Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Infiltration to Disrupt, Divide and Misdirect Is Widespread in Occupy

Posted 5 months ago on Jan. 24, 2014, 11:33 p.m. EST by go4broke (120)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Recently it was brought to my attention that there are people who are trying hard to co-opt Occupy for nefarious reasons. I usually don't read most of the links that this poster puts up, but I'm glad I read this one (and I went on to read several more concerning the same subject) which as you can see from the title is about infiltration of the Occupy movement. And it isn't that I was unaware that this was going on, it's just it reminded me of how prevalent it is.

"As Part II of this discussion will show, infiltration is the norm in political movements in the United States. Occupy has many opponents likely to infiltrate to divide and destroy it beyond the usual law enforcement apparatus. Other detractors include the corporations whose rule Occupy seeks to end; conservative right-wing groups allied with corporate interests; and members of the power structure including nonprofit oganizations linked with corporate-funded political parties, especially the Democratic Party, which would like Occupy to be its tea party rather than an independent movement critiical of both parties."...my emphasis

..."Some may wonder why Democrats or groups closely affiliated with the Democrats, such as MoveOn.org, Campaign for America's Future, Rebuild the Dream or unions like the SEIU, would want to infiltrate Occupy. (Note: Indviduals who are Democrats or members of a union, MoveOn or other groups are not the same as the leadershiip). Essentially, leaders of these groups see Occupy as the Democrats potential answer to the tea party. Occupiers do not see themselves that way, but these movements want them to adopt their strategy of working within the Democratic Party."

Instead Occupiers want to "build an independent movement to challenge the corrupt system." This... while the infiltrators make excuses for the Democrats who have betrayed us. And some of the infiltrators like Van Jones of Rebuild The Dream even position themselves as Occupy spokespersons adopting the Occupy lingo, and doing their best to drag Occupy into the Democratic Party where it will join the corrupt duopoly and become spineless. This infiltration also extends into social media, facebook pages, etc.!....my emphasis & my words

"Infiltration has been common in political movements for centuries, as have divisive methods, attacks on leaders, escalation of tactics, fight over money and misinformation disseminated to the public." Some of those methods include character assasination, e.g, "I know you are a liar," and anger along with profanity aimed at anyone who disagrees with their partisan agenda. These kind of attacks are usually reserved for those who are most recalcitrant to the attempted co-option of Occupy, and they are usually repeated over and over and over again without being elaborated on, with the idea that if they say it enough, it will become true in the minds of others, and also to keep the target of their assault on the defensive. It is a very common tactic to defame someone who wants systemic change in the hopes of ostracizing that person and to cause turmoil within the movement, and it has been used by the corrupt elite, including those political parties and their minions who keep them in power for eons in the hope of retaining the power of the corrupt status quo....my emphasis & words again

Edit;, 5:30 pm, 1/25/14 - From the early mixed reaction I have gotten from my thread, I realized that it was incomplete so I would like to add the below comment which is based on my research and experience.

Some of the people who would like to co-opt Occupy (Democrats mostly from what I can see) have a real penchant to lump people whose ideals are very close to Occupy's .....with right-wing zealots and groups, who like some Democrats are trying to destroy this movement, by besmirching Occupiers with all sorts nasty names and innuendos in trying to link the two.

From disingenuously lumping these two very adversarial groups together, the co-opters want people to come away with the false and foolish notion that they, the Democrats in most cases, and ONLY THEY are the true Occupiers and hence viable alternative to the corrupt system we now have.. End of Edit

Although I have somewhat of an adversarial relationship with the poster who originally put this link up, I would like to thank him for doing so.

http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/infiltration_to_disrupt_divide_and_misdirect_20120224

57 Comments

57 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by shadz66 (17705) 5 months ago

Re. this thread, I'm just going to put this down here gently & walk away quickly and quietly ..

multum in parvo ...

