OWS Movement Imported From Spain But Made in America

When the Wall Street banks collapsed under the Bush/Rove/GOP, it sucked the wind out of the industrialized economies and quickly bled out to across the globe.  If you watched anything other than Beck/O’Reily/Hannity et. al. you will remember the first major protests took place in Iceland.

Meanwhile back at home, a suppressed albeit deeply, cherished, American tradition called racism was reignited when Empire Murdock planted the first images of two adorable, little, chocolate-colored girls playing in the Lincoln Bedroom into the collective brains of pasty White America some of whom in turn, strapped guns to their hips and took to the streets in costumes reminiscent our racist forefathers.

God forgive us for being distracted while the rest of the world began to burn.

The OWS movement came to the western world through Spain.  By early 2011, unemployment in Spain was approaching 21% (46% among youth) as the Arab Spring hit Egypt.  On May 15, 2011 a series of protest, coordinated through Twitter and Facebook, unfolded in 58 Spanish cities.

By now you’ve heard of the New York City General Assembly. They began this summer as a series of meetings “on the fourth floor of 16 Beaver Street, near Wall Street. In addition to New Yorkers, there were also Egyptians, Spaniards, Japanese and Greeks.  Dick Army was not among them.

Due to the lack of centralized coordination its hard to know for sure but as this writing there are an estimated 300 OWS protests in the US alone, over 3,000 arrests.  So far, no sign of the tea party.

Here’s the map.

One of the several Salt Lake OWS Facebook page is approaching 9000 members. You will not find a larger Facebook group specific to Utah. Here’s the local website

The biggest camp is at Pioneer Park downtown (map). Here’s a good video Larry found.

If you can’t camp, please at least go there and take them food (there is a full time kitchen) and warm weather supplies


Thanks George W. Bush. Your stumbling incompetence may have changed the world for the better.

, , , , , , , ,

  1. #1 by Larry Bergan on November 10, 2011 - 9:56 pm


    Interesting history of the movement!

    The New York General Assembly video is very beautifully done. It is not all that recent, nor is the one in Salt Lake, but it’s a wonderful thing to see the young people are getting it and have already come up with the best new ideas we’ve seen in decades.

    All of the good things that have happened in the last few days are not a coincidence. The senate voting to protect internet neutrality today would never have happened without the involvement of the people and I believe the OWS movement was instrumental in that decision and in the victories against Republicans and their attempts to pass laws which take our rights away.

    The middle class has a new, earnest and youthful energy.

  2. #2 by Richard Warnick on November 11, 2011 - 8:13 am

    The “kids” are alright. Three years ago they celebrated Obama’s victory in Grant Park, now they are protesting there (and everywhere) because Obama didn’t deliver on his promises.

    The 99 Percent Movement has already won the media battle.

    In just under two months, the Occupy movement has managed to turn the country’s attention toward social inequality. As many in the movement struggle with unemployment, student debt and unaffordable mortgage payments, words like foreclosure, debt and joblessness have reentered the public discourse.

    Instead of obsessing on the SuperCongress and deficit hysteria, the TV talking heads are discussing the war on the middle class.

  3. #3 by brewski on November 11, 2011 - 1:43 pm

    words like foreclosure, debt and joblessness have reentered the public discourse.

    So have words like defecating, anti-semitic, anti-democratic and hypocrite.

  4. #4 by Cliff Lyon on November 11, 2011 - 5:33 pm

    How profound. You forgot “racists,” “uninformed” and “tribal.”

  5. #5 by brewski on November 11, 2011 - 9:29 pm

    Cliffy, I love it when you throw around that tribal word. It is even funnier when you refer to that “study” for support of the word “tribal” when in fact a simple word search reveals that the word “tribal” doesn’t appear in it once. So much for accuracy.

    As for actual tribalism, it is the Democrats who proudly boast that they are are confederation of special interest groups tribes. They have the union organized crime tribe, the LGBT tribe, the guilt ridden 4th tier prep school Cliff tribe, the black tribe, the open border Hispanic tribe, etc.

    In fact, people on the left proudly label themselves with various hyphenated monickers displaying their tribal affiliation for all to see, like some kind of warpaint. So I don’t know why you call conservatives tribal at all, when all we call ourselves are Americans.

    As for racist, take it up with Thomas Sowell.

  6. #6 by Larry Bergan on November 11, 2011 - 11:39 pm

    I’m sure everybody has heard.

    A man was found dead in a tent at 10 o’clock this morning in the Occupy Salt Lake camp. They think it was due to a drug overdose or fumes from a tent heater – or both.

