Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: From Bankers to Belugas

Posted 2 years ago on Aug. 31, 2013, 8:54 a.m. EST by OWSanarchists (0)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

OWS is planning on dropping the fight against Wall Street to replace it with a fight against the animal holocaust.

Here's the proposal by Justine Tunney:


At first glance, it might seem a bad idea to stop the fight against Wall Street bankers. They do a lot of damage! However, the economy is getting stronger and people just don't care and/or understand the problem. It's not like 2 years ago. It's hard nowadays to get people to protest against bankers.

On the other hand, everyone cares about animals. In addition, the animal holocaust is a HUGE problem that affects the whole planet and everyone as a consequence. Everything is connected.

This is going to be more than PETA 2.0. We already have PETA. This is going to be WAY bigger. We're going to use civil disobedience, make no demands, educated, have no leaders, etc... The bread and butter of anarchy.

We're planning a new logo with the First of Power. The twist is that it's going to hold a small animal as it if just saved it. You can help us by proposing a sketch.

Let's go from bankers to belugas! Let's stop this animal holocaust! Together!



Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Removed from spam folder.


[-] 3 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 2 years ago

It might have been the spam filter. Calling the mods "dictators" isn't winning me over.

[+] -4 points by peanutboy (-26) 2 years ago

Thanks. Unfortunately, this posting and myself will be banned again very shortly. We are not Democrats. Like Odin, PeterPropotkin, struggleforfreedom, I am an anarchist. Anarchists get banned here.

[-] 6 points by jart (1186) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I'm an anarchist and I run the website. Show me evidence that you're being banned simply for being an anarchist (rather than being a troll) and I'll talk to the mods about it.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago
[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

http://occupywallst.org/users/Thrasymaque/ may be a better place to search for the ''peatnutboy'' &

http://occupywallst.org/forum/my-latest-rant/#comment-1000928 also provides insights into Trollboy.

ad iudicium ...

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (32486) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Or just plain non-sense?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

that would be the senate action bill for bombing Syria

[-] -1 points by ChristopherABrown (550) from Santa Barbara, CA 2 years ago

Does that go for censorship as well?

[-] -1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

First my own disclaimer or perhaps confession would be a better word, I'm omnivorous. I make no apologies for it or any attempt to rationalize it. I would not change my diet willingly, it would take government criminalizing the eating of meat.

I do know that earth's population is approaching a point where it may become necessary for us to alter the typical Western diet and reduce or eliminate its animal content. I don't believe that will ever happen because the population in general develops concern for animal life or even the lives of other people. If it happens at all it will be the result of severe meat and fish shortages, rising prices, and government action.

I do wish you luck in your effort and hope you can derive some satisfaction from it. I see it as a task that is going to be much more difficult then Occupy's previous endeavor. You're working to convert and convince the same 99% that consume processed animal products at levels that created an obesity epidemic. It's only my opinion, but I don't see it as possible to convince them they should be concerned about the lives of animals they consider food when you couldn't convince them to take action to improve their own life and that of fellow human beings.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

are you a pacifists ?

[-] -1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

In the strict definition of a pacifist, that war or violence can never be justifiable, no I am not.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I am

[-] -1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

I wish you best with that decision. Was there a reason for asking me if I was also?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Most would be afraid to aspire to be a pacifist

I've heard rational of "what if" scenarios since child calling for reasons of violence

those that use violence should be stopped

[-] -2 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

I don't aspire to be violent or to be a true pacifist. I simply live my life as peacefully as I am able and acknowledge that there could be situations where I personally could react to violence with violence.

How would you stop someone that employs violence and still remain a true pacifist?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

by not supporting them

[-] -1 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

Not sure how effective that would be against a mugger, but good luck with the approach.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

I'd bomb the town he lives in

[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 2 years ago

Interesting form of pacificism.