[-] 0 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

Thanks, that was a very informative link on how we can become co-opted or crushed by the corrupt elite and how we can combat it. And in particular for me it provides more valuable insight on the MO of the neocon elite's minions who are intent at embedding this movement in one of the two parties in the duopoly.

[-] 2 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

all inclusive means acceptance of the status quo, many democrats helped make this possible. teaching is a full time job when the cats are herding.

[-] 2 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

disrupters have proven to be true, we all know this

[-] 1 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

Edit was made on this thread. Look towards the bottom. If anyone chooses to withdraw their support, or even their denunciation of this thread, that's understandable.

[-] 3 points by gsw (2867) 5 months ago

I would say this is a valid poInt, here

many sympathetic with occupy have often labeled as rightist Koch whores, ....

a spectrum of ideas and thought made the site more informative, once, the debates more engaged and enlightening, but soon, with the presidential election, the democratic sympathizers seemed to become a majority on this site, as the lesser evil argument was powerful, and the shrils became more subtle

Iinfighting of people who mostly agree on most big issues, and the name calling, and repeated lies, gets old fast here, and has driven many away.

But this site has little to do with occupy, as one has always been pointed out, it is a shadow of occupy, and an important light to finding non mainstream media and non corporate propaganda.

Shining a light on Monsanto,on coal trains, and oil polluters, on phone metadata gatherers, on Koch machinery, on banksters, these issues go beyond party loyalties and unite good thinking Americans.

Yes one party is worse than the other, by 10 times,

But we should seek for common ground where possible, and not be cooped by any party, obviously.

Eventually occupy concerns will become common sense of a majority, it was in the beginning, and that is why it was quashed by Obama, and the power elites

[-] 1 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

You can thank me more for this, more accurate one too, as they completely ignored the more dangerous and well funded threat of the libe(R)tarians.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-right-wing-libertarians-john-birchers-and-cons/

The forum was/is even worse.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/wall-street-libertarians-have-co-opted-this-forum/

or perhaps you are the sympathizer I suspect you are?

Hey?

Have you ever heard of Florida?

You should see what's happened there.

http://www.rickscottwatch.blogspot.com/

It's amazing, how well ignored that important link is.

.

[-] 0 points by beautifulworld (21309) 5 months ago

Right, even the most left wing people, who, for instance, are staunch socialists, are often called right wing here. It's pretty funny and ridiculous.

[-] 1 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

Anyone whose views are closer to Occupy's has been accused of being a right-winger of some sort. Objective; keep 'em on the defensive.

[-] 1 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

topic change is rapid on this site, even a thread with important thoughts will be changed in responses and questions and attacks begin. the internet is tough on synergy.

[-] 0 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

I'm trying to keep on "topic" here 'cause I put the thread up. lol But having the topic naturally morph into another one isn't so bad I don't think.

[-] 0 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

roman strategy is our biggest obstacle to any political change, lots of believers

[-] 0 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

everyone is welcome and most everyone agrees on the problems, the solutions are different and yet agreement on the problems is the starting point and the starting point was stopped.

[-] 0 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

The "solutions" are often different by design not by conscience.

[-] 0 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

Really?

You borrowed this after I posted the original from a year or two ago ion another thread?

Shameless!

( It makes me think my suspicion about your former username are correct, but we'll see)

It's OK. it was a trick posting anyway.

Did you notice what was conspicuous in it's absence?

There was never any danger of a liberal co-option, they can't stick together on much of anything.

It's been proven.

what's conspicuous in it's absence are the libe(R)tarian's that were everywhere in the early days. I've rad reposts that say trhey still are.

I know they were here on the forum in force in those early days, and they spent a lot of time attacking the liberals here.

Remember Ron Lawl?

No doubt they did the same thing on various Occupies..

Therein lies the REAL co-option and I believe, with the money and skills that faction has always been willing to spend, a successful one.

Just look at how many return here as puppets even now.

