|
Post by chaoman45 on Oct 26, 2011 23:16:46 GMT -6
For those unaware, the movement is based off of Occupy Wall Street to protest structural violence and economic inequality. iirc, it's officially "Occupy Together," though it might as well be Occupy everything. There is one in most every major city and was inspired by the Arab Spring. But even the Arab Spring turned violent and so is this. www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15469096Is this a repeat of the 1960s mentality? Have you seen any of these movements in your city? Note: Occupy Omaha was sort of large. if you consider 1000 for a city of 410,000 large.
|
|
|
Post by daveshn on Oct 27, 2011 0:38:48 GMT -6
I'm more afraid that this is going to turn into 1790's French mentality.
So far, things are looking the same: Tax breaks for the rich, some members of the law-making body are corrupt, lobbyists keep the wealthy in positions of power at the cost of the poor,...
All it needs is the wrong spark.
|
|
|
Post by Cabi.net on Oct 27, 2011 5:43:46 GMT -6
I agree with what the protestors were originally protesting for. A more fair society. Now that it's becoming more popular (I'm trying not to sound like a hipster when I say this.) people are just perverting what the Occupy movement stand for. People are supporting and going to these rallies and acting self-entitled. They don't want a fairer society, they want to be the people who have the power. They aren't looking to move forward, they are looking to trade places.
Another bad thing about the popularity is that some people will go to these protests and try to cause trouble. These are the people who will try and set off that spark Dave mentioned. Luckily there doesn't seem to be that many people doing stuff like this. The protests seem to be (mostly) peaceful.
I don't think that it will turn into a revolutionary movement though. The fact that people are able to protest like this shows that the situation isn't as bad as during the revolutionary period in the late/early 1700/1800's. The same applies to the current Arab Spring. The people weren't allowed to protest and when they did they were attacked by police. Not when things got bad, nearly, if not every time they tried to protest.
|
|
|
Post by Jafar on Oct 27, 2011 19:58:34 GMT -6
The world as a whole is getting more and more corrupt, but people as a whole are getting more and more fed up with this corruption. But while standing up for rights is good, as Cabinet said, a lot of people don't even adhere to what they protest for with how they act. "Occupy Vancouver" isn't too large, but whether or not police will be sent to break it up was a local headline today. Hopefully morality prevails and both sides can work something out...
Personally I am for peaceful public protest with a logical reason behind it, such as opposing a dictatorship or unfair laws, but to fix the world people have to first fix themselves. I'm still learning a lot about Islam, which has solved my problems and made me stronger. If God willed it to be, I'll make a positive impact later on on many people, maybe some of those involved in these protests.
While I agree that income inequality if excessive is wrong, more people need to learn to be satisfied with what they do have, and this together with more rich people being charitable would logically improve society, but that's not the direction we're headed in the world. Basically as I see it there are two types of people in this world, both involved in these protests, the person who accepts destiny as it comes while showing selfless and sincere gratitude for what they do have and the person who does not.
The grateful will prevail, and corruption will get smacked as it deserves. The question I have is, how many protests, violence and deaths (see: Syria) will we have to see before justice comes? Only God knows.
|
|