    Officials are using this as an excuse to shut down the Occupy movement here by sunset tomorrow night, saying protests will be allowed during the day, but no overnight camps will be allowed anywhere in the city.

    I went down there tonight and everybody is sort of in shock. They are trying to stay in good spirits, but there is a foreboding atmosphere.

    Hope everything goes OK tomorrow!

  7. #7 by Shane Smith on November 12, 2011 - 6:36 am

    brewski :

    words like foreclosure, debt and joblessness have reentered the public discourse.

    So have words like defecating, anti-semitic, anti-democratic and hypocrite.

    Must be an example of brewski playing nice, since he is never a jerk first…..

  8. #8 by Cliff Lyon on November 12, 2011 - 10:04 am

    Use of the word tribal in the media, to describe the far right has become ubiquitous. One rarely heard the word 4 years ago.

    A strong indicator of the right’s denial of this over-pronounced zoological feature is their inability to understand this well-understood zoological variation so profoundly expressed by 20-25% of our population.

    Such lack of comprehension among the most tribal of our species is also predicted in science and is best illustrated by the most popular defensive tactic employed by the right; “I know I am, but so are you.”

    None of us fully escapes the false assumption that everyone else “thinks like I do.” Objective (enlightened) self-perception is the exclusive domain of the left.

  9. #9 by brewski on November 12, 2011 - 11:16 am

    Well the media (you read) uses the term so that must make it so.

    If you Google liberal tribalism you get 1.4MM hits.

    If you Google conservative tribalism you get 1.3MM hits.

    So much for ubiquitous.

  10. #10 by Richard Warnick on November 12, 2011 - 6:47 pm

    At the GOP presidential debates, we’ve heard the audience cheer for the execution of innocent prisoners, for the idea of letting people die when they can’t afford medical care, and for Herman Cain’s fatuous statement, “If you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself.”

    They booed Maria Bartiromo for asking Cain about accusations of sexual misconduct.

    Tribal is as tribal does.

  11. #11 by Cliff Lyon on November 12, 2011 - 6:56 pm

    My appreciation for Brewski’s refusal to disclose his real self is reinvigorated by arguments based upon key word searches.

  12. #12 by Cliff Lyon on November 12, 2011 - 6:57 pm

    Huntsman just punked them all for being water boarding cheerleaders and got applause.

  13. #13 by brewski on November 12, 2011 - 7:22 pm

    Re #10. Pretty much everything you said is verifiably not true. You can have your own opinions, but you can’t have your own facts.

  14. #14 by Shane Smith on November 12, 2011 - 8:07 pm

    Why do you get your own facts brewski?

    They did cheer for executions, and even without proof the odds alone say at least one was innocent. And at least one was innocent based on the actual facts of the case. They further not only cheered for letting someone die for not having insurance, one man actually yelled it out, “let him die!” They further cheered Cains blame yourself and booed the question about his misconduct.

    All of that is verifiably true, and you, self proclaimed man of facts tell us it is not true.

    What world do you live in?

  15. #15 by cav, moniker impaired. But 'New', you must admit. on November 12, 2011 - 8:28 pm

    Sorry Gov Huntsman, if you’re gonna be all reasonable and shit, NO VOTES FOR YOU!

  16. #16 by brewski on November 12, 2011 - 8:32 pm

    I am happy to have a discussion about the facts:


    At the GOP presidential debates, we’ve heard the audience cheer for the execution of innocent prisoners,

    Fact, they cheered for executions. They did not cheer for executions of innocents. I am quite certain that innocent people have been executed and that is why I am against the death penalty. Nevertheless, as the question was asked, the people were not cheering the execution of innocents.


    for the idea of letting people die when they can’t afford medical care,

    The question posed was about a person who was well off and chose not to buy his own insurance even though he could afford it. The question was not about people who couldn’t afford it. This is quite different from Richard’s assertion.


    and for Herman Cain’s fatuous statement, “If you don’t have a job and you’re not rich, blame yourself.”

    Yes, he said this.


    They booed Maria Bartiromo for asking Cain about accusations of sexual misconduct.

    Yes they did. My interpretation of this is that the audience wants a debate about jobs, the economy, the budget, Iran, etc.

    So Richard was factually wrong about 2 of the points.

  17. #17 by cav, moniker impaired. But 'New', you must admit. on November 12, 2011 - 8:49 pm


  18. #18 by Shane Smith on November 12, 2011 - 9:15 pm

    They cheered for executions, and one was innocent, which may be explained with the words he used. Accurately.

    Your interpretation of why they booed does not change that they in fact booed.

    That leaves a single statement that is arguably still in the same spirit, at least.

    Which you call “pretty much eveything… verifiably not true.”