They come here and scream out all their anti union bullshit and how Occupy has nothing to do with them.

They come here and shout about guns rights, even though Occupy marched and had vigils for Travon Martin.

Lies.

Occupy Detroit has been supported by the Teamsters all along..

Now the the danger was always from the libe(R)tarins.

There was a guy who used to post here, that was in the employ of a libe(R)tarian federalist think tank.

He was strongly anti-union, although he would never admit it..

He would also occasionally post from the John Birch Society as well.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-right-wing-libertarians-john-birchers-and-cons/

You may not remember, but I do.

[-] 2 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

Your comment is rather 'loquacious' (I love that word too!) Did I spell it correctly?

You have met much of the criteria of a co-opter in that comment!! Thanks for that. The defense rests!

Did I not give you enough credit for putting that wonderful link up on how people, mostly Democrats are trying to co-opt Occupy. So sorry...Thank You, Thank You..;-)

I see your little men were hard at work early this morning as reflected in the BCs of the day, and non-partisans' scores plummeting. Good work! Things are back under control, eh?! lol

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (5783) from St Louis, MO 5 months ago

In complement, another article dealing with the co-option and surveillance of activist groups:

http://www.popularresistance.org/open-letter-to-ows-you-were-right-all-along/

An article as inspiring as it is informative.

[-] 3 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

Good post, and link which I remembered reading in part a while back, but I could not find it when I was doing my research for the thread. Thanks

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (5783) from St Louis, MO 5 months ago

I've been meaning to put that 'open letter' in a post of its own, but haven't had the time lately to devote to forum posts, with the exception of the GMO post I'm about to put up soon.

What I find interesting about threads of this nature, is seeing who shows up when, and what they have to say. It's usually very telling.

[-] 0 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

no nee to go for broke unless this is it

[-] 0 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

You missed something VERY important.

what that article failed to report.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-right-wing-libertarians-john-birchers-and-cons/

they've been here for while too.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/wall-street-libertarians-have-co-opted-this-forum/

Can I expect you to give us informed, cogent and precise commentary on this even more effective co-option?

Or were you part of it, and so won't comment at all?

[-] 0 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

the trickery of all inclusive continues, some believe it is incredible, others believe it is evil. how much do numbers matter is the question?

[-] -1 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

So then you admit you're Bircher?

I'm not surprised in the least.

It's place where being incomprehensible is way of life.

You fit 'right" in.

[-] 0 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

do you support all inclusive?

[-] 0 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

Thanks for your admission........:)

It's one that lends credence to this.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-right-wing-libertarians-john-birchers-and-cons/

http://occupywallst.org/forum/wall-street-libertarians-have-co-opted-this-forum/

Good to know. You probably really like Alex too.

You know in all the videos of the early days of OWS, I can't recall seeing any Obama signs, but I damn sure did see Ron Lawl signs, along with signs about his pet project "end the fed".......

The simple fact that have ignored this, means you've done so deliberately.

So no, I have no use for Birchers. Nor does OWS.

[-] 2 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

what do birch trees believe in? do ou support the federal reserve?

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

KISS 4 U then.

By ignoring the facts of libe(R)tarian co-option I've provided, I am forced to surmise that you supported and likely promoted it.

You have no defense, only reality.

What did you say your old username around here was?

[-] -1 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

The NYCGA and other general assemblies were mostly infiltrated by Democrats. Nowadays, they shamelessly use the Occupy name for their groups and campaigns. We called them the DDs when we saw them arrive at general assemblies: Despicable Democrats.

[-] 1 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

I agree with your comments with the obvious exception in saying that there are a lot of good Democrats who simply do not understand what has and continues to go on, namely their selling out of the people for $pecial interests. They in many instances were us before our awakening. The Democrats who have set their sights on co-opting Occupy though are the apologists who know better, but have an agenda to carry out.

