So your argument is that the people of Harlem exercise exclusivity over the entirety of Harlem? Strange, I was just there the other day and I didn't have to get permission from anyone.
That's a terrible argument.
OK. So the owners couldn't exercise exclusivity of the park but guess who did...OWS!
That's just an opinion. I am sure you or others will come back and say that people could safely jog through it, walk with their dogs, babies, etc. And I might just go jogging through Harlem in the middle of the night as well because it is so safe.
Acts such as these might, but acts like being booted out just after midnight does not help the city's position on this.
There are many lining up in the wings and expressing their dissatisfaction with the way things were handled. Even those that agreed on the end result did not like the means and methods.
At about 1 a.m. Tuesday, police handed out notices from the park's owner, Brookfield Office Properties, and the city saying that the park had to be cleared because it had become unsanitary and hazardous. Protesters were told they could return, but without sleeping bags, tarps or tents
This I can agree with. If OWS could come together on one topic, it would be to actually protest Wall Street by marching down it instead of just sitting in a park. The financial institutions that created the mess need to be held accountable and thus far, they have not been in the slightest.
Looks like to me they were asked to leave by the land owner so the property could be cleaned. It appears they think their 1st amendment rights include squating on private property rather than just the freedom of speech.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/15/zuccotti-park-evacuation_n_1094164.html
So your argument is that the people of Harlem exercise exclusivity over the entirety of Harlem? Strange, I was just there the other day and I didn't have to get permission from anyone.
That's a terrible argument.
Straw dog.
They were also accusing them of hoarding/collecting needles and weapons.
If they did everything correctly, why did they keep the news media away from the park when they did this?
Sure, we can send cameras into a war-zone but a bunch of squatters at Zucotti are TOO DANGEROUS??!?!?!?!
Don't care. If you can point to where the judge has misapplied the law, then please do so. If he has and you can't point this out, a higher court will do so for us. If they do that, then I'm 100% down with the eviction from there. Until they do, I'm not sympathetic.
Again, everyone always attacks the motivations of judges that issue rulings they don't like. I'm tired of it.
That is by far the biggest problem with the Occupy movement, and the reason it will never get larger support. You can't have a movement that demands 99% concensus before any action is taken or nothing will ever get done. When they were evicting the Occupy Portland protestors on Sunday, the news showed them having a meeting to determine where they would move to. A handful of options were presented, with none getting the support of more than about 30% of the people. So they kept voting, over and over and over, with the same results. Meanwhile, they are standing in the middle of Main Street completely blocking traffic. If police hadn't intervened to get them moving, they would have stood in the street for three months trying to get a concensus and never arriving at one... and that was a group of 500 people, not a nation of 300 million.They have, but they are not the only ones...
See, the problem is, when you are burned over 90% of your body, you can't just point to the worst of it and say "this is the problem". At the best all you will get is some Noxzema and a band-aid and told to quit whining (you have it better than the XXX's).
If you start making lists, they you get people dividing and quibbling over item number 14, and you lose focus.
The last thing is, there are only a few things that every member in the protest agrees with. You will get dissent on other items. The gist here is that a lot of people are dissatisfied with the way things are being done in general. You get TOO specific, you no longer have a cohesive unit.
best post in the thread, by far.<snip>
You want the movement to succeed? Stop going for a bullshit level of concensus that is unrealistic to expect at any point in the real world. Find some captivating or motivational individuals and use them as figureheads to be the voice of your movement; I know you want a shapeless mass of bodies where everyone is equally important, but the crazy anarchist blazed out of his gourd on meth ranting about destroying the government can NOT be as important as the well-spoken college professor with a detailed list of failures in banking regulation. You put those ideas on the same intellectual pedestal, and the entirety of what you say is going to be ignored because you're giving the lunatic fringe entirely too much power. And, for God's sake, come up with a clear, cohesive, unifying idea. The Tea Party is about small government and lower taxes; that's simple. What's Occupy's main message? Is it the need for more banking regulations or getting money out of politics? Roll with that. Don't clutter it up by trying to address every single bad thing that's happening all at once; this, combined with the apparent need for concensus on everything is going to make your movement effectively motionless and any support you managed to gain will effectively disappear.
best post in the thread, by far.
:thumbsup:
I'd say it's a pretty safe bet to assume that the OWS people are breaking the law (city ordinance) by staying in the park. Governments, whether federal, state, county or city have laws/rules against staying overnight etc in parks unless specifically authorized (e.g., campgrounds). This is routine for numerous good reasons.
Also, in every city I've seen the issue of protests come up there is an ordinance requiring a permit for a gathering in excess of (insert number) people. It's unlikely NYC is an exception. If OWS doesn't have their permits they are breaking that law too.
Cities just don't allow people to camp out on parks, whether public or private.
Fern
AP, here's the problem.
99% are in the 99 for various reasons. There is one common thread, being the one who are writing the laws that make this possible are under the pay and sway of the 1%. (Actually, the 0.1%, but you start sounding like an Ivory Soap ad with 99.9%).
The specifics may vary, but the general cause does not.
When you start adding things like the copywriting of a minor genome in soybeans enabling Monsanto to pretty much corner the market (cross polination is almost IMPOSSIBLE to prevent, and when you "own" the genome, you have the "right" to sue anybody growing beans that have it that did not pay you for the seeds....)
http://www.triplepundit.com/2009/11/the-monopoly-named-monsanto/
But who the hell would support that, nationwide, if it were put on the list?
Like I said, the problem is too amorphous to consolidate into a nice bullet list everyone can agree on. What can be agreed on is that the middle class is being slowly crushed and we will be ending up as a 2-class society pretty quickly unless something is done to reverse the trend.
You didn't really address his point, which is that OWS, as it exists, will not accomplish anything because they're trying to accomplish everything through means that everyone agrees with.
I'd say it's a pretty safe bet to assume that the OWS people are breaking the law (city ordinance) by staying in the park. Governments, whether federal, state, county or city have laws/rules against staying overnight etc in parks unless specifically authorized (e.g., campgrounds). This is routine for numerous good reasons.
Also, in every city I've seen the issue of protests come up there is an ordinance requiring a permit for a gathering in excess of (insert number) people. It's unlikely NYC is an exception. If OWS doesn't have their permits they are breaking that law too.
Cities just don't allow people to camp out on parks, whether public or private.
Fern
The main reason that they PROBABLY weren't kicked out sooner (legal or not) is because it would look like "The Man" does not want them there. However, two months is long enough. With no cohesive message, shitting on the ground, general degradation of the area, etc., it is about time they MovedOn.
NYC ordinances on parks don't apply to Zuccotti park as a general rule, it is not a publicly owned space. None of the NYC curfews on parks apply there, and in fact by law it is required to be open to the public 24 hours a day.
Cities do not allow that sort of thing, and for a number of 'good' reasons.
None of that speaks to the fact that cities generally have ordinances prohibiting camping out within city limits.
At the very least you look to building codes etc. Someone who actually owns the land would not be permitted to camp out on it.
Cities do not allow that sort of thing, and for a number of 'good' reasons.
Fern
Otherwise, you'd have big tent cities in most major cities.
Otherwise, you'd have big tent cities in most major cities.
Which is funny because that's going to be a reality when the middle and working class keeps continually getting screwed, and it'll have nothing to do with protests. There are non-protest related tent cities all over the country already.