  19. #19 by brewski on November 12, 2011 - 10:11 pm

    Let’s follow the actual event and what actually happened:

    Brian Williams said that Texas had executed more inmates than any other state. Full stop.

    Then they applauded.

    You would need to know that the people who were doing the applauding knew that one of the executees was innocent to come to the conclusion that they were cheering executing innocent people. Since Brian Williams didn’t mention that, then it seems that they were applauding what Brian Williams said and not what he didn’t say.

    So let’s make an analogy. If Brian Williams had asked about honoring our veterans. Then people applauded. But also not mentioned and not in the minds of the people doing the applauding at that moment was a fact that some veterans had committed war crimes. Your and Richard’s conclusion was that those people were applauding war crimes.

    So I am sticking to that 1 was factually wrong.

    2 is factually wrong.

    OK, I admit that only half of what Richard said was verifiably untrue. You got me.

  20. #20 by Shane Smith on November 13, 2011 - 1:33 pm

    Fair enough, I did expect them to know that, and that is unfair.

    I guess that is the trouble. If you support something like capitol punishment, you really should know easily available information about it. Like the startlingly frequency we execute provably innocent people. I guess that is unreasonable of me.

  21. #21 by Richard Warnick on November 13, 2011 - 10:10 pm

    The cheering of executions in context, for brewski (emphasis added):

    Your state has executed 234 death row inmates, more than any other governor in modern times,” NBC’s Brian Williams told Perry as the conservative audience broke into cheers and applause. “Have you struggled to sleep at night with the idea that any one of those might have been innocent?

    “No, sir, I’ve never struggled with that at all,” Perry flatly stated. “In the state of Texas, if you come into our state and you kill one of our children, you kill a police officer, you’re involved with another crime and you kill one of our citizens, you will face the ultimate justice in the state of Texas, and that is you will be executed.”

    The audience again cheered at Perry’s mention of “the ultimate justice.”

    “What do you make of that dynamic that just happened here, the mention of the execution of 234 people drew applause?” Williams asked.

    “I think Americans understand justice,” Perry explained. “I think Americans are clearly in the vast majority of cases, supportive of capital punishment. When you have committed heinous crimes against our citizens, and it’s a state-by-state issue, but in the state of Texas, our citizens have made that decision, and they made it clear, and they don’t want you to commit those crimes against our citizens, and if you do, you will face the ultimate justice.”

    The “let him die” audience reaction, in context (emphasis added):

    Healthcare, and the role of a strong central government in providing it, is one of the key issues separating the GOP, which opposes Obama’s healthcare insurance overhaul. So it was no accident that the issue became part of the debate as host Wolf Blitzer posed a hypothetical to Paul, who is also a physician.

    “A healthy, 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living, but decides: You know what? I’m not going to spend 200 or 300 dollars a month for health insurance, because I’m healthy; I don’t need it,” Blitzer said. “But you know, something terrible happens; all of a sudden, he needs it. Who’s going to pay for it, if he goes into a coma, for example? Who pays for that?

    “In a society that you accept welfarism and socialism, he expects the government to take care of him,” Paul replied. Blitzer asked what Paul would prefer to having government deal with the sick man.

    “What he should do is whatever he wants to do, and assume responsibility for himself,” Paul said. ”My advice to him would have a major medical policy, but not before —”

    “But he doesn’t have that,” Blitzer said. “He doesn’t have it and he’s — and he needs — he needs intensive care for six months. Who pays?”

    “That’s what freedom is all about: taking your own risks.,” Paul said, repeating the standard libertarian view as some in the audience cheered.

    “But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?” Blitzer asked.

    “Yeah,” came the shout from the audience. That affirmative was repeated at least three times. Paul, who has always had a reputation for being a charitable man, disagreed with the idea that sick people should die, but insisted that the answer to the healthcare problem was not a large government.

    True, it was a hypothetical, a rather far-fetched one (even without Ron Paul’s absurd suggestion that we ought to lecture a guy in a coma about personal responsibility!). Statistics indicate almost no one willingly goes without health insurance when they can afford it (only an estimated 2% of uninsured Americans).

    I seriously doubt that Wolf Blitzer pays only $200-300 a month for health insurance. Although the average monthly premium for a high-deductible individual policy is $183, premiums are much higher than average on the East Coast, and such a bare-bones policy would never cover six months of intensive care anyway.

    A more realistic scenario would be the person who pays exorbitant premiums faithfully for decades and then when they become seriously ill or have a major accident, the insurance company suddenly drops them. This happens about half the time.

  22. #22 by brewski on November 14, 2011 - 1:49 pm

    Yes, it seems like getting rid of the death penalty and having a single payer plan would solve all these problems.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: