you have more right wing media outlets who may not agree with OWS and speak against it… so I fail to see the point you were trying to make in saying the media is against them because they are not beholden to them in one universal stand. Using your premise I could also say that the media is against OWS [but I won’t] because some, more conservative leaning media outlets have showed them negatively.

So let me get this straight, one member of the government telling his views on the tea party means the entire government is against them? I do not follow your logic.. Do I believe the tea party overall is racist? .. No. Do I find some of the tea party people who refer to him as coon are racist? Yes. Yet I do not smear ALL of the tea party as racist and neither did this piece.

I have seen no unbiased study which said the “majority “ of America like the tea party, in the same token I have seen no unbiased study which said the majority of Americans like OWS. When you look at the issues, the majority of Americans do not believe we should balance our budget on social security and medicare, the majority of americans do believe we should invest more in our schools, the majority of Americans do believe that we have an ever growing economic inequality mode of production.. this is not just leftists, this is also conservatives and moderates.

The stamps is saying what it means to say, that simply because there are arrests does not make it an unjustified or not a protest of liberty when we look at the history of protests and the amount of people who were going against establishment trains of thoughts or the men and women who were beaten and the women who were raped.

I am not saying you cannot support the tea part because who you support or do not support is not of my concern. I am saying that if you, well my friend who originally said it, is going to say a movement is not a good cause because there have been arrests then that flies in the face of every social movement in our nation’s history.
Reply
:iconfuiron:
Fuiron Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2012
What do the Tea Party folks stand for?
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
T.E.A. Party stands for the "Taxed Enough Already Party"...even though their taxes have been lowered and business tax rates are lower than it has been in decades
Reply
:iconfuiron:
Fuiron Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2012
So, it is tax protest? This explains their dislike of a Democrat president in some ways, but why did they split away from the Republicans? Isn't less taxation the POINT of many conservatives?
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
It is a tax and a conservative movement. They do not like democrats because.... democrats pushed for the repeal of DADT while most tea party people thought it should have stayed in place, many tea party Republicans are amending state constitutions to say marriage is only between a man and a woman, democrats are challenging those bills as unconstitutional, ... I do not understand your "This explains their dislike of a Democrat president in some" If you look historically more debt and deficit have been gained under Republican presidents than democrats.. this to me explains their ignorance of history.
Reply
:iconfuiron:
Fuiron Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2012
Ignorance of history seems a disease of many people, including at times myself. In general, High Schoolers are taught that Democrats do not worry about taxes, while Republicans are to be against them. Hence, when hearing about social programs, the average person imagines taxes rising, and hearing about cutting government programs (such as education) imagines taxes being lowered. I do not expect people to be smarter than me (and I took years of courses to figure this stuff out even that far).
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
In my High School we did not learn things along the lines of party, we learned what liberals and conservatives valued and what "pet projects" each value and how each would approach different problems and what historically has been shown to work or what would have worked.

If you simply invest heavily in education you would cut A LARGE PORTION OF YOUR DEBT, because higher education means lower abortion rates and unwanted pregnancies, means less people dependent on government programs, means more entrepreneurs and as such more people employed and so on.. yet every few years we cut education.

As education has been cut .. you see our debt rising even more as more people because of a lack of education become dependent on the system.

I am a autodidact, I am self taught so never saw the need for courses yet I do wish to take a few classes as that may look well when I get into politics.
Reply
:iconfuiron:
Fuiron Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2012
*nods* Yes, indeed. As for learning by myself, I enjoy it, but I like having company, too. Other people can offer insights I cannot see, and their ways of thinking can be truly alien.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Feb 6, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Well being an autodidact does not mean you do not take the views of others. I can read the views of others I may disagree to either reaffirm my views or see what it is about their views I do not like or how I would do better. Such as Ayn Rand, good general ideas yet I would approach in a much different ways than her stand by and just let the market handle it approach.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconwerejaguar:
werejaguar Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011
Great job, and all I have to say is that when it came to the tea party people it seems that they were older and more likely to be armed than say the ows people are.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
If Occupy Wall Street happened any place else you may have seen guns. Since the gun laws in New York are quite strict but since their message is reform not revolution like the tea party that of course is another reason they did not have guns. They wish to reform the system, hold politicians accountable and so on.. the tea party speak more of the overthrow of the federal government

Thanks for the fave as well
Reply
:iconwerejaguar:
werejaguar Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011
You're welcome and yeah I don't doubt that for one minute. That is why I think the tea party are the more dangerous of the two, that and they have electoral sucess already.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
Sadly some of the stuff I hear from the Republicans remind me of a man I respect and who is on my influence map
[link]

"while the state exists there can be no freedom when there is freedom there will be no state"
-Vladimir Lenin

Funny if they knew they sounded like Lenin they would shut up about the evil state or perhaps embrace their inner revolutionary hahaha
Reply
:iconwerejaguar:
werejaguar Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011
Maybe, maybe not, I swear these Republicans are like old people complaining about young people skateboarding. They are a geneation if not more behind in their way of thinking and think that if they can be ignorant or bigoted enough they can go back to their "good old days".
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
lmao @ old people since their party is called the GOP .. Grand Old Party.

They are just Tories ... I often laugh at how similar they are in their want for a liberal economy, a state's right supremacy and yet everything they advocate for must be done at the federal level. But hey, I fully support them if they want to take their state and leave the US *whistles*
Reply
:iconwerejaguar:
werejaguar Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011
so do I, as long as those states are called Alabama, Mississppi, South Carolina and Utah
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 26, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
Such a shame, the women in Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina are naturally thick and sexy...
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconmechatails7218:
MechaTails7218 Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011
Well said, good sir. Just a word of advice, put a "read before commenting" tag or whatever it is before the article because someone might misinterpret this as an anti-OWS piece.

I like how this shows how real movements, not astroturfed ones like the tea party, are met with opposition from the establishment. A corrupt government won't play nice when it's met with opposition, and will make up and use flimsy excuses to attack them. Besides direct opposition with police raids, they will also use plants like rabblerousers to make the movement look bad, the media will use strawmen fringers to demonize the movement. They know they can't win if the middle and poor united against the wealthy, as we outnumber them 99:1.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
To be quite honest good sir, if someone comments on something with their preconceived notions of what something may say or may not say then they are the very people who go into an election booth and vote straight ticket... the same mindless people who will serve better use as slaves rather than leaders... if one is serious in their ventures then they should not have to be told to read something before commenting it. I can lead someone to the ideal but I cannot make it theirs...

I agree with your assessment, like that one guy who had an antisemitic sign at the occupy wall street ... Fox news and all of the right wing stations showed that one man for weeks what they DID NOT show is what happened after that. When the OWS people were confronting that man asking him to leave because this was not a hateful movement and so on... Fox did not play that because it does not fit their narrative of the OWS people being antisemitic evil commies who want to destroy America.

Instead like the tea party, the right wing narrative is to smear them as evil people. Let us not forget that they did the EXACT same thing with Martin Luther King Jr. they called him a communist, they said he was an subversive agent to the American way of life and wished to destroy it...

The smart are often challenging the ideals of the powerful to make life better for the many at the expense of the self.
-Emanon

This is the way of all true social movements, a small group fighting, dying for an ideal that is greater than the self, the ideal of liberty.
Reply
:iconmechatails7218:
MechaTails7218 Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011
True, true.

We should be careful with throwing out the left vs. right phrasing. While Fox News is right winged, and they blatantly set up propaganda in favor of the big corporations and the Republican party, the left vs. right war is one of the biggest tools these crooks use to divide and distract the people. With the vast majority of both parties in the pockets of big corporations, they capitalize in on the "We need to vote a Democrat/Republican in because we can't let a Republican/Democrat screw us over" line of thinking. OWS has people on both sides of the isle and people in between them coming together to fight the real enemy, the last thing we need is a splintering of the movement.

Also, if you ask me, a good chunk of the movements in history have been about a form of class warfare in one way or another. During the abolitionist movement, who held the most slaves back then? The rich plantation owners. Slaves were expensive to buy and upkeep, so only those that had a lot of money could keep buying more slaves and gruel to keep them fed. Women's rights? If women got the right to vote and run for office, that's a huge variable/group to cater to that might not vote in your favor if you play your cards wrong. Which would make it harder for a politician to be corrupt, including ones that are bought out. It would raise women from a subhuman like class to a human one. It goes on. And these movements had the exact same opposition throughout history: people that are mislead through misinformation through various dubious sources, or misunderstand the reason for them, or are just plain ol' hateful about change and would rather cut the nose off to spite the face.
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
*compromise on policy [not police]
Reply
:iconatheosemanon:
AtheosEmanon Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
I do not think it is a tool to have a set of principle and are willing to go against those who oppose those views through your last breath. If a man does not stand on a set of principles that he would put above all else then what good is he? I use the term right wing in the sense of what the “right” or more conservative leaning groups have been known for throughout history, particularly the socially conservative groups in this country’s history. Such as the limit of the individual in conjunction for a business or economic venture. I wear my politics on my shoulder and they are definitely to the left of many, I am an unapologetic liberal, I am an unapologetic progressive and I am an unapologetic democratic socialist if these things would divide me from a group that I would not agree with on my best of compromising days then so be it. I am more than willing to compromise on police, but I shall never be willing to compromise on principle. This is not a dividing tactic it is a simple truth of what one holds dear personally vs what has been shown to work historically. If one wishes to allow division based on something that they would not and cannot agree with anyway, then so it.

I am not naïve enough sir to believe that I will agree with everyone in this country, man is naturally divided, it is a good thing to have different views and the liberty for such. Where that line must be tempered by pragmatism is in the not automatically seeing the different of opinions as the opinions of destruction and assuming them to be enemies. While I do not agree with many of the right wing narratives in this country they are not my enemy, and in general both sides have the same general ideal but different ways of getting there. These people are no more useful to me in my direct and loud opposition to their very position on my premises of what I believe to be liberty which does not allow me to compromise on many things for the sake of the people I am fighting for,

A man’s politics like his faith are his own, to work under the false premise that there is no left vs right, that there is hm differing of political opinion and a manner of doing things make no sense to deny such an obvious thing. Does it make one a buyer of propaganda, no sir, it makes one aware that in this country and on this earth that not everyone will share your particular views be they politics, social, economic, religious and so on.

Notice sir, I did not mention party, you did, I generally see no real different in the two major parties with very few exceptions. I would vote for a Democrat like FDR any day, I would vote for a Republican like Eisenhower or Goldwater as well. But principled politicians who understand that hatred comes from change and that gaining the hatred of people who you vehemently disagree with is not something to be shied away from… it should be embraced and loved for standing up for an ideal that you would not only live for, but that you are willing to die for.

Everything can be predicated on the premise of class. The have and have nots will always battle for a bit more.. this is a way of life, has been since our founding and before. I see nothing new under the sun as matters of differences, only thing new is the players the game is and shall always be the same. To test the limits of human greed but to not be so quick to be unable to differentiate between human need and want. It is a fight of the ages, to provide but not to enable, to give but to not spoil.. a thin line but one that must be walked.

Many social movements tend to be the have nots vs the haves, those that have learn to be prosperous on the abuses of a system and those who believe themselves morally obligated to challenge that system… The fight has not changed in thousands of years, it is the same battle, over the same wants over a different means of attaining them.

Time tells who was right, yet as the saying goes, history is also written by the victors so we must learn to find the truth with the lies of the text written even if it challenges what we believe to be true, especially if it challenges what we believe to be true.
Reply
:iconmechatails7218:
MechaTails7218 Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011
It's nice arguing with you. You actually argue with well thought out arguments instead of strawmanning the opposition (or use other logical fallacies) and claim victory.
Reply
Add a Comment: