Diamondeye wrote:
You can hear things about the "proles" throwing the "boot off their neck" and other such nonsense, and the slobbering over any perceived provocation, no matter how minor, in the hopes some 1917 style workers' revolution is going to kick off tomorrow.
The real hilarity of that is that these same people pooh-poohd the idea that civilian-owned firearms could possibly be any protection against tyranny, and had all kinds of elaborate arguments detailing how that could never work.. but now all of a sudden a bunch of nitwits camping out in the streets are going to organize into a worker's revolution!
I think that in order to have a "Worker's Revolution," first you need some of the revolters to be working. Perhaps I'm nitpicking.
The hilarity I find is that all the "civilian-owned firearms have no place in society and don't make you any safer!" people are the ones who are getting fired on by cops. How's that working out for you, guys?
Stathol wrote:
LadyKate wrote:
Seriously, what kind of protest is this that they have the dang thing CATERED??
They only said that the revolution would not be televised. Nobody said anything about it not being catered.
We are the 96.3%.
Apparently, it won't be televised, because television is so a decade ago. Now, the revolution WILL be YouTubed.
And ALOL at We are the 96.3%.
Hannibal wrote:
I'm happy that the movement is causing discussion on topics. I just wish they would learn that camping out a illegally in a public space is not going to advance anything except labeling of the movement. If the tea party and the occupy wall street movement ever realize they are talking about basically the same thing and joined forces? Wow things would have to change.
Pretty much this, yeah. It's hilarious to me to see how dumb Occupy is as a movement. It doesn't recognize the similarity to Tea Parties' grievances, and arrives at completely ridiculous various "demands" and objectives that won't solve any of them. And then, they're stupid enough to protest without a permit (while often supporting Authoritarian consolidations of power by expanding government!!!), and complain and cry "favoritism!" when they get forcibly removed from the premises after being duly warned.
The Tea Party attendees, meanwhile, hold down their jobs, stage events across the country rather than blowing their last savings to fly cross-country and become a homeless trespasser, and finally, file for permits so they don't have to be evicted from their protests. They seem to have it all together, huh? I wonder which has the more thought out solutions to the common problems they both decry...