Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Self Reliance

Posted 10 months ago on June 13, 2013, 4:47 p.m. EST by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Teach a man to fish and not only can he feed himself but he can teach others how to fish as well. We need to get back to basics. People should be able to feed, clothe, and house themselves.

76 Comments

76 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 months ago

I'm sorry the fishing patent is owned by WESAYSO ©

that man is required to pay a fife for our idea

[-] 1 points by GuyGardner (-4) 10 months ago

"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life." - Terry Pratchett

[-] -1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

cleaver now.

[-] 1 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

Its an analogy of socialism/communism ( the govt dependence) vs capitalism( self dependence)

[-] -2 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

is that what you take away from this??? that was not my intention. i advocate libertarian socialism, anarcho-syndicalismt, and technocratic guidance. what i am suggesting is a shifting away from the corporate coup in place over our ability to provide for ourselves. this is not just about people on state aid. this is about an entire population that doesn't now how to do anything for themselves. not even the basics feed, clothe, house. im not talking about buying it either.

[-] 0 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

may not have been your intention but you paraphased an old quote.

[-] -3 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Capitalism and Socialism are equally bad though.

Self-reliance is completely independent of both.

Both capitalism and socialism/communism glorify the aquisition of wealth and material goods.

[-] 0 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

with capitalism you have a chance to do what you want with your life depending on your ambition, drive, talents, and determination to not give up. you do not have that with socialism/communism.

[-] -3 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Yes, but in the end Capitalism always promotes the aquisition of wealth and material goods.

Capialism does not promote well of the mind or soul.

[-] 0 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

success can bring wealth, what you do with your own money is up to that individual.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

What if I don't money? Would I be screwed in a system that glorifies Stuff over Substance?

[-] 0 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

I do not understand your post. "What if i dont money? would i be screwed in a system that glorifies stuff over substance".

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Capitalism demonizes poor people. Somehow if you are not rich and you speak out against the vain and greedy, then you are considered the scum of the earth.

Socialism is the same exact way. You will be forced to work for the benefit of all as opposed to the benefit of yourself and if you speak up against the establishment the you are the scum of the earth.

Neither system allows for People to be treated like People. Both put what the majority sees as good as opposed to the actual Good.

Money should be avoided in favor of intelligence.

[-] 0 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

"Capitalism demonizes people"? Wrong , capitialism enriches people who are willing to work to better themselves. so many poor people have made their lives ( and their families lives) better because of capitalism. Regarding your last sentence,......you seem to have successfully avoided both.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Capitalism seeks to get rid of poor people by creating more rich people.

I dont want to be rich.......

I can and I proabaly am far more successful in my life without money than I would ever be with money.

I will make this clear to you so you can hear me: I DO NOT WANT TO BE RICH!

Success and the ability to accumulate material wealth are completely independent of eachother.

[-] 0 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

" capitalism seeks to get rid of poor people be creating more rich people" one of the dumber things you have posted. capitalism doesnt create wealth,. people do..its up to the individual.....capitalism gives you choices,...........you dont have to be rich if you dont want to be. no choices with socialism or communism or fascism.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

yes, but the goal in a capitalism is to get Rich. In many people's eyes I am a leach on society because I choose not to work and pay taxes, but still use publicly funded institutions. I am demonized all the time for my choice live simply.

Capitalism puts the priority on aquiring MORE and MORE stuff. Bigger cars, Bigger houses, Bigger guns, Bigger tvs, Bigger everything.

Instead government should encourage people to Not buy big cars and big houses and big guns and big tvs. Government should distance itself from economic activity.

[-] 1 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

capitalism puts no priority on anyone,..............a person puts that on themself. You make your own choices.

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Yes, the goal in a capitalist system is to get rich, is it not?

[-] 1 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

the goal of capitalism to to make your own choices about your own life. want to be " rich" capitalims gives you a chance at that,..dont want to be rich, you dont have to be, your choice . it is not about statism where the govt controls every aspect of your life.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

I don't know how to break this down to you. Little House on the Prairie was fictional.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

i don't know how to break this to you but you are a fool. go ahead stay on the corporate gmo tip enjoy your fema camps you moron.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

Fema camps? lol, you dolt.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 months ago

no one has to take a job they don't want or eat

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

i just want to know what an internment and resettlement specialist is.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (5689) from St Louis, MO 10 months ago

From that link, it sounds like the military's version of a prison guard, doesn't it?