Top 45 Lies in Obama's Speech at the UN

You are a welcome new addition and I hope you to stay as there are a lot of good people here who appreciate you being kindred spirit, but you will have to learn to play hard-ball as you can see. So I urge you to do so without getting in the gutter with them.

I will answer some of my less supportive comments ;-) later as I have stuff to do today. "DD", I like that.

[-] 1 points by RadicalsUnite (94) 5 months ago

when dd needs to get in bed with powerful criminals to win a election for a spot in a mixture of bullets and banks, we have crash landed and the decay is here to stay

[-] 0 points by go4broke (120) 5 months ago

Agreed the DD in the White House got there via huge bribes from the banking industry which flourishes in WAR, but we must never give up hope. Previous generations didn't.

[-] 0 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

Good points about the Democrats. Fully agree. I don't like petty fights, so I will simply ignore those that just want to harass me. Take care.

[-] -1 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

Your insinuations about me are exactly petty.

I don't want to fight either.

I just expect you to prove what you are insinuating.

Not to do so , IS supporting petty fighting.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

Who's still there?

Seems to me I've heard this before.

Who did you say your other username was?

Did you watch or join in all the attacks on liberals on this web site?

[-] -2 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

Who's still where? What? No other username friend.

[-] -2 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

Are you daft?

libe(R)tarians are still there.

They're still here.

Who no comment on the (proven) fact that liberals don't stick together very well?

Why no comment on this?

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-right-wing-libertarians-john-birchers-and-cons/

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

Hey friend, I don't come here to fight. I didn't know what "where" you were talking about. I commented about the NYCGA, not this website. I'm not interested in having a convo with someone who calls me "daft". Since I joined Occupy, my #1 rule has been - create a community and foster understanding even through disagreements. Insults are for children, not occupiers. Bye my friend.

[-] 0 points by ZenDog (13694) from South Burlington, VT 5 months ago

create a community and foster understanding even through disagreements.

accept with dems of course, you have no intent on fostering an understanding or building a community among them or anyone who advocates caucusing with them - the single exception being an Independent Senator from Vermont.

fuk you

[-] 0 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

If you didn't, when why is it you're avoiding commenting on libe(R)tarian co-option?

And then after playing dumb to a simple question, you call me childish, while still avoiding answering that simple question?

Indeed by proxy it would indicate a co-option by (R)epelican't forces, as that's who libe(R)tarians often pretend to be in REAL life.

The sad part, is you don't remember the hard push by libe(R)tarians to co-opt this very web site.

[-] 1 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

I haven't seen co-option attempts by the right. I don't think it would be possible really. The right wing are too different from basic Occupy concepts. They couldn't fool anyone. What I have seen from the right is the attempt to insult Occupy, to make us look like fools. They tried to ruin our image in the mass media by making us look like uncleaned hippies.

The Democrats are an entirely different animal. Republicans know what they want, they just want something really dumb - really to the right. Democrats know what they want, but don't realize the Democrat party will never give that to them. Democrats are often deluded. They think Obama cares about the people, that he's a socialist, etc... They basically think Democrats are very similar to Occupy in ideology. They really are not. Democrats are 1%ers who just want to make money and gain power.

That's why the democrats are a danger for co-option, but the right really isn't. Some people remain fooled to this day in thinking that Obama is a socialist. He's a right winger.

[-] -3 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

You didn't see it, because it already happened.

You've still not commented on the information on libe(R)tarian co-option.

Why are you ignoring the obvious?

Why are you using this a divisive technique?

If you' like so many others are not here to further divide?

did yuo also miss the organized coalion that attacked liberals opn this very web site?

It was a savage attack, that left this site reeling after an attack by gun nutters on the heels of Sandy Hook.

did you miss that too?.

[-] 3 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

I'm sorry, I have not seen right wingers try to or take control of Occupy. I have seen them insult Occupy, but not try to take control of it. I have seen Democrats try to take over the NYCGA and other general assemblies, and have seen some Democrat groups use the term Occupy to make their campaigns.

You seem obsessed with protecting the Democrats from criticism? Do you not agree that Obama and his friends are part of the 1%?

Please try to use a nicer tone, or I will have to stop our exchange. You seem vindictive for some reason. We can agree to disagree. No need to get angry or to insult an occupier who does not see things your way. I'm not sure why you insinuate that I have some bad intentions. I do not. Just learning and exchanging ideas.

Take your morning coffee and you'll feel better.

[-] -1 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

Like I said and you ignored, that's because they already did.

It's you who's insinuating.

You should stop that now.

I guess you missed a lot?

So where does your ill-informed opinion originate?

According to some.

We are all part of the 1%.

Do you know what faction made that accusation?

Please stop putting words in my mouth and making those insinuations.

Will you address ANY of the questions and facts I've put at your disposal?

[-] 3 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

You're making my head spin mate. Not sure what your deal is. I'm not here to fight. See you later.

[-] -2 points by shooz (18014) 5 months ago

So you just came here to talk about tiny houses and attack liberals, and make insinuations about me?

That's all you've done so far.

Here.

Comment on this.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/how-right-wing-libertarians-john-birchers-and-cons/

[-] -1 points by ZenDog (13694) from South Burlington, VT 5 months ago

especially the Democratic Party, which would like Occupy to be its tea party rather than an independent movement critiical of both parties."...my emphasis

YOu are an idiot. I will tell you why you are an idiot. You are an idiot to suggest the Dems represent a threat to OWS. If OWS cannot caucus with those most closely aligned with their political inclination, then OWS is doomed.

I would suggest that you are part of the infiltration - intent on making sure OWS does not rise up to threaten that tenuous grasp repelicans have gained on the reins of power.

Some one should cut off your hands

[-] -2 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

Don't call other occupiers "idiot". We gotta stick together. We don't have to think the same to avoid insults. Great minds can accept and tolerate differences without insulting them. If you have to insult someone, insult Democrats, not occupiers. Come on man!

[-] -2 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

Both the Democrats and the Republicans have "that tenuous grasp on the reins of power". In fact, since OWS started, the Democrats have had a tighter grip on power. OWS as always fought against a Democrat White House after all.

The Democrats are not closely aligned to OWS at all. Very different philosophies. The Democrats are much more closely aligned with the Republicans than with OWS.

Anyways, we have seen countless times how dangerous the Democrats can be as an infiltrator of Occupy. There are some groups on Facebook who use the Occupy name to further their Democrat agendas. A real shame.

We're both OWS supporters, so I guess we can both agree that the Democrats and the Republicans are both really bad.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13694) from South Burlington, VT 5 months ago

so . . . lets see . . . Senator Bernie Sanders is a Socialist and often cheered by OWS. Senator Bernie Sanders caucuses with dems and criticizes them when and as he feels appropriate. Senator Bernie Sanders does not caucus with repelicans. Finally, Senator Sanders does not find this behavior conflicts with or compromises his Socialist inclinations.

Therefore, I must conclude, based on your fear mongering around the supposed threat posed by dems to OWS - you are either:

  1. filled with fear, terrified that your own convictions will not sustain some mythical onslaught of ideological dogma posed by . . . Onona.drones . . .

  2. Your fear is not at all pathological and neurotic but rather fact based and pragmatic, recognizing the threat to repelican machinations that OWS could, theoretically pose . . . and so are intent on the very infiltration and dissemination of fear your op outlines . . .

  3. You are in fact attempting to illustrate the very behavior you have written about by enticing the easy and obvious response - since Senator Sanders is not the least bit afraid of caucusing with dems while criticizing them when opportunity avails, there is no reason why OWS should not do likewise.