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

not a guard.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (5689) from St Louis, MO 10 months ago

Hmmm, what are you thinking it is?

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

ss.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (5689) from St Louis, MO 10 months ago

I can't argue with that opinion, heheh. Besides, what's a fascist regime without some version of the SS.

[-] 1 points by gameon (-51) 10 months ago

A fascist.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

yeah thats what it looks like.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

are you suggesting these sites don't exist??? would you like to see them up close and personal??? don't worry girlfriday you will. but in the meantime. before i go as far as showing you a picture confirming their existence let me fill you in on our governments powers.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 1099 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to seize all means of transportation, including personal cars, trucks or vehicles of any kind and total control over all highways, seaports, and waterways.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10999 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a "new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis." FEMA's powers were consolidated by President Carter to incorporate the...

National Security Act of 1947 allows for the strategic relocation of industries, services, government and other essential economic activities, and to rationalize the requirements for manpower, resources and production facilities.

1950 Defense Production Act gives the President sweeping powers over all aspects of the economy.

Act of August 29, 1916 authorizes the Secretary of the Army, in time of war, to take possession of any transportation system for transporting troops, material, or any other purpose related to the emergency.

International Emergency Economic Powers Act enables the President to seize the property of a foreign country or national. These powers were transferred to FEMA in a sweeping consolidation in 1979.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

did i say somewhere that obummer signed all the orders? no i did not some of the orders are older than 50 years. that doesn't change the fact that these orders exist at all. at all. at all. at all.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 10 months ago

fair enough.... well pretty messed up then huh?....

I guess we better get control of the gov... before some corporation buys it

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

more than messed up. why are all these cold war policies still on the books it's been 25 years? notice kennedy signed many. this should tell you something. he WAS their stooge. then he WASN'T. then he was dead. what if someone ascended to the top of the halls of power. and got to the very top only to realize that the other men in the room where absolutely insane. let us not forget they wanted to nuke cuba. NUKE CUBA plus operation northwoods signed by the joint chiefs of staff. you think obama would reject a recommendation from the joint chiefs of staff?? you think any of our politicians would?

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 10 months ago

that's a good question....and from the look of things I'm not to sure he would....

added... I can't see Obama nuking anyone.... but he certainly does seem to be doing some messed up sh*t

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

Little Alex Jones parrot head.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

you gotta a problem with truth.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

I gotta problem with Alex Jones fear mongers.

[-] -1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

i am not an alex jones fanboy.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

Yes, you are. The first step is admitting that you have a problem.

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

so is Cannonball Run II, but you dont see me complaining.....

BTW Walden is also Not fictional......

It is possible for an individual to live a free and independent life.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

Sure you do. You are one big walking circle jerk. You have already stated that you are specifically here to not make sense. So, don't even try.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

You used the fact that Little House on the Prairie is a work of fiction to make your argument that simple living and self-reliance are also works of fiction.

I dont care whether I make sense or not. Most of the time the truth doesnt make sense. Einstein died beleiving that Quantum Mechanics is not scientific fact.

Reality is weird. Live with it.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

No. Try again.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Okay.

You used the fact that Little House on the Prairie is a work of fiction to make your argument that simple living and self-reliance are also works of fiction.

I dont care whether I make sense or not. Most of the time the truth doesnt make sense. Einstein died beleiving that Quantum Mechanics is not scientific fact.

Reality is with it. Life is weird.

How was that? Better?

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

Nope. Stay with it though.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Third time's a charm?

You used the fact that Little House on the Prairie is a work of fiction to make your argument that simple living and self-reliance are also works of fiction.

I dont care whether I make sense or not. Most of the time the truth doesnt make sense. Einstein died beleiving that Quantum Mechanics is not scientific fact.

Reality is with it. Life is weird.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

Three strikes you are out.

It isn't quite as romantic as you seem to think that it is.

[-] -3 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Don't Stop Believing!