    • how very clever of you - I never would have guessed you were engaged in a very subtle method of sabotaging The Koch Machine . . .
[-] 1 points by gsw (2867) 5 months ago

Occupy was shut down by someone? Who

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2011/11/pers-n17.html

[-] 3 points by ZenDog (13694) from South Burlington, VT 5 months ago

Hatred of these conditions is broadly felt, and the Occupy protests have won the support of broad sections of the working class. Whatever the attempts by the media and the political establishment to pollute public opinion, mass sentiment is instinctively anti-capitalist and hostile to the giant banks and corporations.

.

A successful struggle against these conditions, however, depends on the independent political mobilization of the working class. No other social force can settle scores with American capitalism and all the ills that go with it—inequality, the destruction of democratic rights, and war.

.

That is an example of editorialization, written by an author from the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) - or World Socialist Website - your link.

At the bottom it says:

  • The fundamental task is the building of a new political leadership that seeks to unify all of the struggles for jobs and decent living standards, in defense of democratic rights, and against war on the basis of a socialist program. The Socialist Equality Party is spearheading this fight. We urge all workers and youth seeking to carry forward the fight against Wall Street to study our program and join the SEP today.

  • Joseph Kishore

Sounds to me as if Joseph is attempting to begin a new political party. Good thing for the repelicans - I mean, just imagine if he advocated co-opting the Dems.

His method might have worked - if repelicans had gotten their own way and let the banks and the auto industry just implode - putting over two million more Americans out of work and making the prospect of 25% unemployment a real possibility. Had DC not bailed out those too big to fail then yes, a completely new party might have a chance of rising up, and rejecting completely everything that the two major parties have to offer. That would likely only be a short term honeymoon, that would in the end result in gridlock as bad as or worse than what we have now.

Your link presents the same tired bullshit. It does not provide solutions, not solutions that account for current circumstances. Those too big to fail did get bailed out, and therefore a completely independent organization cannot sustain mass protests and civil disobedience sufficient to make the establishment cave in. It has not happened yet.

It will not happen.

We could have taken over from within. Fear of the dems can only mean that the Convictions and Principles within OWS are weak.

You fear compromise.

Because of your fear you cannot bend the political class to your will.

I certainly cannot do it myself - not alone. While it may be true that I have been advocating radical shit since . . . 1997 or 8 . . . and some of that radical shit is even now coming to pass, the War on Drugs is, finally, at an end game stage, surely my advocacy had little to do with it. All I advocated in that regard was, in the end, inevitable.

If we cannot bend the political class to a state of reason and of common sense and decency, then all that remains is for Global Warming combined with the next economic meltdown to do it for us - and then it may be too late.

Surely it will, and that is precisely what makes repelicans so dangerous. In their hubris many of them refused to believe that the bailouts were necessary. They lack the will, the strength of character, the wisdom, the courage, to institute the many measures required to secure democracy - in fact, they have worked far too hard removing by legislation those barriers, those regulations, so necessary to a free republic. And they still insist the bailouts were a bad thing. As if by their insistence alone that can make it fact.

It cannot.

They are not qualified to legislate. Their only skill is that of graft and corruption.

And here I am again - wasting my breath. insane.

fukyou

[-] 5 points by gsw (2867) 5 months ago

You don't waste your breath on this issue.

Global warming is huge. We should have put solar on every American home with electric or coal heat.

Still could.

I most agree with you, )

Probably coopting tthe democrats is as good an idea as any other at this time.

Thanks for restating your position for me one more time.

Peace, and love... I did up vote your above comments.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (13694) from South Burlington, VT 5 months ago

Probably coopting tthe democrats is as good an idea as any other at this time.

Nervous? I thought I heard you stutter . . .

It is a bit late at this point to attempt co-opting dems - OWS has lost its momentum, and I presume a good measure of the good will that was generated in the early days.

I Googled Union march and Occupy Wall Street looking for a particular article. If you read through the list of returns it is clear just by the titles that OWS had found broad based support among the public, and among the working class. But I could not find the article I was looking for . . .