You used the fact that Little House on the Prairie is a work of fiction to make your argument that simple living and self-reliance are also works of fiction. I dont care whether I make sense or not. Most of the time the truth doesnt make sense. Einstein died beleiving that Quantum Mechanics is not scientific fact. Reality is with it. Life is weird.

I don't like you very much.

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

It's ok. I think you're a fucking moron and I don't care if you like me at all.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

I'd rather be a "fucking moron", than whatever you are. At least I respond with coherent thoug

[-] 3 points by GirlFriday (21783) 10 months ago

[-] 1 points by HCabret (7) 7 hours ago

I'd rather be a "fucking moron", than whatever you are. At least I respond with coherent thoug ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink


lol, ya........you deserve that. A coherent what?

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

A coherent wh

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 10 months ago

subject matter is often recycled

[-] -3 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

At least she is resourceful.

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

YES!!!! Finally!

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

people need to relearn how to live. gardening, animal husbandry, enhancing ecosystems to support foraging, wildcrafting, hunting, fishing, trapping. im not saying lets ditch technology and trade what i am saying is people have been tricked into a system that they don't even want to be in talk to people see how happy they really are. even happy people if you ask them soulless job or barefoot in the park what do you think the answer will be??? and hey i like stuff. useful stuff. entertaining stuff. but its just stuff. i don't know i know i am way out of the mainstream. but still i can't help but feel like that is how we regain control.

[-] 1 points by Narley (-634) 10 months ago

I think most people don’t understand how difficult it is to be self sufficient. You can do it in varying degrees, but it’s difficult even at the littlest level. One end of the spectrum is akin to wilderness living, or living as our great-grandfathers did. Grow, forage and hunt for food. I mean completely living off the grid. The other end of the spectrum hobby gardening, maybe sewing your own clothes for fun, etc…

But, at any level, being self sufficient means giving up some level of modern convenience and comfort. Plus it’s time consuming and hard work. I was raised on dirt poor farm with no running water, not air conditioning and so on. It wasn’t fun. It’s essentially dedicating your life to sustenance level living.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

i never said self sufficient i said self reliance.

[-] 1 points by Narley (-634) 10 months ago

So now I'm confused. Do you mean people need to have the skills, but not use them? I admit sometimes I'm not that bright, but, in the context you discuss I don't understand the difference between self reliance and self sufficient.

Don't they both mean being able to sustain yourself and get by without having to rely on assistance?

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

self sufficiency means producing everything you consume. self reliance falls somewhere short of that. self reliance would be me trading venison for rice that i can not produce but a self sufficient person would only raise their own rice or no rice for them. i think self sufficiency is a fools errand. man lives in communities even if they are rural or pastoral and individuals have different skills and talents that allow them to excel at different things.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

or stop hunting and fishing all together. humanity's footprint on this earth should be as small as possible.

Knowledge is Good, Ignorance is Bad. Techonology is not inherently either way. Technology becomes bad when the person using the technology is ignorant.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

stop hunting and fishing? no way bro. there are ways to enhance the natural environment so that it becomes super productive. this is what we need to do.

[-] -3 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

Killing only makes things worse.

That is personal opinion of course.

I am pro-vegetarian as it is the most human diet possible, but I got to respect the choices of others.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

i see every lawn, every stretch of highway, every curb cut as a place that food should be being grown. using the techniques of perennial plants, layering and beneficial planting our environment should be bursting with food. and raw materials.

[-] -2 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

only if we could all rely on eachother? Im confused now....

Should we exploit the earth to its fullest or rely on ourselves?

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

and yes you should be able to rely on your fellow man. not to take care of you only but in a reciprocal relationship where the whole is mightier than just one man. just one man rarely accomplishes much.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

well we should take advantage of our ability to enhance natural systems instead of destroy them. then we can enhance our ability to reap a sustainable benefit from the land.

[-] -1 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

I think that keeping as much of the world wild is the best case scenario.

Just dont mess with it at all.

[-] 0 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 months ago

well im glad you like.

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 10 months ago

at least one other person living today in the world recognizes the fact that we are individuals and do not pocess a central hive mind.

[Removed]

[Removed]