So I redefined my search and went forward month by month. The returns, again to judge based on title alone, all appear uniformly positive, indicative of an organization on the ascendance, one growing in both popularity and in influence.

But by February of 2012 something seems to happen, and by March of 2012 the titles all shift from glowing praise and adulation at the future prospects of OWS to that of arrests and evictions. Instead of articles in praise of Unions joining hands with OWS there are now articles about OWS and a failed attempt to occupy Union Square.

On February 2, 2012, Salon published an article titled: What Occupy taught the unions - taught - that is past tense.

. . . Unions . . .

It should have been apparent at the outset, breaking the grip of the one percent using non-violence and civil disobedience would require very careful planning, deliberate action, and careful coalition building. And yes, perhaps even some degree of hypocrisy . . . for in a society where Union men and women enforce the law, and where that law is used to fracture unions, some degree of hypocrisy must be necessary if only to shield from general view the motives and ambitions of those intent on fracturing the grip of the one percent along those fault lines that do exist.

It's over now. The economy is back on the uptick, whatever momentum OWS once had is now gone, and the parks are now largely empty. We have lost and in loosing what we have gained are some new rules dictating park usage, and a footnote found among the historical record. while I am sure you are only doing your job and while it is I am sure a fine job you are doing, it now appears to be entirely up to you. having so successfully curbed this movement and stifled that public outpouring of discontent

The infiltration is, likewise, over - or at least, there is no reason why it is not, beyond that of sheer paranoia. The one percent will no doubt jealously watch over their basket of eggs like any other raptor . . . so much for the influence of leaderless movements. They are, as the Google search above illustrates, quickly led astray and boxed in a dead end.

It is a shame really, for so much of the public did seem to pin their hopes on our success. Our success. Look back through that list of search returns - the hope and optimism is palpable - it breathes.

And while you probably thought your kind upvote would somehow shut me up, I must still insist: at this point there are only two solutions left. That is to make a violent and bloody example among the one percent and see if perhaps that is a method of instruction they will accept, or we can wait for the natural world and evolution to take its course and eliminate much, if not all, of civilization that humanity is so dependent on. That is not advocacy, simply a statement of the alternatives that we face.

We.

I can say such things. Not because such talk is legal within an academic context, but rather because I am a dead ender. I do, honestly, have those moments, where I just don't give a shit. Were I more influential then surely I could count on it - being dead ended I mean.

Not that it matters . . . like I said . . .

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by IBringYouTruthsRelaxAndListen (18) from Union City, NJ 5 months ago

Go back to your Democrap site you Occupy co-opting dork troll!

" And here I am again - wasting my breath. insane.

You're paid by the dems, so hardly a waste. More like your duty as an Occupy dork troll.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (13694) from South Burlington, VT 5 months ago

REally? YOu think someone pays for my opinion? I wish - for it would make my life just a little easier. The reality is I pay - I PAY - to present my opinion to the world - and that is not a matter of egotism but rather a conviction - that I have an obligation to present . . . what I have witnessed . . . to the mass of humanity, that they may do with that information as they see fit.

. . . YOur boss must be nervous . . . stating the obvious threat OWS posed to the one percent and that clear route of attack that does and must remain open to all . . .

You must not have been listening at the seminar - when they spoke about using identities as a means of suggestion I'm sure they intended to convey something about subtlety - I must conclude that either you simply were not listening, or perhaps you are a double tongued double agent . . .

The possibilities are wonderfully delicious . . .

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by tabletennis (77) from New York, NY 5 months ago

I remember well. At the NYCGA, the Democrats tried to co-opt us while the Rebuplicans tried to make us look bad in the media. From my experience, the Democrats are the most dangerous. The Republicans know they have no chance to co-opt us so they just spit on us. Unfortunately, many occupiers are confused about the Democrats. They confuse them with socialists and generally good people.They are the more sneaky 1%.